or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by snova

Then wouldn't it be prudent to not say so in your post?   again, looks like more and more like you are trying to gracefully back away from eating crow. Im done.  For a guy you tries very hard to look open minded, you failed today.   Very uncharacteristic of you and surprising.  I'm very surprised.
Did you even look at the  Huffington Post article which state there was a meeting 1 year ago between Beats (Iovine) and Apple (Cook)? Pretty sure 1 year ago is less than 15 years and quite relevant, no?  Here is what I see and I could be wrong, but to me it appears that you made bold statement that you think the first report was BS (from Financial Times and confirm by separate source from USAToday), and now after this second report NY Post report, you are trying to slowing...
yeah.. this guy is connected.
I don't work at Apple, nor was I a fly on the wall in past meetings between Apple and Beats.   Both the initial meeting in March of 2013 and any subsequent ones.   Thus ask me why $3.2B in a bit absurd, I am going to repeat what I said in the other thread. No one knows what was offered, what Beats has been being worked on prior to announcement and what the angle is, except people who were in those meetings.  As to worth, too high or too low, as I stated in previous thread,...
Jimmy Iovine was instrumental to allowing the first major music label to sign with Apple for the iTunes store  back in 2001. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/06/apple-beats_n_2815676.html "The meeting between Cook and Iovine, who is also chairman of music company Interscope-Geffen-A&M, was "informational" and covered a broad range of music-related topics, the sources said." "Iovine, [...], has a long association with Apple and was one of the first music industry...
lol.Makes even more sense if Apple buys Beats as a wholly owned subsidiary.   keeps licenses and successful brand in place, while Apple pulls the puppet strings in their favor.  For all those doubters, all I got to say, is evidence continues to mount from different media sources.  Still think its an absurd rumor? 
hardly absurd  considering Apple meet with Beats, one year prior to this "Fools" joke. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/06/apple-beats_n_2815676.html
why would Apple NEED to transfer the rights? All they need to do is acquire Beats as a wholly owned subsidiary.  Leave the Beat brand alone and pull the puppet strings in their favor. 
  What does music online service have to do with a company who started off building headphones (HW)? Nothing, right? Well, bam.. out of nowhere a Headphones (HW) company get into the music services ("Cloud" w/ client SW development) business. There is obviously more to Beats than a bunch of guys who want to compete in headphones biz.   We have no idea what Beats showed Apple to justify such a high price, was it just what we have seen thus for or did they show them...
USA Today has confirmed through their own sources that this is not a rumor. http://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/2014/05/08/report-apple-to-acquire-beats/8868913/
New Posts  All Forums: