Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Apple Plans to Purchase Universal Music

Posted by pudge on from the ringo-might-be-displeased dept.

mrbiiggy writes "Apparently Apple has been plotting to purchase Universal Music for $6 billion, reports Spiegel Online (read the Google translation). Who knew Apple even had that kind of cash? (The L.A. Times is also reporting this, free reg required.)"

9 of 584 comments (clear)

  1. What's your plan, big guy? by salamander_sjv · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I've got a home server plugged into the stereo, with all my music available via iTunes. I use a Powerbook G4 as my main machine, and I'd like to get a 30GB iPod to plug into my car stereo. This type of setup seems to be becoming increasingly common.

    I buy my music on CD, although I only grab them off the shelf when I want to check out the cover art and lyrics. I suppose I might start buying electronically, but unless the price drops to reflect the savings on manufacturing and distribution, I don't really see the point. I still like having a tangible object to associate with the artist's work. (so much so that whenever there's a sale on I end up buying albums I like that I ripped from friends)

    Steve must be pretty sure that he's got a killer reason if he's planning such a huge move. I suppose that killer reason could be big savings to the consumer, but somehow I doubt it. What else is he going to offer?

    1. Re:What's your plan, big guy? by James_Duncan8181 · · Score: 5, Interesting
      It offers Apple a guarentee of relevancy?

      It would mean that any DRM system that is worked out for music will have to consider the interests of Apple/Universal. This effectively avoids a MS lockout on music, which would obviously be very harmful to sales as the Mac is very media orientated.

      Otherwise you are right, there seems not that much of a natural fit between these companies.

      --
      "To any truly impartial person, it would be obvious that I am right."
    2. Re:What's your plan, big guy? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 5, Interesting
      In the last year, I have bought a single CD. Okay, a 2CD set, but the principle's the same. Most of the time I listen to WCPE Internet radio. They provide a very good service (including an Ogg Vorbis stream), and play good music, with very few interruptions. Radio, as a way of distributing music, has been around for a very long time, and the music industry doesn't seem to have a problem with it. I consider WCPE to provide a good service, and happily contribute to their costs (they're listener supported).

      The kind of service I would like, and which I would happily pay $10/month or so for goes one step furthur. I would like direct access to their catalogue, so I could stream or download any tracks I wanted when I wanted them. They could then log which tracks I download, and pay the artists concerned proportionally. I would be perfectly happy for the music to expire if I stopped paying for it. I would not be happy with some kind of analogue watermark that affects the quality of the sound.

      I would also rather that they used Ogg, instead of AAC (Apple's apparent choice) since then all the money would go to distribution and the artists, not to patent royalties.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    3. Re:What's your plan, big guy? by MikeMo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm in the CD replication business. It's really hard to get a CD done for less than 19 cents in any quantity. There are people out there doing it for less, but they're losing money on that kind of work (makes sense, sometimes), and they're probably not paying the appropriate royalties. There's a fixed minimum determined by the cost of the materials, let alone paying for the machinery and the folks to run the things.

  2. Apple Records? by Reeses · · Score: 5, Interesting

    What about that injunction from Apple Records (the old Beatles record company) preventing Apple Computer from getting into the music business? Anyone know if this would apply?

    --
    Reeses
  3. Lock-in? by ashpool7 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Unlikeley.

    Evidence:
    The iPod is available for Windows.
    MP3s play on any computer.
    OS X promotes open standards.
    OS intentionally provides Windows and Linux interoperability.


    Apple seems to has no interest in things that *lock* a user in. Sure, they have things that entice users to stay, like iTunes, but there's no lock-in there. I see the mentality being "well, you _could_ use something else, but why? Our stuff is SWEET!"

    ;-)

  4. Apple knows the key by SuperKendall · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Apple realizes what no-one in the record industry does - that if you open wide the full possibilities for selling music, the take will be enormous.

    If Apple buys Universal, then they can continue to sell normal CD's - but also sell everything online. Even older unpublished stuff, which is currently languishing. Then you have not just CD buyers, but nostalgia buyers and people who just want one hit song and not a whole CD. That provides many more channels for revenue, unlike normal music companies which oddly seems to desire that only limited revenue channels be allowed to exist.

    Furthermore, by staying away from copy protection they save money over the stupid record companies spending all sorts of cash trying to prevent the CD buyer from accessing their own music! While other companies are building up bad will with stupid formats for online music and CD's that don't play in all CD players, Universal could sweep the industry.

    At the very least, the entry of a non-music company into the music business has got to have some interesting ramifications somewhere. Especially when you have a computer company that understands consumers better than most at the helm...

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  5. Don't forget Pixar! by shotfeel · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Everyone seems to forget that Jobs is also the CEO of Pixar (makers of Monsters, Inc,, Toy Story, A Bug's Life...).

    I still remember about a year ago the NYT had a big Tech vs. the Entertainment Industry with a picture of Eisner (Disney CEO) representing the Entertainment industry, Jobs representing the tech industry (hiliting Apple's Rip, Mix, Burn campaign) and a screen shot of Monster's Inc. representing "pirated" works. Although the article stated Monster's Inc. was created by Pixar (distributed by Disney), the reporter seemed completely unaware of Job's other job. It would have added a whole new twist to the significance of the "facts".

  6. This could be very big news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've been working in the music business for about 10 years now... I've run my own label, worked for other independents, spent some time with Sony Music (in their distribution arm) and now work with all of the majors via a marketing consulting company. If Apple is thinking along the right lines this could be very good news for consumers. Why?

    1. Universal Music Group is the largest major label in the industry.

    2. UMG already owns an incredible MP3 download service called emusic.com. Yes, there are ZERO DRM controls. Just great music from thousands of artists (mainly independent at this point, but still an important step).

    3. Apple would want to leverage their hardware/software assets vs. the content UMG controls. This would clearly mean cross selling between the iPod [one of Apple's most success products in years], the Mac platform, Quicktime, and all of UMG music/video assets. ... from an insider's perspective, everyone in the business already understands that digital distribution is the future. The key arguement is HOW and under what TERMS. This could be a very interesting step in the right direction. Certainly exciting.