Beats deal defenders cite 'humanized' music subscription service as benefit to Apple

1568101113

Comments

  • Reply 141 of 243
    patsupatsu Posts: 430member
    Regarding the two items I highlighted in red:  How many people have used their 'curation engine' and determined that it is leaps and bounds better than Apple's solution?

    After watching almost the entire Iovine interview, it looks like he's a bit of a braggart about his curation solution, but where's the proof? Isn't it really just a scheme to employ a bunch of DJ's?

    If the deal goes through, I will take one for the team to sign up and report back.
  • Reply 142 of 243
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    snova wrote: »
    as dumb as I am, I know enough in my little brain, when its pointless to debate with an addict. Best wishes to you sir and your mental health.

    You can scamper away all you want but I will not let your libel attacks slide. Back you up your claims or shut the **** up, but please stop being passive-aggressive.
  • Reply 143 of 243
    smarkysmarky Posts: 75member

    Beats are a terrible brand that make terrible cheap headphones that are then sold at premium prices.

     

    There music service is of no value at all. It only just launched and hasn't done that well. Nobody gives a damn about it. You could just create this from scratch (if you where a company big enough like Apple, they really have nothing to offer)

     

    There is absoultely no value in anything beats do or have as IP, if your buying the brand I still don't get it, maybe if your Microsoft, but not if your Apple.

     

    Very very odd purchase, sure apple have a bigger plan that we all do not know about, else this is extremely stupid move.

  • Reply 144 of 243
    pazuzupazuzu Posts: 1,728member
    snova wrote: »
    as dumb as I am, I know enough in my little brain, when its pointless to debate with an addict. Best wishes to you sir and your mental health.

    What is going on with that one today- Courtroom Dramas? Judge Judy? Spewing Profanities?
    Not going near it. Taking the high road- not getting baited into the Twilight Zone.
  • Reply 145 of 243
    yojimbo007yojimbo007 Posts: 1,165member
    patsu wrote: »
    Not at all. Now that I think about it. Eddy Cue may continue to lead iTunes, while Beats lead the all-access streaming service. Both will fight to be the best. Beats may indeed cannibalize iTunes. Besides, it is unclear if iTunes will be available on Android, but Beats is. May (or may not) be a bigger PR mess if Apple takes iTunes to Android.

    Apple will remain Apple in terms of device and service quality. Beats headphones, if Apple continue to sell them, will use whatever Apple come up with. Not the other way round.
    Respectfully disagree.
    Beats is a startup with no proven track record in streaming.

    Beats hardware is at be mediocre!

    I feel this is Iovine playing apple for some of its cash. And apple is being suckered.

    Beats has only one proven recorded about themselves.
    They can sell mediocre stuff and make you feel it is the best ! Total marketing. That is more sumsung like.

    Apple on the other hand says we only care about delivering the best.
    Total contradiction by associating with a mediocre product ...

    But i hope im wrong and you are right ... If the deal goes through !
  • Reply 146 of 243
    jlanddjlandd Posts: 873member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

     

     

    Hmm... that interview with Walt explains a lot. Apple is buying a person. But come on! $3.2 billion?! Is Tim going to have Jimmy Iovine run iTunes like a completely separate business, like how 3M has many diverse divisions that all need to prove their worth to the company or they are spun off or shut down?

     

    If Apple is going to be in the business of acquiring other businesses now for growth, versus growing the business themselves, shouldn't they also be seriously looking into buying AT&T, Hulu (or Netflix), and other such core (as in the case of iPhone business) or peripherally important (as in headphones) businesses?

     

    Personally, I see this as a defining and significant departure from Apple's strategy until now.


     

    It's a departure but it's for a different field than the hardware or software that they've done so well with, and that's content and to be where people go for that content, which is where they don't lead.  So it makes sense to be a different set of rules and strategies than they've previously shown.

     

     I think Apple is looking at Beats in the same way they might be looking at Hulu or Netflix, for their portal, their established go-to place, except that Beats has the charismatic leader at the helm for whom everything he touches (seems to) turn to gold, and his company is perceived as champagne to their beer. The whole list Dick Applebaum posted (why is it so hard for me to make the multi-quoting work!!???   :  )  rings true, though I'll bet the headphones get sold off, as that seems like a bad fit (branding instead of technology or product innovation) that just happens to be among the assets.  Whichever way this turns out (Iovine running iTunes, Apple gaining the Beats portal separately and Iovine to consult their overall music business, etc, etc) it's not inconceivable that in three years it pays for itself and then everyone's a genius.   And here's the flipside:  if it doesn't go terrifically Iovine will buy it back in three years for 1/4 of that, which is what he did with Interscope, what, three or four times?   

  • Reply 147 of 243
    patsupatsu Posts: 430member
    yojimbo007 wrote: »
    Respectfully disagree.
    Beats is a startup with no proven track record in streaming.

