Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Apple Confirms Purchase of Beats For $3 Billion

Soulskill posted about 5 months ago | from the throwing-down-the-big-money dept.

Businesses 188

SimonTheSoundMan writes: "Apple has confirmed it will buy Beats Electronics and Beats Music for $3 billion. Apple will make the purchase using $2.6 billion in cash and $400 million in stock. An important part of the acquisition for Apple is absorbing the Beats subscription streaming service, even though it only has about 110k users. The Beats brand will remain intact, and will continue to sell headphones. "

cancel ×

188 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Dumb motherfucks! (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47113941)

ALl I can possibly think of right now! Jump the shark Fonzie!

Re:Dumb motherfucks! (1)

smitty_one_each (243267) | about 5 months ago | (#47115809)

I mean, if you're really are into purple vegetables, I guess, but, crikey, that there's a fetish. . .

Re:Dumb motherfucks! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47116401)

Jump the shark Fonzie!

Yep, Apple have jumped multiple sharks and become the new Microsoft

They're even cheating with APIs to block competitors, just like Microsoft did. http://marksands.github.io/201... [github.io]

Of course, this'll never be a story on Slashdot, 'cos Apple pays for it not to be.

reciept for his ass (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47113973)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJ8NUEuaURs&feature=youtu.be&t=7m13s

I wonder if the deal includes Iovine's soul (1)

Dave Taylor (3466517) | about 5 months ago | (#47113983)

or maybe just a lifetime of conscription.

I dislike Beats... (4, Funny)

AcquaCow (56720) | about 5 months ago | (#47113993)

...but I appreciate what their marketing team has done for the rest of the headphone industry...

Re:I dislike Beats... (1)

UnknownSoldier (67820) | about 5 months ago | (#47114293)

What do you mean?

Note: I have Senns HD 380 Pro and the old Sony MDR 7506's

Re:I dislike Beats... (4, Interesting)

Farmer Tim (530755) | about 5 months ago | (#47114553)

I think he means they make any other headphones look like high quality bargains by comparison.

Re:I dislike Beats... (1)

symes (835608) | about 5 months ago | (#47114883)

In particular, they have made over ear headphones popular. Which is great as those in ear things make my ears hurt. I wouldn't buy Beats but do have some nice earphones and don't mind wearing them in public.

Re:I dislike Beats... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47116083)

Over ears were ALWAYS readily available. Even low cost ones that have great sound quality. For years, you could get a pair of Sony MDRZX100's of equivalent for under $20 at Wal-Mart/Target. They sound better than any ear bud style and a lot of over ear models that cost 2-5x more. They are very durable too. I keep a pair in my backpack 24x7 I take to work and travel with.

Re:I dislike Beats... (1)

amiga3D (567632) | about 5 months ago | (#47114951)

Seriously they aren't that bad.....but then they aren't worth what they cost either. Kind of like most products that are overpriced like all these chinese made shoes with Nike and other high cost brands on them that cost about 30 times what the actual cost of producing them is. Everything is that way. Overpriced cars, motorcycles, clothes, etc. Brand names sell. Who knows this better than Apple? They claim a premium on hardware that is certainly overpriced compared to most peecees even if they do have the bonus of not being saddled with Windows.

Re:I dislike Beats... (1)

stms (1132653) | about 5 months ago | (#47116461)

I think he means that beats made "high quality headphones"* sexy. Which in turn made the average Joe consumer actually care about the quality of their audio gear. Which helps nerds like you and me get better priced audio gear because big companies see the value of investing in the production of high quality audio gear.
*I use the term "high quality headphones" loosely because beats aren't great but they are much better than what most people were using before.

Re:I dislike Beats... (1)

glwtta (532858) | about 5 months ago | (#47114893)

You mean driven the price of "legitimately worth $350" headphones to $500?

Have you seen the Denon line post-AHD2000? I attribute that abomination entirely to the "Us too! Let's be Beats!!!" syndrome.

Re:I dislike Beats... (1)

Cramer (69040) | about 5 months ago | (#47115819)

Unless they were milled from a block of gold, no headphones are worth $350, much less $500.

Re:I dislike Beats... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47115341)

I'm all about that Sennheiser. I hear Grado is great too.

