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

[Max(IT)]

Why not? The watch is an Apple product. People only behave like this for Apple products. At least I think this is what will happen initially. Maybe the watch will go the way of the 5C after a time, who knows for sure. They did miss the mark with the 5C, so who knows?

People change smartphones every 2-3 years no matter which brand. Samsung, LG, HTC's users behave the same.
There iPhone 5C still sold more than most of the competitors.... but we are still speaking about smartphones.

Watches are a different product.
I don't know how Apple would convince people to change a $1000 smartwatch every other year.

 

[AppleScruff1]

A cheap watch could easily be seen as a tool.
But when you speak about better watches, they are more similar to jewels than tools.

This has got to stop. I've agreed with you way too many times in this thread.

 

[odds]

Because that is how you operate? Whenever somebody accuses somebody else of intentionally lying to further that person's worldview, my suspicion always falls on the accuser projecting his or her own MO onto others.

Sorry, I didn't mean to accuse anyone of intentionally lying even though I now see that's what I was doing with my comment about Gruber spouting high numbers to manipulate the public. I haven't been reading Gruber for nearly as long as some of you may have, but does he have a track record of 'shooting high' with regards to Apple product pricing? It's not a secret that he REALLY LOVES Apple products, so for him to give these high estimates with the Watch isn't really that surprising. Anyone who loves Apple as much as Gruber does wouldn't be caught dead underestimating the price of an up and coming Apple product, right?

If Gruber is getting these figures from someone at Apple or someone close to Apple, I'd be surprised. Ultimately, Gruber is just making educated guesses at these numbers. They seem quite high to many of us here in the forums. Only time will tell what the TRUTH is.

Until then, have fun here...

 

[Max(IT)]

This has got to stop. I've agreed with you way too many times in this thread.

Something must be wrong

 

[AppleScruff1]

People change smartphones every 2-3 years no matter which brand. Samsung, LG, HTC's users behave the same.
There iPhone 5C still sold more than most of the competitors.... but we are still speaking about smartphones.

Watches are a different product.
I don't know how Apple would convince people to change a $1000 smartwatch every other year.

I'm thinking of the cheaper models. I don't think they are going to sell millions of the more expensive models, but that's just my opinion. The functionality is the same across the board as far as we know at his time. All the extra money is mainly for bling.

 

[Max(IT)]

I'm thinking of the cheaper models. I don't think they are going to sell millions of the more expensive models, but that's just my opinion. The functionality is the same across the board as far as we know at his time. All the extra money is mainly for bling.

I'm not really interested, but I'm surely puzzled by the way Apple is going to price that Apple watch.

The basic sport model could be seen as the usual, well defined, slightly overpriced Apple's product.
But what about much highly priced other models ?

 

[AppleScruff1]

I'm not really interested, but I'm surely puzzled by the way Apple is going to price that Apple watch.

The basic sport model could be seen as the usual, well defined, slightly overpriced Apple's product.
But what about much highly priced other models ?

The high end model is going to appeal to a different market segment, IMO. They are making a fashion statement with the gold model. People aren't going to buy the gold one to use for jogging and exercising. It will be a piece of fashionable jewelry. It will sell, but maybe in very small numbers. Maybe it will be a flop or maybe Apple will get a boatload of advertising and exposure out of it. I think the company is changing yet again, the next few years will give us a good indication.

 

[Max(IT)]

The high end model is going to appeal to a different market segment, IMO. They are making a fashion statement with the gold model. People aren't going to buy the gold one to use for jogging and exercising. It will be a piece of fashionable jewelry. It will sell, but maybe in very small numbers. Maybe it will be a flop or maybe Apple will get a boatload of advertising and exposure out of it. I think the company is changing yet again, the next few years will give us a good indication.

True true, but I'm not thinking just about the Apple watch edition expensive model.
I'm thinking about many of the mid tier versions, that will probably priced just short of $1000 .....

