Apple Buying Universal Music? [merged threads]

Originally posted by fryke
1.) This rumour _started_ off of a LA Times and 'Der Spiegel' article. And both claim to have 'anonymous sources', which - although both are well respected publications - doesn't give the article(s) much credibility.
Click to expand...

Even if the resources were not credible, it is out in the open more than before. Apple does not like having their "secrets" thrown out like this and especially if it is true. So to me it's black and white. Either it's BS or thehy are stretchin' out their feathers and struttin' to impress the "alphas males".

Originally posted by fryke
2.) I never said Apple would be putting all their chips in it. With having a vision I rather meant that Apple puts their money where their vision is supported, expanded and can be profitable. I think expanding on the idea of the digital hub is money better spent than, say, buying Motorola's PowerPC division and then noticing that they can't really do better. And also better than just throw money into more developers to create better software faster. Apple has a long history in software development, and software like iMovie, Mac OS X and Safari shows that their software development money is well spent at the moment.
Click to expand...

I know you didn't say that, but 6B is alot of ching for Apple to lay down. I doubt they have that laying in a drawer somewhere.

Also, what I meant about the software was release golds of programs ie Safari 1.0 not a beta. iCal 1.0 not the beta. I appreciate the yearly updates of the OS, but please give a non-buggy program.

Originally posted by fryke
On topic: Whether it's a bad or a good idea to buy Universal Music, just imagine the big splash of the following announcement (and I'm not claiming it will happen):

"Apple today unveiled the new line of iPods. (Features etc. ...) They also announced the new version of iTunes, number 4, which lets you browse an online catalogue of music tracks from all relevant record labels. You can click on a track and accept to buy it for 0.99 USD, it gets automatically downloaded, added to your iTunes 4 library and synched with your iPod. The MPEG-4 based AAC codec used sports a better quality than MP3 (CD-Quality, actually) and you are free to use the song according to copyright laws. You can copy it to your other Mac or PC, you can burn it on CD and, of course, listen to it on your iPod. In related news, Apple has bought Universal Music and has signed new contracts with (insert a couple of big stars that will celebrate their comeback)." (Those stars would, of course, star in a new 'Switchers' ad, saying that they were under other record labels before and have now 'switched' to Apple Universal.) ;-)
Click to expand...

You have to be an ad writer! You made it sound REEEEEALLy good!

But again, are they going to keep dealing with computers or just the iPod, iTunes, and music?

I, personally, will never use there music service becasue they will never carry any of the music I listen to. I am sure there a many who will glad buy from it, but it will not be my music shop.

I just hope that this, if it does happen, works. If it doesn't, I really do not want to speculate what could happen to Apple...

PS - The market closes in 27 min. and their stack is at 13.10 :(
 
Two points really.
One.
I know you didn't say that, but 6B is alot of ching for Apple to lay down. I doubt they have that laying in a drawer somewhere.
Click to expand...
Uh. macrumors said: may offer $5 billion to $6 billion So for one, I don't know why people started assuming any price will be $6b.

Two.
I, personally, will never use there music service becasue they will never carry any of the music I listen to. I am sure there a many who will glad buy from it, but it will not be my music shop.
Click to expand...
Are you psychic? Can you travel through time? I doubt it somehow. Unless you listen to home-made music you create with a soup-tin and a fork, there is no reason to assume ANY type of music won't be released under any possible new record company, whether its owned, or associated with Apple or not. If its music you buy, SOMEONE has to be producing it. Why not Universal/Apple ??

Also. Is Universal Music a seperate company, or a subsidary to Universal Pictures...?
 
Originally posted by Pengu
So for one, I don't know why people started assuming any price will be $6b.
Click to expand...

Does it matter!?! $5B? $6B? It still is a chuck of cash!

Originally posted by Pengu
Two.

Are you psychic? Can you travel through time? I doubt it somehow. Unless you listen to home-made music you create with a soup-tin and a fork, there is no reason to assume ANY type of music won't be released under any possible new record company, whether its owned, or associated with Apple or not. If its music you buy, SOMEONE has to be producing it. Why not Universal/Apple ??
Click to expand...

In this instant, yes I am psychic.

Pengu, does "banjo_boy" give you any hint!?! Bluegrass is my music of choice and most of the best names are on independent labels and will probably not be part of this.

You have to understand that you DO NOT find bluegrass music easily. If a place has it, it is usually in the back of the store and they have 3-5 CDs of "best of bluegrass", each one having "The Ballad of Jed Clampett", "Dueling Banjos" and "Foggy Mountain Breakdown" on them. Or else it is a shop that is run by an ex-hippie that sells only bluegrass and folk music.

If Apple did add some bluegrass, it will most likely be more country than bluegrass.

Country Rocks, but Bluegrass RULES!
 
I thought this was an odd thing but after thinging its a possible scenario based on these facts.

The music industry is having problems from piracy mainly due to its pricing model once downloadable music was coming to market. Instead of working with the technology they fought against it. They would rather you buy the $18 CD instead of on a per track basis. Customer backlash pretty much blew the whole thing to hell in a handbasket. So enter... Napster, Scour, etc. Also over th elast few years the new talent has been all that spectacular, but they blame downloadable music. There are more factors that just piracy in my view but I prefer to fix the problem instead of bitching about it.

Solution: Now with Apple with a possibility exists to be able to have music on a per track basis now. Before music was limited to having single by what the label dictates, not the uses can control that for a per cost on the track. More so they will ba able to create a new method of distribution for music that the industry is afraid to take. This is a risk yes, but could be what gets all this RIAA BS straightened and the customers not paying $18 for a CD to get one song.