Re:I dislike Beats... (1)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | about 5 months ago | (#47115561)

Grados sound nice in quiet rooms, particularly if paired with a half decent headphone amplifier. Connected to an ipad, outside, with the wind and the traffic? Not so much.

If sealed headphones that sound as good can be had, I'm all ears.

good closed headphones can be found (1)

mbkennel (97636) | about 5 months ago | (#47115615)


www.head-fi.org

Not as good as open in general, but not bad at all.

Style over substance (4, Insightful)

AmiMoJo (196126) | about 5 months ago | (#47114015)

I think it's safe to assume Apple wanted the Beats brand and styling, since the technology is nothing special. Beats headphones sound shit compared to much cheaper competitors, so apparently the logo is worth billions.

We seem to be in another bubble, where brand popularity is valued way too high.

Re:Style over substance (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47114081)

> Beats headphones sound shi

I'm of two minds on this. Yes, they are crap headphones that sound horrible, but they are much better quality than the Bose scam products. So while they do sound painfully bad, they are still much better than the garbage that the general public associates with good quality. Maybe Apple can do something about the poor quality and actually start making a product that is merely bad instead of horrible. Either way, they can't do worse than Bose.

Re:Style over substance (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47114685)

Bose was a communist subversive. Fact. Bose was close friends with L Ron. Fact. Bose was once married to Castro's half-sister. Fact. One does not need to know any more than that to conclude, Bose sucks. Fact.

Re:Style over substance (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47116097)

No highs? No lows? Must be Bose!

Re:Style over substance (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47116361)

They DO worse than Bose. Beats headphones are just shit. I'm surprised Beats has any speaker drivers in those headphones. x

Re:Style over substance (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47114095)

I think it's safe to assume Apple wanted the Beats brand and styling, since the technology is nothing special. Beats headphones sound shit compared to much cheaper competitors, so apparently the logo is worth billions.

Apparently, someone at Apple, someone with a lot of influence, thinks that all the negros who buy the shitty, over-priced Beats headphones will now also buy more of Apple's other shitty, over-priced products.

Good luck with that.

Re:Style over substance (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47114733)

Go to any inner city high school, one thing you will notice be expensive sneakers and iphones. NOMESAYIN?

Re:Style over substance (4, Interesting)

NoKaOi (1415755) | about 5 months ago | (#47114137)

so apparently the logo is worth billions

Well, isn't that the case with just about everything? Branding & perception. Ask your average purchaser what they think of Beats headphones and most of them will tell you they sound amazing and are totally worth the price. It's like Coke vs. Safeway Select cola. They taste exactly the same (not all brands taste the same, but in that particular case they do), but the store brand is 1/4 the price. Yet plenty of people still buy Coke when the store brand version is sitting in the same aisle. Now think of brand names in just about anything. What makes Beats any different? Do you seriously think quality matters more than branding perception to most consumers?

And you're ignoring this part:

An important part of the acquisition for Apple is absorbing the Beats subscription streaming service

Not just the service, but more likely the licensing agreements.

Re:Style over substance (1)

rogoshen1 (2922505) | about 5 months ago | (#47114211)

Seriously has Apple ever done anything that puts branding and perception over Reality? Distortion of this kind is pretty much a Field that they invented.

(or they were getting flack over not having any minority execs, and with this deal Dr. Dre is now a VP @ Apple right?)

Re:Style over substance (1)

mythosaz (572040) | about 5 months ago | (#47114377)

It's like Coke vs. Safeway Select cola. They taste exactly the same (not all brands taste the same, but in that particular case they do)...

If you think the favor of Coke isn't unique and clearly distinguishable versus knockoffs, you don't have a particularly good palate.

I don't profess to have a great palate, but being a Coke drinker, I can even pick out Dasani from among other bottled waters because of the salts they put back in. [Most of the big water bottlers RO their water, and then put back in a distinct set of minerals. You can easily develop a taste for Dasani over Aquafina or the other way around...]

Re:Style over substance (1, Informative)

greg1104 (461138) | about 5 months ago | (#47114699)

Serious Coke drinkers can even tell what type of container the soda was stored in. Larger containers are carbonated more heavily so they can survive being opened more times, and that makes them taste differently.

