Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Beats Co-Founders Dr. Dre and Jimmy Iovine Expected to Take on Senior Roles at Apple Following Acquisition

ashwin4 said:
Can someone explain why apple would purchase beats?
Click to expand...

Assuming this wasn't sarcastic, Time.com has some interesting arguments:

http://time.com/93557/apple-beats/

So, much more than just headphones, it's also a defensive move against Spotify and other streaming services.

In addition, Apple could use the Beats brand on other platforms (iTunes for Android was long rumored, Apple could now use the Beats brand etc.) and not dilute its brand on cross-platform offerings or confuse consumers.

Also, Beats had well over $1 billion in sales in 2013, Apple is getting something with real revenue.
 
Dre only owns 20-25% of the company does he not? So he won't be pocketing the entire 3.2 billion.

As for Dre taking up a "senior position" within Apple if this goes ahead? For the love of God, why? Acquire the company and assimilate it into your business Apple, don't give Dre a role.

I have never used this term and often role my eyes when I see it used, but it's true here ...

Steve must be spinning in his grave, wouldn't happen under his watch. The Apple I knew and grew up with is slowly changing for the worse if guys like Dre end up with senior positions.
 
Ugh, there are things you should know about this purchase

1) You WON'T see Beats Logo on every single Apple product. We did not saw ''Intel Inside'' on any Mac and we won't see Beats Logo on any Apple product

2) Apple is not buying them for their headphones. Apple needs to improve iTunes Interface and kill Spotify to stay dominant on music industry.

3) Apple is not filled by idiots, do you really think people on Macrumors can think better than whole Apple team?
 
So much knee jerk negativity, do you really think that Cook would do this on a whim? Or do you think that actually it's you guys who are passing judgement on a whim?

There seem to be an unmistakable hint of snobbery or perhaps even worse, a kind of "we don't want their kind in Apple", and I'm not sure I really want to explore what exact "kind" that is.
 
Yixian said:
So much knee jerk negativity, do you really think that Cook would do this on a whim? Or do you think that actually it's you guys who are passing judgement on a whim?

There seem to be an unmistakable hint of snobbery or perhaps even worse, a kind of "we don't want their kind in Apple", and I'm not sure I really want to explore what exact "kind" that is.
Click to expand...

I have a pair of Beats in ear headphones, and I like them.

However I can't see guys like Dre being able to keep their trap shut about what goes on within Apple, just look at his drunken video with Tyrese about being the "first billionaire in hip hop" before the deal is even confirmed as a done deal.

Dre and Iovine are not guys Jobs would have entertained, but as others have said its likely Cook has poor negotiation tactics with the labels unlike Jobs, but Steve was Steve ... he had his ways.

Stop looking for racial overtones that don't exist.
 
ashwin4 said:
Can someone explain why apple would purchase beats?
Click to expand...

Let me get this strait. The articles below this one explaining the move didn't help, and you have apparently never heard of Google; so you've decided to ask us.
 
Trapezoid said:
Come on. They spent 3.2BN if this story is true. You're saying there's a possiblity that the licenses are not transferrable?
Click to expand...

Perhaps Apple is trying to use this as a way to try and scare the content providers in television and cable. If you refuse to negotiate with us in good faith, then we'll just buy out a player who already has licensing deals in place. Perhaps that may piss off the television and cable content providers initially, but once the public has a taste of a different way to watch this type of content, what are they going to do, stop providing it? Whose going to try and take a service away from the marketplace, especially if its popular. This is all assuming that Apple is able to transfer the rights to these licenses successfully if they do this transaction with beats and whether that also carries over to the television landscape.

That price seems mighty excessive though to me.
 
unobtainium said:
This has already been repeated dozens of times. Apple already TRIED to get a Spotify competitor off the ground and failed, because record labels wouldn't sign cheap enough licensing deals with Apple (which is perceived to have incredibly deep pockets). The result was iTunes Radio, which was a failure from the beginning - because the future is in on-demand streaming. Apple knows this and they know they need a horse in the race, and they don't have years to develop it and sign those deals.
Click to expand...

