An In-Depth Look at Apple Watch Band Options and Potential Pricing

[Rogifan]

You keep focusing on the thousand$$, What about the watch that people will actually buy in great numbers? What is Apple's track record on upgradability? They solder the RAM on a $3200 laptop, gimped the iPad with 1 GB of RAM and you honestly think they are going to provide an upgrade path for a $349 watch? I'd be beyond amazed if that happened.

No I think the "service" will be expensive enough that it will end up applying to only the more expensive watches. But I'm also not convinced we'll get a new watch every year. Apple is not going to stick new sensors in it unless they're highly reliable. And I'm doubtful we'll have highly reliable new sensors on the market every year.

 

[AppleScruff1]

Someone on Twitter posted a concern that Apple was creating a "not for you strata" with the gold watch. It doesn't bother me because there is a watch that in theory is for "everyone". If the only watch Apple was selling was the gold one then I would be worried.

They may decide to create something for the ultra high end market like the gold watch, but as long as they sell cheaper models for the masses, why not? Or maybe all of this is a bunch of bs. I will say that if the watch is solid 18K, it's going to be a few thousand no matter what.

----------

No I think the "service" will be expensive enough that it will end up applying to only the more expensive watches. But I'm also not convinced we'll get a new watch every year. Apple is not going to stick new sensors in it unless they're highly reliable. And I'm doubtful we'll have highly reliable new sensors on the market every year.

It's new tech, it will grow with leaps and bounds the first few years. And you know Apple is already working on a thinner version of the watch. I say 2 years max before a new model.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

All true examples of luxury purchases, no doubt.

However, were comparing luxury watches here. These types of watches are built to last a lifetime. I sincerely doubt that this first-generation Apple Watch toy will do the same.

Right but they are highly expensive purchases that the ultra wealthy make routinely and without thought. Some are purchases that last considerably less time than Apple's Watch will yet cost much more and have no resale value. That is my point.

People are getting hung up in the "lasting" nature of luxury watches. That might be a factor for someone who makes $100K. It's not really to someone who makes $500K+ $4K to them is pocket change.

 

[varera]

People claiming there are luxury watches sold for tens of thousand are right. It is enough to take a look on Breguet catalog, for example.

But if the same people are claiming it does not matter what technology are used in these items, they are wrong. None of expensive time pieces have a battery inside. None of the quartz, mechanic only, with very delicate and interesting technology decisions, that are designed to function for decades.

I do not believe people who want a smart watch, which is by definition something that is supposed to be changed every 2-3 years, would pay thousands to get the same piece but in gold.

If Apple is betting on that, it is a mistake.

 

[Max(IT)]

Apple does know exactly what they are doing. People will buy a new watch every two years.

Seriously, why?

----------

Maybe it's just me, but $199 is the top price I'd pay for *any* watch. "Fashion" is a null word to me - I only care about functionality, and there is no functionality on any watch that is worth more than $200 to me :/

I *do* like the look of Rolex - if they were ~$100, I'd buy one

Not speaking about smartwatches, just about mechanical watches, your post is verging blasphemy.
You can't find any good watch for 200$.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Someone on Twitter posted a concern that Apple was creating a "not for you strata" with the gold watch. It doesn't bother me because there is a watch that in theory is for "everyone". If the only watch Apple was selling was the gold one then I would be worried.

It's really none of their concern as consumers. Apple thrives or is humiliated by its own decisions. I don't know where these people live but I know here in DC, in ATL, in NYC, and other cities there are entire malls that house 100% "not for me" crazy expensive stores. Those stores do fine w/o me and I don't feel insulted or degraded that I can't afford to shop there -- if they had something I wanted to buy. It's almost like people are calling for product censorship if it doesn't cater to them. Ridiculous and a bit scary. (A lot of existing Apple products that are in the "not for me" strata too like a MP).

 

[Max(IT)]

Besides the gold and and jewels, think this is the difference between a $1000+ and $20.000+ premium watch.
Image

As much as I love Apple, I'm absolutely with you on this.

