Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Media Music

Roxio To Concentrate on Online Music Business 288

Posted by michael from the house-built-on-sand dept.
DevGhost writes "Roxio Inc. said on Monday it would change its name to Napster and focus on the money-losing online digital music service, selling its profitable CD and DVD software division to Sonic Solutions for $80 million."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Roxio To Concentrate on Online Music Business More

Roxio To Concentrate on Online Music Business

Comments Filter:

  • MBA (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Mateito ( 746185 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @12:48PM (#9930793) Homepage
    This is what happens when you let an MBA run an organisation.

    • 3-minute MBA (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Marge N. Lacoste ( 801569 )
      Here's Entrepreneurship 101: The successful entrepreneur turns a Risky Venture into a Cash Cow. She then sells the Cash Cow, when it has matured, to the professional manager. And starts a new Risky Venture. The difference between enterpreneurs (whom the /.ers envy) and professional managers (whom they scorn) is called management style. Most entrepreneurs have neither the patience nor the inclination to manage a mature company. Those who recognize this in themselves move on to bigger and better things.
    • Hah. This [imdb.com] is not an MBA. This is the CEO of Roxio.

  • Sounds like a solid business plan (Score:5, Interesting)

    by hattig ( 47930 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @12:49PM (#9930797) Journal
    I wonder how many of the board of that company also moved with the profitable portion of the company, leaving the employees and the unpopular directors and managers with the loss making portion?

  • Newsflash! (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @12:49PM (#9930799)
    Roxio commits corporate suicide. Film at 11...

    • Re:Newsflash! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Amiga Lover ( 708890 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @12:57PM (#9930939)
      Roxio commits corporate suicide. Film at 11...

      First there was the dot.com bubble... then it burst...

      now corporations are intent on seeing that movement continue. Watch for the new dot.com suck. First SCO making a side business of OS production and concentrating on making their own customers hate them, now Roxio going for an even bigger/quicker dive.

      Next up, watch Dell decide to sell off their computer production business and go into making bathmats. or something.

      • Re:Newsflash! (Score:3, Funny)

        by Dmala ( 752610 )
        Next up, watch Dell decide to sell off their computer production business and go into making bathmats. or something.

        Hey, that wouldn't be a bad idea. I mean, I can knock together a decent PC in an hour or two, but a good bathmat? That's hard to come by.

    • Re:Newsflash! (Score:4, Interesting)

      by robslimo ( 587196 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @01:08PM (#9931094) Homepage Journal
      Roxio commits corporate suicide. Film at 11...

      Nah, they are actually very shrewd and forward-looking. They know that if not now, then eventually something like the INDUCE act will be made law, effectively making illegal CD & DVD burners as well as Roxio's (formerly Adaptec's) popular duping software.

      They're just gittin out while the gittin is good, see?

    • Re:Newsflash! (Score:3, Insightful)

      by ericdano ( 113424 )
      Exactly. They finally get some good software happening, and then they want to flush it away to join the "online music revolution"?!?!?!

      Wonder if they are taking odds in Vegas on how long they will last........

  • Really (Score:2, Funny)

    by Frothy Walrus ( 534163 )
    You mean that the 3 copies of Toast that everyone pirated didn't keep them alive?

    • Re:Really (Score:5, Insightful)

      by dasmegabyte ( 267018 ) <das@OHNOWHATSTHISdasmegabyte.org> on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @01:00PM (#9930981) Homepage Journal
      Read the fuckin' summary. The CD/DVD burning division -- which makes DirectCD and the AWESOME toast application -- is profitable. Meaning, it makes profit.

      Roxio is SELLING the profitable part of their business to concentrate on the stuff that's not working.

      Why? Because they're dumb.
      • Selling something can be a good idea.
        Lets say someone offers you $80 million for a company.
        1. If you think it is worth more than $80 million, you should not sell it.
        2. If you think it is worth less than $80 million you should sell.

        Apparently they took option #2.
        Profitable doesn't automatically mean worth more than the offer price.

      • Re:Really (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Here's another take on WHY:

        They don't want to be sued and/or have their software declared illegal.

