Amar Bose To Donate Company To M.I.T. 275
MBC1977 writes with this eyebrow-raising news from CNN: "'The Massachusetts Institute of Technology announced Friday that [Amar] Bose, the 81-year-old founder of the sound system company that bears his name, has donated the majority of Bose Corp.'s stock to the school.'
Very cool indeed!"
Midrange (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe they'll be able to get BOSE to make equipment that is testable for reviews and has some midrange.
Unlikely (Score:2, Informative)
These are non-voting, unsellable shares.
MIT only gets the dividends.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
it's clear they're non-voting, non-sellable shares, and are only good for getting free money.
Yeah, I would hate to have someone scam me by giving me free money! That bastard!
Regards
Re: (Score:2)
I genuinely hope that this is possible. It would be great to have a company like Bose, which has an Apple-like (albeit a bit worse) reputation in the consumer audio world, start producing decent systems - the current pricing structure could definitely support that.
Just imagine - the tards buying BOSE because it says BOSE on it might actually get some decent sound for their money, and better sound makes the world a better place. Ever been to visit a friend for a few days and realized that you'd be without de
Re: (Score:2)
"No highs, no lows, it must be Bose!"
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
There are many ways to look at a university. It's about research, it's about federal funding, it's about raising money from alumni, it's about patent licensing and athletics, it's about recruiting faculty, promoting faculty, about running a big physical plant, internet pipes, etc. etc. Oh, and there are students, too. Teaching is just one of many things that happen there, not the most visible - even at places that claim to emphasize the student experience. Students do get to pay up to around $200K for t
Re:Midrange (Score:5, Interesting)
To get the "message" that they are losing money on every students, Universities pull accounting tricks worthy of Hollywood. They take all of their expenses, including research and administrative related ones on the one hand, they take what students pay on the other, totally ignoring donations, and they say, "eh, student tuition is only one third of our income, therefore student are actually not paying much at all".
In reality, some studies have shown that top-level college education really costs no more than about $40k per year per student for engineering, about $80k for medicine, and sometimes as lows as $10k for maths or philosophy. Law is also cheap. If students pay $200k over 4 years, they are totally covering that. In most of Europe, students typically pay less than $10k per year, sometimes much less. Oxford and Cambridge charge about $15k per year. They seem to be doing quite well nonetheless. As it was reported here not so long ago, even top-level US-universities pay their professors a relative pittance compared with other professionals with similar qualifications.
If universities stopped admitting, they would immediately lose 1/3 of their funding, and so would have to let go of a corresponding share of their staff. They would lose their status and soon all of their donations, losing another 1/3, later they would lose all of their network and influence obtained through alumni, professors would not be needed for teaching and soon the place would be an empty, nearly pointless shell. That doesn't sound like being better off financially.
The morals is that Universities are there for teaching, and students are at the very center of their mission. Research and whatnot is indeed nice, but it is there to attract funding and top-level researcher, ensuring the quality of the teaching because beginner teachers want to join their teams and so work hard to get tenure. A few top-level researchers are also dedicated and excellent teachers, which is very nice from the university point of view, because they get to write the classical textbooks on their field, ensuring more revenues. Students and alumni are not the only teaching-related income universities get. There are many other things to say, but I'll stop.
However, saying that universities would be better off without students is utter bollocks, to be polite.
Re:Midrange (Score:5, Insightful)
College Tuition has been rising at about twice the rate of inflation over the past ten years [anengineerindc.com]. If you look at Harvard's endowment, they could easily pay every student's tuition [anengineerindc.com] based on extremely conservative returns on their 26 billion investment.
Colleges and universities are a racket. Few other industries, as a whole, have experienced the same kind of wholesale constant increase in funds like the education market.
Well, except for the defense industry, but that's another story.
To get back on topic, donating voting shares to MIT would have been a very interesting opportunity for students -- they would get to run the company, and learn all about the real-world application of technology. Alas, with dividends only, I'm not sure there's as much education going on as there could have been.