 

[jlseattle]

All wrong

Two things I know from reading Apple's website. Apple Watch (basic model) will start at 349 price point. It is stated here:

https://www.apple.com/pr/library/20...e-Watch-Apples-Most-Personal-Device-Ever.html

As well, the apple watch is always listed first and then the sport and then the edition. The sport version is 30% lighter and more sturdy (ion-x glass) than the Apple watch. I hope everyone is right that the sport is cheaper but it won't be the case

The bands will be interchangeable according to the pictures. We see both the apple watch and edition versions with the sport bands. I personally want a black and an white band but I don't see them limiting bands in the mid tier watch. Here is a link of the watches with each working with the sports bands:

http://www.apple.com/watch/overview/

This is just my instincts about what will happen. I will be VERY happy if the sport edition is cheaper but with my luck it won't.

 

[Max(IT)]

Where is Apple selling a $20,000 watch?

Even for 3000$ would be the same.
You just can't compare an Apple watch to a Rolex, an Omega or something like that.
That's insane.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Seriously, why?

Same reason they upgrade anything -- they want the latest and greatest and best they can afford and don't want to be seeing wearing or driving or using last year's item. The only time they don't upgrade is when there isn't really any materially change from last year to this years model -- iPads are a great example of that.

 

[Max(IT)]

Why? Because luxury watches get handed in for servicing on a regular basis. So this is already part of the process. Apple could offer this to the Edition folks only. Walk in hand over watch and $500 and Apple puts a new set of internals (cost including labor, $200) and you come back and pick up a better watch. Apple makes a profit on the transaction and the rich person does two trips to the Apple store (probably picking up a new iPad on a whim while there).

There's nothing suggesting such a marketing strategy so far.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Even for 3000$ would be the same.
You just can't compare an Apple watch to a Rolex, an Omega or something like that.
That's insane.

But who is doing that other than the Apple Watch detractors? I know I'm not. A Rolex is a Rolex. An Apple Watch is something very different even though it has "Watch" in the product name. It's a tiny hurdle detractors need to get over before they can see the truth that the Apple Watch is pretty much an entirely new product category with an old school name.

 

[Max(IT)]

You keep focusing on the thousand$$, What about the watch that people will actually buy in great numbers? What is Apple's track record on upgradability? They solder the RAM on a $3200 laptop, gimped the iPad with 1 GB of RAM and you honestly think they are going to provide an upgrade path for a $349 watch? I'd be beyond amazed if that happened.

----------



Exactly. Why would I rag on Mercedes for selling a $200K car if I can only afford their cheapest model?

Apple hasn't a tradition about modularity.
I don't believe it.

 

[brinary001]

Short version: I know nothing, so I'll just randomly guess with no real logic behind it.

Remember back when people were SWEARING up and down that the iPad would be $1200 to start? They ended up looking like total fools.

TL;DR but the gold Apple Watch will be expensive.

 

[diddl14]

Hmmmm...you and tons of other people are simpky missing the point here. Apple is targeting this thing as a fashion accessory, by evidence of their marketing strategy.

The point is, that a premium fashion accessory is timeless. Apple Watch will never ever have that specific premium quality, no matter how much marketing Apple trows at it... But no doubt that people with 5-6 digit monthly incomes are happy to just buy a new one each year or so

 

[Max(IT)]

Same reason they upgrade anything -- they want the latest and greatest and best they can afford and don't want to be seeing wearing or driving or using last year's item. The only time they don't upgrade is when there isn't really any materially change from last year to this years model -- iPads are a great example of that.

IPads doesn't cost thousands....

Btw, even for the base model, a watch isn't something people are accustomed to change every other year.

----------

But who is doing that other than the Apple Watch detractors? I know I'm not. A Rolex is a Rolex. An Apple Watch is something very different even though it has "Watch" in the product name. It's a tiny hurdle detractors need to get over before they can see the truth that the Apple Watch is pretty much an entirely new product category with an old school name.

I'm not a detractors by any mean, but it's called watch and is priced similarly (supposedly), how can it avoid the competition ?

 

[TallManNY]

There's nothing suggesting such a marketing strategy so far.