 

[AppleScruff1]

True true, but I'm not thinking just about the Apple watch edition expensive model.
I'm thinking about many of the mid tier versions, that will probably priced just short of $1000 .....

They may not sell that well either. Mom and dad probably won't spend that much for each kid to go along with their iPhone. Or maybe the whole watch thing will be a short lived fad? It's an expensive accessory and there is no subsidized pricing.

 

[doelcm82]

I think you will get a basic band with the entry level watches. Of course the more desirable bands will be extra and/or optional. Remember, Apple is big on upselling you, hence the small standard storage on iPhone's and iPad's.

I'm okay with that. Not coming with a band would annoy me.

 

[AppleScruff1]

I'm okay with that. Not coming with a band would annoy me.

The band is a necessity, it's not an accessory like a case. I can't see one not being included. It might not be the one you prefer, but it has to have a band.

 

[NoNig]

himhh that would go against Apples philosophy, especially Jony Ive.
Jony Ive was quoted on the new Motorola watch that can be designed and changed by costumers "I believe that’s abdicating your responsibility as a designer"
It seems unlikely that customisation will go further than the wrist bands. Also Im sure the way the chip and other electronics are integrated into the watch it would not be possible to allow for such customisation. Same with the MacBook Pros and the way Ram sits directly on the motherboard and cannot be changed. Its the apple way and although it can be argued that its too restrictive the end results are pieces of hardware that are unparalleled in its quality. Also Judging from sales it seems thats exactly what people want.
Samsung for years playing the "we got a removable battery" game but apparently the new galaxy will have a non removable battery and you can bet that this was as a direct result from trying to compete with apples quality.

Maybe I didn't specify my point good enough (English isn't my primary language, as you'd might have guessed).
What I meant was; the internals can change. Not the house/case itself - nessecarily.
Imagine being one of those actually buying the gold edition for x-amount of dollars (or, whatever your currency may be), and after a year or two, new hardware are released.
Then you could go to the Apple store, for an exchange/upgrade program, and get the internals of your watch upgraded - much like some people do with their watche's battery.

Dunno. I just imagened it being a possible way out of the; 'But I spent thousands of dollars on this thing, and it turns out, it's just an expensive bracelet/accessory'-problem.

Well. Imagine if that is excactly what you did. You 'just' bought an expensive case - the rest is up to you.

I could also imagine the more 'cheap' versions being one-time-purchase only. That way, they could diversify your initial purchase decision and you could chise whether or not you wanted to do the one-time thing or the buy-in thing.

… Apple currently doesn't seem to be too concerned about fragmentation. Not that it, in itself, is the justification or reasoning behind my initial thought about the upgradability-path.

Hopes that made more sense?

 

[splogue]

This was one idea that I did no think about. Very interesting concept indeed. I believe that you will be right on this one.

While reading your comment (and of course the others), I too was thinking of the rationale for a 10 to 20k gold apple watch. I of course cannot spend that kind of money on a gold watch as it is not financially responsible for me and my family. However, I started to think about other cultures on this planet where wearing your wealth is not only a status, but also a form of banking. If I am not mistaken, India is a very large consumer market of gold in that they actually wear almost two thirds of their assets in gold. I am quite sure this is similar in other cultures in the mideast and Asia. Just a thought of cultural differences in exploding world markets.

Oh, now that is interesting, and absolutely true. That never occurred to me.

Perhaps Apple is planning on selling many (not all) of the Editions outside of the U.S. That would be an interesting twist.

Sean

----------

I do think Apple will partner with the fashion industry on watch bands. And I wouldn't be surprised to see some type of MFI program. The question is will these be available at launch or will Apple want to keep the band market to itself for a while?

I love this idea. A Ralph Lauren band for my Apple watch? Sign me up!

Man, I'm going to need to start working a second job to help pay for this stuff if some of these speculations turn out to be true.

Sean

 

[splogue]

Do you realize how the super rich shop?