Re:Midrange (Score:5, Insightful)
I, on the other hand, went to Moody Bible Institute [moody.edu]. It is a college that aims to prepare people to do full-time Christian ministry. Since most of these graduates wind up in fields that don't have great earning potential, they don't charge tuition. I'll repeat that: they don't charge tuition. It's not an easy school to get in to, (it's certainly not for everyone) and it is by no means perfect, but it was the right fit for me. (I'm a missionary, but I'm up late tonight doing some open source coding and getting distracted by Slashdot.) Anyway, Moody avoids charging tuition by having a profitable publishing house, as well as a radio station and broadcast media company. All of the profits that they turn from these (as well as some hefty donations) are what keep the financial wheels turning at the school. When I graduated in 2005, they estimated that for my graduating class, the waived tuition amounted to a $78,000 scholarship per graduating student.
I receive letters occasionally from Moody asking for donations, and these are MUCH more easy for me to stomach. I don't have much in the way of spare money at the moment, but if/when I have the means, supporting Moody is something I'd like to do. I appreciate my education, and the fact that I could get through it without taking out ANY student loans, and I'd love to help present that opportunity to others if at all possible.
Anyway, I realize that I'm on a tangent, but I think that Moody Bible Institute is as close to a true non-profit as I've seen any university be.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It is a college that aims to prepare people to do full-time Christian ministry. Since most of these graduates wind up in fields that don't have great earning potential,
Huh? [wikipedia.org] Say again? [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
I think i know your confusion
there is a difference between full time Christian Ministry and running a Mega-Church.
In one you spend most of your time actually doing work and in the other you spend most of your time raising funds.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm pretty sure you will find that the average MIT graduate is not nearly as successful as Bose. Sure, they'll earn money, but I don't see how some of it has to be channelled back to their alma mater. People make their own success and money, college education is only a part of it. College is only 4 years, what about all the 12 years of school before? Don't they deserve any kudos?
Re: (Score:3)
Although I think there's little better use for one's money than promoting education
Too bad that universities are largely in the business of granting degrees, not educating.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Midrange (Score:4, Interesting)
Misleading headline (Score:5, Informative)
The headline makes this story sound more sensational than the reality. MIT doesn't get any control over the company, just a pile of dividend-bearing stock.
Re: (Score:2)
Doesn't being a stock-holder also mean some control over the company?
Re:Misleading headline (Score:5, Informative)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-voting_stock [wikipedia.org]
Non-cumulative Preferred Stock (Score:4, Informative)
Just to put a finer point on it, it sounds like non-cumulative Preferred Stock [a type of non voting stock with very few rights].
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preferred_stock [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
A sound decision indeed (Score:2, Funny)
I also wish MIT could open-source the designs and IPs of Bose for
the greater good of the audio world.
Re: (Score:2)
Good idea. It will tell everybody what not to do.
No highs, no lows, Bose.
Lows for the size (Score:2)
Re:Lows for the size (Score:5, Funny)
Among self-contained radios as small as a Wave music system [bose.com], can you recommend one with better lows?
Just tune to pretty much any Country / Western channel. That'll bring you down.
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, aesthetics and size matter to some, and a Bose system certainly beats computer speakers. Of course, you can alway
Re: (Score:2)
Of course, aesthetics and size matter to some,
And that's the key bit right there. There's nothing good about Bose's sound. Their high end systems lack midrange and any form of soundstage instead option for a system that can be barely seen. Pretty much every other audio company can beat the quality of a Bose system, but you end up with some large boxes in the living room.
Personally if the budget can stretch I'd much prefer a system from the likes of Bang and Olufsen who don't try to make the system disappear but rather make it a part of the design of th
Re: (Score:2)
While I agree that most B&O products are quite overpriced, I have yet to hear better speakers for the price of a set of BeoLab 5's.
They're ridiculously expensive, yes, but they sound absolutely amazing.
