Apple Said to Be in Talks to Buy Beats for $3.2 Billion

Post by leemcalilly » Fri, May 09, 2014, 1:42 AM UTC

scep12 wrote: post #25

state wrote: post #9

I cannot figure out any way to reconcile the incredibly poor quality of Beats products with a hopeful future for Apple. Can someone make the argument for why this is a good idea?

Some are speculating that Apple is more interested in the beats music streaming service. I'm not sure I buy that -- doesn't Apple nearly have its own? Even if they don't, surely they've got the foundation set to build one quite effortlessly.

Post by leemcalilly » Fri, May 09, 2014, 1:46 AM UTC

doe88 wrote: post #27

As I see it it's not for the hardware, but for the streaming service and for Jimmy Iovine and his connections/knowledge in the music industry. I don't know how he could fit with Eddy Cue but I think Jimmy Iovine would bring a lot if he was in charge of the music services in iTunes.

Post by rdl » Fri, May 09, 2014, 2:05 AM UTC

Aqwis wrote: post #31

Cookingboy wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They are over marketed a bit and over priced, sure, but just as much as Bose, B&O and a lot of other premium sound brands. How do they objectively have "incredibly poor quality"? Do you have a link that support they have really poor sound quality or bad build quality or horrible customer satisfaction rate?

Bose is a damn bad example as a premium brand to compare Beats to. Their consumer headphones are widely considered to be way overpriced and gimmicky. The brands Beats should really be compared to are Sennheiser, Shure, A-T, Denon, Beyerdynamic and the like. Any offerings from these brands at a price point from $100 and up offer at least as good sound quality as Beats' cans and for a much lower price, and many of thei…

Post by bherms » Fri, May 09, 2014, 2:21 AM UTC

baddox wrote: post #53

bherms wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quality when applied to speakers and headphones is typically demonstrated by frequency response, with a perfectly flat response being the pinnacle. Headphones like Beats appeal to people who have only had bargain headphones (think a few bucks), and they do this by having attractive packaging and just basically amping up the bass response because bass has a "wow factor".

A flat response is rarely desirable, or at least rarely intended, except for equipment designed for audio production.

Post by jcampbell1 » Fri, May 09, 2014, 2:29 AM UTC

abalone wrote: post #58

jcampbell1 wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You think they can't do their own licensing deal? When you are the richest guy in town it is hard to negotiate a good deal. It is probably much smarter to just buy Beats. If they bought Spotify, they would be stuck supporting Android and Windows customers. The $3B price probably reflects the current profitability of the headphone line. For what it is worth, audio brands seem to have staying power. I am not sure if…

I don't understand your argument. Beats also supports Android and Windows, like Spotify.