Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
I couldn't even get to the watch table in the store near me because of the crowd. I feel like you haven't actually seen the watch table...

Every Apple table I 've been to at the four Apple stores in my area have always been the least busy spot. Many times no one is there. Other times, the few that are there are passing the time while waiting for a genius bar appt. and have no intention to buy.

So, while the apple watch table at your store may be busy, that's not exactly common.
 
I think Apple was trying to marry tech and fashion, and it’s a unique proposition given that Apple seems to be the best company to do that. It doesn’t seem to be working too well, so perhaps tech + fashion isn’t really a thing.
It's definitely seen as a fashion product as well and you would be surprised how focusing on that aspect helped it to appeal to less tech enthusiasts in the first year
 
haha..
Told you so...

Timmy is such a fool. Can't wait till he retires. This was a failure because the Apple watch has a limited market (only iphone users), and is not a revolutionary or a must need product.

If he included a whole assortment of health sensors it would have given the Apple watch a unique place in the world. But I still think those stores are a bad idea. Let's face it, the Apple watch is not a watch, but an iphone companion. They should be sold together, not separately.
 
Their attempt to enter the luxurious world of watches failed so it's expected they need to do that...esp after they discontinue the Watch Edition....
 
  • Like
Reactions: Soccertess
It was a low-risk experiment and helped get them some attention. Remember all the rumors about Apple patenting some special sort of ceramic gold alloy? My guess is that in the process they decided ceramic is a good material to work with.

A low risk experiment, but also a reality check , you do an experiment cause you have an expectation that there will be success. I think apple got more of a reality check in relation to smartpwatches than the apple edition.
 
That was the 38MM SS Link. Which, let's be honest, never had a huge audience anyway because it was more of a masculine look and more men went with the 42MM version of the same watch. BB didn't reduce the price on the Milanese Loop watch by much, but that one was more popular. I do think that Apple didn't sell as many watches as they hoped, but they never would've gotten to the S1/S2 watches if they'd had dismal sales.

The $949 to $249 example is definitely an outlier, but still, I picked up a base AW with a nice nylon band for $170 that was selling for $350 just weeks earlier. These sort of deep, 50%+ discounts - within basically a year or so of their release - are simply not normal for Apple products.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
haha..
Told you so...

Timmy is such a fool. Can't wait till he retires. This was a failure because the Apple watch has a limited market (only iphone users), and is not a revolutionary or a must need product.

If he included a whole assortment of health sensors it would have given the Apple watch a unique place in the world. But I still think those stores are a bad idea. Let's face it, the Apple watch is not a watch, but an iphone companion. They should be sold together, not separately.
To be fair, I don't think the solid gold Edition watches were Tim's idea and he looked quite embarrassed at the keynote when it was introduced.
 
Ok. Find a fitness device with GPS, a color OLED screen of around same size, touch screen, haptic feedback, heart rate monitor, water proof that is in same price range. It also needs to have bluetooth support and have 2 GB of storage for music. Can it get notifications? That would be a plus. It needs to cost $369 or less.

The vivoactive HR is close, with much lower resolution screen (205 x 148 pixels vs 272 x 340 - thats a 1/3 of the pixels of small Apple watch), no touch, not haptic, no music storage so it cannot power your headphones. So if you want music you need to buy a separate device. It is $269, not bad but its missing alot the Watch has. Now maybe it is better at the things you want but its not cheaper - its just less.

The point is, the market doesn't need a fitness tracker with an OLED screen and 2GB of music storage, notifications and a high resolution screen. Though wouldn't it be great if the iPhone had a high resolution OLED screen or *gasp* a macbook pro?
 
And if sales remain slow, what do they market it as then?
No idea but I think they're selling at a decent enough cllp. I think the issue is that everyone thought since it came from apple, it would sell millions upon millions. I think it was a mistake by Apple to position the AW as a piece of fashionable jewelry. The smart watch sector is still fairly young, and companies are still feeling their way around on what a smart watch is supposed to be (just compare Samsung, AW, and Fitbit)
[doublepost=1477069150][/doublepost]
At the same time, they still offer the stainless steel and Hermès watches. I always thought the most threatened category was the $500-1000 "mall watch" (e.g. Movado). For about the same price you get a watch plus all the fitness features, and with the Hermès you get top-quality leather.
They haven't fully abandoned the fashion aspect, but I think they realized that positioning as a fashion product did not generate the sales they hoped for.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
I think Apple was trying to marry tech and fashion, and it’s a unique proposition given that Apple seems to be the best company to do that. It doesn’t seem to be working too well, so perhaps tech + fashion isn’t really a thing.
I think tech and fashion is a thing insofar as we're talking about watch bands and diamond-up phone cases but I don't think it's a space Apple fits in. I really hope this little luxury experiment is over. I always hate to engage in "Steve Jobs never would have this that or the other..." but I really don't see him greenlighting a device at $10,000 that does the same thing as the $500 model. Let Hermes and Coach knock themselves out making pretty and expensive watch bands if they like but there is no reason to join in with exclusive models that are far outside the reach of Apple's typical customer.
 
