Apple to buy Beats for $3.2 Billion
 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27336863

This deal makes no sense on the face of it. The headphones are popular and the brand is cool but Apple already have a cool brand in music and the headphones are not anything special outside of the marketing. If Apple wanted to move more seriously into the headphone business they could do it without blowing billions on Beats and their image would ensure some traction at least.

Apple will have to keep the brand 'Beats' making it the first time they've sold anything under another brand. It would complicate the rather simple focus Apple have for their products and I don't see the revenue being worth the money they're spending and the additional focus they'll have to spend on this market. I mean seriously, how does Beats help Apple?

The other aspect is Beats' streaming service but surely there are better targets than a fledging streaming service without many users? Spotify is a much more mature service with a bigger user base. Spotify would be a much better fit for Apple, the technology is there, the experience is there and it would instantly give them a platform on Android and Windows Phone. Spotify is the biggest threat to iTunes as well so that's one rival killed off.

The only thing that would make sense here would be if they purchased it to stop either Google, Samsung or Microsoft buying it and using the brand to market their phones ('Beats' Phones + headphones + steaming) and instantly gaining ground on the one area Apple still excels at on mobile devices.


Still Spotify would surely be a better buy.

But then again I am not a Chief Executive of the world's richest company. :p:

Re: Apple to buy Beats for $3.2 Billion
 

Beats headphones are a fashion statement, ridiculously overpriced and technologically inferior to Bose and Harmon Kardon which can be purchased for less.

Re: Apple to buy Beats for $3.2 Billion
 

Indeed but even if they were technologically advanced it wouldn't be beyond Apple to match it if they so wished, especially with billions at their disposal. Hell, they could buy those firms at a cheaper cost (probably). It seems they want it for the brand but why?

Re: Apple to buy Beats for $3.2 Billion
 

Perhaps they have something special going on behind the scenes in their R&D dept that apple wanted to get it's hands on. Unlikely considering the quality of their products to date but there will be a good reason behind it, they aren't going to spend 3.2 billion just for tat.

Re: Apple to buy Beats for $3.2 Billion
 

perhaps they need some tax deductibles lol

Re: Apple to buy Beats for $3.2 Billion
 

If they actually start making some decent quality headphones, which is something Beats don't generally do at the moment then change might not be a bad thing.

Re: Apple to buy Beats for $3.2 Billion
 

I do not own a pair, but have tried various models with various kinds of music. They sounded good playing Hip Hop. Absolutely awful playing anything else. The £70 set of Sennheisers I settled on outclassed all the Beats headphones I tried, some of which were over twice the price.

Even on Hip Hip, the Sennheisers were close in quality to the Beats headphones.

That, combined with the fact that Sennheiser actually make headphones that are *used* in studios, rather than headphones that are merely endorsed by producers and singers persuaded me to buy the Sennheisers. Endorsements can be bought. A good reputation (which Sennheiser headphones have in studio circles) can only be earned.

Re: Apple to buy Beats for $3.2 Billion
 

You may not like this but Sennheiser also make some pretty rubbish bargain basement tosh that I'd (literally) rather throw in the bin than use, even as a backup set.

Far more "awful" than even the awfullest of Beats.

Re: Apple to buy Beats for $3.2 Billion
 

Agreed gasdfdsaq, they make headphones for all budgets and customers of all ages - certainly my 16 year old son gets through about 3 pairs of earbuds per year! That would be unacceptable if he were buying the top end Sennheiser HD 800 model !

Re: Apple to buy Beats for $3.2 Billion
 

My flatmate did resort to buying sets of £5 earbuds because his cat kept eating them. Speaking of which I'm now a bit worried about my Shure studio monitors...

Re: Apple to buy Beats for $3.2 Billion
 

bet they go up again once apple buy out is complete

Re: Apple to buy Beats for $3.2 Billion
 

Detachable cables are good mitigation given that the jack-end of in-ear phones is usually the first thing to fail, even really expensive ones. I recently had to replace the cables on my UE18 stage ears... replacing the whole unit would have been prohibitive!

Re: Apple to buy Beats for $3.2 Billion
 

Sounds like what people used to say about Apple products too.

---------- Post added at 15:23 ---------- Previous post was at 15:22 ----------

Yeah, all my Shures (both over the head and in ear) have detachable cables but that said, a replacement cable for my se535's cost £30-50.

Re: Apple to buy Beats for $3.2 Billion
 

totally agree with you and unfortunately people think because they have a big brand backing them then they must be great.

---------- Post added at 07:37 ---------- Previous post was at 07:30 ----------


Yeah I agree with you. Detachable cables and single sided cable are what I go for.

Re: Apple to buy Beats for $3.2 Billion
 

That's assuming they are still available. Apple are known for buying successful companies (think Siri, Lala etc), taking some aspect of their technology, then stopping the sale of any products. In the case of Siri, they stopped the App and integrated it with the OS. In the case of Lala, they stopped the whole service and eventually launched iTunes Radio. Beats have a streaming service , together with the licences to stream music from a lot of record companies. Apple may be interested in those licences.

---------- Post added at 10:20 ---------- Previous post was at 10:19 ----------

I don't buy the low end ones. Besides, even if I did, I would not have paid nearly as much as I would on a set of Beats. So, I'd be more inclined to think I'd got what I'd paid for rather than I'd been ripped off..