Re:Style over substance (2)

geekoid (135745) | about 5 months ago | (#47114815)

unless they are blinded, and then that ability magically goes away.

Re:Style over substance (4, Informative)

mythosaz (572040) | about 5 months ago | (#47114869)

Sure. There's no questioning that, say, fountain Coke varies from location to location - McDonald's uses RO water, generally the same equipment, and a Coke there tastes different (and to me, better) than a fountain Coke at Burger King -- which purifies its water, but not RO. Also, apparently, a larger quantity of the water is kept chilled in their RO system (keeping it colder, allowing for better CO2 absorption).

[A quick "McDonalds reverse osmosis" search shows a few articles that all say the same thing.]

You can generally get a good Coke at your local Water and Ice store for similar reasons.

Anyone living near Mexico can also tell the difference between a glass bottled Mexican Coke and the US version because of the sugar used.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M... [wikipedia.org]
It used to be a treat at "real' Mexican restaurants here in the Southwest, but now they're available at Costco.
[I personally avoid most sugared drinks, but indulge in the occasional "MexiCoke."]

Regardless, Safeway Select Cola is in no way "exactly the same" as Coke :)

Re:Style over substance (1)

Em Adespoton (792954) | about 5 months ago | (#47114897)

Coke and Safeway Select DO taste the same though. Of course, that's today's Dasani Coke, not the coke of yesteryear that used whatever water the local bottler felt like using. I've definitely tasted how Coke has changed in different places over the years, even though I don't drink it at all anymore.

SS has also done a pretty good job at making their Tonic Water taste just like Schweppe's. Maybe they've caught on to the Dasani mineral content? It wouldn't be too difficult, as they've stripped out all the extra stuff, so all you've got left is a simple set of minerals and H2O.

Re:Style over substance (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47114385)

Funny this should come up just as I'm enjoying a Mexican Coke. If Safeway makes a non-HFCS soda I might give it a try. Until then, when I treat myself to a soda (it's a treat folks, not a staple) it'll usually be Mexican Coke. If it isn't that, it's Perrier mixed with Welch's grape juice. It used to be Calistoga water in that mix, but for some reason Safeway stopped carrying it and none of the other waters here have as much carbonation as Perrier. Either that, or they come in plastic which I hate...

Re:Style over substance (1)

Proudrooster (580120) | about 5 months ago | (#47115799)

It has to do with Apple owning the culture of "cool" in the USA.

Just ask yourself, would a teenager rather have a closet full of trendy clothes or an gold iPhone 5?

Yes, the gold iPhone 5 wins everytime....

Apple gets Dr. Dre out of this deal, thus Dr. Dre will now be an Apple employee/aquihire.

Apple needs to transition from selling tracks on iTunes to getting people to pay for streaming without destroying the music business. Dr. Dre is the man for the job.

Apple has watched the decline of facebook as the young-ins are a leaving because it just ain't cool anymore and they do not want this to happen to their brand, which is really, really smart.

When Apple lost Jobs, they really lost the reality distortion field and it is going to take about 5 amazing icons working together to regenerate the reality distortion field and this purchase move them toward that goal.

Re:Style over substance (1)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | about 5 months ago | (#47116341)

I think it has more to do with Beats Music and Iovine being a god among Hollywood insiders.

Beats headphones probably means the pack in earbuds change at some level.

Re:Style over substance (3, Informative)

nblender (741424) | about 5 months ago | (#47114209)

I hadn't heard of Beats until last week. I was in a Future Shop (like Best Buy) with my son and he was all gaga over some of these Beats headphones on display... So I put them on and listened. It was like I was listening to music through a tin can while someone tapped on the can with a pencil... I'm far from a 'golden ear' audiophile wanker... I have a pair of mid-low end Sennheisers on my head 8 hours a day at work...

Re:Style over substance (1)

Hadlock (143607) | about 5 months ago | (#47114363)

They also brand android software drivers for cell phone and tablet speakerphones.

