or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Rumor: Beats CEO in talks to join Apple as 'special advisor' to Tim Cook
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Rumor: Beats CEO in talks to join Apple as 'special advisor' to Tim Cook

post #1 of 72
Thread Starter 
Building on an earlier rumor that Apple is in discussions to buy Beats Electronics, a new report claims the music company's cofounder and longtime music executive Jimmy Iovine is in talks to join the Cupertino tech giant as a special advisor to CEO Tim Cook.


Beats cofounder Jimmy Iovine. | Source: Billboard


After Apple's rumored interest in acquiring Beats for $3.2 billion set off a media firestorm on Thursday, a follow-up report from the New York Post claims Iovine is in discussions to take on a "special advisor" role at Apple.

As with the Beats buy, details are scarce, though the publication cites sources as saying Iovine will counsel Cook on "creative matters" if a deal is reached. The scope of the purported advisory position is unknown.

Also unknown is how the music mogul is planning to enter Apple. While mere speculation, Iovine could be brought on as a so-called "acqui-hire" if a buyout does happen.

Iovine, who currently serves as chairman of Universal Music Group's Interscope Geffen alongside his role at Beats, has a long history in music and carries a number of high-profile artists in his stable. Even with his background, it is unclear why Apple would need him on the roster.

In a 2013 interview, Iovine claimed he was "really close" to Steve Jobs and spent three years trying to sell the late Apple cofounder on a subscription-based music service. Beats subsequently launched Beats Music, while Apple debuted iTunes Radio; two very different takes on music streaming services.

Apple's rumored acquisition of Beats is already being questioned by pundits and industry watchers, making associated claims of Iovine's special advisory role similarly suspect.
post #2 of 72
That makes a lot more sense.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #3 of 72
Apple "acqui-hiring" a Beats executive with strong music industry connections is one thing. But buying the whole company is another. I think in the end this may play out as Apple picking up a high-powered executive, ala Angela Ahrendts, not a Beats buy.
post #4 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

That makes a lot more sense.

I don't buy this rumour. I did read the other article, just not the 182 comments (yet) but I doubt Apple would triple overpay for the company. Besides, iTunes is doing well in spite of declining sales. I don't see any incentive for Apple to buy Beats Electronics. Heck, I don't see why Jimmy Iovine had a close relationship with Steve Jobs.

For some strange reason I get the feeling they want to sell the company and are trying to drive up its price. Purely unfounded on my part.

OT, but why is his last name all lowercase? Even on Wikipedia (yeah yeah, I know)
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
post #5 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Iovine, who currently serves as chairman of Universal Music Group's Interscope Geffen alongside his role at Beats, has a long history in music and carries a number of high-profile artists in his stable. Even with his background, it is unclear why Apple would need him on the roster.

You can't see WHY Apple would need this guy??!! Apple, who is run by a bunch of stick-in-the-muds, needs a cool guy to front for them. With the loss of Steve, the keynotes have been dull as dirt... so dull, in fact that when Phil Schiller said, "Apple can't innovate, my ass!" it was the high-point of the whole event!

Apple needs a face that speaks for it that is memorable, like John Hodgman or Carly Foulkes, the girl-in-the-pink-dress was for T-mobile. Cook & crew may be the best managers, but they stink as the public face of Apple.
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #6 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post

I don't buy this rumour. I did read the other article, just not the 182 comments (yet) but I doubt Apple would triple overpay for the company. Besides, iTunes is doing well in spite of declining sales. I don't see any incentive for Apple to buy Beats Electronics. Heck, I don't see why Jimmy Iovine had a close relationship with Steve Jobs.

For some strange reason I get the feeling they want to sell the company and are trying to drive up its price. Purely unfounded on my part.

OT, but why is his last name all lowercase? Even on Wikipedia (yeah yeah, I know)

It threw me too but it's a i, not an L

In some fonts upper case I(i) looks like lower case l (L)
post #7 of 72

This is slightly unrelated to the topic perhaps, but I don't think that I've ever seen a picture of him without some sort of hat or cap on, he must be bald.

