Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

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

JFazYankees said:
I'm sorry, I don't care what track record John Gruber has, his pricing estimates and retail expectations are way off. There's no way Apple won't sell the bands alone as accessories after they've emphasized how easy it is to swap them out. And, of course, his prices are way too high all around, especially for the Edition.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Gruber is soaking wet on the bands. Apple didn't come up with this snazzy band attachment method only to tell customers that they can't buy whatever band they want for whatever watch they buy. In fact I am sticking by my prediction that the watches and bands will be sold separately. That will be so much easier on Apple's inventory besides.
 
MVallee said:
I'm not planning on buying the gold version one way or the other, but $10,000-$20,000 sounds insanely high.
Click to expand...

The Apple Watch's case will only be about 2oz. 18K Gold costs about $900 an ounce. That's only $1800. So, I'd bet The Gold watch comes in at $2499 - $2999. Apple is still making a ~ $250 to $750 excess profit on the gold watch compared to the regular watches.
 
I just think it's too early into the cycle for Apple to be diversifying that high into the industry.

While I'm sure they have something in mind, we don't know the planned refresh rate, the future innovation cycle, current capacity, planned length of life... or even its usage in the market. So many unknowns
 
puma1552 said:
But if it's a fashion accessory, how can you spend $10k on one knowing that in 12 months it will be half as thick? $10k for this is absurd.
Click to expand...
I like the way you toss out the word "knowing", as though the price of the first edition has actually been announced and so have the dimensions and release date of the second generation Apple Watch.
 
Rogifan said:
I think making guesses are silly. The only thing I will say is I think Gruber is wrong about the bands. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if bands is where Apple hopes to make a lot of money. No way do I think Apple will restrict people from buying bands separate from the watch. I doubt you'll be able to buy a watch without a band but I'm certwin Apple will let you buy as many bands as you want.
Click to expand...

I'm leaning towards full a la carte.
 
There is no way in hell that the leather loop band will be more expensive than the milanese loop, no way. I just have to laugh when reading his articles. What a bunch of nonsense.
 
puma1552 said:
Not to mention, the Apple watch is just plain ugly, so it's not much of a fashion accessory IMO like a nice classic watch.
Click to expand...

Yes. A nice, classic watch like a Rolex Submariner, which is a tool to help keep divers from dying. Which is somehow appropriate attire for a nice dinner? I wonder what people would think were I to make an exquisitely gilded hammer and have my pants modified to have a hammer loop, then I wore that out to a black-tie event.

My point is that fashion is a bizarre world when you look at it. I personally find most modern watches with their enormous bezels and paragraph of text on the face absolutely hideous.
 
hoits2000 said:
Wow. I really thought Apple would really get the smartwatch movement going. Instead it looks like it is just going to kill it, if those prices are correct.

I was hoping for more of this kind of breakdown:

349/449 for Sport Apple Watch
499/599 for Metal Apple Watch
999/1099 for Gold Apple Watch

I was planning on getting the Metal one since I love my Pebble Steel so much but screw this watch it is cost $1000 for a metal watch.

Come on Apple. The world proved we NEED a computer. That we NEED a phone. But watches have been around for ever. You don't need them with everything else we have and I for one won't be spending anything close to 4 figures for a wrist onramnet.
Click to expand...

I just don't get it. Even the low estimates of the price of raw gold in the gold watch is something like $600 for the smaller gold watch. There is no way the solid gold edition watch is going to be sold for less margin than just about anything that Apple sells.
 
Mascots said:
I just think it's too early into the cycle for Apple to be diversifying that high into the industry.

While I'm sure they have something in mind, we don't know the planned refresh rate, the future innovation cycle, current capacity, planned length of life... or even its usage in the market. So many unknowns
Click to expand...

This.

Save your outrage for when we know more. It probably won't be as outrageous as your imaginings.
 
InklingNL said:
$10,000?! That's more than a Mac! Why would you waste your money on that?
Click to expand...


For the same reasons some people will spend $4000 on a pair of shoes or a $1000 for a t-shirt. The gold Apple Watch is not targeted at anyone who visits this website.
 
squirrrl said:
Why not? They are marketing it in high end shops like any high end watch. I think they are definitely positioning their product as a high end fashion watch.
Click to expand...

Appreciate some of the watches will be priced higher based on the materials they're made from, however, the Apple Watch is a consumer electronic device, NOT a high precision time piece. As someone else has said the internals of these devices (despite their complexity) are inherently disposable. They are solid state and can (and will) be mass produced in a factory in china for $1 each. I'm struggling to think of them in the same way as, say the moon watch, which is a precision time piece that can be handed down to your grandchildren and if it goes wrong, you can get it repaired.

I can understand $1000 for a first iteration piece of tech, but $20,000.... That would only make sense if it had $19,000 worth of gold in it.

