Dr. Dre and Jimmy Iovine to take on senior roles at Apple following $3.2 billion Beats acquisition

The Wall Street Journal (paywall) is reporting that Dr. Dre and Jimmy Iovine will take on senior roles at Apple following the $3.2 billion acquisition, which was first reported earlier this week. The roles won't be full time, but the pair will commute from Los Angeles, where Beats is based, to Cupertino when necessary. 

While the specific roles Dre (real name Andre Young) and Iovine will be playing within Apple remain unclear, the Wall Street Journal reports that Apple may be interested in the deal-making power on Iovine as well as the trendier image associated with the Beats brand. Billboard reported in April that Apple was looking to overhaul iTunes and iTunes Radio to combat falling demand for downloadable music in the face of streaming services such as Rdio and Spotify. In light of this, the acquisition of Beats makes a lot of sense as they have a streaming service called Beats Music

The New York Post reported earlier this week that Iovine will join Apple and become a "special advisor" to Tim Cook on creative matters. The deal with Beats highlights Tim Cook's willingness to step away from the spotlight, allowing senior Apple execs more stage time at WWDC keynotes as well as hiring Angela Ahrendts, former Burberry CEO, as Apple's new retail chief. 

Source: Wall Street Journal (via MacRumors) | Image via Billboard

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Twitter adds new password security options for accounts

Next Story

Facebook ditches its Poke and Camera iOS apps

105 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

hahahaha, some of these comments are just plain idiotic

This is a business decision. It doesn't matter if beats headphones offer value for money to the consumer. Nor does it matter that an iPhone represents the best value.

There are phones which offer higher specs, at a lower price point than apple. There are also headphones which offer better sound quality for a lower price point.

so then, why do beats account for 58% of all premium headphone sales? If people can buy a better set of headphones for less, why don't they?

Gullible People + Great Marketing = BIG SALES!

There's very few companies able to make consumers want to rush out and buy their products. Just look at the lines of people queuing down the street for apples next big thing. Remember the thousands of people all queuing up for the MS Surface? No, me neither.

If someone can sell an inferior product, at a higher price point and take significant market share in an incredibly short period of time.....why on earth wouldn't another business want to buy them?

Apple and Dr Dre have done well. Both companies are very alike. Style > Substance.

The same can be said for Bose and Sonos

Welp. this is terrible, beats is terrible. and dr.dre is 99.9% a businessman and 0.000000001% an audio engineer. And I guess this is not the first time apple is making stupid choices?

Apple made a terrible mistake. Its like from a cookie box picking the worst tasting one. beats is far from the best. another reason to stay away from apple.

trojan_market said,
Apple made a terrible mistake. Its like from a cookie box picking the worst tasting one. beats is far from the best. another reason to stay away from apple.

I think that people who makes decisions to spend more than $3 billion on a company know a LOT more than you ever will. But thanks for your opinion.

trojan_market said,
Apple made a terrible mistake. Its like from a cookie box picking the worst tasting one. beats is far from the best. another reason to stay away from apple.

Your so wrong... apple is as mainstream as it gets. Apple wins again....

mrdeezus said,

Your so wrong... apple is as mainstream as it gets. Apple wins again....


I think you're wrong, apple was always going for the best and that has always been their Achilles's hill. now they are moving away from it and guess what? there are many other products in the mid range. Having beats on their audio is going to hurt their reputation a alot at least from the eyes of few apple fans that I talked to. Bose could be better option. beats just has a bad reputation quality wise

As if Dr. Dre means anything to the company other than an icon anyways.

I see Monster in that picture, do they own the company? As in, the same Monster company which sells HDMI cables for $120? That explains exactly why they're so expensive then.

beats are just fashion. I personally will never use them. Anyone who think they are superior sound quality need to take some time and do some research. I build audio recording preamps for a living. I doubt Dr Dre's sound engineers use beats in their studio.

mrdeezus said,
You may think there crap and you might not like how they sound but THE MAINSTREAM DOES. And that's business.