 

That was my first thought when opening this thread. He's like the Edge (from U2). Has anybody ever seen a picture of him without some hat on?

 

As for the topic, I guess that Iovine joining Apple as a "special advisor" sounds a lot better than Apple buying Beats for 3.2 Billion.

post #8 of 72

lol.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

That makes a lot more sense.

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? 

"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #9 of 72
If they do hire him, I hope they can get him to quit leaking self-promoting information.
post #10 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

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. 

Why does this cost over $3 billion?
Quote:
For all those doubters, all I got to say, is evidence continues to mount from different media sources.

What evidence? More articles about a rumour is not evidence.
Quote:
Still think its an absurd rumor? 

I said it's unsubstantiated and that I would like an explanation as what Apple would get for that purchase that it can't do it itself. So far no one has been able to even begin to answer that question and looking at what HTC paid for it over a 50% share, what HTC was paid to give up all it's shares, and knowledge of Apple's history of mergers and acquisitions it would be a unique occurrence in their history if Apple were to buy Beats for $3.2 billion dollars.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #11 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by jakeb View Post

It threw me too but it's a i, not an L

In some fonts upper case I(i) looks like lower case l (L)

"So much for me preferring sans serif"

Thanks!
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
post #12 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post
 Heck, I don't see why Jimmy Iovine had a close relationship with Steve Jobs.
 

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 executives to sign onto what was then Apple's nascent iTunes initiative, announced in 2001."

"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #13 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

^ post

Good to learn, thanks.
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
post #14 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

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. 

Why does this cost over $3 billion?
Quote:
For all those doubters, all I got to say, is evidence continues to mount from different media sources.

What evidence? More articles about a rumour is not evidence.
Quote:
Still think its an absurd rumor? 

I said it's unsubstantiated and that I would like an explanation as what Apple would get for that purchase that it can't do it itself. So far no one has been able to even begin to answer that question and looking at what HTC paid for it over a 50% share, what HTC was paid to give up all it's shares, and knowledge of Apple's history of mergers and acquisitions it would be a unique occurrence in their history if Apple were to buy Beats for $3.2 billion dollars.

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, Apple has proven time and time again that they are conservative with their money and pay a fair price.  Beats has also prove they are thinking way beyond just headphone hardware. The company has legs and connections which is allowing them to succeed in ways Apple has not been able to do. 

 

For you to sit here, be a doubter after we have had there separate reports now from three rebuable different sources, the odds are not in your favor.  More over for you to doubt value here for Apple is a bit crazy.  Frankly, and no disrespect intended, but I would wagger that if you or I had any true ability or talent to determine true evaluations of companies worth prior to acquisition we would be doing that as our primary jobs instead of sitting here and typing 10s of thousands of posts on Appleinsider.


Edited by snova - 5/8/14 at 10:51pm
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #15 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

^ post

Good to learn, thanks.

yeah.. this guy is connected.

"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #16 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

For you to sit here, be a doubter after we have had there separate reports now from three rebuable different sources, the odds are not in your favor.

Your other asinine comments aside, if you actually read what I wrote I have no favour. I have taken no stance as to what will or won't happen. I have provided information about historical data which you have discounted by replying with "well others are reporting on it, too." You're taking a side here by claiming there is evidence despite even providing evidence that Iovine has been talking with Apple for nearly 15 years.

I'm looking for a cogent concept that would make Beats be worth $3.2 billion to Apple and you et al. have repeatedly failed to do anything but state one. Note that I have repeatedly asked for one, not simply making statements that it must be true because rumours exist.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #17 of 72
Beats makes crappy headphones, with no design taste or marketing taste evidenced by the brand.

I think Apple is more likely to buy the design for the 1980s Chrysler LeBaron and start a gas-guzzler car division than it is to buy Beats for any reason. Just my opinion.
post #18 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

For you to sit here, be a doubter after we have had there separate reports now from three rebuable different sources, the odds are not in your favor.