They don't look at prices at all. They'll see the gold watch - 'I want it!' Then hand the credit card to the cashier without ever looking at the price. There is no comparison of value when you're super rich. You just get the stuff you want.

This is absolutely correct. They won't carefully consider the various options. They won't even know what those options are, nor do they care. That's what the salespeople are for.

They will walk into the shop, ask for the Apple watch, and buy the one that the salesperson tells them is the best. The price won't even come up until the end of the discussion, well after they've tried the watch on, and are halfway through a complementary glass of Scotch. Then they'll walk out with the watch.

Sean

 

[Tiltasauras]

Man, I'm going to need to start working a second job to help pay for this stuff if some of these speculations turn out to be true.

Sean

Seriously. I'm beginning to think the Apple Watch will be quite expensive. I just noticed that it says "ceramic back" on the underside of the Watch, as opposed to "composite back" on the underside of the Sport Edition. Every single differentiator puts more space between the cost of the Watch and the Sport Edition (sigh). Don't think I can talk myself into spending an extra $200-300 for sapphire, stainless steel, and ceramic... with zero extra functionality.

 

[pdaholic]

This is absolutely correct. They won't carefully consider the various options. They won't even know what those options are, nor do they care. That's what the salespeople are for.

They will walk into the shop, ask for the Apple watch, and buy the one that the salesperson tells them is the best. The price won't even come up until the end of the discussion, well after they've tried the watch on, and are halfway through a complementary glass of Scotch. Then they'll walk out with the watch.

Sean

Precisely! And hopefully the watch won't snag on my Russian sable fur coat. I hate when that happens.

 

[cdm283813]

Who would have guessed that Apple's most expensive product in 2015 was going to be a... watch.

What's worse? That trash can computer or a $10,000 watch that requires a phone?

 

[TallManNY]

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.

Many luxury devices don't actually last that long. People drink $1,000 bottles of wine that last an hour. Woman buy handbags that they expect to use for a year or even just a season and then discard. Luxury watches which are generally sold to men are expected to last a long time. But other luxuries are experiences like a trip to a far off land that lasts a week.

Also don't discount the fact that Apple might not update this thing so quickly. The iPod Touch hasn't had its hardware updated in years, but it still sells in the Apple store. There are cheaper MP3 options that look nearly identical, but the Apple product still outsells any of its individual competitors.

I think either Apple has found a way to sell this relatively cheaply (i.e., $3,000) because it actually uses far less gold than has been estimated. Or It will sell for $5,000 and up AND there will be an upgrade/replacement/repair plan either specified or implied.Maybe the watch costs $10,000 but then you get new internals every couple of years.

 

[Elvergun]

I agree! Can't compare the two watches. Mechanical watch vs a digital fad watch. Any WIS knows..

Most people are not a WIS...all they know is that something they strap to their wrist to tell time is a watch.

I'm not sure the Apple Watch is a fad...and a WIS can own and enjoy both (mechanical and digital). Better yet, a WIS can enjoy both at the same time with something like the Kairos watch (or band).

 

[macsimcon]

Pricing and options

I assume the Sport will start at $349, the Watch at $549, and the Edition at $999, maybe even $1,999. Apple wants to sell these to everyone, not just the wealthy.

As others have indicated, you can't price a watch that only lasts three or five years with a Rolex that could last fifty years (and retains the same functionality).

And I think Gruber is wrong about the straps: the modern buckle will be available on both the 38mm and the 42mm. From Apple's website, describing the modern buckle leather band:

"This band is available in soft pink, brown, and midnight blue"

If it were just for the 38mm, I think they would say so.

 

[Aluminum213]

$20,000 for a smart watch that's going to be outdated in one year?

Lol

 

[macsimcon]

Less gold...

I think either Apple has found a way to sell this relatively cheaply (i.e., $3,000) because it actually uses far less gold than has been estimated.

Right. If Apple really has figured out a way to make the gold twice as hard by compressing it, then the case should theoretically require half as much gold to retain the same strength.

