The HTC leadership must be kicking themselves. The company they sold for $300M a mere 2-3 years ago is worth so much more now. If only they has realised the potential.
According to news reports, Dre/Iovine bought back 1/2 of the 2011 stock for $150m exactly one year after HTC bought 50% of the company (HTC kept the other 25%). Dre/Iovine ended up with 75% controlling interest. They were making big money and wanted control back.
HTC said they wanted to "concentrate on mobile..." Maybe that means that HTC wasn't doing as well as they wanted at their core business. Then in 2013, the Carlyle Group bought HTC's remaining 25% stake. According to Bloomberg, Sept. 2013, Carlyle paid $500m for that 25% -- the Bloomberg headline is interesting: Did Dr. Dre Underprice His Beats in the Carlyle Deal?
Yeah I read that letter and the Beats hardware stuff is rolling up under Schiller, not Ive or Riccio.
Marketing sets product direction at Apple. Then it goes to Ive and co to physically design the fine details or the actual product itself. Engineering work to make it work. That's the same for every product at Apple.
Google buys robotics, self-driving cars, advanced AI that will create assistants like in movie "Her", life-extension technologies that will extend human lifespan, advanced drones/aeronautics companies that will bring internet to all parts of the world.. and Apple buys urban fashion accessories for $3 BILLION DOLLARS!
Let that sink in for a bit so you realize how completely rudderless Apple's leadership has become.
If that's the case, there's no point to posting it. It would just be a boring fact, like "the sky is blue." But, that isn't the case. Apple is still a brand and company to be reckoned with. And you know it. Otherwise, you wouldn't be spinning so hard for your "APPLE IS DOOM" fantasies.
Marketing sets product direction at Apple. Then it goes to Ive and co to physically design the fine details or the actual product itself. Engineering work to make it work. That's the same for every product at Apple.
Poor Ive.
Like throwing Air Jordan's at Christian Louboutin.
The difference here is, this company actually makes real money and has two people that can help them in other ways. I believe buying a successful company for just two years of their revenue, and gaining the best streaming service, and accessories that your competitors try to use to make them seem cooler than you, is much better than spending the same money on a thermostat company that only makes $300 million a year. Or better yet, 12.8 billion on Motorola which hadn't made a profit in years. Many doubt Cook's judgement, but they refused to by nest for such a price because it didn't make sense and doesn't solve a problem that Apple has. They have been rumored to do a subscription service for years but they were being blocked by the label heads. Now the will negotiate with one of their own. Someone who already negotiated the terms Apple could not get.
You bring up some good points, but I still don't feel like Apple is getting the value for its money that I expect when it makes acquisitions. They wanted the music streaming service and maybe a couple of new executives, but they payed for the headphones business and all the other baggage that went along with it.
Apple's strongest quality is it's focus. Now they are going to be forced to keep the headphone business going and manage a second brand in order to justify the enormous price tag. If Apple isn't careful this could become a distraction and dilute their mindshare.
I also think trying to buy the negotiating abilities/street cred/whatever of beats could easily backfire. Beats will now be thought of as an Apple brand; there is no guarantee that someone who loved Beats but didn't love Apple will continue to do so now that beats is part of Apple.
I have been very happy with Cook's leadership, but this acquisition seems extremely out of character for Apple and Cook in particular. I hope I'm wrong, but I can't shake the feeling that everyone would be better off with Beats and Apple staying separate companies.
You bring up some good points, but I still don't feel like Apple is getting the value for its money that I expect when it makes acquisitions. They wanted the music streaming service and maybe a couple of new executives, but they payed for the headphones business and all the other baggage that went along with it.
Apple's strongest quality is it's focus. Now they are going to be forced to keep the headphone business going and manage a second brand in order to justify the enormous price tag. If Apple isn't careful this could become a distraction and dilute their mindshare.
I also think trying to buy the negotiating abilities/street cred/whatever of beats could easily backfire. Beats will now be thought of as an Apple brand; there is no guarantee that someone who loved Beats but didn't love Apple will continue to do so now that beats is part of Apple.
