Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
I'm sorry, G,
but that article is very misleading. Music labels make no effort, at all, to sell physical copies of singles. They are a promo tool that "lose" money on each sale. There are relatively few available for sale, and now, with the proliferation of $.99 singles on internet sites, they are vastly outnumbered by the number available via itunes, Napster, et. al.
Statistics don't lie. Statisticians do.
Ron Tutt, Drummerman
http://www.drummerworld.com/drummers/Ron_Tutt.html
October 31, 2003, 10:20 AM ET
UMG To Acquire DreamWorks Records
Universal Music Group has reached an agreement in principle to acquire DreamWorks Records from DreamWorks SKG for about $100 million, sources confirm to Billboard Bulletin. The label was founded by the Hollywood triumvirate of filmmaker Steven Spielberg, former Disney honcho Jeffrey Katzenberg and record mogul David Geffen.
Under the deal, DreamWorks will be placed within Interscope/Geffen/A&M, under the direction of Jimmy Iovine. According to sources, it is too early to say whether the label will continue to operate on its own or will be folded into one of the Interscope labels. Also, no decision has been made yet as to whether DreamWorks principals Mo Ostin, Lenny Waronker and Michael Ostin will stay on.
DreamWorks issued its first release in 1996. The label has major upcoming albums on the way from Toby Keith, Floetry and Nelly Furtado and was also home to the late Elliott Smith.
While questions are being raised about the future of the music industry, UMG management thinks this is a time of opportunity, according to one source familiar with the deal. "For those who believe, there is a lot of gold to be mined now," the source says.
I note from the APS website
that they claim to have a number of patents pending on their digeplayer.
"APS has successfully designed and marketed a variety of products for the airline industry. Recently, based on the expressed needs of airline executives, the Company designed an In-Flight Entertainment System (several patents pending) that has generated tremendous interest from major airline carriers."
Would someone be able to identify what those claims might be? TIA
LOL!!!!/
Use your imagination, sentinel.....
The hype king throws in the towel
http://www.agoracom.com/nonmemforum/msgreview.asp?id=289304&refid=0&orig=289304
Apple singing a new song with iTunes
When Apple chief Steve Jobs rolled out iTunes for Windows recently, the absence of any Microsoft representatives was as telling as it was glaring.
Traditionally the two industry rivals have put their hatchets in sleep mode for the sake of promoting products beneficial to both companies.
Jobs was always delighted to announce a Microsoft Office or Internet Explorer upgrade for the Macintosh, rightfully reasoning that compatibility with Windows would help keep Apple from falling off the face of the earth. In 1997 Bill Gates even invested $150 million of Microsoft cash in Apple — a goodwill gesture many suspected was meant to keep the antitrust hounds at bay by extending Apple's life span.
At the same time, any innovation that Apple brought to the Macintosh was always quickly countered by Microsoft — a practice dating back to the first version of Windows, announced before the Macintosh's debut in 1984 but not released till two years had passed.
The iTunes rollout showed just how much times have changed. There was no pretense of alliance with Microsoft or Windows. Microsoft said it was not invited to the event.
At the same time, there's been no follow-up announcement from Redmond of a WinTunes or similar music offering from Microsoft. A Microsoft executive had no comment on whether any such venture is planned.
To some extent, the companies' strategic gamesmanship continues. Microsoft recently announced it will no longer upgrade Internet Explorer for the Macintosh — the grounds being that Apple now offers its own browser, Safari. Microsoft's new Outlook mail upgrade focuses on managing spam, an area where Apple's OS X mail program has garnered considerable praise.
Apple doesn't offer as powerful a suite as Microsoft's Office (one has been periodically rumored). But its AppleWorks package integrates most desktop-productivity functions and continues to improve.
While desktop competition may be continuing, Apple's iTunes snub reflects a new digital world order. The personal computer, albeit still vital, is just one of many moving parts in Apple's strategy.
Although Apple did not respond to queries, it's reasonable to speculate that Microsoft was not invited because it simply wasn't needed. Bono, Mick Jagger, Dr. Dre, yes. Bill Gates, no.
Apple's goal with iTunes — which has yet to make a profit despite sales of more than 15 million songs — is not to sell music but to sell its music player, the iPod.
The iPod has been a huge Apple hit. Apple sold 336,000 units in the most recent quarter, according to Business Week, and analysts expect sales to jump by 50 percent during the holiday season. It's the best-selling music player and may be the coolest "gotta have" digital device around.
But Jobs has little interest in identifying the iPod or iTunes with Windows, or even with personal computers. The iTunes-iPod combination has established Apple as a significant player in the music business — an industry where, so far, Microsoft has been uncharacteristically passive.
