Very true.
But a year after a $400,000 boat is released, the next model doesn't double in speed and functionality
It's going to be interesting seeing how Apple will market the Apple watch and what product niche(s) it falls into
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Watch Display Rumored to Be Going Up in High-End Parisian Department Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Very true.
But a year after a $400,000 boat is released, the next model doesn't double in speed and functionality
It's going to be interesting seeing how Apple will market the Apple watch and what product niche(s) it falls into
Why does one have to exclude the other (besides fitting your own personal RDF)? If someone can afford it, who am I to judge his motives of spending the same money in relation as I spend on a lower cost watch or any other consumer article for this matter.
Reading these threads, the apple watch already is providing a ton of entertainment....
The Face will be Dated, not the Band
People are forgetting that the
Watch bands are interchangeable and will likely be interchangeable between revisions. Since the majority of the cost of the gold watch is in the band itself, you no longer have this problem of an expensive paperweight... Just change the face, keep your bands.
Also, never underestimate how much a rich person will pay for looks.
People are forgetting that the
Watch bands are interchangeable and will likely be interchangeable between revisions. Since the majority of the cost of the gold watch is in the band itself, you no longer have this problem of an expensive paperweight... Just change the face, keep your bands. Also, never underestimate how much a rich person will pay for looks.
Fashion as a trend yes. But the industry is based on timeless things. Why do you think Chanel is a high fashion brand? Or Hermes? Or Louis Vuitton? It's because of their timelessness and history.
Women don't buy a $5000 chanel bag so they can throw it away for a better, newer one two years later. Its a classic fashion ICON. Its part of their fashion collection, and its value increases overtime. This is especially true for time pieces, people *collect* watches. They don't replace them with a faster and better one every year. They add more and more to their collection, and wear different ones for different occasions.
The apple watch, on the other hand... I will be surprised if the thing will still be functional enough to run iOS11 or whatever two years later.
Don't get me wrong. This thing as a wearable will sell like hot cakes. But its got nothing on traditional high end watch brands.
Vuiton or Channel may have sold one off timeless exclusive pieces, one day, but that's not how they sell things now. Most of their revenues don't come from anything that could thought of as timeless (though their marketing may still use that as a hook).
Maybe they're not going to try selling it to you.
I'm a tech person and not a fashionista. I'll buy it (not the gold one) because I am intrigued by the possibilities inherent in a smart watch that is closely integrated with the iPhone I already have.
Tech people aren't all the same so many won't have the same reaction I do. Others will wait until they see a use case that fits their own life.
We'll have to wait and see what happens. I know plenty of women who buy handbags often, as well. But they usually do that because they want to change up their look or what have you. I don't know anyone in either gender who buys the same watch year after year in order to stay up to date with the latest and greatest version.
It remains to be seen whether the Apple Watch Edition will be regarded as a true "collector must have" or simply as a very expensive watch that is only going to be in style for a year or two before being replaced with a better version thanks to newer technology.
I think Apple probably feels that the Edition will be regarded as a collector must have; but I know from my own circle of friends and acquaintances that watch collectors are some of the most particular people I've ever met. I think it could go either way.
The same way they spend 2x the avg per capita income on a luxury car that will depreciate by 10-20K the second they drive it off the lot and another 30K the two years after that.
The same way they buy $10K dresses for ONE occasion.
The same way they fly in a private plane that costs 20X a first class ticket on a commercial airline
There are a lot of very wealthy people in this world. Maybe not on your block but they exist just the same. It's absolutely nothing on them to get $5K bottle service in Vegas. You really think they are sweating a $4K watch that makes a statement?
That is why I am happy about this as a stockholder.
These people will buy one now, and in 2 years, they'll be buying another one.
To those that do, thank you very much!
Plus, once you're in the Apple ecosystem, it's harder to drop out of it. I know it sounds weird, but most people in that are looking at buying the devices don't want to spend another day downloading and looking for their favorite apps. With an iPhone, it takes about 45 minutes to get the apps from your old iPhone on to your new one. I suspect it will be the same with
Convenience
Functionality
Whilst Apple can seemingly print money, most folks can't. Even if this is the next success for Apple (I don't think so, but that is beside the point), it will impact other Apple product sales. People are not hoarding money waiting for Apple to invent things for them to spend it on. Most folks have disposable income that is finite and that means should they choose a watch, they probably won't update their iPad etc. still ok for Apple, but this unlikely to be a huge incremental increase for Apple performance.
I just don't see folks buying these things each iteration, like a phone or tablet (don't understand that either). In fact I think it is quite likely that folks will only dabble once, when they realise they have to charge it so regularly, take it off every shower, or during any real world activity (especially the more expensive ones). I have a smart watch and even though it lasts 2-3 days between charges, it has already become tiresome.
Looking forward to see the first covers to be made available for them
I could live with the stainless steel sapphire model with premium strap costing $350. But as it stands $350 only gets you in the door and thats for the ladies model.
