Bigger market, more money to spend, and exploiting teenage rebellion would be my guesses. That said, as I wrote earlier, "If you think the thug subculture doesn't exist and its soundtrack isn't rap, you're either blind and deaf or a fool."
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.
Beats Co-Founders Dr. Dre and Jimmy Iovine Expected to Take on Senior Roles at Apple Following Acquisition
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Bigger market, more money to spend, and exploiting teenage rebellion would be my guesses. That said, as I wrote earlier, "If you think the thug subculture doesn't exist and its soundtrack isn't rap, you're either blind and deaf or a fool."
Terrified? What? The movers and shakers of Apple and most other fortune 100 companies were products of the 60s. Guiltless sex....not a problem. Drugs? Well, the demi-god Steve Jobs dropped acid and all he did was change the world. And weed is a staple of the Silicon Valley and thats why no tech company tests job applicants for it . Civil Rights protests? That was a good thing. Voter registration. Ditto. Stopping the war? Ditto...and we are still trying to stop those even today. Protesting government intrusion into our lives? We're still fighting that (losing) battle...but props to Mr. Snowden for keeping it real.
So I'm not sure what was so terrifying about the 60s since I born and grew up in 'the City' (aka San Francisco) and yes, even went to Berkeley....got married, had 2 kids and just celebrated my 36th wedding anniversary. I think things turned out all right.
Peace, baby!
Last edited:
You are a funny man and probably the most sanest person on this thread, can't believe the hysteria on display, until we see how this pans out how could anyone possibly comment on whether this is good or bad...
Would it upset you if that was one of the several advantages of this possible deal? Certainly it wouldn't be the only advantage. Honestly I have no idea if $3.2 billion is an appropriate price (given that we know nothing about how well Beats Music is doing), but increasing sales within any given demographic couldn't be a bad thing. Also, dismissing the value of The Beats line because there mass popularity might just be a "fad" could be reason enough to avoid making any future acquisitions.
Lol no argument here about them being terrible. Basically the reason why the beats are popular at all because in the hip hop industry Dr. Dre has got virtually every rap artist, many sports stars and even some actors
wearing these headphones around their neck as if it was a fashion accessory. The kids see this and tell their parents they want these awful headphones because all the hip hop artists and sports stars have them. I'm sure Dr. Dre provided all these stars a pair for free to help promote this junk. I'd like to think these "Artists" would use something much better for music reproduction when it comes to their own personal listening.
----------
I think Apple could rename them to IBeats. This would be HUGE
I'm hoping that doesn't happen.
I wouldn't even say they are racist undertones - it's pretty out there in the open.
The old "rich and black? Must either be:
a. Able to entertain whitey with music.
b. Be an athlete. or;
c. Be a drug dealer.
It couldn't possible be as a result of exemplary (and self-taught) business skills and acumen.
Last edited:
That's basically what I guessed from your first response.
Yeah you would think anyone who cares about their music would want people to appreciate it.
The video on YouTube with Dr. Dre and Tyrese says it all. These are just thugs that love to throw around the N word. I find it disgusting and racist. Will never buy another product from Apple again. Even though I'd love an updated Mac mini.
The only thing your generation did was pile heaps of debt upon your children with completely unsustainable and predatory business practices.
Peace, baby!
Bit a of distance from whether Beats and Apple could be/will be a match made in commerce heaven, but....
I find it ironic that to be in the position of defending a form of music I ceased to like after it passed from Sugarhill Gang and Jazzy Jeff to pick up lots of unsavory themes, and much of which (but not all) I don't personally respect that much or find that much virtue in, but them's the breaks...
First, the "ebonics" label (while coined, I believe, by an African-American teacher) never took off in the community you're implying "speaks it" - so your use of it externally (and derisively) to label that community when it's not used internally has a whiff I know I don't care for.
Second, you act as if everyone who's into rap speaks only in "rap," lacks language education and is unemployable - all of which are demonstrably anything but the situation.
(As in I can enjoy Irish dance routines, without losing the ability to move my arms when I walk. And equally many rap afficianados are quite capable of speaking and writing mainstream business-friendly English.)
On the other hand, it's sadly true that the unemployment rate in most African-American communities has chronically lagged that in others (and we could talk about other social problems as well) - but ALL of that was true long before Dr. Dre and his cohort were born, so, while these are meaningful, real, serious (and complex, multi-variate) set of problems, with causes in both the effected groups and society as a whole, whatever, the reasons simply don't have their roots in hip-hop culture.
Also many genres of modern music pretty much across social lines are angry, noisy, full of in-group slang and promote highly-arguably offensive attitudes and destructive activities.
Third, "creative spelling" and other "preversions" of "standard English" aren't limited to those in your inferred "ebonics community," but is actually encouraged in some school districts.
