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.
YouTube’s streaming music heyday is about to end. As part of the Beats deal, the heads of the three major labels have secretly agreed not to renew their YouTube licenses. You can’t win unless you kill the competition, and Tim Cook has made a preemptive strike.
Interesting read, especially in light of this thread, looks like Jimmy gets paid after the deal too, not just a one shot deal, and a swipe at YouTube as well...
I'm a bit bemused by these 2 rumours too!
Just to set things straight I'm quite satisfied with Apples presentations, you think that the quip Phil made would carry any weight
if it weren't for the revealing of Mac Pro?
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.
Apple still know how to entertain & Federighi is a good presenter, maybe it's the hair!
Getting back to the question of Jimmy lovine he maybe their to give that missing essence of Jobs in the form of Love of Music, as of late there really wasn't
an event with musical ending.
More over Apple did have Harman Kardon make pro-speakers for them, they HK are owners of AKG headphones they AKG have made a Dre Beats
version of their 700 - 400 series. I love the retro look of the "akg 701"
If they could make & improve those headphones tech wise but keep the look.
On the front of their model for subscription, I don't know anything about their sound-files & if those are higher quality?
Dre Beats bought out MOG (for 14M) which created deals for their mobile/sound system in all thing lap-tops, iPods, Cars etc
but to have Apple now buy DB for 3.2B is questionable & laughable.
hmm... audio equipment may be an Apple' weak area so there may be some credence. For example Apple head/ear-phones are poor compared to the Etymotic Pro ones I use. That said, it might simply be choice on Apple' part so far, maybe they don't want to make premium quality head/ear-phones. However, I think Beats equipment sucks the big one so I hope it's not true.
sorry, I have not been able to provide you with any insider information about the evaluation of Beats valuation.
1) So now you're claiming I asked for insider information and not simply a model as to why this would be worthwhile to Apple?
2) You should really pay more attention here instead of trying to make smarmy comments. This forum is great resource for learning if you're willing to open yourself to the knowledge and PoVs others have to offer.
Until such time, all valuation I for one will consider a scientific wild ass guess
It's a scientific -and- a wild ass guess? How exactly does that work? My understanding of the term "wild ass guess" is one that involves no data points in which to build a model. There is nothing scientific about that.
With Beats and Apple there are plenty of points in which to make factual statements. You've even made one yourself which you cited as Iovine met with Cook in 2011. Unfortunately you then stopped looking for more data and decided that was all the proof you needed.
Making a prediction is like counting cards. In that case, based on what cards have been removed from the shoe and the number of cards remaining you can reliably calculate the odds of another card appearing. Playing the odds doesn't guarantee any hand but over a long enough period the odds will balance. You don't deviate from your bet because "you have a feeling." Determining how a person will act is tricker as it contains a lot more variables and any one person may appear irrational but as a whole they tend to follow predictable patterns. Companies often do the same thing.
Could Apple pay 8x(?) more Beats than any other acquisition in their history? Possibly, but do you honestly think, given all the information you have about Apple and Beats' actions and financial history that it's the most likely thing to happen? It would be highly unusual so what information can you provide to be the catalyst for this atypical move? The best I've read is that Apple feels iT(Music)S is getting stale and no longer appealing to a younger crowd. I can see that as anything well structured, long-established, and ubiquitous can seem boring to a younger generation.
Just as it was clear that he was not looking for opinion either from other posters either that he has tried to shutdown.
If I didn't want an intelligent opinion I wouldn't ask questions on this forum. Note that I qualified my comments with the word intelligent, something you having been supplying in your comments
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.
Speaking of reality your comments seem to be slipping further and further from it. You can make it back to Earth Sandra.
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.
Oh, give me a fucking break with all the sensationalism. I don't think many people really give a shit how "cool" Apple's execs are, as long as they're the best for the job and develop great products. "Dull as dirt"? Not quite. The products have always been the star of the show, and Apple keynotes are still by FAR the most exciting in tech. Apple's execs arent the most charismatic people on the planet, but they certainly dont "stink" as far as tech execs go- They're still more charismatic and sincere than most.
Until such time, all valuation I for one will consider a scientific wild ass guess
It's a scientific -and- a wild ass guess? How exactly does that work? My understanding of the term "wild ass guess" is one that involves no data points in which to build a model. There is nothing scientific about that.
exactly! we finally agree. This is a common phrase that one use's when you are being asked to provide an accurate number when in fact you have no freaking clue or accurate information which will lead you with any hope to even come close.
exactly! we finally agree. This is a common phrase that one use's when you are being asked to provide an accurate number when in fact you have no freaking clue or accurate information which will lead you with any hope to even come close.