Never said its not good business, its great business. They sell like hotcakes. Everyone I know wants a pair, and I do not try to talk them out of buying, I just inform them that there are better options out there, but its their decision.

wow thats good for Apple. regardless of whether or not these things are good (and they used to be much better with Monster helping them out) this will just solidify Apple. Companies directly competing with Apple should be quite worried. Of course unless HTC or Samsung acquire Bang & Olufsen, or Bose speakers.

Edit: You know what, I think that Apple has gotten the second best name in the game to consumers, whoever puts Bose speakers in their phone will sell a LOT!

I duno, maybe it's just me, but I think they aren't that great sounding devices... I've heard much better for cheaper.

sanctified said,
Audiophiles are the snobbiest people I know

Audiophiles are not snob. Most Audiophiles wannabes are snobs.

This explains why Beats send a warning to Rudy Huyn (WP's favorite dev) that it shouldn't brand his new studio '6Studio' because it sounded too much like 'Beats Studio'. Made absolutely no sense until now.

Bunch o' haterz! Beats (wired) deliver tight studio bass for genres that utilize very low frequency bass and crips mids. i.e. hip hop and dance, and they do well with electronic. Obviously classical and metal, and rock you need to look elsewhere. Duh.

Where they do suck is their Bluetooth is worthless, their earbuds are questionable, in general they are over-priced but that's subjective, and the most crappy element, beats on a phone. Nothing but a branded, muddy loudness button, hahaha.

But please haters give it a rest.

MorganX said,
Beats (wired) deliver tight studio bass for genres that utilize very low frequency bass and crips mids. i.e. hip hop and dance, and they do well with electronic.

No, they don't, they provide #### sound quality with #### quality bass without proper frequency response using insanely horrible components made of the cheapest freaking materials with zero research. If you enjoy horrible sound quality with a scooped 70 to 150 Hz frequency band (which clueless people think counts for "fat bass") and ridiculously erratic frequency response all-over, then all the power to you. But you know what? The thing is that you just have no idea what you're talking about. Go get some proper quality headphones like Denon AH series headphones or Sennheiser HD 25 II, designed by real professionals who actually know what they're doing, and then tell everyone how wonderful your bad excuse of a joke which is Beats Audio headphones really are.

>>(which clueless people think counts for "fat bass")<<

You mean people who like it? As opposed to people who call themselves "audiophiles" who measure music as opposed to listening to it? roflmao. That's why they dude's a billionaire.

He was a multi-millionaire because he made music people like to listen to, despite "audiophiles" in whose opinions those genres aren't even music.

Then he made headphones that produced the music the way people like to listen to it and has become a billionaire.

Measure that and stop hating on the dude. BTW, Denon is garbage across the board, and Sennheiser is only decent at the highest price point. Of course, that's my opinion (I prefer UK Dance music.) But opinions are like ########, everyone has their own and no one, including so-called audiophiles, thinks theirs stinks.

Measure that!

PS: Beats sell mostly to affluent people who think Whiz Khalifa is kewl!

MorganX said,
Bunch o' haterz! Beats (wired) deliver tight studio bass for genres that utilize very low frequency bass and crips mids. i.e. hip hop and dance, and they do well with electronic. Obviously classical and metal, and rock you need to look elsewhere. Duh.

Because hip hop and dance is stuck in low frequency. /s

MorganX, you're so clueless it's frightening, just go away and stop writing utter BS. I won't even comment about your shameful comments about Denon and Sennheiser, and anyone with half a brain knows that Dre being rich has nothing to do with the topic whatsoever.

audioman said,
MorganX, you're so clueless it's frightening, just go away and stop writing utter BS. I won't even comment about your shameful comments about Denon and Sennheiser, and anyone with half a brain knows that Dre being rich has nothing to do with the topic whatsoever.

Attacking the guy for voicing his opinion? And disagreeing with yours? Maybe you should stop posting.

The one who started attacking is the guy who claims everyone be hatin' because they disagree with his warped, sheepish "opinion". Maybe you like being a goody saint, but you're not, you're just contributing to that nonsense.

