It's Official: Apple Acquires Beats for $3 Billion

[silvarios]

davemchine wrote:
2) from what I have read their streaming audio service is quite good so perhaps they are gaining some tech or licensing deals there.

Lot of good services out there. I think Beats paid about $14 million two years ago for the service. Seems like Apple could have spent their money better if they primarily wanted the music streaming component.

[vision63]

I have my trusty Bose headphones but the Beats sound fine. They don't sound as good as the Bose but it's exaggerated how terrible they sound. I like some bass. Not as much as the kids though. The problem with the Beats (and the Bose) are they are too freaking expensive. They're just headphones. Can't cost but a few bucks to make.

[silvarios]

vision63 wrote:
The problem with the Beats (and the Bose) are they are too freaking expensive. They're just headphones. Can't cost but a few bucks to make.

Exactly the problem. There are better headphones which cost the same or less.

[vision63]

silvarios wrote:
[quote=vision63]
The problem with the Beats (and the Bose) are they are too freaking expensive. They're just headphones. Can't cost but a few bucks to make.

Exactly the problem. There are better headphones which cost the same or less.
I saved, put on layaway, mowed lawns etc, sold candy just to buy Converse All Stars, Nikes and Levis when I was young. I understand why the kids want these things over the more practical options.

[silvarios]

Yeah, I've been there too. Still not smart to be so slavishly devoted to brand. I figured kids today would be a lot wiser than me.

[hal]

I've read that the purchase is all about grabbing a particular Beats executive. You can gripe all you want about the quality of the stuff, but the marketing is clearly top notch.

[silvarios]

hal wrote: You can gripe all you want about the quality of the stuff, but the marketing is clearly top notch.

This is a deal site, strange not to gripe when something costs more, but is inferior.

[sekker]

I think it's fine so long as the cash is from offshore accounts. Then it's really half he price in US dollars.

[RAMd®d]

I can only assume that there is more to it than the public knows about.

Agreed.

This is still the case, as it has been from the jump.


They've invested in a fickle market then. It isn't based on quality or substance, but style. Styles shift with the wind.
- - - - -
True, but Apple has been pretty good at selling style.

True, but the key to Apple's continued success is selling a graceful blend of style and substance. This does make it a safe bet for the spec-challenged, image conscious demographic, like those who buy BMWs without knowing anything about the car other than it's fashionable and a symbol.


I saved, put on layaway, mowed lawns etc, sold candy just to buy Converse All Stars...

For me it was US Keds and PF Flyers.

I drifted away, not for any sense of freeing myself from brand idolatry; it was just too much work.


but the marketing is clearly top notch.

That's generally been acknowledged, but it's not much comfort.

The headphones aren't very good. They are rumored to be better these days, but that wasn't much of a bar to jump.


strange not to gripe when something costs more, but is inferior.

One can split hairs about defining inferior, but I believe the beats cans to be mediocre at best, and as such, to be way over priced. Mediocre cans probably do well on limited genres, so in that case good enough is good enough. There's nothing wrong with that if it works for you. But they are far from what I think of, without qualification, as a *good* product. It's not like Apple bought Sennheiser. LOL

One day, I want it revealed that Apple did this deal with a brilliant hidden agenda that gave them something very valuable in moving them forward in building a great product, however tangentially it might be. If it's getting a great industry exec who knows the industry rather than trying to use a tech exec who has to learn the industry, that's good enough for me. (lol) But I'd *really* like it to be something brilliant, and quite unexpected.

I consider Apple products nothing near mediocre and appreciate that their marketing is definitely part of their success. Given that, it disappoints me for the time being, that Apple has partnered with what I see as a schlock merchandiser.

If Apple were to turn beats cans into a quality product more fitting of the price, I'd take that as a win.

Until something changes significantly, I'm left wondering WTF, over?

[silvarios]

sekker wrote:
I think it's fine so long as the cash is from offshore accounts. Then it's really half he price in US dollars.

Interesting point.