Let's face it, the apple watch will either be a joke in 2 years or will be hugely successful (like the iPhone and iPad) and be superseded by faster, thinner better hardware almost every year.... In 5 years time the first one will look like something a cave man would use (i have an original iPhone and sometimes i just lay it side-by-side with my iPhone 6 plus, so i speak with some experience here lol).

There is no option available that will make these watches anything other than antiquated in 5 years time, so those price tags would simply be for the sake of fashion and pandering to a market which i think would be a shame if apple started playing that game. They should stick to their usual high margins and build cost + R&D and just price it the same way they would price a new iPhone.
 
People scratching their head over a massively expensive watch probably don't realize that their exists an ultra-luxury market that thrives on the old axiom "if you have to look at the price tag it's too expensive for you." And, no, practicality isn't part of the "should I buy" equation for this consumer either. It's purely do I want it or not.

I don't think Gruber's pricing is on target or his idea about the watch bands. But the Apple Edition will be prohibitively expensive even still.

I'll say this though about Gruber's article... great link bait for a slow Friday.
 
jaw04005 said:
From a tech point of view, the Apple Watch is going to be very much a 1.0 product. It looks bulky and we all know they're going to release a slimmer, faster and more capable version next year. I personally don't see the point in purchasing anything beyond the "Sport Edition."

However, I guess there's always the Kardashians of the world.
Click to expand...

They probably wouldn't pay a dime. Apple will probably place these strategically among the rich and famous to maintain a reality distortion field.
 
squirrrl said:
I agree.. I bought the leather case for my wife's iphone5s when it came out... it was scuffed and pretty dingy looking after only a month of use.
Click to expand...

You have to get their black leather case. Mine still looks like new.
 
I think there is another major point being missed here.....

I know people with lots of money who spend $15k+ on watches. They would never buy an Apple Watch for that amount for one reason...... They buy a luxury Swiss watch with a high price tag because it is a status symbol and people know it....... But that symbol would be completely devalued if anyone could go and but an identical watch albeit made from some different materials for just $349..... Never mind thete fact that millions of people will have apple watches rendering them 'common' and losing all exclusivity value.
 
To the majority of people posting in this forum thinking people are fools to spend such money, now you know what it would feel like as someone in the third world looking at you. Your phone costs several times what some people earn in a year and you don't even consider it. Your baseline for what's absurd is simply what's beyond your experience. It's not based on some rational argument or moral belief that you pretend to have. It's so easy to say that some people are simply stupid without even considering their point of view, and funny to not even see that you're basically the same.
 
rossy100 said:
I think there is another major point being missed here.....

I know people with lots of money who spend $15k+ on watches. They would never buy an Apple Watch for that amount for one reason...... They buy a luxury Swiss watch with a high price tag because it is a status symbol and people know it....... But that symbol would be completely devalued if anyone could go and but an identical watch albeit made from some different materials for just $349..... Never mind thete fact that millions of people will have apple watches rendering them 'common' and losing all exclusivity value.
Click to expand...

Completely agree, its the same watch, same internals, just a gold case.
 
Here's the thing. A $20,000 watch is more than I make in a year, so keep in mind that this is coming from someone who will not own one anytime soon.

The problem I have with this is not how much it would cost. There are other $20,000 watches I'm sure. The problem I have is the lifespan of the watch.

A classic mechanical watch at $20,000 -- It would and should last a lifetime. An Apple watch? It has a custom battery inside that lasts a day on one charge. It'll have a maximum life of 5 (optimiscally 10, but at a way reduced volume) years. At that point, what good is the apple Watch going to be? You'll need to replace it with the latest and greatest one, unless Apple included a cool way to replace the battery. That's fine! Just swap out the watch, keep the same band. But by then, the Apple Watch 5 is not going to have the same shape or size; you'll need a new band too. _Its how Apple works._ even if you can replace the battery in it, it'll be obsolete eventually as newer BlueTooth protocols come out - tech becomes obsolete no matter what. A mechanical watch does not rely on software, it relies on a simple battery or wind up function. If taken care of it will literally last for ever.

What's my point? I'm not sure. I just think that while a $20,000 watch is extragavent, a $20,000 smart watch that will go outdated is a scary prospect.

But then again if one is filthy rich then I guess it won't matter anyway...
 
JFazYankees said:
I'm sorry, I don't care what track record John Gruber has, his pricing estimates and retail expectations are way off. There's no way Apple won't sell the bands alone as accessories after they've emphasized how easy it is to swap them out. And, of course, his prices are way too high all around, especially for the Edition.
Click to expand...


Remember to come back to either gloat or eat crow when the prices are announced!
 
Another thing to think about is Apple's emphasis on finding the  Watch to suit you - half of the introduction video is dedicated to it.

While I understand that there will be some variance, I just can't see the gap existing between models being tens of thousands of dollars.
 
Rogifan said:
How is this newsworthy? Gruber doesn't know any more than the rest of us. You might as well throw up an article asking MacRumors to guess what prices will be.
Click to expand...

Gruber is merely stating an opinion based on arguably sound analysis. He has a pretty good track record.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back