Re: (Score:2)
The Beolab 5 like all omnidirectional speakers can generate a very pleasing sound effect. The Beolab 5 also uses some nice components. HOWEVER there are some fundamental flaws to the design that make it unsuitable for critical music reproduction. In particular this design is subject to what is known as the "flanging effect" that makes creation of a good stereo image impossible because of the upper and lower discs. It is an interference or comb-filter in the audio spectrum. These speakers also have a dip in
Re: (Score:2)
I worked at B&O a couple of years ago (that touchscreen remote? I worked on that) and during my stay there I listened to more music on more stereos that I would have imagined. B&W, obviously and Dynaudio was well-represented, being a Danish company and all that.
The BL5s consistently sounded the best to me when compared to similarly-priced speakers when playing music I'd listened to hundreds of times and knew extremely well. It was subjected to endless listening panels during development and various
Re: (Score:2)
At least B&O are open about the sound/picture quality of their products. They admit they do not sound/look the best for the money, but you pay for the nice design and extras like motorised TV stands and they self calibrate etc.
Re: (Score:3)
Take a look at anything from Tivoli audio like the Model One. They have a downfiring port so placing them on a wooden table helps even more. But I was absolutely blown away by how much better they sound and look (retro) than the Bose crap.
Re: (Score:2)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Ink on a digital medium that goes through CRC? Please tell me that is a joke....
I need a vacuum tube computer to accurately reproduce that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, my impression of Bose is mediocre sound with high end price. It works, but it sure isn't the awesomeness their advertising makes it out to be.
I find putting bass speakers on a hard surface really helps. Had the subwoofer of a cheap 5.1 system (not Bose) on a carpeted floor, and all I did was slide some scrap plywood (about 3x4 ft) under it. Did wonders for clarity and sound projection. Can feel the board vibrating when you rest a hand on it. Haven't stumbled over an easy way to improve the highe
Re: (Score:2)
be careful here. when people say audiophile today they mean the religious zealot variety.. you should have a problem with bose. objectively speaking, their products do not offer good value for the money. either the same sound can be purchased for 1/10th the price (3200$ lifestyle vs $320 hometheater-in-a-box systems from decent brands), or you can do a lot better for the price point asked. 3200$ buys you a very nice system. the fact is that no matter how much one 'engineers' things, it's impossible for s
Re: (Score:2)
Bose make some very good speaker systems. They also make some quite average-sounding speaker systems. They are all overpriced for what they deliver though, but the marketing behind them, and the sleek industrial design, makes sales for them.
Some of the high-end Bose stuff is quite good. Their midrange stuff is probably what was being referred to when mentioning no midrange.
Bose's more popular systems are the small coffee-cup sized satellite speakers and a large subwoofer. The satellites are great at produci
Re: (Score:2)
Some of the high-end Bose stuff is quite good.
I"m sure it's not worth the money. I can't speak for their pro stuff, but the consumer stuff is garbage, especially for the money.
The satellites are great at producing high frequency sounds
no.. modern tweeter designs in the last 15 years can handle 20-25khz (even higher on some systems). the current bose designs still use treated paper cones like speakers did in the 1970s. the best paper cone tweeters peak at 16khz or so. the cheap $0.50 drivers in the satellites are hardly the best.
and the sub can generally put out more than enough bass for the system,
no. it's a terrible design. the sub isnt' even really a sub because it can't repro
Re: (Score:2)
Bose's more popular systems are the small coffee-cup sized satellite speakers and a large subwoofer.
A "subwoofer" is not large if it has a 5 inch driver. That's not even large enough to perform as a decent low-bass driver, more of a low-mid, so I wouldn't call it a subwoofer.
Re:Mutually exclusive (Score:4, Interesting)
It depends upon the model. Speaking of speaker systems only, some used resonance to produce boomy base to impress the rubes, leaving inadequate response at deep base and low-mids.
