Apple Gives Custom Apple Watch With Gold Link Bracelet to Designer Karl Lagerfeld

[Mactendo]

They gift laptops left and right RIGHT NOW, and they're not made of gold, or you really think all those movies and series actually buy those Apple laptops... This is no different.

Laptops in "Movies and series" are called product placement and that's what I was talking about.

 

[RebelScum]

April 25, 2018: Apple releases Watch OS 4.0. Requires Watch 2 and above (not supported on Watch 1).

in related news, people who enjoyed their device for 3 years upgrade to new one, saying "I guess $9.72/month is too high a price for some people to avoid being a smug prick."

----------

Probably a millennial who has been brainwashed to think woe is me at other peoples success while take no initiative to cultivate any success of their own.

Wait, you're going to use a company's success as a case study against someone pointing out said success to accuse them of being lazy and unsuccessful?

Should we get off your lawn?

----------

Can you read minds now? I was being sarcastic, I'm pretty sure I know what my intention was over you.

Even if that was my intent, rogifan hardly "owned" me, he questioned my seriousness and belief that these one offs were slowing the manufacturing process of Apple Watches.

I was joking and at least one forum member understood I was doing so in my post. That is all.

You clearly weren't.

 

[Keirasplace]

Laptops in "Movies and series" are called product placement and that's what I was talking about.

Product placement in video productions : media exposure of your product leading to increased awareness and sales.

Giving product to high visibility people : media exposure of your product leading to increased awareness and sales.

Not much difference at all as I see it.

Of course, for this to work well. The media exposure must be positive.

So, you must not give it to a personality that may embarrass you. You have a bit less control on those high profile people, and how the message gets out, than when going through traditional media. But, the upside is a lot more powerfull than merely seeing the product in a media. Nike built 10B in sales on the name of Jordan alone.

The personalities own Brand, style, identity and credibility also sells the product. When the product is highly related to the personalities area of expertise (like a fashion icon (Turlington, Lagarfeld) wearing your product (or Jordan wearing shoes), this effect is amplified).

Apple has used media exposure of their products for 25 years at least, this is the same thing except with a personal product like clothing, you use something a bit different than merely showing the tech.

 

[RebelScum]

You're right to a degree and so am I : ) Money is an essential element of for profit companied.

But ask yourself. Why don't companies generate profit? In most cases it's because they fail to attract or keep their customers...or they are chasing some elusive business plan fantasy like a lot of startups do.
Sounds like you will disagree but fundamentally business is all about people. Certainly the economic climate has a tremendous impact and provides what seems to be an exception to a very fundamental principle. Also finances must be functional for any business to work, that's a given. In my experience any entity solely 100% focused on money....absent any desire to benefit people is evil. This mindset that business is only about money is very limiting at best.

You guys are talking about the difference between marketshare and mindshare. Both are important, and you're both right. But only insofar as mindshare translates to marketshare eventually.

 

[unplugme71]

I'm so SICK OF THE IWATCH!

Whats IWATCH?

I only know of Apple Watch, Pebble, etc..

----------

$25,000 for a smartwatch that will be obsolete in 2-3 years time.

But seriously, what are people going to do with their $17,000 Apple Watch when the hardware no longer supports the software much like iPhone? Buy a new one in 2018 for another $17,000?

Yup. When you have that much money you absolutely do.

My biggest concern is that the watch straps will be compatible for at least 5-7 years. If you can't swap the ones you have now with the next 3-5 generations, then I'm not interested in it. Those straps get costly and well, I'm not going to keep buying them.

What I do hope, is Apple sells the watch itself without straps in future models so I can transfer over mine.

 

[Mactendo]

Product placement in video productions : media exposure of your product leading to increased awareness and sales.

Giving product to high visibility people : media exposure of your product leading to increased awareness and sales.

Not much difference at all as I see it.

I see the difference between showing it as a cool gadget in a high profile movie that literally the whole world would see and giving it away to any celebrities. Be it Madonna no one would care except her followers. Turlington is not known to anyone outside of US, Lagerfeld would affect only fashionistas and persons a la Paris Hilton and that's again if you know who's it and even then it's a question of personal choice and like/dislike of that particular person. But show it in a movie of the scale of James Bond in a smart manner and the next day there will be lines to Apple Stores around the world.

 

[valmak]

There is no way that apple all gold bracelet is only $25K. I would say it's closer to $50K. The gold leather strap doesn't have much gold on it and it is $7K.