Re:Style over substance (1, Insightful)

jbolden (176878) | about 5 months ago | (#47114469)

I don't know about that. Beats has something like 2/3rds of the headphone industry selling $50 headphones for $200. Beats probably does about $1b in 2014 in sales. I'm hard pressed to see how that brand isn't easily worth $2b and for a control investor a like Apple who could leverage beats to also sell phones... I don't see the bubble.

I'll agree the technology is worth $0.

Re:Style over substance (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47115177)

We seem to be in another bubble, where brand popularity is valued way too high.

What is your estimate of the value of the Beats brand? Please show your work. Obviously you have one or you wouldn't have made that statement. And clearly you wouldn't just pull a number ut of thin air, but rather you made an effort to come up with a more accurate number. I'm sure you're right, but please explain how you got there.

Re:Style over substance (2, Informative)

mjwx (966435) | about 5 months ago | (#47115313)

I think it's safe to assume Apple wanted the Beats brand and styling, since the technology is nothing special. Beats headphones sound shit compared to much cheaper competitors, so apparently the logo is worth billions.

You see Beats sells headphones with cheap hardware worth about $50 for around $300.
Apple sells phones with cheap hardware worth about $100 for $600.

Both utilise brand over performance, style over substance and both like to give their customers a good rodgering at every opportunity. It's a marriage made in corporate heaven.

Re:Style over substance (1)

shirro (17185) | about 5 months ago | (#47115771)

Apple has become something of a fashion brand. While they still make some very good technology clearly many people buy their products for other qualities. Perhaps Apple think they risk being seen as an old persons brand and young people might defect to the competition. Buying Beats seems like a way to try and buy credibility amongst a new generation. Given that many tech buyers are fairly ignorant pushing branding and celebrity endorsements probably isn't a bad way to go for shareholders. I might think Beats is rubbish but I think most things teenagers like are rubbish so I would never make money out of them.

If they start selling MacBook Pros by Dre with loud colours, crap specs, celebrity endorsements and even higher margins than currently I think Apple will have lost the plot.

Beats? BEATS? (2, Interesting)

mark_reh (2015546) | about 5 months ago | (#47114107)

Why don't they just buy iHome while they're at it? Then they'll control 90% of the iCrap market.

Re:Beats? BEATS? (1)

bengoerz (581218) | about 5 months ago | (#47114167)

The markup in Beats puts iHome to shame.

Beats takes analog audio hardware that hasn't changed since the 70s, sprinkles fairy design dust on it, and sells it for big money. What better model for Apple's transistor & software business?

Re:Beats? BEATS? (1)

Jeremy Erwin (2054) | about 5 months ago | (#47115513)

Beats takes analog audio hardware that hasn't changed since the 70s

If a pair of headphones incorporates neodymium magnets, it was designed after the 1970s. As for analog? Most passive headphones are analog.

Re:Beats? BEATS? (1)

zieroh (307208) | about 5 months ago | (#47115987)

Beats takes analog audio hardware that hasn't changed since the 70s, sprinkles fairy design dust on it, and sells it for big money. What better model for Apple's transistor & software business?

I was going to object to your outright dismissal of design and how important it is to good (or sometimes just popular) products. But then I remembered that this is slashdot.

Hint: The failure of Linux to make inroads on the desktop is due to the exact same reason: the elevation of engineering above everything else.

(And yes, I too am an engineer).

Bubble of $23,600 per user (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47114111)

2.6 Billion dollar = 2,600,000,000 dollar
110k users = 110,000 users

this is equivalent to 23,600 dollar per user

Big bubble!

Re:Bubble of $23,600 per user (2)

Stormwatch (703920) | about 5 months ago | (#47114431)

As others have mentioned: it's not the users, it's not the shitty headphones -- Apple wants the licensing deals that Beats already has.

Re:Bubble of $23,600 per user (1)

Goody (23843) | about 5 months ago | (#47116331)

Then they need to spin off the shit headphone business. I doubt they will considering Cook is getting his picture taken with Dr. Dre.

Re:Bubble of $23,600 per user (1)

binarylarry (1338699) | about 5 months ago | (#47114441)

Yeah someone at apple was smoking some fine chronic, that's fo sho.

Beats Streaming Service has 110K Users? (1)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | about 5 months ago | (#47114127)

I wonder how many iTunes Radio has.

