I've said it before. To me, this supports the concept of another subsidy play, this time getting others like Insurance companies to chip in on the price Apple wants for this iWatch so that our out-of-pocket price can be lower. Much like iPhone, it allows Apple to get it's full price & margin for iWatch while being able to offer us consumers a cheaper-than expected price.
Why would Apple be interested? iPhone is their best selling, most profitable product. They initially tried getting buyers to pay the full price and ran into a falloff in demand. Then, they switched to the subsidy model and the rest is history.
If I'm them, I want to replicate that "innovation" wherever I can. Where else could I get companies like AT&T, Verizon, etc that might chip in on the price I want for a new product (like iWatch)? One place is very obvious if you watch much television. I bet you can't watch even 3 hours of television without seeing some health-oriented commercial where something tangible is being offered for as little as free* (diabetes testing, various kinds of monitors, and on and on- sound familiar?). Now what makes that stuff free*? Someone else pays for it. Who? Insurance companies and medicare.
I wonder if Apple has found a way to bundle up some of that in this iWatch concept so that Insurance companies and Medicare will subsidize the iWatch? Then, like iPhone, it might be available for as little as free* or seemingly cheap because much-to-all of it's retail price is paid for by Insurance companies or Medicare.
I've posted the concept before and it's generally shot down. But here's Apple trying to strike deals with Insurance companies that probably involve sharing of data. That has negative to very negative connotations. So what's their angle? Why would Apple be doing this? Then, just follow the breadcrumbs.
I actually quite agree with this. I've stated before as well that I don't believe the iWatch is what people believe it is going to be. I believe it will be a health device targeted almost purely at the medical industry, or at a minimum a "fitness" device, but not a conventional tech watch. However, I don't necessarily think they'll get insurance companies to subsidize it for the average consumer....BUT, if they do get insurance companies to offer consumers incentives for wearing the device and reporting their information to the insurance company (Ala a fitbit/pedometer program, except with a lot more sensor capability), then consumers will be willing to fork over the money to buy the watch at full price. If they make it stylish, AND I can get $2-300 per year in incentives from my insurance company, then I won't mind paying $800 for the device.