 

[SHNXX]

There is no way that apple all gold bracelet is only $25K. I would say it's closer to $50K. The gold leather strap doesn't have much gold on it and it is $7K.

Gold doesn't cost that much.

 

[C DM]

I see the difference between showing it as a cool gadget in a high profile movie that literally the whole world would see and giving it away to any celebrities. Be it Madonna no one would care except her followers. Turlington is not known to anyone outside of US, Lagerfeld would affect only fashionistas and persons a la Paris Hilton and that's again if you know who's it and even then it's a question of personal choice and like/dislike of that particular person. But show it in a movie of the scale of James Bond in a smart manner and the next day there will be lines to Apple Stores around the world.

One might be a bit more focused than the other but the idea is about the same (and honestly many movies, even many big ones, aren't even seen by half the world if not less).

 

[Mactendo]

One might be a bit more focused than the other but the idea is about the same (and honestly many movies, even many big ones, aren't even seen by half the world if not less).

But you get the idea of a much different scale.

Showing the features you want, in the conditions you want, in the way you want (and showing it as a part of an imaginary TV/movie world to dozens of millions of loyal fans of this world) is not the same as a watch hanging on Pharell Williams wrist.

 

[FrankieTDouglas]

But it still gave you the need to post on this thread

Yep. Because posting in a thread isn't equivalent to buying a ham-fisted "fashion" gadget.

 

[C DM]

But you get the idea of a much different scale.

Showing the features you want, in the conditions you want, in the way you want (and showing it as a part of an imaginary TV/movie world to dozens of millions of loyal fans of this world) is not the same as a watch hanging on Pharell Williams wrist.

It's similar enough given the difference of one being a fashion accessory it accomplished a similar enough of a goal. Certain things are marketed differently to one degree or another to get a similar end result--more appeal and more sales. Basically a difference without a meaningful enough distinction to somehow make one or the other necessarily more right or wrong or better or worse for the respective products in their product lifecycle.

 

[matthewhuk]

Looks vile!

 

[Aetles]

Pretty cool that all these wealthy celebrities are being given expensive watches only they would be able to afford in the first place, I guess.

I'd say it's all PR from Apple. Probably part of their advertising budget for Apple Watch. And it seems to work out quite well for them…

 

[s1m]

Explain why. You might also explain why you think you are better. Declaring random people that you don't know anything about to be "horrible human beings" doesn't quite show you in the best light yourself.

First I did not state that I think I am better.

Second it wasn't a random person it was specifically Karl Lagerfeld. If it was a random person I would have posted something along the lines of "I just saw some random person on the street and they are a horrible person - I know nothing of them but I am sure they are horrible".

Third my point was not to show myself in any light - good, bad or so bright I need to wear sunglasses at all times.

Fourth I have never heard positive things about Karl Lagerfeld - the only things I have heard would point to his horribleness.

I don't have time to go back through all that I have heard but this article summarises pretty much all that I know of him:

http://jezebel.com/5930968/karl-lag...ch-the-history-of-fashions-biggest-misogynist

----------

Product placement in video productions : media exposure of your product leading to increased awareness and sales.

Giving product to high visibility people : media exposure of your product leading to increased awareness and sales.

Not much difference at all as I see it.

Of course, for this to work well. The media exposure must be positive.

So, you must not give it to a personality that may embarrass you. You have a bit less control on those high profile people, and how the message gets out, than when going through traditional media. But, the upside is a lot more powerfull than merely seeing the product in a media. Nike built 10B in sales on the name of Jordan alone.

The personalities own Brand, style, identity and credibility also sells the product. When the product is highly related to the personalities area of expertise (like a fashion icon (Turlington, Lagarfeld) wearing your product (or Jordan wearing shoes), this effect is amplified).

Apple has used media exposure of their products for 25 years at least, this is the same thing except with a personal product like clothing, you use something a bit different than merely showing the tech.

The gift to Lagerfeld is for one of two reasons - to increase the brand image of the Apple Watch in fashion circles and thus lead promotion of the product through that. Most people aren't going to see photos of Karl Lagerfeld and want an Apple Watch as a result. Is it about placing this item as an Apple Watch.

The second reason is a vanity piece allowing an industrial designer to gift something to his fashion icon perhaps.

Either way personally this is having an adverse impact on my brand engagement with Apple.

