Speaking of ignorance, you realize there is a difference between revenue and profit, right? It will take $3B in profit to break even.
All I can say is 'good luck Apple'. I hope your shareholders get their 3 BILLION dollars worth out of this deal.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Announces $3 Billion Beats Acquisition, Jimmy Iovine and Dr. Dre Joining the Company
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Speaking of ignorance, you realize there is a difference between revenue and profit, right? It will take $3B in profit to break even.
All I can say is 'good luck Apple'. I hope your shareholders get their 3 BILLION dollars worth out of this deal.
Sorry to see a class act like Apple hook up with a piece of crap like Dre. Along with many others I've been waiting for a new mini with current-gen technology and Apple is spending three billion on a ghettophone company.
That really says a lot about whether Apple considers desktop users like me to be real customers. Maybe Apple is suggesting it's time to move on.
That really says a lot about whether Apple considers desktop users like me to be real customers. Maybe Apple is suggesting it's time to move on.
Dre as a full time apple employee?!
Give me a break. He's gonna spend at least 40 hrs a week on projects for apple? Full time employee my butt!
Give me a break. He's gonna spend at least 40 hrs a week on projects for apple? Full time employee my butt!
Don't tell me to calm down. Yes, the products they developed yesterday and are selling today are the same, that's a bit obvious, thanks very much for the insight, how brilliant that summary.
Thanks, I'm not your buddy and I'm afraid I do have an idea except what point you're trying to make.
I think you are really on to something here. Steve has been gone long enough that the things he was finishing up have already been released. Apple now has boring, old logistics guy Tim and past his design prime Thinner-Yes-Thinner Jony trying to carry on the legacy of innovation. It is not working.
They spend a ton of money on Beats but do not have modern Apple displays, a large phone or an enthusiast's desktop computer to sell. Very sad.
So, Dre isn't really a billionaire like he said in his now infamous video, then? Another article on this site suggests he'll cop for $750m from this deal through his stake in the company, and I find it hard to believe he's presently worth the additional $250m.
OK, he'll never have money worries - but still, false advertising!
Probably already been mentioned but he was worth a few hundred million before the deal so he wouldn't be too far off that mark
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
I appreciate the points that you made in the full post (only a portion of which is quoted above). However, if it was such "a great deal" where was the competition in this one? Where was Google? Where was Amazon? Microsoft? Maybe even Sony or Samsung? As people are spinning in this thread, if Google could pay huge for a smart thermostat why wouldn't they pay up for this "bargain"? Aren't they in need of Iovine, streaming knowledge, industry contact leverage too? How about Amazon? Don't they need the same talent & tools to chase the very same opportunities? I didn't see a word about any competitors for this "bargain" which could mean that Beats only was interested in selling to Apple or it could mean that only Apple was interested in paying that much for Beats.
I know "we" feel compelled to spin anything Apple would do- good or bad- as positively as possible and I've witnessed it 1000 times over how "we" will always try to spin lemon into lemonade. To me, this looks just like another one of those.
However, as usual and within this very thread, we're seeing the endorsement effect in action. The rumor has become reality so the passionate anti-Beats bashing in threads from recent days is evolving into "wait & see what Apple does with this" and will soon be replaced by "best headphones ever". As late as yesterday, it was probably about 95% against. In this thread, it looks like that's probably sliding toward 60%:40% and I bet by the time this thread is dead, it may even flip to the crowd becoming mostly positive… or at least in the ever-popular hedge of "I'll wait & see" which bridges the passion from steep negative through acceptance and then strongly favoring.
A few days ago, the call was on for Apple to scrap this deal and buy one of the established quality brands instead. But now that Apple had endorsed this brand by buying it, we'll soon be bashing those quality brands as inferior to Beats even if nothing changes in the hardware itself. First it's "wait & see". Soon it's "I finally gave them a listen and wow!.." and then it's "shut up and take my money" and "best headphones ever".