 

[Max(IT)]

They may not sell that well either. Mom and dad probably won't spend that much for each kid to go along with their iPhone. Or maybe the whole watch thing will be a short lived fad? It's an expensive accessory and there is no subsidized pricing.

We will see in a while

----------

Maybe I didn't specify my point good enough (English isn't my primary language, as you'd might have guessed).
What I meant was; the internals can change. Not the house/case itself - nessecarily.
Imagine being one of those actually buying the gold edition for x-amount of dollars (or, whatever your currency may be), and after a year or two, new hardware are released.
Then you could go to the Apple store, for an exchange/upgrade program, and get the internals of your watch upgraded - much like some people do with their watche's battery.

Dunno. I just imagened it being a possible way out of the; 'But I spent thousands of dollars on this thing, and it turns out, it's just an expensive bracelet/accessory'-problem.

Well. Imagine if that is excactly what you did. You 'just' bought an expensive case - the rest is up to you.

I could also imagine the more 'cheap' versions being one-time-purchase only. That way, they could diversify your initial purchase decision and you could chise whether or not you wanted to do the one-time thing or the buy-in thing.

… Apple currently doesn't seem to be too concerned about fragmentation. Not that it, in itself, is the justification or reasoning behind my initial thought about the upgradability-path.

Hopes that made more sense?

That supposed a fixed form factor.
I don't believe Apple would keep this form factor for two generations in a row, especially with improvements in power consumption and battery technology.

 

[dwsolberg]

This might be Apple's pricing, but if it is, then it's a mistake.

Existing expensive watches are jewelry. That's their central point — to look attractive. Functionality is more or less unimportant because reporting accurate time is EASY. Also, in 30 years, the watch will still be valuable because of the watch it looks, not because it reports time. Yet its functionality will be as current today as in 30 years.

If Apple is going to create jewelry, then what's the central point of the thing? I would say that Apple will want it to be functionality, but functionality of any Apple watch you buy today will be obsolete in just a few years, let alone 30. On the other hand, if you're selling it as jewelry, then it's based on attractive it is. I don't think it's ugly exactly, but I have trouble comparing it to jewelry. Even if it is attractive, does someone really want to buy something attractive with obsolete technology inside?

If Apple makes the technology replaceable, then it's going to have to support legacy hardware for many years, which is going to make it more difficult to innovate. ("Well, we could add these sensors or make the watch thinner, but we can't because the $20,000 watch we sold three years ago would be obsolete.")

The only thing that makes sense to me is if Apple had a very generous trade-in program for the expensive watches, but so far I don't see it.

I will be buying the cheapest watch they sell because I love playing with new functionality, but there's no way I'm buying expensive jewelry unless it will last.

 

[Max(IT)]

What's worse? That trash can computer or a $10,000 watch that requires a phone?

You lost any credibility the moment you called MP "trash can"....

----------

Many luxury devices don't actually last that long. People drink $1,000 bottles of wine that last an hour. Woman buy handbags that they expect to use for a year or even just a season and then discard. Luxury watches which are generally sold to men are expected to last a long time. But other luxuries are experiences like a trip to a far off land that lasts a week.

Also don't discount the fact that Apple might not update this thing so quickly. The iPod Touch hasn't had its hardware updated in years, but it still sells in the Apple store. There are cheaper MP3 options that look nearly identical, but the Apple product still outsells any of its individual competitors.

I think either Apple has found a way to sell this relatively cheaply (i.e., $3,000) because it actually uses far less gold than has been estimated. Or It will sell for $5,000 and up AND there will be an upgrade/replacement/repair plan either specified or implied.Maybe the watch costs $10,000 but then you get new internals every couple of years.

You can't compare a watch and a bottle of wine.
You should compare a watch and .... a watch.
luxury watches are usually kept for years.
I don't buy the "new internals every year" solution. That isn't Apple's way to do things.