there are dozens more littered on this website
None of those in any way prove what we have asked of you. Don’t try again. I already used the search and found absolutely nothing.
stay in denial
So obvious those shots at Dr Dre were racist.
And how about saying the headphones are for food court THUGS. I wonder what race that's referring to?
I'm pretty sure Apple has a plan, and a strategy. They've asked the questions you just asked, and answered them for themselves months and years ago. It's not like they decided to buy Beats yesterday, and are now thinking "now what?".
Beats are insanely popular, they look stylish (except that one product you keep spamming, that I've never seen in stores, and probably will be discontinued), they have an extremely powerful brand name, and the mainstream are willing to pay a big premium for them. All that combined is pretty valuable. Yes, Apple could have invested millions and billions, as well as valuable time, energy and focus to create their own headphone line-without a guarantee of success- but this move makes more sense on many levels.
Bottom line is Beats makes very good sounding headphones that are very portable (foldable) and are very stylish. Many of you are judging the old Beats models that did not sound very good. Those were engineered by Monster. Beats fired them and did the engineering themself. Since last Fall the new models have gotten very good reviews for sound quality. Of course they are not top rated by audiofiles. But that's not Beats target market anyway. I'll give you an example. There are incredibly great vaccum cleaners you can buy that are professional level. They are the same price as Dyson vaccum's but are way better. So why do people buy Dyson instead of these professional brands?
So my point is why is there so much unwarranted hate for Beats? They own 80% of the highend consumer market. They are growing extremely fast. They make great profits and margins. Their name is huge with young demo's. So why all the hate? The only conclusion I could reach is fear and prejudice. And many of the comments on this forum confirm that.
I think this picture says it all.
The other headphone is the top rated under $200 headphone vs the Beats Solo2 that is $199.
I mean really. The other one looks so clunky. I'd never wear that outside.
Why are these being worn outside anyway? Get a quality headphone and have it never leave the house.
Proteam backback vacs are easier to use and blow away the Dyson and cost the same. They will last 5x longer than the Dyson.
So why do people buy Dyson instead of a pro vac like the Proteam? Because the Dyson looks great. Dyson markets heavily. And the Dyson seems easier to use (which is actually not true. A backpack vacum is much easier)
Now we are talking about Headphones which are even more about style. Its something people wear EVERYDAY in PUBLIC. My example about Dyson is to show that even for things that have very little to do with style, looks still matter. And they definitely matter when it comes to something you wear everyday in public.
No. I'm saying different consumers have different priorities. Some want performance at all costs. Some want a combination of performance and looks. That does not make them ignorant or dumb.
So appearance for the Dyson does not matter? So why does Samsung and a half dozen other brands have made carbon copies of the Dyson design in their own vaccums? In fact Dyson threatened to sue Samsung for this. If Dyson's success was just about lies why don't other vaccum companies also tell lies?
So Dyson is only successful because of lies? Who speaking FICTION now?
My background is in accounting and finance. I don't need an education in Marketing to understand what customers want and what they don't want. Appearance is VERY IMPORTANT. Its one of the reasons why Apple products are so successful. So are you telling me Apple is telling lies also? You can believe all you want that appearance does not matter. But you are fooling yourself. The entire auto industry is based on appearance.
Find me a non-studio headphone that looks just as good as the Solo2, cost the same or less ($199) and sounds better........
So Apple must be gaining on lies then?
I don't speak fiction. You need to learn the difference between fiction and an opinion. Just because my opinion is not the same as yours that does not mean I speak fiction.
By definition an opinion can never be false. Never.
Someone can say they hate strawberry's. That's not a false statement. That's an opinion.
My whole point is appearance is a huge factor in consumer goods.
Do you seriously think someone would buy a brand new car if they think its UGLY? It does not matter how many features it has, how reliable it is. If a car is UGLY to someone they are not buying it. Same can be said about houses. Same can be said about shoes. Designer bags. Jewelry. Suits. Sunglasses. Watches. And Headphones.
From recent reviews the Solo2 headphones also sound very good. People love the entire package. Beautiful headphones, a cool brand, great resale value, great bass, and very good sounding. Are they the best sounding headphones for the price? Of course not. People don't care.