After all, according to Apple fans, "iTunes has 800 million credit cards!" You'd think they'd manage more than 0.01% of their users...

I gotta admit--I don't get this one. Streaming service? Apple has iTunes Radio. Headphones? Okay, but they're not folding it into Apple. As someone mentioned, Jimmy Iovine [wikipedia.org] ? I would think they could get him cheaper than 3 billion.

Re:Beats Streaming Service has 110K Users? (1)

glwtta (532858) | about 5 months ago | (#47114827)

Beats owns the "high-end fashion accessory" segment of a technology-oriented market - seems like a perfect fit with Apple.

They're making money hand-over-fist (I assume?) selling shitty headphones at silly prices, why should it mean anything more than that to Apple?

Re:Beats Streaming Service has 110K Users? (4, Interesting)

R3d M3rcury (871886) | about 5 months ago | (#47114875)

Actually, a co-worker brought up a good point.

Apple had to go begging and pleading to the music labels to get permission to stream music and they probably got reamed. Supposedly, Beats Music has a kick-ass licensing deal with the labels--better than Spotify and Pandora. So now that's Apple's deal.

Re:Beats Streaming Service has 110K Users? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47115525)

Those license deals aren't transferable. (I might be wrong, but I think this was discussed on Ars--I remember it because it was one of those reasonable explanations that turned out to be untrue.)

Re:Beats Streaming Service has 110K Users? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47115599)

I appreciate speculation, but have you seen the contracts?

Beats has industry contacts thanks to Iovine and Dr. Dre, with licensing contracts better than what Apple can get. Yes! The deals are THAT GOOD! Only reason to buy Beats, is to get to that.

Besides. $3Billion is cupboard change to Apple. I'm betting they make $10Billion off of it in 2 years.

Re:Beats Streaming Service has 110K Users? (1)

quenda (644621) | about 5 months ago | (#47116633)

Besides. $3Billion is cupboard change to Apple. I'm betting they make $10Billion off of it in 2 years.

Most of Apple's money is from hardware. $3G is many months gross revenue from iTunes.

Re:Beats Streaming Service has 110K Users? (2)

Em Adespoton (792954) | about 5 months ago | (#47114995)

This is likely for the streaming agreements, so they can bolster their offerings on iTunes Radio. I doubt it has much to do with the headphones (hence why they're leaving that part of the business alone).

Apple has now jumped the shark (2, Informative)

Spy Handler (822350) | about 5 months ago | (#47114133)

what exactly does Beats have that Apple can't come up with by itself in an afternoon? Hell they could get Eminem or some other rapper to endorse it for a lot less money.

I used to be an Apple faithful but I think their days of innovation are past. Even Samsung is still trying to make its own shit like the VR goggles rather than just buy whatever seems popular.

Re:Apple has now jumped the shark (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47114305)

Samsung has never tried to make their own shit. They are nothing but shameless rip-off artists.

Re:Apple has now jumped the shark (2)

YouGotTobeKidding (2884685) | about 5 months ago | (#47114843)

I can see why you posted AC - because you are a 'tard. Just look at the size of Sammy's patent portfolio and the amount they spend on RnD. Actually dont. It will blow your little apple fanboi mind. Not saying Samsung is above copying...but Apple has copied a shit ton more than Samsung.

Re:Apple has now jumped the shark (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47115127)

If you think Samsung is any better than Apple, you need to look again. They are both shit rip-off companies and the world would be better off without either.

Patent portfolios are not a measure of innovation.

Re:Apple has now jumped the shark (1)

BasilBrush (643681) | about 5 months ago | (#47116147)

It becomes expensive throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks.

Re:Apple has now jumped the shark (4, Funny)

Charliemopps (1157495) | about 5 months ago | (#47114791)

Hype.

Apple used to be good at making it.
Then Jobs died.
Now they have to buy it.

Re:Apple has now jumped the shark (0)

praxis (19962) | about 5 months ago | (#47115195)

what exactly does Beats have that Apple can't come up with by itself in an afternoon?

Already-signed, good deals licensing music recordings for streaming to customers.