Your other asinine comments aside, if you actually read what I wrote I have no favour. I have taken no stance as to what will or won't happen. I have provided information about historical data which you have discounted by replying with "well others are reporting on it, too." You're taking a side here by claiming there is evidence despite even providing evidence that Iovine has been talking with Apple for nearly 15 years.

I'm looking for a cogent concept that would make Beats be worth $3.2 billion to Apple and you et al. have repeatedly failed to do anything but state one.

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 back out of eating crow.  Am I wrong?  Perhaps its time to quit with the nay saying and go into observation mode with an open mind.


Edited by snova - 5/8/14 at 10:29pm
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #19 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

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, 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 Business Insider and confirm by separate source from USAToday), and now after this second report NY Post report, you are trying to slowing back out of eating crow.  Am I wrong?

1) Did you see that Jobs and Apple spoke with Iovine many, many times over the years?

2) Again, I have no evidence to say that any report is or isn't BS. That's the difference between us; you want something exiting to happen so you get rambunctious when some rumour you approve of occurs, instead of actually trying to analyze its parts and than making a determination about its likelihood based on available information. There is absolutely no evidence to say this will or won't happen, all you can do is use the information available to create a most-likely case but it's pointless if you don't separate yourself from your desire. I have zero desire to see this happen or not happen. I am neutral. It means nothing to me either way; you, however, are clearly putting excess weight on that feather. You might end up being correct, but that's chance, not because you built a valid statistical model.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #20 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

2) Again, I have no evidence to say that any report is or isn't BS. 

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.

"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #21 of 72
Iovine is a master of self-promotion. The fact that multiple media companies are reporting this story probably means he leaked it to multiple reporters. There is also the familiar echo chamber aspect of rumors that must be considered. It may or may not turn out to be true, but seeing it reported in multiple places does not add weight to the likelihood.
post #22 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

Then wouldn't it be prudent to not say so in your post?

Where have I stated otherwise? I don't recall a single comment I made that stated this will not ever happen.
Quote:
again, looks like more and more like you are trying to gracefully back away from eating crow.

What am I backing away from? I started off by stating that I don't see how this is worth over $3 billion to Apple and I've maintained that, despite opening myself up to additional information that could make me see the benefit such an expensive purchase for IP that Apple has under its belt for an acquisition that far exceeds what Apple has ever paid for a company. The odds are that will change someday but why Beats (asking for the n-th time)?

See the difference: "I don't see the value." ≠ "There is no value." If I felt the latter was true I would back it up with evidence. Not seeing value and asking for someone to point out the value is looking for more information. All I want from you is information.
Edited by SolipsismX - 5/8/14 at 10:48pm

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #23 of 72
Anyone in need of a good laugh after these comments, read this thread:

http://www.gixxer.com/forums/showthread.php?t=226570
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
post #24 of 72
Maybe Beats is trying to dupe Samsung into paying $3.7 Billion. Samsung is more desperate to look cool than Apple.
post #25 of 72


Edited by GTR - 5/8/14 at 11:13pm
If you want to make enemies, try to change something.
Reply
If you want to make enemies, try to change something.
Reply
post #26 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post

[image]

1) Now Dropbox I could make a case for a $3.2 billion purchase.

2) Dropbox is the example I would use for an argument as to why Apple needs to buy Beats since Apple had every component of what Dropbox brilliantly and beautifully does but couldn't figure out how to do.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #27 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post

Maybe Beats is trying to dupe Samsung into paying $3.7 Billion. Samsung is more desperate to look cool than Apple.

 

Google just upped the ante to $4.4 billion. Apple will pick it up from Google next year for $1.5 billion.

Hmmmmmm...
Reply
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
post #28 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

1) Now Dropbox I could make a case for a $3.2 billion purchase.

If you know what you are doing and confident in yourself you may want to consider a career change. It likely pays a lot better than what you or I make in our real day jobs.   I personally won't pretend to be able to present a case for acquisition valuation for either Dropbox, Beats or any other company that wants to put itself up for sale.   Anyone, who attempts to do the same here that has no inside knowledge of either company or the professional background to do such evalution is just speculating wildly.   However, you somehow feel that you can evaluate  spending billions of dollars on companies without insider information while playing arm chair quarterback. 