True. But the cost of the solid gold casing really suggests that something to create longevity needs to be done. It is just a different playing field, one were you spend a lot up front but you get perks and service down the road.

One thing that really extends the life of a product like this is replacing the battery. I do it with all my iPhones and frankly it is a difficult process. But putting a brand new battery in after a year and half really makes a difference.

If the battery is as weak as the rumors, then in a year the natural loss of capacity is going to really hurt the watch's functionality. If the Edition is selling for $5,000 or more, then I think Apple needs to support the watch in some new ways. Take a look at the type of service you get from the stores where Apple wants to sell this watch. It is different and better than at an Apple store. And making the internals replaceable and easily fixable would be one way to add service. Battery technology basically mandates that you HAVE to replace these batteries every two years. And even for the rich, Apple can't expect folks to be happy if they've spent $5,000 and the watch is basically non-functional after two years because of a non-replaceable battery.

I suspect the Edition watch might even have a prompt that suggests you hand it in for servicing every year.

 

[Apple'SIS]

Gruber is hack fanboy who has been consistently wrong about the Apple Watch. Serve him the claim chowder already.
Prelude to Tomorrow’s Big-Ass iPhone Apple Event Monday, 8 September 2014

I’ll be very disappointed if this is just a device that shows a fake analog watch face, displays notifications from a tethered iPhone, and tracks your footsteps and heart rate.

In short, I don’t expect to see Apple’s take on the sort of thing Android Wear is trying to do. I expect Apple to do something different, and quite possibly something less but deeper.

WRONG

Apple Watch: Initial Thoughts and Observations Tuesday, 16 September 2014

With Apple Watch, I think we’re only going to realize just how big a breakthrough it is after Apple fully unveils its computational power and the depth and complexity of WatchKit. And if I’m wrong, and Apple Watch’s computational hardware is in fact only slightly ahead of existing smartwatches, and that WatchKit is really just a glorified notification display system for iPhone apps, then Apple is in deep trouble.

I do not think Apple is in deep trouble.

WRONG

Apple Hires Sales Executive From Tag Heuer Tuesday, 8 July 2014

The iPhone is nothing like Vertu, and whatever new products Apple is coming out with won’t be either.

WRONG

Jony Ive and the Future of Apple February 23, 2015 Issue

According to Clive Grinyer, “Jon’s always wanted to do luxury.” By this point, Grinyer said, Ive had already fulfilled one duty of industrial design: to design a perfect stapler, for everyone, in a world of lousy staplers. (Most designers driven by that philosophy “didn’t really rule the world,” Grinyer said. “They just ruled staplers.”) A few years ago, Grinyer had considered working with Vertu, the British-based cell-phone manufacturer, whose bejewelled but technologically ordinary products sell for tens of thousands of dollars. Vertu’s survival challenged the assumption that inevitable obsolescence removes modern consumer electronics from consideration as luxury goods. Ive was “very interested” in Vertu, Grinyer recalled.

Good that Gruber is only an Apple fanboy wannabe analyst. I trust Ive and Cook know what they are doing.

 

[MentalFloss]

You have to get their black leather case. Mine still looks like new.

That's the one I got. Looked completely messed up after six weeks of normal use, and I am careful with my stuff. The smallest waterdrops left a mark on the case, in the places where it was touched the most, it got shiny VERY quickly, and in some places, the leather came off from the plastic part of the case. I have never had a case before that looked so terrible after such a short time (in fact, I had a wooden case on my 4S which after two years looked like new). If I imagine having that kind of low quality leather on a watch strap, I could probably throw it out after a week.

Like I said before, I am not going to buy another leather product from Apple. I am sure there will be a huge amount of great third-party straps for the Watch. Certainly with much more reasonable prices. In fact, I am hoping Apple will sell the Watch without a strap.

 

[iSee]

But who is doing that other than the Apple Watch detractors? I know I'm not. A Rolex is a Rolex. An Apple Watch is something very different even though it has "Watch" in the product name. It's a tiny hurdle detractors need to get over before they can see the truth that the Apple Watch is pretty much an entirely new product category with an old school name.

