Beats by Dre
- Started
- Last post
- 115 Responses
- formed0
mono - yes, I think they'll keep making money, Beats makes money, but the stock will eventually taper off and stagnate if they can't keep revolutionizing an industry and/or coming up with top tier products (which Beats is not part of).
For a stock to run, there has to be interest and momentum. Look at Tesla and Netflix. Look at Google - they keep raking in the cash AND they are pushing for new industries. Then look at other tech stocks like Sony, that have faltered. Look at Microsoft (and it is moving now that there is some innovation), their innovation tapered off ages ago and the stock stagnated for 10 years, yet they make money.Apple is pretty late to the bet! They tried their hand with iRadio (or whatever it was called), that was already years late. What do I know, though, is I won't buy anything with a Beats logo (or association). Teens will, but they are fickle, so when the next fad hits Beats will be put down.
My 2cents. They'll make a ton off of the first round of the iPhone6 simply off of momentum, but that will change. The S5 is very nice, HTC is very nice, G3 looks amazing and they all move so much faster than Apple.
Again, $3billion for "talent" seems absurd. I can understand that $60mill or whatever it was for Burberry's CEO, but I can't understand this.
Who knows, it'll be entertaining to watch (assuming the deal gets finalized).
- the stock has been rising, actuallymonospaced
- it's near an all-time high, both of which were under Timmonospaced
- in fact, over the last year, Apple's has risen over 40% compared to Google's 30%.monospaced
- also, iRadio "or whatever it was called" has over 40M active listeners. You're just assuming things it seemsmonospaced
- where did I say the stock is not rising? Not me that assumed iRadio was not great, that'd be WallStreetformed
- the entire market has risen, too, MS is even up a decent amountformed
- You said it in your first sentence here. Then you refer to of all the companies as stocks instead of companiesmonospaced
- Then you said iTunes Radio was too late, and you're wrong there too.monospaced
- you're simply just regurgitating stupid analyst woes and crying "doom" and then threatening to break up with applemonospaced
- I think you're doing the right thing by choosing the tech solutions that fit your lifestyle. Apple isnt' for everyonemonospaced
- monospaced0
@formed, yeah, they could have "bought the best" if this had anything to do with getting great sound or speakers or headphones... but it's not. They did "buy the best" when it comes to the music industry. Dre and Jimmy are in the mix and have been for a long time, and their streaming offering, along with industry know-how, will help keep Apple in the business. This is more about Iovine's connections and insight, and how to keep Apple part of the music industry in general. They revolutionized it with iTunes and the iPod, but that's a dying tech. Streaming and personalized music services are the future, and this is what Apple's betting on.
- formed0
I guess they are trying to get them addicted at a young age - hence the fashion emphasis.
Who knows, nobody seems to have much clarity on the logic (besides "buying" talent and Beats does have 1.1billion in revenue, so not a "bad" investment).
Beats does make a few car systems, but nothing compared to Harmon. Maybe that's what they are aiming to include? Dunno, but I can't see Beats being put in a BMW anytime soon (I sure as hell wouldn't buy it! Or anything with "Beats" label).
Given their cash, if they wanted streaming they could have bought the best, if they wanted car they could have bought Harmon, if they wanted talent I am sure they could find some for a lot less than $3billion.
Apple is losing some momentum. They once dominated the high end, but now they are just on par, the rest has (almost) caught up. I'll be getting a Surface 3 and ditching my iPad as soon as it is available (August for the i7), just got a S5 for one of my sales people, so much nicer than the 5s (with the exception of the slow motion, which is nice).
Time will tell, these moves are the first for the Cook era, if there is any faltering, Apple's stock will plummet, but I'd bet the keep making cash for a long time, just become more of a fashion brand selling a ton of "stuff" vs. a high end company focused on perfection.
- Was waxing quasirhetorical anyway. Essentially, wtf. Totally agree with everything you said too.stepson
- so, you think the stock price will fall but they'll keep making money regardless? bwaaahhahahaamonospaced
- stepson0
Inferior hardware arguments aside, still don't understand how acquiring Beats Music software will help Apple enter the internet-of-cars, or any other domestic connectivity spaces. From what I understand, Beats Music is failing to find any significant audience, let alone one that even drives / owns a car - isn't the whole brand aimed at children?