Microsoft has criticized Apple's iTunes-iPod strategy for being "proprietary" or "closed" — working on a single device, with its own format. That may prove to be a weak argument to users battered by viruses, worms, crashes and reboots in the all-accommodating world of Windows. Faced with dozens of music players to choose from, the average consumer is going to want the one that actually works.
Apple may also be emboldened by Microsoft's antitrust settlement. Significantly, two days after the iTunes rollout, The Times' Brier Dudley reported that the Justice Department and state prosecutors had raised antitrust concerns about Microsoft's handling of music shopping in Windows. The subtext: Microsoft might want to think twice about offering a "Music for Windows" program.
As a digital-lifestyle provider, Apple no longer considers itself a computer — or even software — company. Where Microsoft fits in the new landscape is less clear, and may not even matter to its long-standing rival.
Rupert Murdoch
ain't givin' nothin' away.
No worries, lick./
They're shaking loose the weak hands/
That seems a small price to pay
for what he's gotten.
"off the shelf"
Struck a few nerves with that one.
Yes, GO YANKS......next week
The White House.
"You knew Wayne, didn't you?" NO/
"I guess that is because no one really knows for certain what goes on in Poway?"
Over the years that I've observed the machinations of the company and its stock, it has become clear that there are people that DO know what goes on in Poway. Your associate, "JBOCCA" is certainly one of them. There are others who have had and continue to have personal relationships with Company officers; DABOSS and Steve Ferguson come immediately to mind. People who had investment interests in "partnered companies," have also had very accurate information about EDIGITAL's business matters. Out of respect for their privacy, they will go unmentioned by name, publicly.
Bless you, for accuracy sake,
ucansee, ucansee.
Just what is it that you think I "am?" You've never met, talked, or exchanged personal correspondence with me. Your sources of information about EDIGITAL have obviously been bad, as your posting history indicates. You are one of Putnam's Boswells, and repeatedly you have posted "optimisms" based on your conversations with him over the years, that have always come up short or very inaccurate. It seems that you are one of a number of people that consider any negative information about this company dismissable based on the slander and rumored inuendos that circulate about the source, and rather than accept the truth, you resort to dismissing that person as being "character-flawed."
I could truly not care less what you think, but for accuracy sake, you should make a better attempt to determine the "truth" for yourself about other people with differing opinions that your own.
BTW,it is spelled vegetarian; an error that I've seen you make on two occasions, now, and the last time you claimed to be one.
You're too sensitive, buddy
try to work some meat into your diet.
"Profitability is close at hand."
Wishful thinking, buddy.
How odd.
He only wants to make money with it.
Definitive reason?
In hindsight, the whole thing stunk.....here's a company applying for a full NASDAQ listing with equal prominence given on their web page for logo wear items (like mugs and shirts) as the important matters like partners products and services. They had NOTHING going except a grossly inflated share price. Instead of a significant OEM in the consumer electronics world licensing their platform for a DAP, they had MAYCOM. Music players with the features they claimed to bring to the table were not required. Secure content was YEARS AWAY. They had no money. Their one revenue bearing contract (Lanier) was failing. They had no board member with financial management experience, and two of the officers sold into the listing hype.
Heady times, eh?
I wouldn't doubt that he "knew"
the listing application was in serious trouble; others did.
He sold for three bucks
and small change; he too was waiting on the bogus NASDAQ listing.
Johnny & Joe!
Can the Magnificents be far behind!!
Robert Loest, no rocket scientist,
but nevertheless an investor who researched the issues, sold his $15 shares for $3 bucks. He sold because as he said, the company failed to market it's technology aggressively enough, and that there were other "software" solutions for the problems of non-standardized codecs and DRM's.
With all of the cyber music excitement lately, you'd think that the old mOS would be THE hot topic; making everything work seamlessly and all. You'd think that they wldn't have to be hustling ODY's from a stand at a music street fair in San Diego. With all the front money from the big time oems that SHOULD be coming in and APL and F-10 and the super secret ongoing design projects involving mOS3 and ?? Maybe booked a larger venue for the SHM than the "big room" on Evening Creek Dr?
The objective fact is that EDIGITAL is an engineering design firm that has gone public based on false assumptions made by amateur investors that it possessed in it's patented technology the Global Standard Rosetta Stone for portable digital music. It should be obvious by now that it doesn't.
Gates, with Orrin Hatch, Kenny Rogers,
Britny Spears and Jimi Hendrix, live from the EMP.
Steve a bad......
(hush yo mouth)
Call me when
he brings out Elvis.
"A waste of money?"
They've smoked through $65 million. What's another webcast?
Where's missy?
"I really don't have much else to say on the matter."
That's right!!
I should be the moderator.
smart, sentinel/
A shareholder's dinner?/
Nice run, Missy
good answer/
Jim Collier has proven to be an unreliable
and overly optimistic source of information. They listed a number of things that turned out to be "unavailable" when the player finally became available.
how 'bout "no use cryin?"