I have been very happy with Cook's leadership, but this acquisition seems extremely out of character for Apple and Cook in particular.
It's all Hollywood bullshit. So unlike Apple.
At least Sony bought content when it acquired Columbia.
You bring up some good points, but I still don't feel like Apple is getting the value for its money that I expect when it makes acquisitions. They wanted the music streaming service and maybe a couple of new executives, but they payed for the headphones business and all the other baggage that went along with it.
Apple's strongest quality is it's focus. Now they are going to be forced to keep the headphone business going and manage a second brand in order to justify the enormous price tag. If Apple isn't careful this could become a distraction and dilute their mindshare.
I also think trying to buy the negotiating abilities/street cred/whatever of beats could easily backfire. Beats will now be thought of as an Apple brand; there is no guarantee that someone who loved Beats but didn't love Apple will continue to do so now that beats is part of Apple.
I have been very happy with Cook's leadership, but this acquisition seems extremely out of character for Apple and Cook in particular. I hope I'm wrong, but I can't shake the feeling that everyone would be better off with Beats and Apple staying separate companies.
I think Cook is bringing people online who sure up places Jobs would have help with. With Iovine they get the person who helped secure the iTunes deals in the first place so, they are really getting back to basics. As far as managing brands, each market that Apple is in is a Brand of its own and completely different markets, but they are designed to support each other. Beats really fits their music line, I see so many iPhones attached to Beats headphones on campus that I can only see the upside and the connection.
Uhhh ohhh... folks... their will be a mass exodus of Apple customers, all selling their Apple products and going to the Microsoft or Samsung dealer. All these (you) Hip-Hop hating (as if Rock music is 100% pure and descent), racist, "this will bring in all the thugs and criminals" into the Apple culture 'cuz goodness knows only people who listen to Rap, smoke marijuana, and live in the 'hood buy Beats. Run to the hills and protect your children!!!!
Okay apple paid 3 billion for beats. If beats sales is 1.5 it will take longer than 2 years to pay for the deal. 1.5 billion is not profit it's total sales. As wise as apple has been with acquisitions I'm going to take a wait and see approach. It may turn out to be a great move.
Keep in mind that revenue does not include Beats Music and most of their acquisitions don't have any significant revenue or built in customers that aren't already buying apple gear already.
Marketing sets product direction at Apple. Then it goes to Ive and co to physically design the fine details or the actual product itself. Engineering work to make it work. That's the same for every product at Apple.
Hmm that's not the impression I got from Walter Isaccson's book or the Jony Ive bio that came out last year. Do you have a source for that?
Apple has to deal with Samsung ripping them off, Beats headphone as knocked off every day in china and you can buy Beasts looking headphones for $35 on the street.
Actually you can get a pair of Beats knock-off earbuds for just $1. I live in China.
A revolting tattooed arm thrusting up like some kind of Fascist symbol now represents the face of Apple.
Goodbye Steve Jobs and your magical Apple.
Hello to Tim Cook's Apple of 2014: Enter the Thug.
Rest in peace, Good Taste; it was nice knowing you.
You have seen the video of Steve and Dr. Dre chatting, right? I see a lot of mutual respect and a deep understanding of issues outside Jobs' main field:
A revolting tattooed arm thrusting up like some kind of Fascist symbol now represents the face of Apple.
Goodbye Steve Jobs and your magical Apple.
Hello to Tim Cook's Apple of 2014: Enter the Thug.
Rest in peace, Good Taste; it was nice knowing you.
You have seen the video of Steve and Dr. Dre chatting, right? I see a lot of mutual respect and a deep understanding of issues outside Jobs' main field: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaxZ8XsN0xo
Comments
The HTC leadership must be kicking themselves. The company they sold for $300M a mere 2-3 years ago is worth so much more now. If only they has realised the potential.
According to news reports, Dre/Iovine bought back 1/2 of the 2011 stock for $150m exactly one year after HTC bought 50% of the company (HTC kept the other 25%). Dre/Iovine ended up with 75% controlling interest. They were making big money and wanted control back.
