That's like looking at the world through a tube. You can only see what the tube allow you to see.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Watch Edition 'a huge mistake' at £8,000
- Thread starter OllyW
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
That's like looking at the world through a tube. You can only see what the tube allow you to see.
The thing is, people with MONEY will purchase this item quite simply because when people look at it everyone will know they ponied up a craptonna cash for it. These would be the unsubtle wealthy.
Usually people with established wealth will go for more expensive but slightly understated watches etc.
The fact that an even better one will come out a year from now, won't matter if you have the money to throw down on an 8k$ watch.
Usually people with established wealth will go for more expensive but slightly understated watches etc.
The fact that an even better one will come out a year from now, won't matter if you have the money to throw down on an 8k$ watch.
WHAT has Apple done to indicate a "new Apple" is emerging?
Edit: Aside from paying less attention to UI and UX than they used to.
Edit: Aside from paying less attention to UI and UX than they used to.
Lots of thing.
Full dedication to renewable energy, labor transparency, charity works, beta programs, more choices etc., things that Steve Jobs wouldn't waste his time to. Just today there is a news that Apple encouraged their store employees to work for local community.
Yes, the Watch is a tech gadget but it is not JUST a tech gadget.
"Apple encouraged their store employees to work for local community"
That cost apple nothing.
Well in that regard, I'll agree with you somewhat. The days of "simple" at Apple are over, and they left with Steve Jobs. You're correct in that he wouldn't have wasted his time entertaining the notion that a person could choose from between 5 different iPad models. Same goes for phone, and notebooks, etc. In fact, he specifically got rid of all that noise when he came back, and he was praised for it - rightfully so.
As for dedication to renewable energy, labor transparency, etc, I wouldn't really say that these things define Apple and change the kind of company they are - they still make lifestyle/technology products, and that hasn't changed. You can argue that because a watch is considered jewelry that Apple is now a jewelry company, but I think this is false. They didn't set out to get into the jewelry market and become a new type of company. They built a gadget that happens to be a wearable and because they're Apple, they paid a good amount of attention into making it beautiful. It would have been quite unlike Apple if they hadn't done this.
As for dedication to renewable energy, labor transparency, etc, I wouldn't really say that these things define Apple and change the kind of company they are - they still make lifestyle/technology products, and that hasn't changed. You can argue that because a watch is considered jewelry that Apple is now a jewelry company, but I think this is false. They didn't set out to get into the jewelry market and become a new type of company. They built a gadget that happens to be a wearable and because they're Apple, they paid a good amount of attention into making it beautiful. It would have been quite unlike Apple if they hadn't done this.
I think two mistakes are made with respect to dismissing the Apple Edition pricing.
(1) These products will not be on 1 or 2 year upgrade timelines. They are not phones or tablets. The hardware doesn't require upgrading like a smartphone or tablet.
(2) For the people the Apple Watch Edition is aimed at, $10,000 is nothing. We make the mistake of applying our own views of $10,000 across the spectrum of the entire population. These will be limited edition versions of the Apple Watch and there are plenty of uber-rich folks out there who drop $20,000 like you and I drop $20 on stuff far more superfluous.
Apple wants the watch to be both a gadget and a fashion accessory. The best way to do that is to push a "luxury" option. They'll sell out of the Edition and in a year's time everyone will be calling them geniuses.
(1) These products will not be on 1 or 2 year upgrade timelines. They are not phones or tablets. The hardware doesn't require upgrading like a smartphone or tablet.
(2) For the people the Apple Watch Edition is aimed at, $10,000 is nothing. We make the mistake of applying our own views of $10,000 across the spectrum of the entire population. These will be limited edition versions of the Apple Watch and there are plenty of uber-rich folks out there who drop $20,000 like you and I drop $20 on stuff far more superfluous.
Apple wants the watch to be both a gadget and a fashion accessory. The best way to do that is to push a "luxury" option. They'll sell out of the Edition and in a year's time everyone will be calling them geniuses.
I don't think those people exist. Not in large numbers at least. Most who have that kind of money, have it because they are not stupid with it, and don't consider $10,000 to be "nothing." It's not like they go around flushing money in public toilets for fun. They may spend more on luxury items, but they still expect value for their money. It is hard to justify the value in the Edition, when a functionally identical watch can be had for $9650 less. You don't get stupidly rich by paying $9650 for about $1000 (estimate) worth of gold.
People blow more money on bottle service at the club or other overpriced pieces of jewelry.
Rolexes don't have $10,000 worth of gold in them. I get they are heirlooms and have a reputation. Apple is aiming for that reputation.
You underestimate the number of rich people in the world who would buy these things.
Personally, I'm waiting for the 'Will it blend?' video of an Edition, or a video of a teenager smashing their Edition with a sledgehammer.
Joking aside, if something's limited, why not say what the nature of that limitation is? By invitation only? Limited number, say 1000? Limited by the amount of gold available on planet Earth?
Joking aside, if something's limited, why not say what the nature of that limitation is? By invitation only? Limited number, say 1000? Limited by the amount of gold available on planet Earth?
Perhaps. I think that many are underestimating the amount rich people value their wealth. Those that are wealthy and stay wealthy, don't usually drop their money without getting some perceived value. I would argue that a $10,000 Rolex has far more value than a $10,000
Watch. First, there isn't an identical version for nearly 1/100th the price. Second, they hold their value, and with time, usually increase in value. I understand Apple is aiming for that, but they have a long ways to go. I think, overall, the Edition is just distracting people from the Watch and Sport. It is putting the watch in a bad light, making it seem laughable in many circles, and down right greedy in others.