Re:Apple has now jumped the shark (2)

zr (19885) | about 5 months ago | (#47115701)

1. beats is a decent popular brand
2. 100k streaming subscribers in one go
3. two highly capable execs to handle day to day dealings with music industry
4. eddie the stuff cue gets to go back to figuring out the cloud
5. beats makes healthy profit, nothing to sneeze at

looks like a very well calculated tactical move

Re:Apple has now jumped the shark (5, Interesting)

sootman (158191) | about 5 months ago | (#47115999)

Wow. A 15-year climb from bankruptcy to the most valuable company in the world and people still look at every single move Apple makes and say "wow, that's fucking dumb." Isn't it just remotely possible that Tim Cook knows what the fuck he's doing, and that there's a good reason for buying Beats? How 'bout we give it a few weeks, huh? Maybe, just maybe, the guy running Apple knows something you don't, and perhaps we should give him the benefit of the doubt just this once and see how this plays out before passing judgement?

Sorry, I must be new here.

Besides: every move Apple makes doesn't have to be some earth-shaking road to an innovation unseen since the last amazing thing they did (which everyone shit all over at the time anyway.) If Apple buys Beats or Pepsi or Whirlpool or Nabisco or whoever for $3 billion and they make more than $3 billion off of that in the near future, then it was a good investment, right? Do you know what would make Beats worth $3 billion today? IF IT EARNS $5 BILLION IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. And oh, look, that's probably what will happen. [fastcompany.com] (And note that Tim Cook probably has better financial info available than a year-old Fast Company article.) Maybe Tim looked at Dre's books and decided that with Apple's awesome buying power and manufacturing prowess that they could DOUBLE the profit of Beats OVERNIGHT. They might earn that money back by next Christmas.

At last Dre has enough money to go back to school (4, Funny)

Kenja (541830) | about 5 months ago | (#47114195)

Now he can finish his Doctorate and stop living a lie!

Re:At last Dre has enough money to go back to scho (1)

FoolishBluntman (880780) | about 5 months ago | (#47114371)

Let's all go over Dr. Dre's crib and have a wild party!
Why not, the fucker's a billionaire
Everybody is bothered because their lame idea didn't win the internet lottery.
Oh yeah, and Dre can go get his doctorate, NOT!

Re:At last Dre has enough money to go back to scho (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47116419)

Now he can finish his Doctorate and stop living a lie!

It's not a lie! He is not claiming to be a doctor, his first name is Dr., you insensitive clod! That's just how they roll in Compton. You sayin' his mama done him wrong?

Buying a streaming contract? (5, Insightful)

kinarduk (734762) | about 5 months ago | (#47114215)

I know apple have tried hard to get the labels to sign up to a music streaming service. Perhaps they bought beats because it already had a contract in place with the major labels, thus removing all of the complicated negotiations?

Only in America (4, Interesting)

Ralph Wiggam (22354) | about 5 months ago | (#47114379)

The DJ responsible for "Fuck Tha Police" just made a billion dollars. I love it.

Re:Only in America (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47114589)

The DJ responsible for "Fuck Tha Police" just made a billion dollars. I love it.

I gotta wonder if he's gonna tweet "Not hard at all, motherfucker!" to T. Boone Pickens.

Re:Only in America (2)

Monkey-Man2000 (603495) | about 5 months ago | (#47114725)

The DJ responsible for "Fuck Tha Police" just made a billion dollars. I love it.

Now he can write a song called "Fuck Tha [Apple] Shareholders"...

WWDC (1)

GrahamCox (741991) | about 5 months ago | (#47114437)

This still seems baffling. But WWDC is next week, so maybe that will shed some light on the real story.

No one cared when it was HP... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47114519)

I find it funny how many people break out their old favorite of Apple bashing when HP was the one that included Beats audio in their "premium" laptops and no one said a word. It is a vanity/luxury brand, it isn't about being the best audiophile headphones. They may not be for you, that is OK. However when you walk on any college campus you see quite a few Macs and Beats headphones so the acquisition makes sense.