Also, a computer monitor or TV that boosts the color red doesn't display a picture that's any "warmer" than a monitor that reproduces colors accurately, it just looks like horrible ####, everyone knows that. It's exactly the same with headphones that have an insanely inaccurate frequency response (among other things), but people have been lead to believe otherwise. Note: BELIEVE, not KNOW, because they just don't know any better than the #### shoved down their numb brains. Almost anyone who listens to quality headphones that reproduce audio at least fairly accurately, appreciates the sound better than #### like Beat Audio, and that's a fact. In the meantime, people can go on perpetuating idiotic myths about horribly produced sad excuse of headphones.

audioman said,
The one who started attacking is the guy who claims everyone be hatin' because they disagree with his warped, sheepish "opinion". Maybe you like being a goody saint, but you're not, you're just contributing to that nonsense.

Also, a computer monitor or TV that boosts the color red doesn't display a picture that's any "warmer" than a monitor that reproduces colors accurately, it just looks like horrible ####, everyone knows that. It's exactly the same with headphones that have an insanely inaccurate frequency response (among other things), but people have been lead to believe otherwise. Note: BELIEVE, not KNOW, because they just don't know any better than the #### shoved down their numb brains. Almost anyone who listens to quality headphones that reproduce audio at least fairly accurately, appreciates the sound better than #### like Beat Audio, and that's a fact. In the meantime, people can go on perpetuating idiotic myths about horribly produced sad excuse of headphones.

All I see are swear words and attacks. Maybe calm down?

The only FACT I know off, is that 9 out of 10 people cannot tell the difference between mediocre and good headphones. Many, many tests have been done to show just that. It's like most people can't tell the difference between come and Pepsi, or 720p ans 1080p. A few of us know that the difference is there, but most people don't.

audioman said,
Link me to those non-existent tests.
Or better, stop making things up.

There are thousands of them. One was done recently by popular mechanics on flac vs mp3. Guess what the results were for the majority of people tested?

Look up ABX testing...

Don't make me laugh,. In fact, no one has EVER published results of even a single ABC/HR (nor ABX, which is the wrong type of test for this) test of headphones, nothing like that exists, just stop making things up and go get people's actual reactions (and look up ABC/HR while you're at it).

audioman said,
Don't make me laugh,. In fact, no one has EVER published results of even a single ABC/HR (nor ABX, which is the wrong type of test for this) test of headphones, nothing like that exists, just stop making things up and go get people's actual reactions (and look up ABC/HR while you're at it).

Refusing to believe is your problem, not mine. Stop attacking members here and put up a valid argument. Childish comments only make you look uneducated.

I said stop making things up, and pretending you're a righteous saint doesn't make you any more credible. Now go check out your non-existent "thousands of tests".

Also suing Rudy Huyn for naming his company 6studios because if you type it out it could possible be mistaken for there logo bstudios. I read that a few days ago and wondered why they would waste their time.

I can't see how the two brands have much in common from a consumer point of view.
At least FB and Oculus (while wierd to begin with) seem to have some common philosophy.

So now Apple takes on a chavvy brand associated with a rapper spouting nonsense in his "music"? Apple now becomes the new Burberry! From executive to ghetto in one fell swoop!

At least do your homework before spouting off nonsense. Dr. Drae today is a producer and business man. He was a gangsta rapper in his early days. Probably way before you were born. He now works with many different genre's these days. Even I know this and I'm in my very late 30's. How? Did my homework before posting! Your post also screams stereotyping. I'm in grad school at UCLA and I see many affluent kids with Beats on their head bobbing their head back and forth. Get a clue dude!

JHBrown said,
Get a clue dude!

At least I have a clue of what decent music is. It certainly is not the crap Beats owners/zombies like to listen to, Dr Dre(ary)'s monotonous ranting parental-advisory crap.

You can't even spell his name. It's D-R-E not D-R-A-E, so you get a clue how to spell before telling me what to do, rap-chav!