        If I were a CEO and I saw the RIAA/MPAA filing numerous claims against my competition, I would be pretty scared too. Think: 321 Studios. Call it potential gain vs potential loss.

        Honestly, look at where the burning software market is going. The best selling/most popular products are the ones that do something that the people who love copyright want to stop. Here are some examples:

        - Copying 'protected' C
      • Maybe it's because they couldn't find anyone to buy the unprofitable part of the company. Because, you know, not everybody is dumb.

        If you read the fuckin' article instead of just the fuckin' summary you would see that they have been losing money even when you include the profits from the software division. Sometimes just making an "AWESOME" application doesn't mean that you have any cash in the bank or are able to pay your bills.

        The $80 million that they made by selling the software unit will let them k
      • if the burning side only makes a mil or so profit then the move makes perfect sense(for roxio, not that much for the buyer maybe) if they think they can make the online music side profitable in around 10 years.

  • $17 billion? (Score:5, Funny)

    by Patik ( 584959 ) * <cpatik AT gmail DOT com> on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @12:49PM (#9930809) Homepage Journal
    Legal battles are still pending in federal court over whether investors who backed the original Napster sustained the service and helped it cost the music industry a purported $17 billion in lost sales.
    It did? Says who, the same people who say my CD burner is really the same as 52 burners?

  • Great business model. (Score:5, Funny)

    by zipcube ( 22314 ) <courtney@courtneymalone.com> on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @12:49PM (#9930810) Homepage
    Board member #1: "Hey, let's sell our profitable division so that we can focus on one that will never make money ever."

    Board Member #2: "Brilliant!"

  • Napster... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by SpiritOfGrandeur ( 686449 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @12:50PM (#9930815)
    Napster on the stock ticker... who would have thought that was going to happen 5 years ago?!
  • First Adaptec, then Roxio, now Napster.

    Boy they're sure good at picking business models. Funny how an individual who changes professions every few years is viewed badly upon by creditors, yet companies who go through disposable business plans the same way are "innovative".

    On the good side though, I think this will be their last name change before Chapter 11(, Inc.). Seriously, what part of focus on the money-losing online digital music service, selling its profitable CD and DVD software division doesn't sound like the bubble all over again.

    Bah... whatev. Just as long as someone keeps supporting Toast, I won't yell too loud.

    • Re:Talk about putting all your eggs in one basket. (Score:5, Informative)

      by JPelorat ( 5320 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @12:52PM (#9930868)
      Adaptec != Roxio. Adaptec sold their EZ-CD Creator cd-burning software to Roxio, but they aren't the same company.

    • Best thing that could happen right now... (Score:5, Funny)

      by artemis67 ( 93453 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @12:58PM (#9930962)
      would be to get Apple together with Toast and Jam. Hopefully, Steve will gobble them up. It makes me hungry just thinking about the possibilities...

    • Re:Talk about putting all your eggs in one basket. (Score:5, Insightful)

      by The-Bus ( 138060 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @01:11PM (#9931134)
      Blockquoth the poster:
      Funny how an individual who changes professions every few years is viewed badly upon by creditors, yet companies who go through disposable business plans the same way are "innovative".


      If you pay your bills on time and have reserves (money in the bank), changes in profession aren't viewed badly upon. It's when you're changing your profession and you've had late car payments and you've got $3000 to live on...

      On the good side though, I think this will be their last name change before Chapter 11(, Inc.). Seriously, what part of focus on the money-losing online digital music service, selling its profitable CD and DVD software division doesn't sound like the bubble all over again.


      Let's say Napster needed $50m in cash in the next three months to be able to put together a plan to become a major contender in online music distribution networks. Maybe they need to pay $5m to each major label, get a huge server farm, whatever. They know what they need, but they don't have any capital. Selling the profitable division is a good business idea if through this change, Napster can become wildly profitable.

      Whether that is going to happen or not, I don't know. Napster has name recognition on one side, but then again you don't think "legal downloads" when you think Napster.