Re:No one cared when it was HP... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47115905)

including beats in a product is not the same as flat out buying it fucktard

Who cares ? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47114527)

Most of Beats products don't work with anything else than Apple products anyway... I bought a Beats earphones for my girlfriend's Galaxy S4, the microphone did not work, neither did the mute and volume keys. I searched around the web, and a lot of people experienced this, without fix. I called Beats, they said that Android is not supported, it's "made for iPhones, iPods and iPads".

So who cares ? Everyone should be happy, now it's clear.

Price for new product?? (2)

Eloking (877834) | about 5 months ago | (#47114679)

Omg, two of the most overpriced brand fused together? Can't wait to see their new Beats+Apple headset for +1k$, everyone will love it.

Android phones with "Beats" branding... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47114709)

I wonder if HTC will find an alternative brand to put on their phones which provide a 'premium' audio experience...

Re:Android phones with "Beats" branding... (1)

QQBoss (2527196) | about 5 months ago | (#47116355)

They already did. Beats was only used with the HTC M7. Now, they call the exact same thing "Boomsound". If you use Sprint in the USA, you can also get the HTC One M8/Harmon Kardon Edition [androidauthority.com] , which is actually an improvement over the software that works with the standard M8's boomsound (though I am not sure the hardware changes at all). It also gains the ability to play FLAC files, which Beats didn't give, a free Spotify account for 6 months for "Framily [sic] plan" users, and a nice set of earphones. But as a past Sprint user for over 10 years, I am an ex-Sprint user now and probably forever, and the only reason I would consider getting this phone would be to immediately root it which would negate some of the bonus features that only work on the Sprint Network. If it supported two SIMs, I would seriously consider that, though.

"The Beats brand will remain intact"... (1)

uCallHimDrJ0NES (2546640) | about 5 months ago | (#47114789)

"The Beats brand will remain intact," says the headline. But will the Apple brand remain intact? This is one of the most confidence-shaking moves we've seen since Jobs died. Isn't quality central to Apple's value proposition? Doesn't Beats have a poor quality reputation? Doesn't everybody know that Dre prefers Koss Portapros?

Re:"The Beats brand will remain intact"... (1)

Em Adespoton (792954) | about 5 months ago | (#47115055)

This is likely why they're keeping the Beats brand intact... they don't want people associating it with the default (cheap) headphones Apple provides.

Personally, I thought Apple's Bose relationship was the best audio one they ever had going. I had some of their Harmon Kardon speakers back in the day, and those were decent for their time.

I really don't see Apple saying "now with Beats inside" any time soon....

Shame theres no Quality to Beats (1)

Dan Askme (2895283) | about 5 months ago | (#47114839)

Clearly Apple doesnt care about quality.
Beats are over eq'd, overpriced, over-marketed with a high profit margin, a gimmick sucked up by the masses, nothing else.

Really not sure what Apple has planned for it, but dont expect affordable, high quality headphones with your next ipod anytime soon.
If you want quality over gimmicks, get yourself some DT990 Pros (or 770 for closed).

Beats By Jobs (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47114847)

Obligatory: http://imgur.com/gallery/XETM0... [imgur.com]

GOOD! (0)

MpVpRb (1423381) | about 5 months ago | (#47114871)

I despise apple. I refer to them as "the distilled essence of evil"

Nice to see them wasting money on a stupid purchase

Re:GOOD! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47115175)

Apple bought them because they're useful for their future. Unlike when Google bought Motorola.

um, what? (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about 5 months ago | (#47114881)

At first I thought, good plan, because Apple doesn't seem to be able to make decent sound devices on their own. The trendy white earbuds may be, you know, trendy, but they sound like carp. But then I read that the Beats headphones (which I had never heard of) are carp also.

Has anyone done a hearing test on the Apple board of directors recently? Just askin'.

Re:um, what? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47115019)

I'm curious, exactly what sounds do "carp" make? A kind of bubbling sound?

Re:um, what? (1)

roc97007 (608802) | about 5 months ago | (#47115205)

It's like pr0n. A word with an obvious meaning spelled to get past censors. Doesn't appear to be an issue here, but I got in the habit of spelling it that way awhile back.

