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 Makes First Australian Magazine Appearance Inside 'Elle'
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
You don't think any statements re the Apple watch are implicitly scoped to people who can afford a phone?
Nothing against the
Watch - I personally like it. Nor do I have anything against people who like fashion or read Elle or anything like that. It's simply that when I read things like the quote above I get all dizzy..
And I suppose b/c it's a 'world' I don't follow yet it's being integrated w/ a world I do (tech) and my brain is trying to divide by 0.. 
I've heard this point over and over on here, and I got to tell you; you're wrong.
Rolex and Omega are the top two sellers in the Swiss luxury watch segment and between them they get about one and a half million watches COSC certified every year.
That's just two brands finding over a million people a year willing to part with $8000 or more for a watch that 'no one wears.'
Go into any store from Walmart to Nordstrom and take a look and you'll see a watch counter with watches running from $9.99 to $500 or more. Macy's in the Mall of America just gutted their entire watch department and made it bigger, including expensive brands like Tag Heuer, Movado and a few others that commonly retail for more than a grand.
These stores don't waste that kind of retail space on products that no one buys or wears any more. They do all kinds of analysis on profit per square foot, and underperforming products are quickly shuffled out of the mix.
So, got to tell you, people do wear watches. They may be less popular among millennials, but there's still huge market for them. And who knows, maybe millennials rejected watches because of their limited functionality, and would be willing to wear a product that is more information filled.
Wow that's a big number with absolutely no context. What was that number 10 years ago? I bet it was even bigger.
Well come on, this is a fashion magazine. What they do is take a person, cake them in makeup, take hundreds of pictures of them, and then take one that turned out good and spend hours Photoshopping the crap out of it until it bears almost no resemblance to the original picture.
So I hardly think we should be surprised that a picture in a fashion magazine would be doctored.
But what they going to do, show the screen blank or with a low battery indicator on it? Post a picture of the model with a giant zit because she had a breakout that day?
Numbers 10 years ago are irrelevant to the statement 'nobody wears a watch TODAY'. This statement has now been debunked.
The statement 'LESS people wear a watch today than 10 years ago' was NOT what the OP was debunking.
I beg to differ. Apple have always pushed their products.
Don't you recall how many times you've seen bands like U2 rocking out with their iPods on; those iconic two color commercials?
And how many times did we see the MacBook Air in its thin glory, back when laptops were the size of a paving slab.
Then there's all the iPhone and iPad commercials.
In fact I'd argue that Apple love the hard sell on all their products. With this one they are trying to shape public perception that this isn't just a nerd toy like Google Glass.
You're right and he knows it. They aren't marketed as fashion accessories. But there's a reason no ads show the watch with the screen off. It's advertising. Advertising shows products in their best light. It would be stupid to show the watch with the screen dark. It's an ad, not a white paper.
You take an ad for an obscure phone from 2011 and say, "Sure seems like a lot of ads DO show phones as fashion accessories as well". Ha! Come on man. Be serious. A lot doesn't mean what you think it does.
You didn't need to reach so hard to find a valid reason for not showing the screen dark. It's advertising. Products are put in the best light in advertising. The objective is to make the product desirable enough for purchase. Apple wants to sell the watch. A blank screen doesn't serve that purpose at all.
Apple is putting it's product in the best light possible, looking the best it can, and that's exactly what they should be doing.
I'm sure there are some people out there who work in the sewers who probably wouldn't want one also. Maybe some deep sea divers. I don't think Apple ever claimed that they expected everyone on the planet to buy this product.
I agree. The market just isn't there anymore. And when that market for watches was there, the tech didn't exist.
Do you actually think anyone believes the OPs statement is literally true? The "nobody" is obviously hyperbolic. I saw at least a few people wearing watches on the subway today. I know it's not literally true.
When I hear "nobody wears watches today," I understand to mean that watch-wearing is at historical lows, and it is so low that that compared to the heyday of watch wearing it is as if nobody wears watches today.
Thus, historical context is quite important.
So, I am guessing the market Apple is going for rail thin, coked up models?
Because that is the only ads I have seen so far.
Everything points to this being a big failure but I know it will be huge, numbers-wise.
But if you thought iPad sales were lagging, wait to you get a load of this thing in a few years.
This closed garden approach is going to look archaic, especially in the smart watch market.
Good luck.
Because that is the only ads I have seen so far.
Everything points to this being a big failure but I know it will be huge, numbers-wise.
But if you thought iPad sales were lagging, wait to you get a load of this thing in a few years.
This closed garden approach is going to look archaic, especially in the smart watch market.
Good luck.
You're right and he knows it. They aren't marketed as fashion accessories. But there's a reason no ads show the watch with the screen off. It's advertising. Advertising shows products in their best light. It would be stupid to show the watch with the screen dark. It's an ad, not a white paper.
You take an ad for an obscure phone from 2011 and say, "Sure seems like a lot of ads DO show phones as fashion accessories as well". Ha! Come on man. Be serious. A lot doesn't mean what you think it does.
You didn't need to reach so hard to find a valid reason for not showing the screen dark. It's advertising. Products are put in the best light in advertising. The objective is to make the product desirable enough for purchase. Apple wants to sell the watch. A blank screen doesn't serve that purpose at all.
Apple is putting it's product in the best light possible, looking the best it can, and that's exactly what they should be doing.
Exactly,
Car adverts don't show their cars covered in mud, dust and fingerprints in some grotty multistory car park.
But that's what they'll be like a lot of the time!
People who wear Rolex or Omega (whether real or fake) do it to show off as a status symbol like driving a big Benz S class. Those same people who wear a Rolex trying to be a mack daddy aren't gonna get a iwatch. I also bet the majority of fashion women aren't gonna get the iwatch either since most women don't like geeky stuff.
The usually people who are first to get tech items are the fat dumpy looking dudes with the oversized Walmart shirts you might see at a Microcenter or comics book store and nobody cool will want to sport an iwatch to be like them, that's for sure.
Does this help? Revenue from 2007-2012? Couple that with the volume from the earlier post. You have units and dollars. This was the quickest thing I could find. Sales of watches fluctuate like everything else. Lately they're on the rise.