I wonder if you'll ever comprehend the difference between stating an opinion and making an unwavering, absolute statement. So far the odds are against it.
PS: If you think we agree then you don't even understand what you wrote, much less what I wrote.
exactly! we finally agree. This is a common phrase that one use's when you are being asked to provide an accurate number when in fact you have no freaking clue or accurate information which will lead you with any hope to even come close.
I wonder if you'll ever comprehend the difference between stating an opinion and making an unwavering, absolute statement. So far the odds are against it.
PS: If you think we agree then you don't even understand what you wrote, much less what I wrote.
Let me make this clear. Feel free to give your opinion and SWAGs. I for one am not interested in debating with opinion and generating scientific wild ass guesses out of my butt. So please... proceed and ignore me. Hope you find what you are looking for from this forum through this approach and are satisfied with it.
Oh, give me a fucking break with all the sensationalism. I don't think many people really give a shit how "cool" Apple's execs are, as long as they're the best for the job and develop great products. "Dull as dirt"? Not quite. The products have always been the star of the show, and Apple keynotes are still by FAR the most exciting in tech. Apple's execs arent the most charismatic people on the planet, but they certainly dont "stink" as far as tech execs go- They're still more charismatic and sincere than most.
God help Apple if they think they need Jimmy Iovine to give Apple some cool factor or to be the showman at keynote events.
Let's see...
Spotify is worth $4 B...
Pandora is worth $5.4 B...
$3.2 B for Beats is not so crazy at all... Plus they have hardware patents that are licensed globally and strong media industry connections...
I predict that this deal will happen and will be a huge success.
iTunes is becoming Apple's biggest money maker.
What hardware patents of theirs would Apple need/want? What industry connections are worth $3B and what would Apple need them for? If Eddy Cue is unable to get a Spotify like service off the ground and Apple is willing to spend the money then just buy Spotify! Or buy Pandora and make iTunes Radio better. Buying a trendy brand that gets routinely panned for being overpriced crap is a horrible idea.
What hardware patents of theirs would Apple need/want? What industry connections are worth $3B and what would Apple need them for? If Eddy Cue is unable to get a Spotify like service off the ground and Apple is willing to spend the money then just buy Spotify! Or buy Pandora and make iTunes Radio better. Buying a trendy brand that gets routinely panned for being overpriced crap is a horrible idea.
You don't understand that it is not easy to get products like Beats Music or Spotify off the ground and time is money.
It takes a long time and a costs a lot of money to get the contract agreements if you can get them at all.
The industry would even challenge Apple more aggressively because they are Apple.
It is easy for Apple to scoop this up and make money because it is already a successful business with no legal problems.
-As soon as Apple signs the $3.2 B check and takes Beats Music Global, the Streaming Music subscription alone will be worth over $10 B.
-Plus Beats owns over 50% of the premium headphone market.
-When Apple ventures into the iTV market, it will need good audio.
-iOS in the Car will get bigger and bigger, Apple can also offer Beats Audio in the car.
-Beats Audio patents are licensed by phone makers, computer makers, car makers etc...
You must understand that if you had $3 B in your pocket right now, you could not build up Beats with it.
Moreover, I would buy Beats over Nest any day of the week and twice on Sunday for my $3 B.
You don't understand that it is not easy to get products like Beats Music or Spotify off the ground and time is money.
It takes a long time and a costs a lot of money to get the contract agreements if you can get them at all.
The industry would even challenge Apple more aggressively because they are Apple.
It is easy for Apple to scoop this up and make money because it is already a successful business with no legal problems.
-As soon as Apple signs the $3.2 B check and takes Beats Music Global, the Streaming Music subscription alone will be worth over $10 B.
-Plus Beats owns over 50% of the premium headphone market.
-When Apple ventures into the iTV market, it will need good audio.
-iOS in the Car will get bigger and bigger, Apple can also offer Beats Audio in the car. -Beats Audio patents are licensed by phone makers, computer makers, car makers etc...
I would buy Beats over Nest any day of the week and twice on Sunday for my $3 B.
But who likes Beats audio? And who says they will still be a fashion statement 6 months or a year from now. Plus does Apple really need to spend $3B on a fashion statement? Does Jony Ive really want to spend time designing headphones? I suppose Apple could make Beats a subsidiary and just leave the brand as is, but that seems like a money grab more than anything. And I think it would have a negative impact on Apple's brand which is about quality, not overpriced crappy plastic headphones.