Huh, Everything I've read states that Apple has been reluctant to move into on demand subscription based streaming until just recently. Do you have an source you can show that says otherwise?
 
This is the ultimate thread. In a way it's like the cover of Ummagumma.

I have no idea if this is a good idea or not. I am not on Apple's board of directors or executive team. I don't routinely make business decisions for the most recognized brand in the world.

Oh and neither do any of you. Most posters can't even spell. "I can know say..." Really that's great grammar. And another guy with a PowerBook G4 and 20" Cinema Display in his sig threatening to never buy another Apple product. When was the last time he did.

The comments on MR on a daily basis from the same mostly "youthful" base that this acquisition may be aimed at, make ridiculous comments all the time, but want to blast Apple for this business deal. These are the same people who will frantically be refreshing their screens in September to order the iPhone 6 the second it is available for pre-order (and yet bashing the features it doesn't have).

The funny thing is, the joke's not actually on you.
 
Few things to say about this...

1. The Beats music service is a good way for Apple to gobble up rights already secured. It´s clear talks have stalled with the publishers on their own service. This gets them in the streaming game FAST.

2. The Beats headphones are complete junk. Really. I´m not joking. Go and get some £40 generic 'megabass' headphones. Similar sound. There's junky little plugins and shareware tools that add ugly ooomph to sound in much the same way as Beats.

3. Beats as a 'brand' is okay. It's mass market. It's down with the kids. Those crappy headphones have been sold for megabucks to people that could have got Jesus-cans from other makes for the same money. It's like a £45 designer tee vs. a £10 tee - it's just cotton, either way. If you can sell the same thing branded up for £45 all power to you. However, Beats is a brand that only appeals to a certain segment of the market - kids love it, mainstream fashion victims too, but anyone with a little sophistication knows it's junk.
Apple is more like a Mercedes types brand - the common man would like a Merc if he could get one, so would a rapper, so would a wealthy professional. Beats is not like this. Beats branding all over Apple stuff would be RATCHET.

4. Slightly contradicting the above, Dr Dre makes as much sense as a way to boost the Apple brand than Angela Ahrendts - Apple is mass market now, Burberry is a very tiny high-end fashion brand with hardly any shops. Dre knows big sales. Commercial bling hiphop, like it or not, is the sound of mass culture. Back in the 90s Apple would have campaigns targeted at business , another one for home users, another for education users. No reason why Dre couldn't have a role cementing Apple's position in the youth Market where Beats has done well - he has the track record. Just don't brand the thing 'Beats'.

5. I imagine the Beats headphones will just carry on as they currently are. Apple will not cross brand. Beats headphones selling heavily in Apple Stores. Tim Cook is a bean counter. He probably realises he could get more margin if Apple owned that brand.
 
RebornProphet said:
I have a pair of Beats in ear headphones, and I like them.

However I can't see guys like Dre being able to keep their trap shut about what goes on within Apple, just look at his drunken video with Tyrese about being the "first billionaire in hip hop" before the deal is even confirmed as a done deal.

Dre and Iovine are not guys Jobs would have entertained, but as others have said its likely Cook has poor negotiation tactics with the labels unlike Jobs, but Steve was Steve ... he had his ways.

Stop looking for racial overtones that don't exist.
Click to expand...

Iovine was a partner with Jobs' good buddy Geffen and has been a major force in the music industry (including creating the best selling line of high cost headphones in the world). My theory is that you have no idea who Jobs would and would not associate with. This deal has such a huge upside that Apple would be crazy to pass on it.
 
Zerilos said:
Iovine was a partner with Jobs' good buddy Geffen and has been a major force in the music industry (including creating the best selling line of high cost headphones in the world). My theory is that you have no idea who Jobs would and would not associate with. This deal has such a huge upside that Apple would be crazy to pass on it.
Click to expand...

The fact I've not mentioned Iovine should tell you that I know who he is and acknowledge his role in the music industry.

It's handing Dre a senior position that I don't understand. He doesn't come across as a guy who can keep his trap shut and could be a disruptive influence.

