This whole thing makes me sad.
Apple should be announcing radical world-changing technology no one else can afford to produce.
Instead, we have this.
wtf
And it's not even close to as good as the major players, spotify and rdio.
This whole thing makes me sad.
Apple should be announcing radical world-changing technology no one else can afford to produce.
Instead, we have this.
wtf
This whole thing makes me sad.
Apple should be announcing radical world-changing technology no one else can afford to produce.
Instead, we have this.
wtf
This is not criminal, it's antebellum.
Those are some valuable customers.For those who care:
3,200,000,000
/
111,000
=
$28,828 per user.
I'm a full-time musician/songwriter. Streaming has absolutely killed music. One ten-thousandth of a cent per spin doesn't pay the bills. Music should be regarded as something with intrinsic value. If this keeps up, music will get even worse than it already is today...because the time people spend on pouring into their art will go down. Sure, there's a small percentage of musicians that will do it anyway, but think of all the good music that would never be, simply because talented artists *can't afford* to spend as much time as they need on their art?
So much music that could've been will be lost. What a shame.
So at 110,000 subscribers and a value of the headphone business at reported $1 billion. The rumored price is $3.2 Billion. So $2.2 Billion for 110K => ~$29,000 per existing subscriber.
The price has got to be a lot lower than the rumored $3.2 Billion.
8 months ago when Beats bought its shares back from HTC, Beats was worth about $1 billion based on the price paid for 25% from HTC.
I say this is a bad deal for Apple and me as a share holder.
MR readers stop being bitter? C'mon. That's like asking birds not to chirp or dogs to wag their tail.Agree w/ your post, but dealing with bitter people is the price of admission for reading these forums.
I'm hoping you're being facetious.Apple have never set out to make an expensive product; it just ends up that way because they don't optimise for low-cost like other manufacturers do. But the goal was never to make something more expensive just because.
$0.000126 per spin
An artist could become a millionaire if only 8 billion people played a song once :d
So we have rubbish headphones that anyone who knows anything are calling over priced junk.
We have a poor subscriber base for the music service.
What do we have?
A fashion logo ?
It's the triumph of style over substance, a time-honored Apple approach.So we have rubbish headphones that anyone who knows anything are calling over priced junk.
We have a poor subscriber base for the music service.
What do we have?
A fashion logo ?
They don't buy "subscribers" they buy a BRAND, what you don't understand ?
It's the triumph of style over substance, a time-honored Apple approach.
I'm not sorry. Spending 3+ Billion Dollars ( if true ) is just plain stupid.
Beats made $1.5billion in 2013, which means that if it continues, they make their money back in two years. Not too shabby for a hardware company.
My father has Alzheimer's. I don't think you have that. Perhaps it's some other disease?
I said in another thread I don't think the fashion aspect should be discounted.
http://stratechery.com/2014/apple-buying-beats/
https://medium.com/editors-picks/ef40bb2cd162
MR readers stop being bitter? C'mon. That's like asking birds not to chirp or dogs to wag their tail.Agree w/ your post, but dealing with bitter people is the price of admission for reading these forums.
And you know what happens next, right? Slowly the products become less about tech quality and more about "fashion," "look," etc. That is not something that I am looking forward to at all. Apple is supposed to make fantastic TECH products that also happen to be designed aesthetically exceptionally well. Not designed aesthetically exceptionally well that also happen to be TECH products. That type of subtle shift I do not think is good for the long term position of Apple. Once the quality starts to be degraded, all bets are off. So no, I do not think this would be a good thing at all.
Revenue does not equal profit, and the Beats fad could end at any time in the age of social media.
Or it could go up massively or remain at its current level. For what it's worth, their 2013 profits were $400 Million.
No, the number of users has not. The technology? Yes.
I would expect such a large acquisition not to be casino-grade.