Humor: What the Apple acquisition of Beats really means

Humor: What the Apple acquisition of Beats really means
Apple’s acquisition of Beats is generating a lot of buzz for every reason you can think of. While Beats’ paid subscriber count is certainly not what made this an attractive buy, its headphone unit makes money, and the fees Beats pays for streaming music rights are rock-bottom, making Beats, along with its music industry centric team, an attractive buy, even at $3 billion and change.

Like we reported last week, Apple plans to leverage Beats headphone design toward improving build and sound quality across the board. That is sure to benefit future ear-pod designs, whatever they may be.

Of course, the image of Beats will change with the Apple acquisition too, there is sure to be some type of culture clash. Over time, we think the team at Beats will find assimilation inevitable. Soon, what we know of Beats today will be on a memory, left in the shadow of what is to come. When it comes to Apple branded products after all, there is a certain expectation…




1. UglyFrank

Posts: 2194; Member since: Jan 23, 2014

So true

24. akki20892

Posts: 3902; Member since: Feb 04, 2013

Forget that humor, look at tim cook, Tim Cook is a painter, I should call him to paint my property.

2. tech2

Posts: 3487; Member since: Oct 26, 2012

This is less of a humour and more of a truth.

17. Nathan_ingx

Posts: 4769; Member since: Mar 07, 2012

Hear hear!!!

3. engineer-1701d unregistered

so so true

4. darkkjedii

Posts: 31533; Member since: Feb 05, 2011

That's the best way, to make this new acquisition tank. I personally have no use for em, my LG Bluetooth works fine. I use em primarily for the gym. Good luck with beats Apple, but no thanks.

11. networkdood

Posts: 6330; Member since: Mar 31, 2010

right on....

23. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Nothing wrong with drumming to a different beat

27. darkkjedii

Posts: 31533; Member since: Feb 05, 2011

Nope, you're right Mxy. I simply have no use for em, I'm not the headphone type. I hope they're successful though. +1

35. joey_sfb

Posts: 6794; Member since: Mar 29, 2012

I also using an LG stereo Bluetooth, HBS700 and HBS730. Personally I prefer HBS730 sound better, clearer, more details and 3D depth can be perceive. My friend that like bass thinks that HBS700 is better for him.

5. maxmppower unregistered


6. Atlas

Posts: 158; Member since: Apr 15, 2012

No, no. In the first picture the price tag should be $29, because that is how much they are actually worth.

8. ArtSim98

Posts: 3535; Member since: Dec 21, 2012

You mean $0,29

9. androtaku

Posts: 246; Member since: Dec 12, 2013

mmm...recommend me a headset that cost $29 but sounds like $299 beat headphone,where can i buy it? best if you can forward a review site say exactly that

19. 0xFFFF

Posts: 3806; Member since: Apr 16, 2014

You can buy pretty much anything and there is a very good chance it will cost less than Beats and work better than Beats. Time Magazine ranks the headphones as the second to worst out of 18 brands that they reviewed in a recent article: "Beats began to sell its sleek, bass-heavy headphones in 2008 as an alternative to the lightweight earbuds that Apple included free with its iPod players. And even at prices of up to $450 apiece, they quickly became fashion statements. The company’s headphones have fat profit margins. Headphone designers estimate the cost of making a fancy headset is as low as $14."

32. androtaku

Posts: 246; Member since: Dec 12, 2013

it rank low in $299 range headphone doesn't make it as bad as $29 craps,maybe on par with $100 bucks stuff $14 bucks cost price? i let you have $20 ($6 bucks for your hard earn margin), try make me a headphone that has quality of that $450 dr.dre crap with the money would'cha? i'll buy a few more from you

22. vincelongman

Posts: 5746; Member since: Feb 10, 2013

The Beats headphones just regular headphones with their frequency response adjusted for more bass Just go into your setting and boast your bass Some good headphones according to audiophiles from head-fi:

26. bigdawg23

Posts: 467; Member since: May 25, 2011

Paying $299 for Beats is already over priced. I travel for work and decided to try them over my personal choice of Bose. I already IMEI2 but wanted noise canceling, Beats noise canceling and sound is well below Bose. I now have both QC15 and QC20 for my iPhone 5 and Note 3. I will assume Apple bought them for streaming rights and using upgraded ear buds in iPhones and iPods.