I agree that Apple is run by smart people and there must be something in this that motivates $3B beyond what we can see as consumers on the outside looking in. I hope it's not trying to "buy cool" and I hope it's not just a "they have high margins too and we would like to further pad our margins" play. Like many though, if there is little more to it than just buying positive profitability in fat margins and trying to buy some "cool", I wish they had some other acquisition of size that delivered a sense of inspiration & "next big thing is coming" excitement.
Shareholders get excited about fat margin acquisitions. Consumers are hungry for Apple to deliver another world-shaker on par with iPod, iPhone and then iPad. I think the wave of negative about this is that the latter group is starving for innovation leadership from Apple. Headphones, streaming expertise and music industry insider deal-making doesn't feel like it can lead to some "next big thing" that blows us all away. Instead, that feels like something probably needed in about 2008.
Last edited:
And yet they are the RICHEST Tech company on the planet. Darn those stodgy fools in Cupertino.
At least now we know, why Apple earbuds are so crappy. Long live crap earphones coming with iPhone or iPod.
google has a streaming service
amazon is a niche player and behind everyone
microsoft has a streaming service
The only black folks that'll be dissing Dre will be rappers trying to sell records while secretly wishing they had that kind of deal.
Buy Wacom Instead!
First Idea:
I wish that Apple would buy a company with a product worth integrating into their products...like Wacom! The Surface 3 actually looks like a pretty neat product in the regard that you can actually use it as a design tool because it has a pen. Why isn't Apple doing this when they have the design community on lockdown?!
Second idea:
I wish that Apple would take a huge chunk of their money to secure some content deals so that they can shake up the TV industry. I'm sure it's the content which is holding up the AppleTV so throw some money and loosen up those content provider *******s.
First Idea:
I wish that Apple would buy a company with a product worth integrating into their products...like Wacom! The Surface 3 actually looks like a pretty neat product in the regard that you can actually use it as a design tool because it has a pen. Why isn't Apple doing this when they have the design community on lockdown?!
Second idea:
I wish that Apple would take a huge chunk of their money to secure some content deals so that they can shake up the TV industry. I'm sure it's the content which is holding up the AppleTV so throw some money and loosen up those content provider *******s.
HobeSoundDarryl
macrumors G5
That part of my post talked to the idea that a big part of this was to buy expertise to "catch up" to others who are already deep in streaming (that Apple is behind others in that area and needed to buy this expertise and existing streaming deals to help catch up). Google & Microsoft already having a streaming service means they don't need this Iovine expertise, music industry influence or this "bargain" headphone business?
The point I was referencing was that this was a great bargain for Apple and that there are these great synergies for Apple. Since several other companies are "copying" Apple with many variations of the same, I would think much of the same synergies would be in this deal for them too. If so, why didn't we hear one word about ANY competitor bidding against Apple? Again, it could be that Beats only wanted to be acquired by Apple or it could be that no one else was interested in Beats at $3B.
I think if we remove ourselves from the Apple Elitist/audiophile mindset, and put on our business caps we can see that one highly profitable company, acquired another very profitable/margin-rich company.
Just because people may not like the people that wear them, or think they are overpriced, doesn't change the fact that Apple acquired a highly profitable company that they can integrate some of their existing technologies into it's product offering....
Just because people may not like the people that wear them, or think they are overpriced, doesn't change the fact that Apple acquired a highly profitable company that they can integrate some of their existing technologies into it's product offering....
that's a really homerish claim. pretty much any decent in ears over $40 top the earpods.
but this isn't strictly about headphones.
considering the cash apple is accumulating every year the price of this acquisition isn't particularly worrying. you have to have some faith that apple has its reasons to make this sort of deal and that they make sound financial sense.
i'd like to see the beats brand used to bring some of apple's products/services to different os's [beats music store (powered by itunes) on android for example]. having a second brand should let them take more chances which could be fun to watch.