Yup, Apple failed to show how it can be on the same footing as a Rolex or other high end product (it really isn't) and while apple had mentioned the fitness aspect in originally, it appears they're going all in on the fitness/health portion now.

I think Apple misses their snake oil salesman.
 
I think Apple was trying to marry tech and fashion, and it’s a unique proposition given that Apple seems to be the best company to do that. It doesn’t seem to be working too well, so perhaps tech + fashion isn’t really a thing.

Apple did manage to sell a lot of bands, apparently, so that part was a good idea. No doubt that even helped sell people on its rather boring (to me) digital watch styling.

Apple wasn't the first to try high fashion with a smartwatch, of course. I think Casio sold a gold Databank back in the 1980s.

With recent smartwatches, I'd say the 2012 I'm Watch, running custom Android with a curved capacitive screen, from fashion conscious Italy, went the luxury route first.

im-jewel.png


They had Sport models for $250, titanium for $900, and then they go into silver and gold, and even diamond encrusted, models from $2,000 to $20,000. You could even order one made of any materials for the case and band that you requested. Now that's a true luxury item.

2012_im_watch.PNG


Going back much further, it was IBM back in 2000 that really started the whole idea of "digital jewelry", with their concept where each piece was a fashionable part of the whole, from wrist display to earring headphones, to necklace microphone, and even an LED notification light on a finger ring.

2000_ibm_digital_jewelry.png


That is actually the kind of true fashion smartwatch innovation I would've expected from Apple, not just an iPod looking case with a swappable band.
 
Last edited:
It's not stupid when 10K to you is like 100 bucks to someone else. It's just a shopping lark.

People do stuff like that. Have you ever decided on a whim to book a suite in a luxury hotel instead of a regular room in a more modest hotel (but still quite nice) hotel down the street? People who spend money that way do this all the time. I am not a 10K on a watch type of gal (though I love a nice suite in a luxury hotel), but I know people who are. Too many Rolexes and Pateks out there tell me that not everyone is a serious watch shopper and people sometimes just buy stuff because it's trendy or will get them some attention.

apple didn't sell those $10k watches
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
The smartwatch is still the future, but it's hard to make something like this popular overnight. Especially when the technology isn't quite there.

The Apple Watch is more like the first mobile phones (1980s) rather than the first iPhone/iPad/iPod. It's a completely new product which you must carry in public, and a lot of people will assume you're a show-off with too much money if you own one.
 
what could possibly make a watch cost 10,000? i don't even understand why the base model costs $400. this is a $200 device at most. and all the gold they added shouldn't make it more than a grand

Why does a Rolex cost so much? I mean, is their stuff really that much nicer than a Casio?

See how that sounds? :D
 
Ok. Find a fitness device with GPS, a color OLED screen of around same size, touch screen, haptic feedback, heart rate monitor, water proof that is in same price range. It also needs to have bluetooth support and have 2 GB of storage for music. Can it get notifications? That would be a plus. It needs to cost $369 or less.

The vivoactive HR is close, with much lower resolution screen (205 x 148 pixels vs 272 x 340 - thats a 1/3 of the pixels of small Apple watch), no touch, not haptic, no music storage so it cannot power your headphones. So if you want music you need to buy a separate device. It is $269, not bad but its missing alot the Watch has. Now maybe it is better at the things you want but its not cheaper - its just less.
Don't forget AW has Apple Pay with it. I use Apple Pay a lot here in NYC.
[doublepost=1477075504][/doublepost]
A little check of reality there for Apple in regards to Apple Watch Edition.
I actually think Apple had no intention of keeping the edition model around. It just seemed like a marketing tool for celebs.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.