Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Apple set to get Beats in $3.2B deal

usatoday.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 79 posts

Re: Apple set to get Beats in $3.2B deal

#61

Post by 001sky »

epo wrote: post #58
InclinedPlane wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Beats has a marketshare of something like 2/3 to 3/4 for headphones over $100 and annual revenue of about $1.4 billion in 2013 (1/6 of Facebook's revenue). If anything, $3.2 billion was a steal.

Citation required for such a handwavy assertion. Beats is a fashion brand and those are notoriously ephemeral. If Beats want to sell they may know the game is up, but then so would Apple.

Citation required for such a handwavy assertion

Fashion brands M&A all the time> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LVMH > LVMH is a classic, diversified example.

Even apple is seen by many as a 'fashion accessory'> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IPod_advertising#Silhouette_St...

They ran an entire marketing campaign based on the gratuitious display of earphone cords !!

Re: Apple set to get Beats in $3.2B deal

#62

Post by ProAm »

dopamean wrote: post #33
ProAm wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They aren't bad headphones, the thing is you can get equivalent quality spending ~$50-70.

> you can get equivalent quality spending ~$50-70 That's what he was asking for. I've frequently heard this and I believe it to be true but as a non-audiophile how do I identify a pair of $70 headphones that are as good as Beats' $200 ones.

There are several good posts on Hacker News and other sites that will frequently reference good headphones for the cost. I cannot find the exact one that I used (because after I got my headphones I forgot the information and probably wont need it for another 4+ years). But check these out and they might help [1][2]

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7685327 [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7658103

Re: Apple set to get Beats in $3.2B deal

#63

Post by adamlett »

InclinedPlane wrote: post #53
adamlett wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obvious? Maybe if the didn't have to pay anything for the company, it would be. But why is it obvious that this acquisition makes sense at that particular price? I'm not saying that it doesn't make sense, only that you have to at the very least consider how much the company is worth to Apple, before you declare it a no-brainer acquisition. Would it still make sense at $4B? $6B? How much would be too much before this…

Beats has a marketshare of something like 2/3 to 3/4 for headphones over $100 and annual revenue of about $1.4 billion in 2013 (1/6 of Facebook's revenue). If anything, $3.2 billion was a steal.

You mention marketshare, but neglect to mention the size of the market. You mention revenue, but neglect to mention profits. For all your numbers tell me, Beats could be operating at a loss in a shrinking market.

And I'm curious: If $3.2B was a steal, what would have been a fair price?

Re: Apple set to get Beats in $3.2B deal

#64

Post by ithought »

aneisf wrote: post #21
ithought wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's interesting that Dre didn't create his music (*sampled), didn't write his lyrics and didn't come up with the idea for the headphones yet is celebrated as a genius. It was Monster's idea and then Jimmy Iovine propelled it to where it went. Dre is a quiet, private person, who rarely tours or produces new music. The idea that he is a billionaire now from putting his name on exorbitantly expensive headphones and mar…

>Dre didn't create his music (*sampled) This is a highly ignorant statement. Sampling recorded music is in fact a very musical process, from the first 20th-century musique concrete experiments to the more modern intricate, multilayered compositions of artists like The Beastie Boys, DJ Shadow, Public Enemy, etc. Musicians always take inspiration from other music. Build a song around a chunky 'AC/DC-style' riff. Channe…

You're right and my comment was off-base. I was just annoyed by the video release of Dre bragging about being a billionaire. Also it's somewhat interesting that he sued Napster and intended to sue college students and universities then becomes immensely successful via the digital music market.

Regardless, I let my personal bias influence an asinine comment. I'm aware that sampling music is artistic endeavor and takes talent and hard work.

Re: Apple set to get Beats in $3.2B deal

#65

Post by glomph »

iambateman wrote: post #2

Beats headphones are crap, sure. And their streaming service isn't as mature as Spotify. But three billion dollars isn't about headphones or online music streaming or Dr Dre's drunken celebration. It's about growth. Apple has a chokehold on the iPod market. They've rocked the market with the iPod, iPhone, iPad and those products will be cash cows for a long time. But where is their next growth going to come from? A w…

Every big sale there are always loads of people who say it is genius and loads who say it is stupid. Usually the answer is that it it is pretty boring.

Re: Apple set to get Beats in $3.2B deal

#66

Post by stevelosh »

sharkweek wrote: post #8
iambateman wrote: post #2

Beats headphones are crap, sure. And their streaming service isn't as mature as Spotify. But three billion dollars isn't about headphones or online music streaming or Dr Dre's drunken celebration. It's about growth. Apple has a chokehold on the iPod market. They've rocked the market with the iPod, iPhone, iPad and those products will be cash cows for a long time. But where is their next growth going to come from? A w…

I was given a pair of Beats Studios almost two years ago, so maybe that makes it easier to say this but, speaking as a non-audiophile, they're... good? I read a lot about how terrible they are, but in my experience, they're comfortable, their noise cancellation is great at work, and I have never noticed degraded audio quality (once again, as a non-audiophile). Could someone point me to a defacto better pair of headph…

Marshall Monitors: http://www.marshallheadphones.com/headphones/monitor/monitor...

Re: Apple set to get Beats in $3.2B deal

#67

Post by EpicEng »

gdilla wrote: post #43
silverbax88 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's like this: Beats headphones are worth about $50, at the most. Noise-cancelling in an office, you barely need to pay anything, because "noise-cancellation" is achieved by the headphones picking up background noise with a small microphone and then playing a dampening noise in reaction to a sound wave. This is easy when the background noise is constant - that's why "white noise" in offices works so well. But if the…

THough it's not about the headphones. It's about the style and brand. Everyone knows the iphone isn't the best bang for your buck feature wise in smartphones. Everyone knows Nest costs $60 to make on your own. But the point is, mass market needs stuff that looks good, performs well, and where design was matters (looks/functions well for most people).

The parent was responding to someone who was discussing the quality of the beats headphones. He wasn't touching on the strategic element of this acquisition.

Re: Apple set to get Beats in $3.2B deal

#68

Post by [deleted] »

InclinedPlane wrote: post #25
pook1e wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> They sell expensive products. They care about design. They represent a way of living. They're Apple in another market. Except they don't care about quality, which is one of Apple's strongest selling points.

Perception of quality is one of Apple's strongest selling points.

[deleted]

Re: Apple set to get Beats in $3.2B deal

#70

Post by ArkyBeagle »

pdubs wrote: post #19
sharkweek wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was given a pair of Beats Studios almost two years ago, so maybe that makes it easier to say this but, speaking as a non-audiophile, they're... good? I read a lot about how terrible they are, but in my experience, they're comfortable, their noise cancellation is great at work, and I have never noticed degraded audio quality (once again, as a non-audiophile). Could someone point me to a defacto better pair of headph…

Sony MDR-V6/MDR-7506 http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/the-best-150-over-ear-headp...

Those are great for tracking and/or studio-critical ( read: intense, "What was that??") listening but they're pretty shrill for general listening.

I find them fatiguing.

I cannot get past the Koss KTXPRO-1. They're very inexpensive, but I can mix on them, they're comfortable and priced very well. There's no fatigue with them.

I really do throw a rough up first on the 'phones because it seems to get me to a decent first mix fast.

I need to buy a nice pair of Grado and/or Stax just to try to wean myself off these things. :) Don't mean to sound fanboiish, but I've used 'em now for going on fifteen years. Headphones are like that.

Post reply on HN