Other speakers, particularly the long-time top-of-the-line 901s, used active compensation to extend the somewhat flat range as far to the high and low as practical. Bose used 9 cheap 5" drivers in each 901, with the result that decent response up to 20 kHz was impossible, as was low distortion and good response at 20 Hz. Due to the complication of having all those drivers and the active compensation box, A.G.Bose claimed (in the class he taught) that the profit margin on the 901s was actually quite small, and the claim seems almost reasonable to me.
Professional speaker designers at more reputable firms joke that Bose's slogan "better sound through research" should read "better sales through advertising".
The fact is that speakers that sound good in isolation appeal to large numbers of uncritical listeners, and that's where Bose does well. A competent critical listener, or someone in a position to A-B against similarly priced reputable brands, will find Bose lacking.
Re: (Score:2)
Nope, he's complaining about the absence of highs and lows. Not the same thing as too much middle at all.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, my beef with Bose is a lack of overall efficiency. Often as much as 10db 1W/1M less than others. So lack of top bottom and mids makes sense to me!
Re: (Score:2)
some are referring to the large bose systems like the 901s.. others are referring to the satellite systems.
just because something makes you happy doesn't mean it isn't stupid or better according to objective measurement. if blowing lots of money on mediocre technology in nice shiny plastic boxes turns you on, so be it. it's still a stupid decision.
Caltech (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
No one at Caltech has to use Bose, they can build their own that are better. It's really just MIT that gets an improvement from upgrading to Bose.
Re:Caltech (Score:5, Interesting)
No one at Caltech has to use Bose, they can build their own that are better.
Curiously enough, there used to be a Caltech project class based on pretty much exactly that, although it's unfortunately no longer offered:
http://www.its.caltech.edu/~musiclab/ [caltech.edu]
As a bit of trivia, Caltech alum Bill Gross actually ended up founding GNP Audio [gnpaudiovideo.com] based on an engineering project he did as a student. He later went on to co-found, like, a gajillion other companies [idealab.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Maybe someone can give them a bunch of Monster Cable stock, and they can get even?
Re:Monster expensive? (Score:5, Informative)
Monster 1 meter hdmi cable = $99 [amazon.com]
Monoprice 6Ft hdmi cable = $2.78 [monoprice.com]
So, yes, monster cables are EXTREMELY expensive.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
It's more expensive because it uses SI, which makes it sound better than Monoprice's imperial cable.
Re: (Score:2)
It's. Digital. Data. You can't make it sound better by changing the composition of the cable.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Where did I say "Monster cables are expensive"?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Imho, active noise canceling is one thing Bose is actually good at. I've used their QC-2, QC-15 and X aviation headset, as well as active sets from Sennheiser, Lightspeeed and David Clark. I prefer the QC-15 for personal use and the lightspeed in the airplane (though I hear the new bose aviation headset is even better, I have not been able to try one yet).
And the link? (Score:5, Informative)
Is it just me, or did Timothy manage to strip out TFA between the firehose and the front page?
http://money.cnn.com/2011/04/29/technology/bose_mit_donation/index.htm [cnn.com]
Nice, but not so nice (Score:4, Interesting)
MIT has done wonderful things for the world. As have many academic institutions. But this is as good a time as any to note that making large donations to an elite academic institution is a pretty ineffective way to use your money.
MIT is already well funded, and while this money may go to fund additional research, it may also just lead to a lot of pretty buildings going up. If you have the opportunity to donate, why not donate to a school that will use the money to dramatically increase the number of students it educates, or to a charity that sees the money directed into existing research initiatives that need it.
I'm sure the new Bose facilities will be very nice and the Bose family will have no problem getting into MIT for the next few generations. Nonetheless, it seems like a bit of a waste.
Re: (Score:2)
Amar Bose [wikipedia.org][quote]Bose enrolled at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, graduating with a B.S. in Electrical Engineering in the early 1950s.[/quote]
Re: (Score:2)
I've been trying to get a consensus, that but I never agree.