Everyone is talking about the headphones but I don't think that Apple is after their headphones. They're after the streaming business, the contracts that Beats have in this industries. Negotiations with record companies is painful and slow, buying Beats gets them the rights. Buying Spotify or Pandora does not give them the rights because the negotiations were only with these companies and aren't transferred to a new owner when bought.

Well sooner or later we will see people dancing with iPod nano nano's with oversized beats headsets and Dr. Dre rapping for the commercial's Microsoft on the other hand will get snoop come out with a new headset with a built in roach clip ;)

Beats built a business raking in revenue faster than apple does. Both are viewed as 'high end high price' products, but the beats headphones are produced for $14US and retail for over $200US. Thats a 1400+% margin that Apple wants a piece of.

srbeen said,
Beats built a business raking in revenue faster than apple does. Both are viewed as 'high end high price' products, but the beats headphones are produced for $14US and retail for over $200US. Thats a 1400+% margin that Apple wants a piece of.

Can I have a source for those figures?

He's been part on 1% for quite a while, you just have to make a bit over about half a mil a year to qualify, maybe even less

I'm mildly worried for the future of Apple. I don't entirely understand this acquisition from a technology point of view so the only other logical reason would be branding.. but the only recent Apple partnership that springs to mind was Apple & Motorola's mobile phone which as we all know was a total flop. I just can't see Apple laptops with a 'with Beats Audio' sticker on, or iPhones or iPods being sold with Beats earphones.

Very strange. I guess all we can do is wait and see what comes of it.

Chicane-UK said,
I'm mildly worried for the future of Apple...

http://investor.apple.com/stockquote.cfm

I have a feeling this will continue to rise rather than fall, and I can absolutely see them selling the 'beats by dre' labels on their gear as marketing hype. I have a laptop with 'beats by dre' but I could be tricked into thinking it was 'tinny noise by dre' as well, as the sound is horrible. The HTC One M7 cell phone sounds better than my laptop, honestly. Its 100% marketing probably cheaper produced headphones than apple is currently making for 10x as much profit.

I can absolutely see an overpriced iPod bundle coming with a set of beats $300 headphones. Or 'beats enhanced' iPods making their rounds to get consumers to re-buy what they already own. Its a small cost to apple to bundle them in but a huge kickback as the consumer thinks they are saving as well as getting better products overall.

Chicane-UK said,
I'm mildly worried for the future of Apple. I don't entirely understand this acquisition from a technology point of view so the only other logical reason would be branding.. but the only recent Apple partnership that springs to mind was Apple & Motorola's mobile phone which as we all know was a total flop. I just can't see Apple laptops with a 'with Beats Audio' sticker on, or iPhones or iPods being sold with Beats earphones.

Very strange. I guess all we can do is wait and see what comes of it.

It's a quiet way of admitting that they cannot innovate, and haven't in quite a while, since before Jobs passing, so all they can do is gobble up other just as "innovative" companies to keep the cash flowing while they still can

I don't think Apple have specifically bought them for any 'technology'. Beats got so big because celebs started wearing and endorsing them. If Apple release a new product that is massively premium priced, let's say the 'Rolex' of the smartwatches..then it makes sense in order to get that price justified and made credible it would need some celebrity endorsement. I think this is also why there have been so many 'fashion' hires at Apple such as the burberry CEO. All of these people know how to sell fashion statements and massively over priced (in terms of high margins).

The other thing is Beats Music gives Apple a chance to take a cut of the streaming market without cannibalising their iTunes downloads. I imagine the beats streaming service will be a testing field for Apple, before we see a platform independent iTunes store and streaming service (i.e. on Android and Windows Phone as well) in the next few years, in order to combat the rise of Spotify and the rest.

Chicane-UK said,
I'm mildly worried for the future of Apple. I don't entirely understand this acquisition from a technology point of view so the only other logical reason would be branding.. but the only recent Apple partnership that springs to mind was Apple & Motorola's mobile phone which as we all know was a total flop. I just can't see Apple laptops with a 'with Beats Audio' sticker on, or iPhones or iPods being sold with Beats earphones.