Edited by snova - 5/8/14 at 11:29pm
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #29 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

...is just speculating.

That's what it means to make a case for something.
Quote:
However, you somehow feel that you can evaluate spending billions of dollars on companies without insider information while playing arm chair quarterback.

Absolutely! I, like anyone else, can state opinions in the form of an argument as to why I feel something may or may not occur.
Edited by SolipsismX - 5/8/14 at 11:31pm

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #30 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by quinney View Post

Maybe Beats is trying to dupe Samsung into paying $3.7 Billion. Samsung is more desperate to look cool than Apple.

Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Google just upped the ante to $4.4 billion. Apple will pick it up from Google next year for $1.5 billion.

Google has no need of buying Beats, but they would if they thought Apple wanted it. Samsung would try to photocopy Beats rather then pay for it.
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
"That (the) world is moving so quickly that iOS is already amongst the older mobile operating systems in active development today." — The Verge
Reply
post #31 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post



With Angela now on board, I guess #4 is Mac (under)wearables¿
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
Send from my iPhone. Excuse brevity and auto-corrupt.
Reply
post #32 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilBoogie View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTR View Post


With Angela now on board, I guess #4 is Mac (under)wearables¿

that or "Magic wand"

"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #33 of 72
.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #34 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by Macky the Macky View Post

Google has no need of buying Beats, but they would if they thought Apple wanted it.

 

Exactly why I said it...

Hmmmmmm...
Reply
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
post #35 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

.

my thoughts exactly.   lets wait and see. 

"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #36 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Absolutely! I, like anyone else, can state opinions in the form of an argument as to why I feel something may or may not occur.

 

I thought this was where I applied to become CEO of Apple.

Hmmmmmm...
Reply
Hmmmmmm...
Reply
post #37 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

my thoughts exactly.   lets wait and see. 

You've been acting very irrational on this topic. As a result you've failed to offer anything useful to me in this conversation. I have no idea what's going on with you but I hope it stops.

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply

This bot has been removed from circulation due to a malfunctioning morality chip.

Reply
post #38 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post

my thoughts exactly.   lets wait and see. 

You've been acting very irrational on this topic. As a result you've failed to offer anything useful to me in this conversation. I have no idea what's going on with you but I hope it stops.

sorry, I have not been able to provide you with any insider information about the evaluation of Beats valuation.  When you find someone on AppleInsider who has this insider information and has the professional skill to provide you a summation of total company value, please let me know.  Until such time, all valuation I for one will consider a scientific wild ass guess from AI forum speculators such as yourself and a waste of time in determining if reports of acquisition are true or not simply based on the 3.2B figure which no doubt is a large number to get one's head around; then again so is 1B or even $250M.  Until then I think its best to take a wait and see position, instead of trying to debunk reports purely based on reported  value of the deal. 


Edited by snova - 5/8/14 at 11:53pm
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
post #39 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post
 

However, you somehow feel that you can evaluate  spending billions of dollars on companies without insider information while playing arm chair quarterback. 

 

And why not? He's entitled to his opinion. Commenting on Apple rumors is what people do on this site.

post #40 of 72
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by snova View Post
 

However, you somehow feel that you can evaluate  spending billions of dollars on companies without insider information while playing arm chair quarterback. 

 

And why not? He's entitled to his opinion. Commenting on Apple rumors is what people do on this site.

Myself and other here are not looking for opinion... just as it was clear that he was not looking for opinion either from other posters either that he has tried to shutdown. He wanted hard facts and evidence and information that is accurate.  That is fair, I think we are all looking for that.    I think we all know how much we value opinion here on AI.  The only thing they are good for is endless debate and frankly a waste of time.

 

If he wants to have a debate based on opinion he is surely free to do that if he finds it valuable and a good use of one's time to have a debate which will never draw any closer to reality.


Edited by snova - 5/9/14 at 12:02am
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
"Building for the future?! They should be running around reacting to the present!" -John Moltz
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Rumor: Beats CEO in talks to join Apple as 'special advisor' to Tim Cook