Ugh (1)

cascadingstylesheet (140919) | about 5 months ago | (#47115031)

Beats just ate MOG, which I actually liked a lot. The Beats interface sucked so bad that I didn't bother subscribing after the trial.

the end of Apple (0)

gelfling (6534) | about 5 months ago | (#47115157)

Litigation over innovation. This is the watershed moment when Apple became a shitty company run by lawyers dedicated to suing everyone.

Is John Sculley running the show again? (0)

Deathlizard (115856) | about 5 months ago | (#47115277)

Apple just lit 3 Billion Dollars on fire? Awesome! It's not like they could have used that money for more important things like improving their own audio hardware using their own iconic music brand, start their own music service using their established music industry contacts and programming team, bought both Spotify and Pandora and still have enough money left to make the first rap star billionaire.

At this rate, Steve Jobs will be vertical due to the sheer speed of his spinning corpse.

CarPlay is powered by Blackberry (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47115451)

The only reason this happened is because of the future of LTE modems in cars. Apple, Google, whomever will create subsidized data plans based on Beats subscriptions that Based Inside Automobiles. This dre'ing around (dre is yiddish for f'n around) regarding the lifestyle brand that Beats is, is whatever, moderately relevant, the key is the emotional curation of the 'talent' Ian Rogers, Reznor, Dre (who Reznor included way back on the Natural Born Killers OST, in the guise of Thaa Dog Pound track, which was under the rubric of Dre) Anyways, pre-installed Beats apps in Cars from 2015 on, that's f'n why, if this comment doesn't get a damn 2.5 for insightful, well, that would be consistent with the cluelessness that abounds even on usually intelligent areas of the internet. I don't care, this is the reason. Apple's first successful cloud service where the device is a car, instead of an mp3 player connected to the internet, it's a car. Current estimates of data are like $499 for six months at 30gigs, theoretically 30gigs of just music streaming is about 5 gigs a month, maybe 3.5, therefore the price will come down as the volume of users goes up. Ok, solved that problem.

I thought ... (1)

PPH (736903) | about 5 months ago | (#47115471)

... this was the outfit that makes those sleeveless t-shirts I always wear.

Never mind.

wow (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47115707)

$27k per user

Brilliant marketing or big blunder? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47115889)

Apple may have just managed to attract a new group of buyers with Beats purchase. Or it could have over estimated big time how Beats will attract those buyers to Apple products. In any case $3 billion is chicken feed for Apple and they need a new demographic of impulse buyers. Beats as a whole is just a company making fashionable products for a ethnic group of young people. The headphones are more fashion statements then good products. I doubt Apple can do much to save that pathetic fact. Apple can't even make good audio products. I am a bit concerned about Apple following trendy product trends which normally do not last very long.
This could be a boom or bust for Apple.

Only 110K people who have figured out how to... (4, Informative)

anyaristow (1448609) | about 5 months ago | (#47116107)

...sign up.

I tried to sign up for the streaming service today. I pressed the prominent "free trial" button, read the terms of service and privacy policy, and filled out the web form, only to be told "username not reserved." WTF does that mean? Temporary trouble? Hit the sign up button again...username not reserved. Picked a different user name. "Email not reserved."

So, I read some of their support forum, where other people are asking, "wtf is username not reserved", and found you had to sign up through their mobile app before you can sign up for the free trial on their website.

I checked again and found no instructions to that effect.

Maybe there are only 110K people who have figured out how to sign up.

Dr. Dre now has the money (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47116213)

Time to buy NWA.com from Delta (was the domain for Northwest Airlines).

Another silly purchase. (1)

blackicye (760472) | about 5 months ago | (#47116305)

According to the wiki entry, they had a valuation of $1B in September 2013.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B... [wikipedia.org]

I guess Apple can afford to throw money around.

Pre-emptive chuckle at the cloth ears brigade.. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47116439)

Who swear there is no difference between a coat hanger and a properly constructed, designed for purpose, optimized, non-monsterbeatswankfad cable.

Same reason why people use coat hangers to connect to satellite dishes eh? Millions of technicians across the world have fallen for cable company marketing, paying for super expensive coax.

In the world of hifi, beats is like bose with 10x the marketing and hipster hype. Complete marketing shit like many products in the industry.

Apple Bleats (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 5 months ago | (#47116453)

Bleats for iSheep

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?