Very strange. I guess all we can do is wait and see what comes of it.

I hope they don't start throwing Beats Audio stickers on their products. I remember right after the Intel transition was announced, you had one group of people insisting that the Intel Inside stickers would appear on Macs, and then another group that insisted they wouldn't. A similar debate popped up about carrier branding after the iPhone was announced. It just goes against Apple's design philosophy.

My guess is that they'll keep Beats headphones separate, since it is an identifiable brand, and roll whatever technology Apple wanted into some of their existing products. I don't know what said tech can be. I've never been impressed by anything marked with Beats Audio. Well, I love the speakers in the HTC One M8, and I thought they used the Beats audio engine, but I was wrong.

Anibal P said,
It's a quiet way of admitting that they cannot innovate, and haven't in quite a while, since before Jobs passing, so all they can do is gobble up other just as "innovative" companies to keep the cash flowing while they still can

I don't see how it's a quiet admission that they can't innovate. Not only did Apple acquire close to thirty companies when Jobs was at the helm, and use what they acquired to roll into what became those innovative products they're known for, but it's also standard business practice for companies to acquire other companies.

I would argue that a company that doesn't acquire other technology, talent, patents, and/or looks for ways to improve their existing products, or try to get a jump start in an emerging market as quietly admitting that they can't innovate.

benthebear said,

I hope they don't start throwing Beats Audio stickers on their products. I remember right after the Intel transition was announced, you had one group of people insisting that the Intel Inside stickers would appear on Macs, and then another group that insisted they wouldn't. A similar debate popped up about carrier branding after the iPhone was announced. It just goes against Apple's design philosophy.

My guess is that they'll keep Beats headphones separate, since it is an identifiable brand, and roll whatever technology Apple wanted into some of their existing products. I don't know what said tech can be. I've never been impressed by anything marked with Beats Audio. Well, I love the speakers in the HTC One M8, and I thought they used the Beats audio engine, but I was wrong.

I don't see how it's a quiet admission that they can't innovate. Not only did Apple acquire close to thirty companies when Jobs was at the helm, and use what they acquired to roll into what became those innovative products they're known for, but it's also standard business practice for companies to acquire other companies.

I would argue that a company that doesn't acquire other technology, talent, patents, and/or looks for ways to improve their existing products, or try to get a jump start in an emerging market as quietly admitting that they can't innovate.

My gut instinct is that they'd just continue to sell Beats as a totally separate product, and that they'd just integrate the headphones better with their products. I've love to hear some official Apple information on why they've made this purchase though - it's very odd.

HP had a few laptops with beats by dre speakers. And must say, they where quite decent. Far superior then default speakers found in laptops or macs.
For headphones, there's quite a few better for similar prices, but in latops they seem to be much better then 99% of the other laptop speakers I've encountered.

Might be a good pro to have in the macs.

Star-Pirate said,
A friend of mine has some beats headphones, there OK, but they only suit music with heavy bass.
Baats headphones are designed to boost lows and highs. They are far, far removed from honest and pure audio and they certainly aren't 'high-end' as far as audio quality goes. It's a concept and a marketing brand, not unlike Apple itself which makes them a good pairing I guess.

They're like the logitech 2.1/5.1 sets. Where anything up to 100hz gets shoved down the subwoofer. I love bass and all, and I don't mind upping it to much. But if I listen to friends systems (most have logitech), I keep getting distracted with the "Why is it making bass so much" while on a proper system, these sounds come from the mid-speaker.

And similar to Youtube and music uploads. Somehow if I upload a song to youtube. The quality 'seems higher' because Youtube dicks around with bass and trebbles.

I have a pair of their IEM and the sound isn't that bad. I don't use them that much (have a set of Bose IEM that are a bit lighter and easier to use while running), but for the price I paid, they seem decent enough.

But I would never pay the money for the over-the-ear cans. There are far better options.