    Beats hardware is at be mediocre!

    I feel this is Iovine playing apple for some of its cash. And apple is being suckered.

    Beats has only one proven recorded about themselves.
    They can sell mediocre stuff and make you feel it is the best ! Total marketing. That is more sumsung like.

    Apple on the other hand says we only care about delivering the best.
    Total contradiction by associating with a mediocre product ...

    But i hope im wrong and you are right ... If the deal goes through !

    I don't know if it's fair to call Beats mediocre when they are doing well, and their product has improved.

    A lot of startups are worse plus not making money despite great hype.

    I would say great execution so far, but they need to keep it up. Continue to improve their h/w (if still relevant), and of course scale the service up. They have a unique concept at the right time.

    The rest in the mean time will depend on whether Apple still like them after due diligent I guess ?
  • Reply 148 of 243
    pazuzupazuzu Posts: 1,728member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    So NOT every 2 years? You can't even keep you lie straight with a less than 10 word response. Shameful.

    And that 3 year difference between the iOS-based iPhone and iOS-based iPad was only ONCE, NOT the very 3 year occurrence you have claimed.

    solipsismx wrote: »
    You can scamper away all you want but I will not let your libel attacks slide. Back you up your claims or shut the **** up, but please stop being passive-aggressive.

    Hey pot meet kettle. You called me a liar and owe me an apology.
    Snova too- for threatening and cursing at him.
    How dare you!
  • Reply 149 of 243
    yojimbo007yojimbo007 Posts: 1,165member
    patsu wrote: »
    If Beats h/w are mediocre, then Apple won't sell them. ^_^
    OTOH, the acquisition can improve Beats' implementation. It doesn't have to be always negative direction.

    If Iovine is good, then Apple will tie him down enough. Being an advisor doesn't really mean he can run away with Apple unprepared. There will be satisfactory terms from both sides. This is all assuming the rumors are true.

    3.2 billion for an unproven streaming startup! That will definitely generate some headlines and a new precedence !

    Time will tell.
    At the end if it goes through.. I hope im wrong and all proponents are right !
  • Reply 150 of 243
    patsupatsu Posts: 430member
    yojimbo007 wrote: »
    3.2 billion for an unproven streaming startup! That will definitely generate some headlines and a new precedence !

    Time will tell.
    At the end if it goes through.. I hope im wrong and all proponents are right !

    3.2b is based on established way of valuating a company.

    As long as Apple want to go there, it will mean they think they can recoup the money back. They are a thrifty bunch.
  • Reply 151 of 243
    solipsismxsolipsismx Posts: 19,566member
    pazuzu wrote: »
    You called me a liar and owe me an apology.

    I don't owe you an apology because I called you a liar. I would owe an apology if you hadn't lied, but you did, twice.

    First lie: You stated that Big Hype was correct in regards to Apple releasing a new product category every two years.

    Second lie: You then contradicted your previous sentence and stated it was every three years.

    You guys have to be trolling to jack these thread because I have a heard time believing you can't even keep track of what you write in a 9 word comment.
  • Reply 152 of 243
    dick applebaumdick applebaum Posts: 12,527member
    I think Apple is buying: a company which includes:
    • a hardware/accessory line
    • several creatives/executives with music industry experience
    • a new, but proven streaming service and software
    • a human-driven curation engine that anticipates what the user wants *
    • the humans with industry knowledge and experience to do that curation *
    • Jimmy as a consultant


    * this has not been implemented, successfully, by anyone prior to Beats. And the Beats curation concept/engine may have much broader implications than just streaming the right music at the right time!


    I read somewhere that Beats has about 1,000 employees and more than half are involved with the Service/software.



    Maybe it's a good time for a departure from past strategy -- remember when the iPod came from nowhere -- then the unprecedented decision to implement iTunes on Windows????


    Today's Apple is quite a different company from as recent as 2001. In order to survive and grow it must listen to the customers, anticipate their needs and be bold and agile enough to implement strategic solutions in a timely fashion.


    In the words of Willy Sutton: "... that's where the money is!"

    Regarding the two items I highlighted in red:  How many people have used their 'curation engine' and determined that it is leaps and bounds better than Apple's solution?

    After watching almost the entire Iovine interview, it looks like he's a bit of a braggart about his curation solution, but where's the proof? Isn't it really just a scheme to employ a bunch of DJ's?

    First, when the video was made, the Beats Service was still being implemented -- AFAIK, it was released in the last 2 months.

    You can download the app and try it, free, for 7 days. I like what I've seen so far, but you be the judge.

    Also, there is a learning [the user's tastes] process and a human-assisted curation process -- both should improve with use.

    There is no proof that you or I can cite. However, we all can cite what doesn't work very well -- what we have now! Human-assisted creation may not prove viable (I think it will) -- but, IMO, it's better to try a different approach, rather than just continue to get the wrong answers [results] faster.

