3 ms·
I just want to go on record with an entirely different idea as to why Apple is buying beats. They're going to make a label. Why Apple doesn't do streaming: App
by asimpletune 12y ago
I just want to go on record with an entirely different idea as to why Apple is buying beats. They're going to make a label.
Why Apple doesn't do streaming: Apple hates committing to something unless it's absolutely perfect. There are numerous examples, but NFC technology is a good one that comes to mind. Granted, they've made mistakes, like Mobile Me, but that was due to poor implementation, rather than immature technology and infrastructure.
A similar problem has been in their way as far music streaming goes. The obstacle in their path to connecting consumers to content are labels (the same applies to cable companies and iTV, but that's a different story). Labels are greedy, difficult to deal with, and a general nuisance who provide little or no value. Meanwhile, the actual content providers, i.e. songwriters and performers, view labels as a necessary evil, but no one believes for a second that needing them is ideal.
The vision: The idea is that Apple is looking to buy Beats to start their own label so they can cut out the label, who is an unnecessary middleman. My reasoning behind this is that Beats is a very strong brand, mainly because it's been run by two very savvy music industry veterans who know how to "produce", in every sense of the word. They're more of a household name than any other headphone maker can claim. If any company had the power, skill, and recognition to pull off disrupting the record industry, it would be beats. The only problem is they don't have enough money, do you know who does? Boom. It's as simple as that.
Just take a look at this http://cdn.macrumors.com/article-new/2014/05/beats-royalty-s.. http://cdn.macrumors.com/article-new/2014/05/beats-royalty-s.... and tell me, from Apple's perspective, what the problem is with a music streaming service? The labels get all the money and the artists get none. All Beats has to do is say, "Boom, we're starting a label and we own the streaming service, so you can have a 30% cut per play and we'll keep 70%". If you were an artist and you could literally improve your earnings by 10x wouldn't you? $248K vs $22K is criminal.
Just imagine, from Apple's perspective, what this would open up? Essentially, it's total vertical integration, a pipe from artist to audience, unadulterated by stupid bullshit. For example they could have complete coordination of everything from the original recording quality of an album to specialized super high end digital to analog converters in the hardware - from lossless media formats that were recorded especially for that format to headphones that are tuned to provide optimal performance.
This is a complete bargain and no ones talking about it. It will serve as a prototype for what Apple would love to do to the television industry (think Apple acquires HBO, a win win for both), and they're doing right under everyone's noses because no one can think big enough. Apple would never, in a million years, purchase a company like that for so much money if they didn't have a very good idea of how it would pay off 10x.
And remember, this is the same company that seriously considered becoming a carrier, in order to launch the iPhone.
- keehun 12y agoThis is great. Too bad "Apple Records" is already taken......
- karmelapple 12y agoAs mentioned elsewhere, Apple Records no longer owns the rights to the name. With Iovine involved, I think the above idea is a distinct possibility. Though it's funny how Macklemore made a song about his dislike for Iovine's attitude and hard bargains. The same could be said of Jobs for part of his life; he could be genuinely unpleasant, and drive very hard bargains.
- keehun 12y agoThat's interesting that Apple Records no longer owns the rights to the name. I thought a historic namesake like Apple Records would hold onto its name dearly. It would be extremely interesting/awesome if Apple indeed begins the Apple Record label. Steve Jobs would probably roll over in his grave in excitement...
- xcntktn 12y ago> Why Apple doesn't do streaming... Uh, yes they do, quite well in fact: http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2014/03/11/apple-itunes-radio-pandora-spotify/ http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2014/03/11/apple-itunes-radio-pa... Already bigger than Spotify just six months after launch.
- sleepyhead 12y ago"Apple hates committing to something unless it's absolutely perfect" Like Newsstand, Game Center and Passbook? This is the biggest misconception about Apple. While this is very much the case for their hardware products like iPhone, iPad, Mac pro and Macbook, it is not the case with software or services.
- 7814317 12y agoWhat is wrong with any of the three you mention? Beyond the lack of support for them, they have all performed well. Most of the issue is getting third-parties interested. I use Newsstand to subscribe to a car magazine from the UK (Top Gear) that would otherwise cost me >$100US/year to have delivered here. The BBC has done a great job with their magazine. There are plenty of other magazines and newspapers that fit in just fine here. But again, I think part of the problem is that magazines and newspapers overall are a dying industry - why would you want to read a magazine when you can just visit a website daily/weekly and be caught up? Game Center is another that has had limited opportunities to shine. Partly Apple's fault because they don't integrate with Android, but a beautiful example of how to use Game Center was the Letterpress game awhile back. I believe Letterpress was an iOS-only game. If it had been a cross-platform game, where many developers go now, then GC would have been useless to them. But the features are there, if a developer decides to use them. The scoreboards and friend matches and achievements are used in many iOS games as well. Passbook is the one that has hurt the most due to a lack of third-party interest. I personally use the Starbucks card whenever I happen to be want one of their drinks. There is plenty of anecdotal evidence that the MLB and airline tickets are also well done. I wish more stores with loyalty cards would release Passbook apps, but again, where is the desire for your favorite grocery store chain to create a Passbook enabled app? Hell, most grocery stores you are lucky to even see an online inventory and this week's sales on their website. I don't confuse "perfection" with "third-party participation".