LOL. If you truly believe that you are ignorant. Tell me why do people spend $1000 for a Louis Vutton bag when a bag of a similiar quality can be had for $200.
And could you refresh my memory and tell me exactly what I said was blatantly FALSE?
If that were true, then just about everything Ive has ever done is wrong. You don't think Apple consistently applies form over function?
You may think that it's not rational to use style when making a purchasing decision, but billions of people see value in style and if they perceive such value then I think it's unfair to claim that they're not rational as you would have to claim that most people in the western world (at least) are not rational in their purchasing decisions. In fact, I would say that style, defined as the look of the product, is the primary factor most people use in choosing a product within the price range they're willing to pay. How many people really analyze all the specifications to make a purchasing decision?
If you're correct, then we should all be wearing plastic bags instead of fashionable clothes or at the very least, we should be wearing the same clothes we wore 20, 30 years ago as long as they still fit and haven't worn out. And Henry Ford was also right - the car manufacturers should only produce cars painted in black.
Brand power is a fact of life. People are willing to pay more more a premium brand.
It may not make sense in your small world but its a fact of life.
Does it make economic sense to own a dog? So are you going to say that's irrational also? Life isn't only about money. You need to get that out of your head.
Wrong. So many purchases are made for non practical reasons. Is there a practical reason to buy a 600 horsepower car? No.
Again you need to live in the REAL WORLD. Not some text book world straight out of ECON101. People buy stuff for various reasons. People buy LUXURY goods not for practical purposes but because it brings them joy, confidence, prestige, ect. Saying that is irrational is straight up condescending and ignorant.
So try again. What I said is not a FALSEHOOD. If it was there would be no such thing as Louis Vutton, Ferrari, Tiffany, ect.
You dont see people wearing headphones on their way to work on the subway, bus, ect?
I see fools wearing huge headphones and/or blaring music such that they couldn’t possibly hear anything around them, sure.
Your question has nothing to do with what I said, however.
So your suggestion is not to spend money even if you have Billions?
So you can take the money with you to the grave? Really?
Do you have an iPhone/iPad/Mac? Then you are buying luxury products yourself. You could have bought a generic Android/PC for much less.
People spend money on different things. As long as they can afford it and it doesn't hurt anyone else who cares? Why are you so judgemental of those buy stuff?
Good for you. You don’t see or hear what I see and hear, however, so that’s you.
YvesVilleneuve AKA Dalai Lama - Even the cheapest breed will cost thousands to feed, shelter, immunize, ect.
What about small dogs? They don't add any home security, personal security, guides, rodent control, ect.
The bottom line is people value different things differently. To some a pet is worth more than $100,000. Why judge? Thats the whole point. Why judge someone who is willing to pay extra to get something they prefer?
Do you always buy the cheapest food everyday? Or only eat vegetables? No. You buy stuff you enjoy eating even if they cost more from time to time.
Maybe you are a Buddhist Monk and don't believe in enjoying life. If so don't look down on others who want to enjoy life. Don't call them irrational because they are willing to spend more for a pair of headphones that matches their style.
You just called several million people fools because they walk around with headphones.
Huge headphones. I wouldn’t go outside with my Harmon/Kardons, first because I don’t want them nicked and second because they’re huge, ungainly, and cancel a fair bit of sound. Over-ear headphones can’t be safely used as utility, and as pure fashion they’re meaningless.
If you think Warren Buffet is an angel read this article about his oil trains and how they cause the price of gas to rise and causes sever environmental disasters.
By Buffett does not want a safer way of transporting oil (a pipeline) because it will hurt his train business.
YvesVilleneuve AKA Dahli Lama - Look it may be okay for you to wear 20 year robes every day but for most of us we like to wear clothes that look good or at least decent.
So may I ask what do you spend your money on?
Do you buy Apple products?
Nonsense. Your style affects how the world sees, judges and treats you. Taking that into consideration when you make a purchase is in no way irrational. Wanting to be seen as cool by your peers is in no way irrational.
Screw ‘em. You will pretend that this reply invalidates my argument.
Forgoing something best for you for something worse that will make you be seen as better is by definition irrational.