And to those who think Apple could use Beats Audio to kill Spotify?

NEVER going to happen. Apple are way too late to that party.
 
Zerilos said:
Iovine was a partner with Jobs' good buddy Geffen and has been a major force in the music industry (including creating the best selling line of high cost headphones in the world). My theory is that you have no idea who Jobs would and would not associate with. This deal has such a huge upside that Apple would be crazy to pass on it.
Click to expand...

If you are saying that this Iovine character will be able to deliver other digital content to Apple in some way, then sure that may make the deal more appealable. Do we know that yet? To be honest, never even heard of the guy before a few days ago. We're pretty much saying though aren't we that we are in good shape so long as Iovine was the brains of the brand, and if it was Dre strictly the deal wouldn't be as appealing? I have no idea how this is going to play out or what the plans are for this company if the deal goes down.
 
derbladerunner said:
Assuming this wasn't sarcastic, Time.com has some interesting arguments:

http://time.com/93557/apple-beats/

So, much more than just headphones, it's also a defensive move against Spotify and other streaming services.

In addition, Apple could use the Beats brand on other platforms (iTunes for Android was long rumored, Apple could now use the Beats brand etc.) and not dilute its brand on cross-platform offerings or confuse consumers.

Also, Beats had well over $1 billion in sales in 2013, Apple is getting something with real revenue.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Because of the headphones, this deal pays for itself in less than a decade. Even if the Music streaming fails to earn a dime, they haven't lost a thing.
 
Whomever brought up Monster Cables nailed it. The problem with the acquisition is that Beats are known for making a product far below the standard we expect from Apple. Go take a look at Head-fi.org and you'll find countless superior options to the entire Beats lineup.

With the long standing rumour that Apple wants to get into the premium headphone market hopefully they don't allow that Beats garbage to infect their product lineup. They would have been far better off acquiring one of the many solid headphone manufacturers like Grado, Audio Technica, Sennheiser, AKG, even Koss if they wanted to make something based on the KSC75s/PortaPros for the low end market.
 
roland.g said:
This is the ultimate thread. In a way it's like the cover of Ummagumma.

I have no idea if this is a good idea or not. I am not on Apple's board of directors or executive team. I don't routinely make business decisions for the most recognized brand in the world.

Oh and neither do any of you. Most posters can't even spell. "I can know say..." Really that's great grammar. And another guy with a PowerBook G4 and 20" Cinema Display in his sig threatening to never buy another Apple product. When was the last time he did.

The comments on MR on a daily basis from the same mostly "youthful" base that this acquisition may be aimed at, make ridiculous comments all the time, but want to blast Apple for this business deal. These are the same people who will frantically be refreshing their screens in September to order the iPhone 6 the second it is available for pre-order (and yet bashing the features it doesn't have).

The funny thing is, the joke's not actually on you.
Click to expand...

So the only safe bet is to agree with the rumor no questions asked even though the information is at best incomplete and at worst false.
 
So ...

I bought Beats and stopped using Apple's headphones only for Apple to buy Beats which in effect means I'm still using Apple headphones. :p
 
Reds622 said:
If you are saying that this Iovine character will be able to deliver other digital content to Apple in some way, then sure that may make the deal more appealable. Do we know that yet? To be honest, never even heard of the guy before a few days ago. We're pretty much saying though aren't we that we are in good shape so long as Iovine was the brains of the brand, and if it was Dre strictly the deal wouldn't be as appealing? I have no idea how this is going to play out or what the plans are for this company if the deal goes down.
Click to expand...

Iovine was a close confidant, colleage and friend of none other Steven Paul Jobs, founder of Apple Computer. Maybe you have heard of him. Iovine was key in helping Steve pen a lot of the initial content deals for Apple.

But of course he is associated with that "black" rapper Dr. Dre, who only appeals to "urban youth" (i.e.poor black people) so of course we can't take him or his "company" seriously. [/sarcasm]
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I hope this also means, now that Apple is in control, that the build and sound quality of the headphones will increase dramatically. I wouldn't mind a Beats headphone if it was actually worth the money.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back