Rarely anyone notice It's about the same price as google acquired nest. iTunes have large customer base with credit card and user that give them the leverage and opportunity to launch streaming music service within the digital store instead of building it from the ground up. At the same time ,ponder over why they need to spend chunk of cash to elevate their music business which might not help much. Good luck with that acquisition if it ever come true.

It will be interesting to see if Microsoft can even compete with this. Dr. Dre with Apple? Maybe they can resurrect Tupac.

Enron said,
It will be interesting to see if Microsoft can even compete with this. Dr. Dre with Apple? Maybe they can resurrect Tupac.

At least Hologram TuPac..

AsherGZ said,
htc had stake in it

In fact, they used to have a majority stake in it...

They sold about 27% for $150 million in 2012, and the remaining 24.8% for $265 million in late 2013.

HTC sold their last shares 8 months ago for 3x less than what Apple was willing to pay.

rfirth said,

In fact, they used to have a majority stake in it...

They sold about 27% for $150 million in 2012, and the remaining 24.8% for $265 million in late 2013.

HTC sold their last shares 8 months ago for 3x less than what Apple was willing to pay.

Apple is paying a lot of money for an image, this will eventually bite them in the ass

So yes HTC bailed and salvaged as much of their investment they could, then Apple comes in and way overpays for the crappy brand

Anibal P said,
Apple is paying a lot of money for an image, this will eventually bite them in the ass

So yes HTC bailed and salvaged as much of their investment they could, then Apple comes in and way overpays for the crappy brand


If it were a crappy brand, people wouldn't have the impression of them being superior to your standard make of headphones. That perception coupled with great sales, image, marketing and so forth makes them incredibly valuable.

Remember that this is a business decision, not a competition for who makes the best headphones. Anyone can make headphones, but not everyone can shift the perception of speakers that go on your ears from being simply that to an entire trend.

History itself has shown that there have been some awesome inventions in the past that have gone under the radar simply because the marketing or the direction is gone. See tablets for example.

Wall-swe said,
But why?

As reported in earlier articles, they have a huge following from people that listen to rap and pay well over the odds for mediocre (at best) quality headphones, so probably being kept to open up more market segments

n_K said,

As reported in earlier articles, they have a huge following from people that listen to rap and pay well over the odds for mediocre (at best) quality headphones, so probably being kept to open up more market segments

Mediocre perhaps? Beat's they have
+great styling
+brand image
+a sort of dedicated following and
+ very high margins

They are match. I don't know why people are confused about this acquisition.

Deviate_X said,

Mediocre perhaps? Beat's they have
+great styling
+brand image
+a sort of dedicated following and
+ very high margins

They are match. I don't know why people are confused about this acquisition.


Mediocre sound quality at best is what I meant. Couldn't care less what a pair of headphones look like, if they sound quality isn't good (and beats are by no means good) then I wouldn't even think about paying £10 for them, let alone £200.

n_K said,

Mediocre sound quality at best is what I meant. Couldn't care less what a pair of headphones look like, if they sound quality isn't good (and beats are by no means good) then I wouldn't even think about paying £10 for them, let alone £200.

For A LOT of people, Beats are fine. I don't see the issue. If you need better quality, go buy it. Simple.

Nashy said,

For A LOT of people, Beats are fine. I don't see the issue. If you need better quality, go buy it. Simple.

I wouldn't see a problem with this but Beats is inverse to the "you get what you pay for" principle in that you're actually paying MORE for Beats with crap quality than you would for a competing brand with better range.

Nashy said,

For A LOT of people, Beats are fine. I don't see the issue. If you need better quality, go buy it. Simple.


Really? You don't get how it's a scam at best?

Nashy said,
For A LOT of people, Beats are fine..

"Fine" isn't worth upwards of $300. THAT is what is ridiculous.

People with Beats headsets probably also have $120 HDMI cables.

Nashy said,

For A LOT of people, Beats are fine. I don't see the issue. If you need better quality, go buy it. Simple.