Someone on CNBC said they spoke with several "sources" who said this is all about the headphones. So basically Apple is paying $3B for a brand of overpriced headphones with crap sound quality. Tim, no. Just no. :no:
But who likes Beats audio? And who says they will still be a fashion statement 6 months or a year from now. Plus does Apple really need to spend $3B on a fashion statement? Does Jony Ive really want to spend time designing headphones? I suppose Apple could make Beats a subsidiary and just leave the brand as is, but that seems like a money grab more than anything. And I think it would have a negative impact on Apple's brand which is about quality, not overpriced crappy plastic headphones.
A lot of people like Beats Audio including myself although I am a Sennheiser fan.
They currently have over 50% of the premium market and it's not just because of fashion, the headphones sound good.
More importantly, the contracts for Beats Music are worth a fortune and are not easy to get even if you have the money.
There are a few things companies like Apple gladly pay for if it fits their need:
1. Cost savings (How much would it cost to do from scratch)
2. Regulatory / Legal hurdles (How hard would it be to negotiate the contracts if at all possible)
3. Current Major Business initiative alignment (Does it fit their current initiative to revamp iTunes / iOS)
If you think about it, Beats covers all 3 of these categories for Apple and that makes it a no brainer.
Not to mention, time is money and Beats is already successful and very well connected.
Comments
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.
http://lefsetz.com/wordpress/index.php/archives/2014/04/01/apple-buys-beats/
And one more thing…
YouTube’s streaming music heyday is about to end. As part of the Beats deal, the heads of the three major labels have secretly agreed not to renew their YouTube licenses. You can’t win unless you kill the competition, and Tim Cook has made a preemptive strike.
Interesting read, especially in light of this thread, looks like Jimmy gets paid after the deal too, not just a one shot deal, and a swipe at YouTube as well...
Just to set things straight I'm quite satisfied with Apples presentations, you think that the quip Phil made would carry any weight
if it weren't for the revealing of Mac Pro?
Apple still know how to entertain & Federighi is a good presenter, maybe it's the hair!
Getting back to the question of Jimmy lovine he maybe their to give that missing essence of Jobs in the form of Love of Music, as of late there really wasn't
an event with musical ending.
More over Apple did have Harman Kardon make pro-speakers for them, they HK are owners of AKG headphones they AKG have made a Dre Beats
version of their 700 - 400 series. I love the retro look of the "akg 701"
If they could make & improve those headphones tech wise but keep the look.
On the front of their model for subscription, I don't know anything about their sound-files & if those are higher quality?
Dre Beats bought out MOG (for 14M) which created deals for their mobile/sound system in all thing lap-tops, iPods, Cars etc
but to have Apple now buy DB for 3.2B is questionable & laughable.
1) So now you're claiming I asked for insider information and not simply a model as to why this would be worthwhile to Apple?
2) You should really pay more attention here instead of trying to make smarmy comments. This forum is great resource for learning if you're willing to open yourself to the knowledge and PoVs others have to offer.
It's a scientific -and- a wild ass guess? How exactly does that work? My understanding of the term "wild ass guess" is one that involves no data points in which to build a model. There is nothing scientific about that.
With Beats and Apple there are plenty of points in which to make factual statements. You've even made one yourself which you cited as Iovine met with Cook in 2011. Unfortunately you then stopped looking for more data and decided that was all the proof you needed.
Making a prediction is like counting cards. In that case, based on what cards have been removed from the shoe and the number of cards remaining you can reliably calculate the odds of another card appearing. Playing the odds doesn't guarantee any hand but over a long enough period the odds will balance. You don't deviate from your bet because "you have a feeling." Determining how a person will act is tricker as it contains a lot more variables and any one person may appear irrational but as a whole they tend to follow predictable patterns. Companies often do the same thing.
Could Apple pay 8x(?) more Beats than any other acquisition in their history? Possibly, but do you honestly think, given all the information you have about Apple and Beats' actions and financial history that it's the most likely thing to happen? It would be highly unusual so what information can you provide to be the catalyst for this atypical move? The best I've read is that Apple feels iT(Music)S is getting stale and no longer appealing to a younger crowd. I can see that as anything well structured, long-established, and ubiquitous can seem boring to a younger generation.
Great¡ Now I hear Sheena Eastons' Sugar Walls in my head...
Good point. Concise. I like it.