HTC said they wanted to "concentrate on mobile..." Maybe that means that HTC wasn't doing as well as they wanted at their core business. Then in 2013, the Carlyle Group bought HTC's remaining 25% stake. According to Bloomberg, Sept. 2013, Carlyle paid $500m for that 25% -- the Bloomberg headline is interesting: Did Dr. Dre Underprice His Beats in the Carlyle Deal?
http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-09-30/did-dr-dot-dre-underprice-his-beats-in-the-carlyle-deal
Pro tip: Use a URL shortener.
Yeah I read that letter and the Beats hardware stuff is rolling up under Schiller, not Ive or Riccio.
Marketing sets product direction at Apple. Then it goes to Ive and co to physically design the fine details or the actual product itself. Engineering work to make it work. That's the same for every product at Apple.
If that's the case, there's no point to posting it. It would just be a boring fact, like "the sky is blue." But, that isn't the case. Apple is still a brand and company to be reckoned with. And you know it. Otherwise, you wouldn't be spinning so hard for your "APPLE IS DOOM" fantasies.
And HP is allowed to sell products with Beats audio into 2015:
http://************/2014/05/28/hp-planning-aggressive-line-up-of-new-beats-audio-products-through-2015-as-beats-design-firm-replaced-by-apple/
Replace *********** with 9to5mac . com
Having to replace those links is so annoying. What year is this?
Stolen from Bloomingdales logo idjut.
Poor Ive.
Like throwing Air Jordan's at Christian Louboutin.
You bring up some good points, but I still don't feel like Apple is getting the value for its money that I expect when it makes acquisitions. They wanted the music streaming service and maybe a couple of new executives, but they payed for the headphones business and all the other baggage that went along with it.
Apple's strongest quality is it's focus. Now they are going to be forced to keep the headphone business going and manage a second brand in order to justify the enormous price tag. If Apple isn't careful this could become a distraction and dilute their mindshare.
I also think trying to buy the negotiating abilities/street cred/whatever of beats could easily backfire. Beats will now be thought of as an Apple brand; there is no guarantee that someone who loved Beats but didn't love Apple will continue to do so now that beats is part of Apple.
I have been very happy with Cook's leadership, but this acquisition seems extremely out of character for Apple and Cook in particular. I hope I'm wrong, but I can't shake the feeling that everyone would be better off with Beats and Apple staying separate companies.
It's all Hollywood bullshit. So unlike Apple.
At least Sony bought content when it acquired Columbia.
Just coz you put it in +7 size doesn't make it true. Nor does Tim saying it, he's no audio engineer.
http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/monster-beats-dr-dre-solo
http://itsjustjustin.com/you-dont-always-get-what-you-paid-for/2622
http://itsjustjustin.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/Monster-Beats-by-Dre-vs-Beyerdynamic-DT-880.png
http://www.forbes.com/sites/geoffreymorrison/2013/11/09/10-headphones-better-than-beats/
BTW I updated my AI killer scriptlet if anyone is interested.
post #92
Uhhh ohhh... folks... their will be a mass exodus of Apple customers, all selling their Apple products and going to the Microsoft or Samsung dealer. All these (you) Hip-Hop hating (as if Rock music is 100% pure and descent), racist, "this will bring in all the thugs and criminals" into the Apple culture 'cuz goodness knows only people who listen to Rap, smoke marijuana, and live in the 'hood buy Beats. Run to the hills and protect your children!!!!
/s if you don't get it.
Maybe I should have used the /s tag. I didn't post it because I agree with what Cook said.
Ah-ha, that didn't come across sorry :P
Actually you can get a pair of Beats knock-off earbuds for just $1. I live in China.
A revolting tattooed arm thrusting up like some kind of Fascist symbol now represents the face of Apple.
Goodbye Steve Jobs and your magical Apple.
Hello to Tim Cook's Apple of 2014: Enter the Thug.
Rest in peace, Good Taste; it was nice knowing you.
You have seen the video of Steve and Dr. Dre chatting, right? I see a lot of mutual respect and a deep understanding of issues outside Jobs' main field:
Ten years ago, Dre hadn't made that video.