 

[ksuyen]

First, Apple has right to gift as much as the guy next door. Second, those gifts are part of the advertisement, they are not charity. Third, I don't see Karl wear Samsung or any other Android watches even if they are made from gold and free. Forth, case closes.

 

[Robert.Walter]

This was hardly unimaginable.

As we go forward, we will see apple watches with titanium, platinum (even Rado-like ceramic) cases and bands.

I also expect to see evolution of the case shape to something different than we see today (Gruen Curvex anyone?).

 

[Tech198]

He can afford it. Its like chicken feed.

 

[CJM]

This exemplifies exactly why I strongly dislike Apple's stainless steel band design. The shape and size of those links is VERY 70's to me. I don't like it in steel, and I dislike it even more in gold. I'd love to see a more segmented steel band, a la this Omega:

[url=https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8797/17158251962_a5f437084f_c.jpg]Image[/url]Alpha & Omega by Sean Molin Photography, on Flickr

Whereas I think that Omega looks quite 80s or 90s.

Does seeing a special version given to Karl Lagerfeld put anyone else off the whole thing? I want a watch even less now.

Yeah, more and more people are using its products and liking them and its making more and more money...definitely lost its way.

At the risk of sounding like a total hipster, what makes things cool is being different from everyone else (or the majority) in some interesting way. It's why a lot of fashion people look outrageous at times. It's why Apple was cool circa ~2003 but is less so now. (Despite being popular with the kids)

In the tech world, being cool is about being in the know about an awesome product before everyone else. Because these people have the Watch before everyone else they think they're cool. Whereas I just think Apple's pandering to celebrity, which is the opposite of cool.

 

[Arran]

Apple Corporate is officially the rich coddling the rich.

Yeah, it's the 1% "looking after their own" or "keeping it in the family", so to speak.

Probably not what Apple intended.

----------

I'm a designer too... Where's mine?

Are you rich?

 

[wilsonlaidlaw]

Where's the rocks?

Wot - no encrustation of diamonds round the screen? How very pedestrian

......and why is Lagerfeld wearing a pair of fishnet tights on his hands?

 

[doctor-don]

Utility in question? Did people say the same about Bluetooth headsets? I think the utility of this watch is absolutely, unmistakably obvious to anyone that actually travels, sits in meetings, goes fishing, plays an instrument, etc. You get a ding on your phone, you glance at your watch. You can't hear your phone? Your wrist just vibrated. Yes, a phone can vibrate but it's not as jarring as your wrist, and can easily go unnoticed.

You say sales will be disappoint as if you actually really know this. You don't, you're speculating, and you have probably less credentials than even the worst analyst.

Everyone is entitled to his opinion, even you. MacRumors is the name.

This watch might be a useful medical device on-the-go, but many people do not wear watches since cell phones provide accurate time.

Looks like one of those gold tone LED watches from the 70's. I've made up my mind. I am going to take the 25 grand I set aside for a surprise model Apple watch and buy more Apple stock instead.

A guy I knew had one of those watches in 1975. To see the time, he had to press a button - every time. That watch cost only $200.

 

[jc1350]

So happy the title said Karl and not Carl. I'm SO SICK of CARL.

And i'm sure 99% of you know who i'm talking about

Carl just needs to S T F U!

EDIT: Just realized you may be referring to a particular fellow and not what comes to my mind when I hear/see "Carl."

I am the 1% who is Carl?

*snicker*

It's unfortunately the way things work in capitalist societies. Think of it : the less you need that money , the more likely the bank will lend it to you.. Money always flows towards people that needs it the least.

It's usually a bad business model to loan money to people who won't, for whatever reason, pay it back.

 

[rk25123]

Yay!!! Yellow shiny metal! I bet he feels important now.

 

[C DM]

Whereas I think that Omega looks quite 80s or 90s.

Does seeing a special version given to Karl Lagerfeld put anyone else off the whole thing? I want a watch even less now.



At the risk of sounding like a total hipster, what makes things cool is being different from everyone else (or the majority) in some interesting way. It's why a lot of fashion people look outrageous at times. It's why Apple was cool circa ~2003 but is less so now. (Despite being popular with the kids)

In the tech world, being cool is about being in the know about an awesome product before everyone else. Because these people have the Watch before everyone else they think they're cool. Whereas I just think Apple's pandering to celebrity, which is the opposite of cool.

Cool enough for tons of people to order a new device that many won't even get for months. Looks like what Apple is doing is just fine as far as what it needs to do for them.