Apple Confirms Its $3 Billion Deal for Beats Electronics

Post by onedev » Wed, May 28, 2014, 9:29 PM UTC

danudey wrote: post #53

gareim wrote: post #25

Apple redefined the mp3 player market, the ultraportable laptop market, the smartphone market, the tablet market, and now they're buying a company that reinvented the higher-end headphone market. Is it smart of a brand that has traditionally created their own iconic images to buy another cultural icon for $3 billion? I don't think so. Maybe this gets used a lot, but would Steve Jobs have done this? Or would he have c…

> would Steve Jobs have done this? Or would he have created his own headphones and music streaming service? I don't know, would he have? You asked the question in such a way as to imply the answer that no, he wouldn't, but you can't actually know that for sure. Also, we shouldn't be holding Apple to the standard of 'Steve Jobs was perfect so if he wouldn't have done this then it's bad'; Jobs made his share of mistake…

Post by will_work4tears » Wed, May 28, 2014, 9:30 PM UTC

apalmer wrote: post #45

k-mcgrady wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When the rumour was $3.2bn he wasn't going to become a billionaire despite his video stating his was - so now the price has dropped he certainly isn't one. Also - what does Beats have to do with his career in hip hop? Hip hop didn't make him almost $1bn, an electronics company he co-founded did. It just irks me every time I see 'hip hops first billionaire'. It has absolutely nothing to do with hip hop.

ehhh i understand where you are coming from, i mean honestly there are multiple existing Hip Hop Billionaires. They are the owners of the record labels, radio stations, etc. Dre is really 'just' the first hip hop artist to make a billion. And from what is currently known, he wont really be a billionaire after the deal. really its just a case of hip hop bragadocio

Post by smackfu » Wed, May 28, 2014, 9:32 PM UTC

ghaff wrote: post #137

smackfu wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I'm willing to bet anything this is going to be seen as where Apple's golden age began to wane. I would argue that they've already been left behind on the music front. iPods are dead, no one wants to buy tracks on iTunes for $1.29, iTunes Radio was too little, too late. A lot of Apple fans are proudly using Spotify or other services on their iPhones. Heck, even the musicians associated with Apple are getting uncool.…

As of about a year ago, Apple was selling about 21 million songs a day. That's a lot of no ones. http://www.billboard.com/biz/articles/news/1538108/itunes-cr... That said, Apple hasn't had much impact on other types of music delivery--although it's probably worth noting that the business models associated with those other types of music delivery are a lot less clear than selling individual songs is.

Post by thisisdave » Wed, May 28, 2014, 9:32 PM UTC

eghri wrote: post #134

k-mcgrady wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lala became iTunes Radio AFAIK.

Lala was way more than iTunes radio. It had low priced cloud music purchases (e.g. $0.29 a song), unlimited cloud streaming for MP3's you already owned, free album listens for 1-2 plays, an integrated streaming player for third party sites, and more. It was way ahead of its time and competitors, but it was killed by Apple and used for almost nothing.

Post by graublau » Wed, May 28, 2014, 9:33 PM UTC

andrewmunsell wrote: post #107

antr wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For those of us not familiar with Beats, what is so special about the music service compared to (for argument sake) Spotify?

Curation and discovery-- they have celebrity and music curator created playlists. They also have an interesting Pandora-like radio where you can essentially select a mood and it'll build a playlist for you.