Just my 2 cents on a possibility...
 
Whether true or not, it looks as though Apple is looking to aquire another company and given their digital hub focus it makes sense that they would target the entertainment industry. I agree with serpicolugnut that the current industry is dying and that it will be replaced by smaller more responsive studios. The current system is based on a topheavy star system giving those on the bottom little chance to get a leg up.

The future is with downloadable music and if Apple is able to come up with a viable solution then they will be at the head of the pack. I'm all for independent music and movie studios but I'm not willing to search a couple hundred web sites to find the music I want. A centralized system is what is needed and I hope that Apple succeeds.

I have this gut feeling that this is the year that makes or breaks Apple. Can Steve pull it off?
 
Ugg wrote: "I'm all for independent music and movie studios but I'm not willing to search a couple hundred web sites to find the music I want."

I remember the days when I went to a different city to (just maybe) find the record I was looking for. ;-)

You wouldn't have to search a couple hundred websites, even without a centralised system. Think Google. Or blogs. Or P2P. There _could_ be a networked system of independent resellers. And, yes, even you with your own band's website could be part of it. However: I still am with you with your hope. :)
 
Originally posted by banjo_boy
Pengu, does "banjo_boy" give you any hint!?! Bluegrass is my music of choice and most of the best names are on independent labels and will probably not be part of this.

You have to understand that you DO NOT find bluegrass music easily.
Click to expand...
You may already know about this, but... Sirius Stream 37 - Bluegrass
 
Originally posted by Excalibur
I agree with you on that Fryke. The words... out of stock, will not be an issue anymore.
Click to expand...
What I really want is for the record labels entire libraries to be made available. Not just the music and artists that they currently have available in stores and catalogs but everything they own. 70% of the music I download is stuff which cannot be bought except at great effort through used stores and similar-purpose online sites.
 
the real question that has to be asked is this:
how will apple debut their music service and not alienate all those people who are used to getting music for free? how do you institute a service like this and reconcile those issues?

next issue:
how do you get the majority of public (willing or not willing) to accept the fact that you have to pay for digital music?

and finally:
how can apple use this business-friendly approach to take future steps into the real $ maker (and therefore the real expansion of influence)?

unfortunately, i don't have these answers. otherwise, i'd probably be getting big $ to work for apple. i do hope, however, that apple does know these answers. they are gonna make or break their future success...

John Galt
 
Well, for once, the quality of the service must be simply perfect. Finding something must be easiest possible, downloads must be as fast as possible (Akamai?) and license restrictions must be almost absent (i.e.: there are laws in each country about copyright, they are enough. we KNOW it's illegal to share that music online, we're just criminals and should be put to jail if we don't agree and copy the stuff.), i.e. no copy restrictions (for your own, private use).
 
'Where there is smoke there is fire." That is what this reminds me off. I am not saying this is true, but I do think their is truth in what is being said. Apple is in the process of transitioning into something more, which is needed if they intend to stay relevant in the new tech industry.

If Apple plays its cards right than we will see that this is another chance to grow the personal computer market.

It will be interesting to see how this pans out. I was just thinking the other day how Apple needs to get in bed with a major movie company or two. But this might be an interesting start, with the music industry first. If Apple can successfully market music over the internet, then I think we can expect to see a similar system in the near future for movies.

Matthew
 
Yes, I'm really dreaming of iFlics 1.0 sometimes. Like iTunes, but for MPEG-4 movies. Choose your bandwidth, choose streaming or download (i.e. choose your price)... Maybe five more years or so... (dreaming, dreaming...)
 
i said that apple is going microsoftish :p

From Slashdot

An article over at the New York Post is reporting Microsoft has expressed interest in buying Vivendi's Universal Music Group, setting up a possible bidding war between the software maker and rival Apple Computer, according to sources familiar with the matter. Microsoft's interest is said to be at the level of "poking around, kicking the tires," but it has indeed had conversations with Vivendi executives about buying the music division, sources said."

also look here
 
... just something microsoft would do. Personally, I think if Apple acquires Universal it would be great. Apple would gain a whole new level of respect from record companies. They would actually be in charge of how music gets distributed and how copy protection would apply. Microsoft on the other hand puts DRM in everything, and there goes your freedom. Want to make a mix of your favorite songs, too bad. Also, everyone complains "we need faster computers" or "macs need to be cheaper" ... well, Apple needs more than 5 percent of the market. I believe this expansion will definitely boost market share ... not instantly, but gradually. Sooner or later record companies, software companies, and movie companies will have their way and Kazaa and those other P2P apps will get banned, and there will be Apple! ;)
 
Until there is a change in the way people think, and I mean a major change, then online music trading will not stop. People thought Napster would be the end. No. Until society is into some star-trek "we don't work for money" sorta thing, then it won't stop. There will ALWAYS be a way to get music without paying for it.
 
Originally posted by gwynarion
You may already know about this, but... Sirius Stream 37 - Bluegrass
Click to expand...

Yes, I have heard it and many other streaming radio and satilite radio station. They are good, but most of them that I have heard really played a few select "pop grass" bands and throw in a couple "oldies" for the 'grassers.

I REALLY hope you all are right. I would love to see the hard to find labels. I would be very happy.

BUT! Is this service even going to happen? Apple is looking. Now, not. Now they are. Now Microsoft. Now, Apple. Now not. What's happening?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top