----------
I agree. I actually doubt they have a limited number. They will make as many as people want to buy. Even if it is limited, limited doesn't mean valuable. It just means there are only a certain number out there.
Last edited:
Perhaps. I think that many are overestimating the amount rich people value their wealth. Those that are wealthy and stay wealthy, don't usually drop their money without getting some perceived value. I would argue that a $10,000 Rolex has far more value than a $10,000
I understand Apple is aiming for that, but they have a long ways to go. I think, overall, the Edition is just distracting people from the Watch and Sport. It is putting the watch in a bad light, making it seem laughable in many circles, and down right greedy in others.
----------
I agree. I actually doubt they have a limited number. They will make as many as people want to buy. Even if it is limited, limited doesn't mean valuable. It just means there are only a certain number out there.
There isn't an identical version of the Apple Watch Edition for 1/10th the price. Different materials and bands.
If you mean feature wise, same can be said of a Rolex.
Apple devices always hold their value far better than competition in the industry. I agree they may not be there yet, but they have to start somewhere. The Apple brand has enough klout. Those who are focusing on the Edition as the center of their bashing are the ones who would find something else to bash.
In other words, haters gonna hate.
Apple made a calculated risk with the Edition for generation one.
They could have waited until the next generation, when the worth and value of Apple Watch has been proven (if indeed it ever is), then introduced a premium version.
It was a bold step, and it'll be interesting to see how this plays out. Let us not forget that Apple products generally find their target market though, and previous products have had their fair share of detractors.
This doesn't mean that I personally like the Edition (I agree that it seems ridiculous), just that I wouldn't write it off early.
They could have waited until the next generation, when the worth and value of Apple Watch has been proven (if indeed it ever is), then introduced a premium version.
It was a bold step, and it'll be interesting to see how this plays out. Let us not forget that Apple products generally find their target market though, and previous products have had their fair share of detractors.
This doesn't mean that I personally like the Edition (I agree that it seems ridiculous), just that I wouldn't write it off early.
I am interested to see where we are in 6-12 months. I question if the Edition even makes it to gen 2. Looking at watch forums and hearing luxury department stores talk, they see it as a novelty, kind of a joke. Maybe they will be wrong. It isn't easy to be both mainstream and luxury at the same time.
EDIT: As for an identical model, subtract the $1000 or so in extra material, and you are still paying an over $8000 markup for the Edition. That is pretty extreme. I am not sure there is another product in the world with that percentage markup.
Perhaps. I think that many are overestimating the amount rich people value their wealth. Those that are wealthy and stay wealthy, don't usually drop their money without getting some perceived value. I would argue that a $10,000 Rolex has far more value than a $10,000
Yes, but there are also those who are, or want to project an image that they are, so rich they can literally BURN their money or FLUSH it down a toilet. Apple's pricing policy makes it clear that THEY are the ones Apple targets with this offer.
I don't think the hiss fit is for the fact that such people of bad taste exist and that they do what they do. They've more or less always been around. They've had their aftermarket gold plated Rolls Royces, toilet seats, jets, iPhones - you name it.
The hiss fit is with Apple for, in a blend of suicidal desperation and greed, selecting this nutty class as suitable advertisers for the validity of their new product.
And this is just plain wrong.
Try every luxury watch on the planet?
$10,000 Rolex doesn't have anywhere near $10,000 worth of materials. The markup is for the brand/luxury.
Many don't see Apple as there yet. I think history has shown they generally hit their mark. I don't think this will be any different, but perhaps I'm wrong.
You miss my point. I don't believe there exists a product line, in this case the
Watch product line, that has a 4285% markup (subtracting $2000 from the $17000 watch for material cost, which is generous) from it's least expensive entry to it most expensive. That has to be unprecedented. As a side note, I do not consider all the watches a company such as Rolex makes to be a single product line. Show me two watches, in the same line, with only differing materials that come anywhere close to that type of markup.They may not even sell a single Edition watch - but it got people talking. It's got everyone saying how only crazy people would spend that much whilst at the same time making them feel secretly smug that they've essentially got the same watch functionality wise but at a fraction of the price makes it possibly the most egalitarian watch going.
And that's what get's me most p****d off about everyone going on about how overpriced the Edition is. It would be understandable if that was the only Apple Watch offered - but it isn't. Apple isn't saying "Look, here's a watch but it's only for rich people" it's saying "Here's a sport watch, a regular watch and hey, if you really want to, here's a crazy expensive gold watch". They had a model at the keynote. You'd think, hey, model, fashion, glamour, money etc etc therefore they must be focusing on the glitzy gold watch to make the rest of us feel penniless and pathetic.
But they didn't. They had Christy Turlington sans makeup raising money for a good cause wearing a SS watch with sport band. They could've had a massive concert with Nicki Minaj and Kanye gyrating around the place singing about how much money they've got with three gold editions on each wrist, but they didn't. They kept it real, attainable, relatable.
Well, actually Christy Turlington Burns was wearing the fashion-chic blue modern buckle, but even that model is quite affordable at $749.
She's got a few then - was only going off her mini-site within the Apple.com site and she's got a white and a black sport band too. Fancy.