- Well, if they needed an audience, it just bought them for $3B and their music service is NOT for childrenmonospaced
- freedom0
So the headphones are overpriced?
Does the music service give Apple anything or are they just a competitor with good connections.
Did Apple buy Beats to shut them down?
- They aren't shutting them down.monospaced
- i wish. hah.akrok
- formed0
stepson - here you go:
http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?v…
There's more somewhere, all I could quickly find. He basically said what other analysts said - if you want music, buy Spotify or Pandora with Harmon for the hardware (which dominates that car market). It would cost more, but you would get far superior products with significantly more users.
To Clarify - they all thought the Beats acquisition was not a wise choice. The 'car' idea was that this is the future - control the car, the next frontier. Google is so far ahead there and Apple's Carplay isn't gaining much traction or fans.
Personally, I don't see much of a market in the home. Sure, Nest has some 'neat' products, but hardly true items of desire (and now that there will be ads, I am out). I don't care for a frig that tells me what food I should buy, etc.
So maybe they make something like Comcast and others have that you can control temp/lighting, and that's fine and I'd like it, but it is purely functional, no 'brand' needed. We'll see next week, but I don't get it, kinda like Apple is going from a highly desired, high end tech company to a generic commodity/fashion company.
- stepson0
hey formed, you said you watched a dozen analyses that speculated the acquisition about cars.. care to share some links? can't find any, sounds inneresting
- ernexbcn0
It's done, Apple confirms $3 billion Beats deal
- monospaced0
Pretty sure this isn't about the headphones. The purchase makes more sense when you consider the type of subscription service beats is now offering.
- dbloc0
I'd rather see a computer with Bose rather than Beats
- yes. Love my Bose computer speakersformed
- Bose doesn't have a subscription streaming music service.monospaced
- I find Bose over-rated.sem
- jtb260
It's all just speculation at this point. It's silly to evaluate the purchase sheerly on the merits of their headphones, and whether they are a good fit for Apple's brand. Apple has a history of making smart acquisitions, and doing some cool things with them. It is surprising that they're breaking from their track record of picking up less high profile companies, but I would wager that there's more behind this than headphones and streaming services.
- cars, that's what else...at least that's what Wall St thinks (watched a dozen analysis of it so far). We'll see....formed
- formed0
mono - by the numbers, this looks like a fine purchase, but Beats are trendy, low quality, fads. That's not what Apple is. Apple has done a masterful job of selling design and quality at a premium price.
When you add Beats to the equation it looks like they are chasing numbers and not quality. Apple has plenty of cash, so why not buy the best if they want music streaming and audio (cars, headphones, etc.). That would be Harmon and Pandora (or Spotify).
To me, this reduces the quality of the brand. Burberry CEO hire sounded good, like they were aiming for a higher end fashion. Beats buy screams "trendy over quality".
Personally, I don't want anything that has the brand "Beats" printed on it. Harmon, etc., Martin Logan, etc., I'd pay a premium for (in a new car, for example).
- It's not about the headphones as much as the service.monospaced
- The service that has no subscribers and has been a miserable failure? That service?ETM
- yes, that onemonospaced
- ukit20
The rumor I heard is that Tim Cook is a big NWA fan
- monospaced0
You guys realize apple bought them more for the service than the hardware right?
- Or. That they are rumored to.monospaced
- yup, read my previous postsformed
- bored2death0
I wonder if Apple was scared of their music service?
- More likely they are worried about Spotify, and wanted to grab something to compete.jtb26
- formed0
They are also going for cars. Beats is in Fiat/Chrysler now.
But as noted, the other way would have been to buy Harmon and Pandora for $16billion. Way more, but they'd own the markets and appear to be a true heavy weight, Beats looks like a kids game.
With Beats they are risking alienating professional (I can't take a company seriously that would promote Beats as "quality", certainly wouldn't pay a penny for it) and running with a fad that is past its prime.
- formed0
Looks like Apple is going full fashion brand.
First they hire Buberry's ceo for $68million, now buy Beats.
I guess they figure the real innovation is over and they'll be a fashion brand only. The hire I understand, but Beats? Most people over 15 think they are a joke.