      If, however, Napster spends most of the $70m in cash that it's going to get on Super Bowl ads, then yes, they learned nothing from the .com bubble.
      • Or, they could drop Napster, integrate Easy CD and Toast more tightly with iTunes and tap into the marginally profitable on-line music business with a highly profitable tie-in. You know, kind of following the business model of the company that is the market leader.
      • Let's say Napster needed $50m in cash in the next three months to be able to put together a plan to become a major contender in online music distribution networks. Maybe they need to pay $5m to each major label, get a huge server farm, whatever. They know what they need, but they don't have any capital. Selling the profitable division is a good business idea if through this change, Napster can become wildly profitable.

        I think most of the negative posters get this full well. We just happen to believe th

  • Let's see if I have this straight: (Score:5, Funny)

    by burgburgburg ( 574866 ) <splisken06NO@SPAMemail.com> on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @12:50PM (#9930818)
    1) Sell money making divisions
    2) Focus on money losing division
    3) ???
    4) Profit!

    I like their moxie!

  • I am not a business leader... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MaestroSartori ( 146297 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @12:50PM (#9930826) Homepage
    ...but how does it make sense to sell the profitable part of a business and keep the unprofitable part? "Focussing" on the unprofitable part to try and fix it, yeah, I can see the sense in that, but getting rid of the bit that keeps the money coming in while you sort the problems out?

    Insanity!
    • The big buzz these days is online music for under a buck. If they can deliver on that the money will just slide under the door in unmarked envelopes from slaphappy investors hoping that it will start the next DotCom Bubble Burst.

      Before anyone goes into the online music distribution business they better seriously consider how they are going to topple iTunes. iTunes is already entrenched and is basically a buzz-word in itself. Just about everyone I know (whether they know what Spyware is or not) knows abo

    • Re:I am not a business leader... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by wfberg ( 24378 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @01:04PM (#9931045)
      They probably need to invest gobs of money in their unprofitable operations to get them to turn a profit. Their options were

      * Loan a bunch of money from banks or private investors, on the strength of your profitable unit.
      * Sell the profitable unit for a lump sum many times its annual profit and invest in in the online business.
      * Sell off the unprofitable unit and let it die.

      They've retained the final option (they can always decide to fire everybody, though that's not cheap), and they've got a handfull of cash (no strings attached, unlike bankloans or investors) AND the assets of the online business so they don't even have to start a business from scratch to invest it in.

      If it all makes sense depends greatly on what their plans are with the cash they've just earned, and the premium of getting a was of cash over other means of investment. It's still likely their online business will die, but if it does, it won't drag the profitable business down into Chapter 11. Possibly saving jobs.

      What it comes down to is that the company thought it's unprofitable online music business is a better investment than the profitable business. It's a high risk strategy, so likely they think the potential reward is great. Whether they're wrong, well, they're right about the risk, so we'll see.

    • it's called capital... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by SuperBanana ( 662181 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @01:09PM (#9931103)
      but getting rid of the bit that keeps the money coming in while you sort the problems out?

      Raises capital- ie money you can use to invest or buy things to make more money.

      Someone no doubt sat down and figured out how much money Napster could potentially make, and how much Toast etc would make.

      It could be that profits are leveling off (since OS X supports CD/DVD burning decently, that wouldn't be surprising) and so the company is taking a chance. Selling off their existing products gives them a lump of cash to use for working on Napster- something like, say, a stupid Superbowl commercial.

      • ...but how does it make sense to sell the profitable part of a business and keep the unprofitable part? "Focussing" on the unprofitable part to try and fix it, yeah, I can see the sense in that, but getting rid of the bit that keeps the money coming in while you sort the problems out?

      Not to accuse anyone of anything (in case predatory lawyes are lurking about) but perhaps to short the stock and rake in money from that? It's not often you can legally predict that a company is going to die a horrible fl

    • This one's easy... MBA 101..

      Here is how you make profit from this:

      Just you need to look at it the right way (this is serious)!

      What is important is NOT the financial health of the company, which will go bankrupt in 5 years (even the management knows this... but thats not what's important).

      Rather, they now have 80M in cash...

      Guess what that means!

      Massive exec salary and bonus time! (until you go through the 80M).