This is the funny thing:

Every time someone argues that the Apple watch is NOT A ROLEX! they are also suggesting that it's arguable. Apple wins each time.

$349 used to seem like such a ridiculously high amount... now it's a bargain since you get the same thing some sucker paid 10 or 20K for, just for a different color. 1K for stainless steal almost starts to seem reasonable.

 

[MentalFloss]

Not speaking about smartwatches, just about mechanical watches, your post is verging blasphemy.
You can't find any good watch for 200$.

Yes, and you can't get a good car for under $100,000 or a good TV for under $5000 or a good pair of shoes for under $500 or someone who doesn't push his definition of "good" on others by calling differing opinions "blasphemy" for under $500 billion.

 

[TallManNY]

People claiming there are luxury watches sold for tens of thousand are right. It is enough to take a look on Breguet catalog, for example.

But if the same people are claiming it does not matter what technology are used in these items, they are wrong. None of expensive time pieces have a battery inside. None of the quartz, mechanic only, with very delicate and interesting technology decisions, that are designed to function for decades.

I do not believe people who want a smart watch, which is by definition something that is supposed to be changed every 2-3 years, would pay thousands to get the same piece but in gold.

If Apple is betting on that, it is a mistake.

Do you want to place a bet on the Edition Watch being sold out on launch day and a waiting list for it for months?

First, I believe WSJ is completely wrong about how many of these Edition watches are going to be made. I'm guessing Apple launches with a few thousand of them available worldwide. They get grabbed immediately. Margins are insane. Top luxury stores in major cities have five or six on hand at most at anytime. They are frequently sold out. Most cities in the U.S. have only one or two stores that sell them.
Not every Apple store carries the Edition outside of the major metropolitan areas.

The Edition will not be available for online order. You heard that here first.

It will be exclusive and expensive. Apple wants it sold in the best shops and those shops do not want to compete with online sales.

I'm guessing the edition makes up less than 2% of Apple Watch sales. But it will get press and it will be worn by the rich and the famous. That alone will make the Apple watch cooler.

And if the watch sells, then Apple simply ramps up the supply of the Edition. There is no reason not to err on the side of low supply for this luxury good. Because you just make it more prestigious if you get the supply too low. You may not optimize revenue, but staying cool and in demand for this luxury good is more important than maximum revenue. After a year of sales, Apple can start working on supply/demand balance for this product.

 

[Rogifan]

It's new tech, it will grow with leaps and bounds the first few years. And you know Apple is already working on a thinner version of the watch. I say 2 years max before a new model.

So you think all these bands they created will be obsolete in two years?

 

[sulpfiction]

If these edition watches are going to be priced this high and obviously the technology will be outdated within a year, what is apples grand plan? Trade in?

 

[Max(IT)]

True. But the cost of the solid gold casing really suggests that something to create longevity needs to be done. It is just a different playing field, one were you spend a lot up front but you get perks and service down the road.

One thing that really extends the life of a product like this is replacing the battery. I do it with all my iPhones and frankly it is a difficult process. But putting a brand new battery in after a year and half really makes a difference.

If the battery is as weak as the rumors, then in a year the natural loss of capacity is going to really hurt the watch's functionality. If the Edition is selling for $5,000 or more, then I think Apple needs to support the watch in some new ways. Take a look at the type of service you get from the stores where Apple wants to sell this watch. It is different and better than at an Apple store. And making the internals replaceable and easily fixable would be one way to add service. Battery technology basically mandates that you HAVE to replace these batteries every two years. And even for the rich, Apple can't expect folks to be happy if they've spent $5,000 and the watch is basically non-functional after two years because of a non-replaceable battery.

I suspect the Edition watch might even have a prompt that suggests you hand it in for servicing every year.

On a smartwatch I'm not only worried about the battery.
In a couple of years even the internals will be outdated....
I'm very puzzled about that.
A sub $1000 device supposed to be replaced every 2-3 years is something Apple already did in several fields. But a luxury device costing thousands is supposed to last years, and I can't imagine how they could find a practical solution for that.