If I didn't want an intelligent opinion I wouldn't ask questions on this forum. Note that I qualified my comments with the word intelligent, something you having been supplying in your comments
Speaking of reality your comments seem to be slipping further and further from it. You can make it back to Earth Sandra.
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.
Oh, give me a fucking break with all the sensationalism. I don't think many people really give a shit how "cool" Apple's execs are, as long as they're the best for the job and develop great products. "Dull as dirt"? Not quite. The products have always been the star of the show, and Apple keynotes are still by FAR the most exciting in tech. Apple's execs arent the most charismatic people on the planet, but they certainly dont "stink" as far as tech execs go- They're still more charismatic and sincere than most.
It's a scientific -and- a wild ass guess? How exactly does that work? My understanding of the term "wild ass guess" is one that involves no data points in which to build a model. There is nothing scientific about that.
exactly! we finally agree. This is a common phrase that one use's when you are being asked to provide an accurate number when in fact you have no freaking clue or accurate information which will lead you with any hope to even come close.
I wonder if you'll ever comprehend the difference between stating an opinion and making an unwavering, absolute statement. So far the odds are against it.
PS: If you think we agree then you don't even understand what you wrote, much less what I wrote.
exactly! we finally agree. This is a common phrase that one use's when you are being asked to provide an accurate number when in fact you have no freaking clue or accurate information which will lead you with any hope to even come close.
I wonder if you'll ever comprehend the difference between stating an opinion and making an unwavering, absolute statement. So far the odds are against it.
PS: If you think we agree then you don't even understand what you wrote, much less what I wrote.
Let me make this clear. Feel free to give your opinion and SWAGs. I for one am not interested in debating with opinion and generating scientific wild ass guesses out of my butt. So please... proceed and ignore me. Hope you find what you are looking for from this forum through this approach and are satisfied with it.
1) You want to debate what is already proven to be factual. That makes perfect sense¡ :no:
2) Your repeated use of "scientific wild ass guesses" again proves my point.
Let's see...
Spotify is worth $4 B...
Pandora is worth $5.4 B...
$3.2 B for Beats is not so crazy at all... Plus they have hardware patents that are licensed globally and strong media industry connections...
I predict that this deal will happen and will be a huge success.
iTunes is becoming Apple's biggest money maker.
What hardware patents of theirs would Apple need/want? What industry connections are worth $3B and what would Apple need them for? If Eddy Cue is unable to get a Spotify like service off the ground and Apple is willing to spend the money then just buy Spotify! Or buy Pandora and make iTunes Radio better. Buying a trendy brand that gets routinely panned for being overpriced crap is a horrible idea.
You don't understand that it is not easy to get products like Beats Music or Spotify off the ground and time is money.
It takes a long time and a costs a lot of money to get the contract agreements if you can get them at all.
The industry would even challenge Apple more aggressively because they are Apple.
It is easy for Apple to scoop this up and make money because it is already a successful business with no legal problems.
-As soon as Apple signs the $3.2 B check and takes Beats Music Global, the Streaming Music subscription alone will be worth over $10 B.
-Plus Beats owns over 50% of the premium headphone market.
-When Apple ventures into the iTV market, it will need good audio.
-iOS in the Car will get bigger and bigger, Apple can also offer Beats Audio in the car.
-Beats Audio patents are licensed by phone makers, computer makers, car makers etc...
You must understand that if you had $3 B in your pocket right now, you could not build up Beats with it.
Moreover, I would buy Beats over Nest any day of the week and twice on Sunday for my $3 B.
But who likes Beats audio? And who says they will still be a fashion statement 6 months or a year from now. Plus does Apple really need to spend $3B on a fashion statement? Does Jony Ive really want to spend time designing headphones? I suppose Apple could make Beats a subsidiary and just leave the brand as is, but that seems like a money grab more than anything. And I think it would have a negative impact on Apple's brand which is about quality, not overpriced crappy plastic headphones.
A lot of people like Beats Audio including myself although I am a Sennheiser fan.
They currently have over 50% of the premium market and it's not just because of fashion, the headphones sound good.
More importantly, the contracts for Beats Music are worth a fortune and are not easy to get even if you have the money.
There are a few things companies like Apple gladly pay for if it fits their need:
1. Cost savings (How much would it cost to do from scratch)
2. Regulatory / Legal hurdles (How hard would it be to negotiate the contracts if at all possible)
3. Current Major Business initiative alignment (Does it fit their current initiative to revamp iTunes / iOS)
If you think about it, Beats covers all 3 of these categories for Apple and that makes it a no brainer.
Not to mention, time is money and Beats is already successful and very well connected.