      Put a big hunk of the money in management salary trusts (happens all the time..that way the

  • In other news ... (Score:4, Funny)

    by operagost ( 62405 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @12:50PM (#9930830) Homepage Journal
    I quit my lucrative job in IT to begin selling igloos to Eskimos.

  • Crap. (Score:3, Funny)

    by LurkerXXX ( 667952 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @12:51PM (#9930835)
    I actually like EZCD better than RecordNow. Bummer it will be going away.

    • Re:Crap. (Score:2, Insightful)

      by tmasssey ( 546878 )
      One word: Nero. [ahead.de]

      • One word:
        Nero [nero.com]. [link updated]

        Indeed...after the fiascoes that were Easy CD Creator 4 & 5, does anybody still use Roxio's CD-burning products anymore?

  • Oh goody (Score:4, Funny)

    by krog ( 25663 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @12:51PM (#9930837) Homepage
    I was waiting for Napster to die again.
  • I wonder if they are going to drop Toast, their CD burning software. Granted, CD-burning capabilities are built-in to OS X and Win XP, but the options there are pretty limited. I always use Toast when possible.

  • What crack are they smoking? (Score:4, Funny)

    by KajiCo ( 463552 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @12:53PM (#9930879)
    April 1st isn't for another 9 months.

  • Now if only (Score:2, Interesting)

    by bob670 ( 645306 )
    Microsoft will buy Ahead/Nero and integrate it into Windows we can call that category dead as well. Roxio - EZCD = t3h b4nkRup+ soonly.

  • doesn't anyone remember 2000? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    What idiots - sounds just like the good old dot.com days. I worked at a company like that where there was a single mainstay product that was profitable, and a bunch of junky websites that were not. Roxio sounds just like that, only they just threw out their single profitable tentpole.

    And now they are throwing themselves solidly in the path of several oncoming trains in Apple, Microsoft, and Sony.

    Short this pig!
  • ...that they use to make their media software so gosh-darn reliable and redirect it towards making napster more impossible to uninstall.

  • very nearsighted (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Stevyn ( 691306 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @12:58PM (#9930960)
    Why are we and the editors assuming this is bad? I'm sure they have people who know the details and have predicted future markets to justify this. Just because one is profitable and one is losing now doesn't mean it will be the same 5 years from now. Hell, if the headline 20 years ago said IBM would sell off it's profitable typewriter business and focus on it's losing computer word processing business would everyone have said it would be stupid?
    • Basically the editors are assuming it's bad because in a sea of competition, Napster's at the back of the heap. iTunes benefits from first-past-the-post, and a tonne of working capital. Microsoft's will benefit from their monopoly and a tonne of Capital. Really, Napster has less money than most of its competitors, and the competition's become very cutthroat.

      It's gone from a non existant market to a highly competitive one. Good luck. Nero's way better than EZCD anyway. Less bloatware garbage gui cra

  • What date is it? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Chuck Bucket ( 142633 )
    I read the headline and article and thought it had to be April 1st! Really, there's only so much room for so many online music services, with margins that seem rather slim, not sure how many can fit in this small/leaky boat!

    CSVB

  • They're going to concentrate on... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Future Linux-Guru ( 34181 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @01:02PM (#9931011)
    ...going out of business faster.

    Sounds like the old Napster.

  • Facinating... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by blogtim ( 804206 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @01:02PM (#9931015) Homepage
    I had to rub my eyes to make sure the news was real... I bet there is a really good story behind this. What does Roxio have that Apple and Microsoft don't? Roxio has links with every CD/DVD hardware manufacturer. It's software is embedded in XP. How does the market for online music compare to that of CD/DVD recording software (hmm, its sort of related...). The answer I bet will be in the Sonic Solutions documentation. What are the caveats to the sale? The folks at Roxio aren't dumb... they've done quite well.

    • Re:Facinating... (Score:2, Interesting)

      by whatmot ( 756982 )
      You are right on the money.
      Exactly what I have been told from an insider @ Roxio. Why stick with a saturated roxio market when you can dominate in a young digital music market by practically owning the distribution channels.