    As to employment for DJs -- according to an industry friend there still is rampant payola ... just more sophisticated. So, I doubt that DJs would, necessarily, be the best choice. Besides, Jimmy has a lot bigger fish to fry.

    And, braggart -- C'mon, we're talkin' showbiz! Jimmy's almost as good as Steve!
  • Reply 153 of 243
    yojimbo007yojimbo007 Posts: 1,165member
    patsu wrote: »
    I don't know if it's fair to call Beats mediocre when they are doing well, and their product has improved.

    A lot of startups are worse plus not making money despite great hype.

    I would say great execution so far, but they need to keep it up. Continue to improve their h/w (if still relevant), and of course scale the service up. They have a unique concept at the right time.

    The rest in the mean time will depend on whether Apple still like them after due diligent I guess ?
    Beats is not mediocre.. Beats product is mediocre.
    Beats has been very successful in marketing a mediocre product and selling at the at a premium !

    That success is in contradiction with apples mantra.
    "We will only make and sell the best! "

    That contradiction is potentially disastrous for apples image !
  • Reply 154 of 243

    my co-worker's aunt makes $70 hourly on the computer. She has been without a job for seven months but last month her paycheck was $19034 just working on the computer for a few hours. Read more on this web site

    w­w­w­.­j­o­b­s­6­1­.­c­o­m

  • Reply 155 of 243
    patsupatsu Posts: 430member
    yojimbo007 wrote: »
    Beats is not mediocre.. Beats product is mediocre.
    Beats has been very successful in marketing a mediocre product and selling at the at a premium !

    That success is in contradiction with apples mantra.
    "We will only make and sell the best! "

    That contradiction is potentially disastrous for apples image !

    Not if Apple or Beats improve their h/w, or drop the mediocre ones. It really depends on where Apple want to go. They are not tied down by Beats' existing stock/inventory.

    It is quite meaningless to simply worrying about brand names. More important for a company like Apple to deliver the goods.
    That's how they survive over the years.
  • Reply 156 of 243
    jlanddjlandd Posts: 873member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SpamSandwich View Post

     

     

    After watching almost the entire Iovine interview, it looks like he's a bit of a braggart about his curation solution, but where's the proof? Isn't it really just a scheme to employ a bunch of DJ's?


     

      That's the Reality Distortion Field mastery and the in-need-of-personality-transplant attribute that goes with it that Jobs built Apple with, that they've been missing since.   

  • Reply 157 of 243
    mutoneonmutoneon Posts: 51member
    The stock of a company's pretty much always moves down on news of an acquisition, while the acquired company always rises. You can see this happen every single day. means nothing.
  • Reply 158 of 243
    snovasnova Posts: 1,281member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by pazuzu View Post

     
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



    So NOT every 2 years? You can't even keep you lie straight with a less than 10 word response. Shameful.



    And that 3 year difference between the iOS-based iPhone and iOS-based iPad was only ONCE, NOT the very 3 year occurrence you have claimed.


     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post



    You can scamper away all you want but I will not let your libel attacks slide. Back you up your claims or shut the **** up, but please stop being passive-aggressive.




    Hey pot meet kettle. You called me a liar and owe me an apology.

    Snova too- for threatening and cursing at him.

    How dare you!

    pazuzu,

    leave it. He is an addict. He won't stop.  Have mercy on him, he does not even acknowledge he has an addition. 

    As far as winning a debate, my pea brain tells me that debates are decided by the audience, not the debaters.  Everything is on record as to what was said, if anyone gives a damn to review. Don't fall for his weasel game and waste your time. Let him be in the world that he has chosen to spend all his waking hours on. Its all he has got. Only he can decide when its time to seek help.  If you have any compassion, please leave him alone.  I'm sure you have better things to spend your time on in your own life then he does and its not our job to get him to seek help. 

  • Reply 159 of 243
    pazuzupazuzu Posts: 1,728member
    solipsismx wrote: »
    I don't owe you an apology because I called you a liar. I would owe an apology if you hadn't lied, but you did, twice.

    First lie: You stated that Big Hype was correct in regards to Apple releasing a new product category every two years.

    Second lie: You then contradicted your previous sentence and stated it was every three years.

    You guys have to be trolling to jack these thread because I have a heard time believing you can't even keep track of what you write in a 9 word comment.

    You know you're absolutely right and I stand to be corrected- my memory must be failing but I forgot when I swore on a bible as I was about to testify under oath.
    My lawyer forgot to object because everyone else understood what I was referring to except you who took it as lies. My apologies to the court.
    You can now attack another poster and high jack the thread with your utter nonsense.
    Good evening.
  • Reply 160 of 243
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Yojimbo007 View Post

    That contradiction is potentially disastrous for apples image !

     

    Indeed it is.

     

    I use Apple product's because they're the best around.

     

    I would never use anything low end like Beats.

Sign In or Register to comment.