29. ocilfa

Posts: 334; Member since: Aug 03, 2012

Koss Porta Pro's, your welcome.

7. Sauce unregistered

Funny how when humor makes fun of Android, almost EVERYONE gets butt hurt and cries to momma and the PA authors..But when it's an Apple article, almost every is pro-article. LOL and you android/WP herds call it iPhone Arena. LOLOLOL Just making an observation :)

10. darkkjedii

Posts: 31533; Member since: Feb 05, 2011

Correct observation, and we both know the usual suspects. No names, or PA will issue warnings. +1

30. ojdidit84

Posts: 462; Member since: Jul 16, 2011

From an objective perspective, we all know that some of the writers here at PA don't exactly do as much research as they should when it comes to ANY of the platforms on some of these articles that are written. This article definitely rings true to the nature of both companies here (although probably not to the extreme price jump shown after Apple acquisition). Truth - Beats are overpriced for the quality of headphones that they are compared to what they claim to be. Apple marks the price of their products and add-ons well above what their competitors do. i.e. Going from a 512GB SSD to 1TB SSD on a MBP is $500. Comparably, the same storage capacity jump on a Windows machine is only a ~$200 difference for an SSD. That's always been the way the Apple has (over)priced their products and people have always made fun of their pricing scheme and the people who've paid the ridiculous overcharge for something that should only come at a fraction of the price. Now of course on any article about the "insert platform here," there will always be the uber-fanboys that cry foul because something was misrepresented in an article or blown out of proportion or just plain wrong. Just as you guys came in crying fowl on something that's been known as a pretty common practice for Beats and Apple - overpricing. Dark, you were pretty objective at one point. Now you're teetering back on the edge of fanboyism. I can has the Darkkjedii back that was posting last year?

33. androtaku

Posts: 246; Member since: Dec 12, 2013

misconceptual of overprice is going from stupid to absurbly moronic. technically in capitalist country,market force won't let anything "overprice",because people has the choice to buy another "underprice" stuff. Louis Vuitton bag cost 500 times more than china rip-off, they serve exactly the same function,did anybody calling LV overpriced?butthurt poor chaps who can't afford them as gift to their gf probably will complaint the loudest,but for those who can actually afford them,they probably doing the earning rather than singing here

34. PBXtech

Posts: 1032; Member since: Oct 21, 2013

Luxury items will always skew capitalist principles because the items fall into the want category and not the need category. People will pay for the Vuitton bag prices because it's a want more than a need. People with disposable cash flows will often purchase want items more likely than need items. It also explains why the iPhone only dominates in the US and Japan. In countries where disposable cash flows are not as common, the iPhone sales are poor. Apple knows this and prices their products in the luxury side of things. Their consumer base believes they are buying the best money can purchase so they don't care, and some use their purchases as status symbols like the Vuitton bag. This is not old news.

38. androtaku

Posts: 246; Member since: Dec 12, 2013

i think u meant "this is not new news" how people derive their value is highly subjective,you make it sounds like apple consumer base are all wrong in their value perception.galaxy phone and iphone has the same huge profit margin (but galaxy phone generally worth nothing in very short period of time),if you really into value u should buy nokia $20 bucks feature phones.

40. PBXtech

Posts: 1032; Member since: Oct 21, 2013

Both the iPhone and the Galaxy phones are overpriced. As for the resale value, that is a risky reason to purchase a cell phone. Consumer choice could change tomorrow and the resale value some people count on could vaporize instantly. There's also more value than just $20 feature phones. You sound offended by that. Get over it.

41. androtaku

Posts: 246; Member since: Dec 12, 2013

oh...onto the "overprice" issue again read post 33,and just buy anything u feel is "underprice",good luck with it

42. PBXtech

Posts: 1032; Member since: Oct 21, 2013

And you think they aren't?

43. androtaku

Posts: 246; Member since: Dec 12, 2013

suggest me an "underpriced" alternative to the "overpriced" S5 or iphone 5s and...i wonder why people say they are overpriced?because some fella do a tear down of the phone component and say it cost the manufacturer just pennies to built? can u buy all the components and built an iphone 5s out of few pennies yourself?

50. PBXtech

Posts: 1032; Member since: Oct 21, 2013

Cyanogen's new phone, Moto X, Nexus 5, many of the Nokia phones. It's really not that difficult, you just have to put your bias aside and look with open eyes.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.