  • Maybe Not such a bad idea... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by hubs99 ( 318852 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @01:02PM (#9931019)
    What if Microsoft bundles a DVD/CD - burning program with LongHorn? Then this might not be such a bad idea for Roxio. The software is great but if microsoft is playing the browser-war with burning software then its potentially a good thing for the ROxio company.

    Also to consider are new DRM rules. Roxio could have to do major upgrading to the software to enable proper DRM and even then Microsoft/MPAA could decide its not good enough.

    What is a great product now does not mean that it will always be the best. You have to admit that CD/DVD burning software is kind of a one-trick-pony-kind-of software that does not have great potential for growth. Sooner or later Microsoft will start to integrate burning capabilities like Apple.

    Also another thing to consider is with growing HD sizes CD burning I am assuming is decreasing. also with MP3 players, which I am assuming will lead to MP3 car players, CDr's could potentially.. gasp.. die. Leaving ROxio with a sinking ship.

    Just some thoughts as to why they would do this drastic move

    • CD burning already in WinXP (Score:4, Informative)

      by extra88 ( 1003 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @01:35PM (#9931422)
      What if Microsoft bundles a DVD/CD - burning program with LongHorn?

      Windows XP already has CD burning capability. Guess what? It's licensed Easy CD Creator code from Roxio. Check the Version info on C:\Program Files\Common Files\Adaptec Shared\CreateCD\CreateCD50.exe (the folder name is left over from when Adaptec owned Easy CD Creator).

    • What if Microsoft bundles a DVD/CD - burning program with LongHorn? Then this might not be such a bad idea for Roxio. The software is great

      You must have used a different Roxio than I did. Even the platinum version is canned crap. Nero beats it pants down (as in, beats the pants off of it.)

      Toast is quite good, but I would guess that the CD burning support in OSX is not as crappy as the CD burning support in XP, which is just licensed from Roxio anyway. Easy CD Creator sucked ass when Adaptec sold it

  • When I read the writeup I seriously thought that it was a joke, then I read the article. Wow.

    Hey, what's up with slashdot posting all the 4-line articles today?
  • it's hard to say for sure. They may have very legitimate reasons for doing this. The CD/DVD software side of the business might be in decline and headed for unprofitability, so they're cashing out while they can. They may also have deals and/or plans on the napster side they're not disclosing publicly that make this decision rational. Those deals with universities are an example. Another possibility is that they have a completely different (and very profitable) project they want to try and need the cas

  • The Real Business Plan (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Perl-Pusher ( 555592 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @01:20PM (#9931245)
    1) Sell profitable division for $80 Million

    2) CEO and major board members retire wealthy, leaving mess for someone else to worry about.

    3) Tell next victim how the previous company tanked without your guidance.

    Sounds like MBA standard operating practices 101, the college class than can be substituted for ethics. The next CEO will just inflate earnings, claim huge savings by outsourcing, hide losses and try to bail before their caught.

    There's a sucker born every minute.

  • makes sense... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by tyroneking ( 258793 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @01:21PM (#9931248)
    As others in this thread have pointed out, Roxio's products are under threat from new functionality in XP so there might not be a lot of growth left in the company.

    So they decide to get some cash and shares ("Roxio will receive $70 million cash and $10 million in Sonic shares") and look to invest in a business where growth is possible - and that's on-line music distribution.

    So long as they don't fritter away their cash pile they should be able to turn a handsome profit and achieve significant growth.

    On-line music distribution has the potential for big bucks because companies are able to charge, and consumers willing to pay, CD-prices for something as cheap as electronic files - the consumer pays for the PCs, MP3 devices and even the distribution channel (the 'net). Roxio/Napster gets to globalise a low-cost business model (bling!), leverage the Napster brand both on-line and badging the p***-poor, but cheaper, iPod alternatives (bling!), consumers feel cool (bling!) and the record industry gets to pay its (mainly) US stars big bucks for doing as little as the do now (bling!).

    It's bling-bling all round! Hooray!