It was in regard to the improper [quote] tags, preempt the inevitable.
Venture capital is far better (Score:2)
Investing the money in a venture capital fund would be far better for people, including MIT students. Venture capital funds startup companies so those MIT grads and graduates of other Universities can actually get jobs using the knowledge they learned in school.
Philanthropy is great, but it spends wealth rather than creating it. (Giving to MIT is more of a gray area in between though.) Venture investments can help the next Bose.
Re: (Score:2)
MIT is already well funded, and while this money may go to fund additional research, it may also just lead to a lot of pretty buildings going up.
Note that he's donated it in such a way that they get dividends, but can't sell the stock. The dividends are unlikely to be large enough to fund pretty new buildings, but may be enough to fund a few scholarships.
Re: (Score:2)
But do MIT students represent the best candidate for scholarships? My understanding is that the undergraduate population there is already pretty well taken care of in terms of need. By the time you have the credentials to get into MIT, you're either impressive enough to get a scholarship (from someone) or you're going to take loans --- knowing that in the final analysis, an engineering career driven by an MIT degree makes them a good risk.
What worries me is all the talented kids who don't make it to such
Re: (Score:2)
. If you have the opportunity to donate, why not donate to a school that will use the money to dramatically increase the number of students it educates, or to a charity that sees the money directed into existing research initiatives that need it.
All schools get donations but MIT has done a lot better than the rest. This suggests that MIT is better at allocating money than other mediocre schools. So from a perfectly rational perspective giving money to the most effective organization makes a lot of sense.
Re: (Score:2, Offtopic)
Bose quality (Score:3, Interesting)
True story: An elderly gentleman walked into an electronics store in Toronto looking to buy speakers. The salesman showed him a couple of different models. The customer pointed at another set on the shelves and asked about them. The salesman said "Oh, those are Bose, they're crap." The customer was Amar Bose.
Re: (Score:2)
I was in future shop and they did exactly that to me. I walked out.
Everyone is bad mouthing Bose, but they have damn good sound at a mid range price. All my friends love my little Bose system in my kitchen.
Re:Bose quality (Score:4, Insightful)
While the bumper sticker Bose trashing you've been hearing here is pretty much accurate, if you read serious reviews you'll find that the universal gripe with Bose isn't really their sound but their value. They don't sound bad so much as they sound just as good as equipment costing a third as much money, and they sound considerably worse than almost anything else you could buy at the same inflated price. So you're suggestion that they sound damn good at a mid range price seems like you haven't done much comparison listening. You basically hit a bullseye on Bose greatest weakness as a product and called it a strength. Spend 5 minutes with Google "best speakers for $X" where X is what you spent on those over priced Bose speakers and you'll find a giant pile of simultaneously better and cheaper equipment. Take the $350 you spent on pretty much anything Bose and get some Audioengine A5's instead.
Re:Bose quality (Score:4, Interesting)
Everyone is bad mouthing Bose, but they have damn good sound at a mid range price. All my friends love my little Bose system in my kitchen.
May I suggest you actually go and do a bit of listening, not to opinions but actual system. The problem your statement is that they don't even remotely make damn good sound. Their high end system has no midrange, destroys soundstaging, and sounds like the retarded echo effects mimicking stadiums or cinemas that you can enable in Realtek Audio Manager on pretty much every computer.
Bose is aesthetically pleasing, but way overpriced garbage in terms of any real sound quality. (not being able to make a duff duff sound from a small system does not a high quality system make), and I far prefer the look and sound of the Tivoli Model One in my dining room and have change left over :-)
*** This post contains personal opinion.
Re: (Score:2)
Bose is way overpriced for what you get. They are a lifestyle product with a really huge marketing budget. There are many competitors who do a better job.
BOSE = Buy Other Sound Equipment.
If you want to hear good sound go to an audio dealer who carries Revel.
Re: (Score:2)
bose is moderately priced? no bose is insanely overpriced. they are the apple of the audiophile world.