There is not really an issue. Both companies manage to market their average product as high end at ridiculous margins. Both basically live on the premise they are 'cool'. Until someone else manages to convince the following hordes they are the next big thing and it's all over.

Xenosion said,

Really? You don't get how it's a scam at best?

You don't get that people will spend a lot of money just for style?

Hell I seen +$1000 women's shoes that still work the same as $25 shoes.

Edited by Doli, May 10 2014, 4:01pm :

Doli said,

You don't get that people will spend a lot of money just for style?

Hell I seen +$1000 women's shoes that still work the same as $25 shoes.


Beats is marketed for quality.

n_K said,

As reported in earlier articles, they have a huge following from people that listen to rap and pay well over the odds for mediocre (at best) quality headphones, so probably being kept to open up more market segments

I think you are going by what you have read. The new Beats Studios, especially the wireless ones are actually quite good. Maybe not $380 worth good, but they aren't mediocre by any measure. During the last year their headphone have actually improved quite a bit, including their build quality. And trust me, I know. I've owned everything from Beats solo (the early 2009/10 version when it first came out) to Sennheiser HD595s to the Bose QuietComfort 15. And I listen to a lot of music.

still_rookie said,
I think you are going by what you have read. The new Beats Studios, especially the wireless ones are actually quite good. Maybe not $380 worth good, but they aren't mediocre by any measure. During the last year their headphone have actually improved quite a bit, including their build quality. And trust me, I know. I've owned everything from Beats solo (the early 2009/10 version when it first came out) to Sennheiser HD595s to the Bose QuietComfort 15. And I listen to a lot of music.

Yeah, I've had a customer go with the Beats for the level of comfort and wireless capabilities over similarly priced Bose that had the upper hand in terms of sound quality and noise cancellation. People keep trying to use one metric when they talk about Beats, when there's multiple levels as to why people would buy them.

I think people just need to quit telling others how to spend their money. Some people here are acting so goddamn arrogant that it's taking away from the credibility and respect I have for them.

Enron said,

I wouldn't see a problem with this but Beats is inverse to the "you get what you pay for" principle in that you're actually paying MORE for Beats with crap quality than you would for a competing brand with better range.

I paid practually pocket change for my urbeats and they not only look better than my JBE and my Marshalls... they sound just as good if not better.

Beats used to be horrible, yes. But the product line in the past couple of years they have vastly improved.

Oh the irony of complaining about Beats price, style, quality, etc. when it's being purchased by Apple. Personally, I see it as a perfect fit.

dead.cell said,

Yeah, I've had a customer go with the Beats for the level of comfort and wireless capabilities over similarly priced Bose

I hope people who complain about Beats are not using Bose products. When it comes to overpriced speakers Bose would be one of the first company i would put on my own list.

Nashy said,

For A LOT of people, Beats are fine. I don't see the issue. If you need better quality, go buy it. Simple.

Thing is, you can get more quality from cheaper headphones. Sony Studio series come to mind. On top of that the longer you use them the better they sound. You'll find people that have owned them for 20+ years. They'll set you back $70-100. With Beats you're not getting anything more than the image.

laserfloyd said,

Thing is, you can get more quality from cheaper headphones. Sony Studio series come to mind. On top of that the longer you use them the better they sound. You'll find people that have owned them for 20+ years. They'll set you back $70-100. With Beats you're not getting anything more than the image.

Some people don't really care. Look at all the iPhone users on the planet who could have a far better phone, but don't.

It's all about personal preference. While you and I know they are overpriced junk, to some they are fantastic, and exactly what they want. Be it for a particular look, or a particular feature.

Nashy said,
Some people don't really care. Look at all the iPhone users on the planet who could have a far better phone, but don't.

It's all about personal preference. While you and I know they are overpriced junk, to some they are fantastic, and exactly what they want. Be it for a particular look, or a particular feature.


Agreed. We're not talking about tax payer dollars here. Not sure why everyone has a sudden interest in how others choose to spend their money, bitching about it as if it belongs to them...