    Of course, I will miss talking to those record shop sales staff who, over the years, have turned me on to all kinds of different music (Television, Foo Fighters, etc.) - and cool UK bands will have trouble acessing these new 'net-based distribution channels without a fight - but hey, who needs human interaction and good (i.e. not-rap;) music when we can let Napster rip us off in the comfort of our own homes!

  • This just in... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Hockney Twang ( 769594 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @01:22PM (#9931278)
    In other news, Sonic Solutions has acquired the former assets of Roxio, and has changed its name to "Roxio." The remainder of Sonic Solutions assets have been sold to the former Napster, now changing its name to "Sonic Solutions."

  • hail mary pass (Score:4, Interesting)

    by theCat ( 36907 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @01:27PM (#9931334) Journal
    you know, throw/kick the ball as far as you can toward the goal and pray someone on your side makes a great play with it.

    "Calculated risk" is indeed a business model. Almost every business that isn't funded by a trust is based on risk of losses. It's not like they are shuttering the profitable business, they are cashing it out and throwing everything into what is obviously a make-or-break play. Maybe CD burners are boring. Maybe there are no great business opportunites left worth fighting over. Maybe someone is rich enough to want to play with some money.

    It isn't insane, it's just risky. I happen to think it is insanely risky, but that's just me. Still if I were sitting on a cool $80M with everything to lose and not much to gain I would give myself a nice salary, make a great try at stardom, and if it went down badly I'd buy an island in the South Pacific and retire to study beaches and waves.

    And how insane is that, really?

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @01:41PM (#9931510)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • Who wants to take a guess as to when Roxio aka Napster will be making an appearance as an official fucked company [fuckedcompany.com]?

  • Some may not agree with this, but it seems to me a somewhat foresighted decision to sell their burning software division, as disk-burning is rapidly being incorporated into free venues, such as online music store software, winamp, etc.. Not to mention windows xp's disk-burning incorporated into the OS. I don't use it, but the masses do whatever happens when they pop in the blank disk. I can't imagine OEM's continuing to pay roxio to include their software either when they will have so many free alternati

  • Might make sense in the long run (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Random BedHead Ed ( 602081 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @02:01PM (#9931794) Homepage Journal

    I thought it had to be April Fools Day when I read the post, which to me sounded a bit like "Microsoft sells Office, Windows and Linux Bashing divisions to Apple, concentrates on PocketPC, TabletPC and FrontPage Express licensing."

    But on second thought, maybe this makes sense. Writing CDs and DVDs used to be slow and cumbersome. The operating systems didn't support it, so Roxio and other software filled a niche. These days more and more people own computers that can burn natively. The market for this software is likely to shrink, or at the very least become commoditized. Watch Longhorn get iTunes-like music burning support. The Easy CD Creator market is doomed, and perhaps Roxio decided that their best bet for growth is to copy Apple.

  • $6 M / $80 M = 7.5% (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Jonith ( 658161 ) on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @02:23PM (#9932080)
    In order to maintain the income that the CD-Burning unit provided you would only have to make 7.5% off the $80M. I'd propose that there many less risky ways to see 7.5% off $80M then trying to maintaining the profitability of 2nd rate CD-Burning software. I don't think Roxio products will ever see another $80M in profit. I'd question whoever was willing to pay $80M for a company that only makes $6M profit / year. As for focusing on Napster, it's a recognized brand and the online music market is big now and is growing.

  • Twist to this whole deal (Score:4, Insightful)

    by XO ( 250276 ) <blade.eric@NospAM.gmail.com> on Tuesday August 10, 2004 @04:05PM (#9933255) Homepage Journal
    I've read all 150+ comments on here so far, and have yet to see one thing noted:

    Part of the deal is they get a crap-load of stock in SonicBlue.

    SonicBlue has hardware/software out there in virtually every thing that reads/writes CDs/DVDs, as far as embedded systems go (like your home CD-Recorder or DVD-Recorder, and players, and such).

    Someone should google around for SonicBlue's profits, and see what type of a good thing it's going to be for them to still be making money off the stock part of SonicBlue, WHILE using this mega cash infusion to put some work into securing hopefully good stuff on the Napster side of things.

Slashdot Top Deals

Today is a good day for information-gathering. Read someone else's mail file.

Close