Audiophiles (Score:2)
Citation plz (Score:3)
True story
What's your source, may I ask?
Re: (Score:2)
So, what did the old customer buy?
Probably the store.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I doubt they'd do it twice...
Meh! (Score:2)
I bet the outcome of this experiment would surprise us all!
Re: (Score:2)
I agree, it's very full of 'meh'.
So a big name school with plenty of funding is going to get a bigger, more funded name.
He would have been better off donating his company to a more needy university/college (or several).
Re: (Score:2)
The first week I lived in Cambridge my bicycle, locked to a rack at MIT, was stolen. In all likelihood a kid like the one you described committed that crime. Put him in the CEO position, and he'll be immensely corrupt and probably destroy the company. That's why not.
Re: (Score:2)
I fail to see the problem. Sounds like he is perfect for the job.
Can't RTFA (Score:3, Funny)
Really no need for complex speaker design for DIY (Score:2)
Having built my own speaker system, I came to realize that the problem with speaker design is to get good sound into a small and shippable product. If you can use your entire house, and many elements, it is trivial to get good sound. For example, many elements covering a wall, each with little effect, is a great subwoofer. After that measure current vs. voltage over the elements to determine element dynamics (Similar to algorithm that controls brushless motors), and feed that back as a correction to the amp
Tax write off (Score:2)
wow.
Re: (Score:2)
I am inclined to agree with that. There are a lot of great universities out there. MIT and Harvard are among the ones with enormous endowments that still get hundreds of millions in donor cash that could probably be put to better use at schools with less name recognition.
Re:M.I.T. already has an $8 billion endowment. (Score:5, Insightful)
Why not give it to a school or schools that actually deserve the money?
FTFY
Re:M.I.T. already has an $8 billion endowment. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Scholarships and testing helps stream out the useful and gifted.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Here's to hoping .... (Score:5, Interesting)
Look at his family story (Score:2)
funding *American* (not just foreign) PhD students
According to Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]:
"His father, Noni Gopal Bose, was a Bengali freedom revolutionary,[3] who having been imprisoned for his political activities, fled Calcutta in the 1920s in order to avoid further prosecution by the British colonial police."
Maybe if "American" students started fighting for what they believe instead of demanding that everything be given to them they would find it easier to get a PhD.
Re:Here's to hoping .... (Score:4, Informative)
I think you'll find that most American universities do primarily fund American students. I did my PhD in a UK university, but I spent three months in a US university on a collaboration, and from what people said it seems like the funding situation is pretty similar, although not quite the same:
In the UK, the university charges tuition fees for PhD students. These have two rates, one for EU citizens (government subsidised) and one for everyone else (full price). This covers lab space, lecturer time, and so on - the university skims about 50% off before it gets to the department, to cover general university overheads. Most PhD student places for EU citizens come with a grant, either from a government grant, an industrial partnership, a charitable trust, or the university itself. This covers all of the tuition fees, travel expenses, and provides a stipend (tax free income). I don't even know exactly what my tuition fees were - they were paid from the grant and I never saw the bill - while my colleagues from Malaysia (for example) were having to pay a huge amount every year. I was paid a stipend which worked out to about the same as an entry level graduate salary after tax, and claimed around £10K or so in travel expenses, while they had to pay for everything.
One of the reasons why the tuition fees were so high for foreign students was that this money was used to subsidise other PhD places. For every 2-3 non-EU students we got, the university could afford to fund another PhD. This is why you see so many foreign students - the UK and USA are both regarded as prestigious places to do a PhD in much of Asia, so our universities encourage them to apply. Once they're here, the universities charge them a lot and use this to subsidise everyone else. Send them all back home, and you'll see a lot fewer PhD places available for locals.
Re: (Score:2)
why? thx cert is hardly worth anything as it is.. the fact that bose equipment can't get the cert is truly pathetic.. especially considering what is charged for it.