With calc apps and keyboards, e.g., whole gens across the nation aren't learning numerical concepts or the fine coordination skills necessary to write cursive - which carries over to other motor and brain activities - which is part of why the US ranks something like 12th in language skills and 26th in math and science.
And I know I'm appalled by the general lack of "basic skillz" and huge gaps in the general fund of all kinds of knowledge in nearly all of the products of modern American education - including among college grads from families with plenty of advantages.
So there's plenty to talk about and work on. But it sez here it ain't 'zactly what you're implyin'...
To quote your generation...lets keep on-point. The comments I made had to do with the so-called evils of rock-n-roll, which is total bovine scat, just as are the evils of hip-hop (hence, the Dr. Dre references in this topic).
But you're right about the debt....and wrong about the predatory business practices. This is just a modern day version of robber barons. We'll survive it as we did in the 1800s and 1900s.
We'll survive it as we did in the 1800s and 1900s.
Not this time. The people who came up with all this stuff: computers, cell phones, railroads, feeding the world, space travel, civilization - they're almost gone. They stopped having babies two generations ago. Most of the people of earth think that's a good thing and want them gone. Oh well.
Haha, great !!!
Dr.Dre - from Compton to Cupertino, the rights man to promote brand new Health app
Dr.Dre - from Compton to Cupertino, the rights man to promote brand new Health app
I agree if this deal is "all about the headphones" then it's ridiculous. It makes zero sense if that is the case because (non-pro) studio style headphones in 2014:boom boxes in 1986. It would be a very short sighted deal.
To your point #1: Apple and the iPhone are still regarded as cool but more to the point Beats are not cooler than Apple. If they were then everyone who casually listened to music would want a pair of Beats. Beats are trendy, but not in the "must have" category. Plenty of Beats products were left on the shelves after this past holiday season. If Apple IS looking to buy cool Beats is every much a fad as boom boxes. So it doesn't solve any problem. In fact it creates a problem because now Apple looks fadish, not timeless.
To your point #2: As I noted earlier Beats is privately held. We don't know what kind of profit Beats makes. They are estimated to make about 1.2B in revenue. By contrast iTunes makes about $4.5B in revenue. So it's improbably that Apple would spend this much cred and capital just for a measly $1.2B in annual revenue that might not even experience growth due to the fad nature of the chief product.
The only logical conclusion is this deal is about the app and Iovine's contacts and good relationship w/ the entertainment industry, something that has soured for Apple in recent years. If we find out its anything else then I don't know who should walk the plank first, Cook or the board for letting Cook do the deal, because, yes, that would be desperation, and the #1 rule is never let 'em see you sweat.
How does marketshare relate to anything said in my post? Marketshare is a moot point in that discussion.
I hope you're right. But no one can figure out what technology Beats has that is worth this much. Beats streaming service is based on their ~$10M acquisition of MOG. Is Jimmy Iovine and his connections in the music industry worth $3B? Most articles I'm seeing are like the Medium one below. That Apple is signaling it wants people to think of it as a fashion company; that Beats is a play in the wearables space; Beats is a way to buy some urban cool; Apple will use Beats brand to create a downmarket cheap iPhone.
https://medium.com/p/ef40bb2cd162
If they had some amazing technology or IP would people really be playing up the fashion aspect?
Edit: According to a Bloomberg story this morning it's about both the streaming music and headphones. But this story leaves the impression that the headphone business is just a bonus because it happens to be profitable. I just hope "improving the quality of design" also includes improving sound quality.
Last edited:
I hate to feed the troll, but they are complete crap. I returned a pair because I dislike loads of bass in my music. Sure there are folks that love deep resounding bass. I am not one of them.
Just playing devil's advocate here for a moment, but your dislike of bass, doesn't make Beats crap, it just makes them an unsuitable product for you.
For clarity, I don't have any Beats and actually, nor do I want a pair as I find them a bit too "look at me" for my liking (I'm also 46, not 16!).
Last edited:
Yes, this much everyone can agree on. We'll see how this plays out in the coming days/weeks, but still think when the dust clears it will show to be more about Iovine and iTunes than headphones.
I didn't think Tony Fadell was worth $3B and I don't think Iovine is either. This purchase may not be about headphones but the only thing that seems to justify the valuation is the brand and the allegedly profitable headphones.
Psssst....Stop trying to use your sound logic here. And don't speak with well-documented facts. There are many who cannot handle either.
I've learned this the hard way. Your quality posts will be ignored by many. Spare yourself.
As you asked in another thread, looks like your post is SPOT-ON with what Apple plans to do with Beats. I suspect this is going to be a great acquisition for Apple.
I support your message.
They're not even good headphones for people who love bass. There are many better options at a variety of lower price points offering superior sound with deep thundering bass. If that was the sound you wanted you owe it to yourself to check out one of the better options I posted earlier.
Beats is Monster Cables for headphones, but worse. At least Monster Cables do what they're supposed to despite the inflated price.