And I understand that computers back in the 1980s were easily $5K but when you have a phone that cost $650 which does everything and more than what this watch can do its pretty wasteful to spend $350 (minimum) when you can whip out your phone and have better results. Thats the part I dont like. You can buy a used iPhone 5s for around $250 to $300.
That's not really the point. The fact is, people who buy $10,000 watches and $5000 handbags don't buy them to throw away a year later. These things don't get *outdated*. The omega seamaster i bought in 2009 is not any more outdated today than when i first bought it 6 years ago. I got new watches since then, but i still wear that one depending on the occasion.
However, the same cannot be said about Apple products, namely iPhone and iPad, and soon the Apple Watch. I haven't kept any of my iphones for more than 2 years, and can't imagine rocking a iphone 3GS today.
Well, that's you. And I'm not sure you could say everyone's like you.
I do, use a 3GS right now, even though I probably could by a Tesla top end car if I was so inclined. So, it is not a money issue either. Though I did just buy and Air 2 (didn't have any Apple produce but the 3GS before that).
I carry a real camera in my handbag (Canon G16), so I don'T really need a better camera on the phone. The only real thing I feel is truly horrible on the 3GS.
I'm quite focused on what I buy my money on, and you might think some device from 3 year back is obsolete. But, I do not. If it serves the purpose I bought it for and I don'T need or want more, then that's it. I keep it. There are many people like me; more than you think.
You must have some inside retail information. I had no idea there was a "ladies" model. LOL!!
I'm sure you're referring to the 38mm model. However, while you might be right that there will be price distinction between sizes, I assure you it will not be based on gender. Since I have yet to see either model in person, I cannot say which one I will prefer. However, as it stands now, because I have slim wrists, I am drawn toward the 38mm.
A quick side note regarding the sizes: I was at a Sony Store last week and I tried on the Sony Smartwatch 3. According to information I could find regarding its dimensions, it appears to be larger than the 42mm Apple Watch yet it didn't feel overwhelming on my wrist at all.
Chupa Chupa, may I first say, I always enjoy your posts. You are always sensible and wise.
I completely agree with your statement. Anyone who thinks luxury and/or fashion is timeless is deluding themselves. That Bentley Continental someone paid $180,000 five or six years ago is now on a used car lot on La Cienega for less than $100k. And while some people do collect watches, there are plenty who don't.
I could understand people being beside themselves if Apple was only making a watch rumored to cost thousands. Then it really would leave most of us out - in the same way most of us cannot afford a Breitling, Rolex, or Tourneau (to name a few). But this is not the case. You either want an Apple Watch or you don't. And remember this, while you currently need an iPhone to use an Apple Watch to the fullest, the opposite is not true. The presence of the Watch will not hamper your ability to get an iPhone, iPad, Mac, or any other product Apple makes. I have not heard any news they will be discontinuing anything in favor of the Watch nor will any device be crippled without the Watch.
They definitely wouldn't be sweating on $4K, but I am also pretty sure they wouldn't be interested in a product like this. In all honesty, the Apple Watch could be considered as a top of the range Ford of watches; nothing wrong with that at all, but when "real" quality watches can cost 100's of thousands, folks with this kind of money don't buy top of range Ford, they buy Rolls Royces, Ferraris, Lamboginis etc.
Sure.
But my point is more about spending money in general, regardless of the item, regardless of useful life, etc. That $4,000 Apple Watch might as well be $400,000 or even 4,000,000 as the vast majority of people would never even consider spending $4,000 on one.
The fact is, when it comes to evaluating cots, it is all relative/subjective.
Well, data shows that there are more people like me than people like you, when 75% of the people are using iphone 5 or newer...
It's odd the direction Apple seems to be going with this.. And to be honest, I really am not all that fond of it. Was it really a smart idea to try and make EVERY product so mainstream? Gold phones, fashion watches, overpriced clothing executives... It's a long ways from the PowerBook G3 days, that's for sure. Whatever happened to understated elegance? Wish that was the direction Apple was pushing with all of this.
----------
I agree with your post, everything you said is fact.. But is it a good thing that Apple is trying to emulate companies like Bentley or any of the other companies that are for the very rich? Hopefully this is only a way for Apple to make more profit, which I think it is, and not some shift in how they view their most important customer base, everyday people. I would really hate to see Apple start to make decisions that are based predominately towards what the very rich can afford. All of this seems completely against what Apple was founded on. Could you imagine Steve Jobs showing/trying to sell/introducing a 4,000 gold watch on stage? Apple is supposed to represent the counter culture I thought? Not the mainstream.. Think different, right?
----------
I agree with your post, everything you said is fact.. But is it a good thing that Apple is trying to emulate companies like Bentley or any of the other companies that are for the very rich? Hopefully this is only a way for Apple to make more profit, which I think it is, and not some shift in how they view their most important customer base, everyday people. I would really hate to see Apple start to make decisions that are based predominately towards what the very rich can afford. All of this seems completely against what Apple was founded on. Could you imagine Steve Jobs showing/trying to sell/introducing a 4,000 gold watch on stage? Apple is supposed to represent the counter culture I thought? Not the mainstream.. Think different, right?