Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Watch Pricing to Reportedly Start at $500 for Stainless Steel, $4,000 for Gold

I hope all of you who said you won't buy one really won't buy one so I can actually get my stainless steel apple watch on launch day.
 
It isn't, actually...

kingofwale said:
THis is a joke right??

You can't replace RAM and Battery in Apple computer, phone and music device, but you can do it to Apple watch? ;)
Click to expand...

I have several stainless steel Japanese digital watches with lifetime warranties and had one of them fail. They actually replace the internals. They ask if an actual qualified horologist/jeweler is in your area to to the repair and if so, send the internals for them to replace. If not, you can send the watch back to them and they repair and return the same to you with new "guts".

This isn't a super large outfit and are able to do this. It would not be a stretch to believe that a Multi-billion dollar multinational in this space selling a watch, made like a watch, would not do the same.

The funny thing is that they referred to said internals as "clockwork". I guess technically it was, but it seemed odd to refer to that sort of tech as such...

-K
 
Not going to read 10 pages of comments but from what I understand, a large chunk of the $4k would be material costs ie the watch will still contain a large amount of gold which will hold its value in line with the price of gold at the time.
 
it's too much the difference between stainless steel and gold..maybe it will be 500$ with 1500$ for gold.
 
DTphonehome said:
Stainless price sounds right. Still don't see the rationale behind gold, as typically gold watches are heirloom type pieces, and an Apple watch will be obsolete very quickly. But i imagine they don't expect it to be a big seller. Maybe just an aspirational flagship.
Click to expand...

well, it's gold.. gold doesn't go obsolete.
(as in-- after it goes obsolete, it's not like your gold apple watch is going to sit in the corner and collect dust for a few years when you finally just throw it out)
 
$5000 for a 12-core Xeon mobile workstation, yes. $4000 for a throwaway gadget, no.
 
They create the market. It *might* be $3,000 in Gold if not plated. It doesn't matter. They create the market and the allure with the price.

It's the Apple exclusive club. It's the guy who can buy next years convertible AMG Mercedes versus you and your 10-year old Hyundai.

It's a game people. Play it or don't. It's your money. Or is it theirs?
 
freddiecable said:
I think apple is playing it right here.

1. they start of with differentiation (unlike iphone).

2. they are targeting the tech market, the sport/health market and the luxury market at the same time. there are quite many people that can pay 4000 USD just to have the gold iwatch. and can you imagine the margins on that watch? and - apple has nothing to loose on also addressing that market right? See it as PR if you wish.

But - I agree with other sceptical readers. The watch will look dated as soon as a slim'er Watch is released. And since it is quite much focus on function rather than 'jewelery' value will go down. But do you remember when Swatch watches went up in value? Last but not least. How on earth can they release Watch without a GPS?

Oh and btw - i'm not solid for 4000USD watch. But 500 is not a problem and i will get one :)
Click to expand...

Because the GPS would kill the watch battery in 4h if used all the time (especially on the smallest one).
 
I'm completely sidelined as far as Apple watch is concerned. Even regular watches I dont wear. The fancy, expensive watches appear more of an encumbrance dominating the wrist, waiting to get caught on something or out there about to get impacted by a hard surface.
 
FieldingMellish said:
I'm completely sidelined as far as Apple watch is concerned. Even regular watches I dont wear. The fancy, expensive watches appear more of an encumbrance dominating the wrist, waiting to get caught on something or out there about to get impacted by a hard surface.
Click to expand...

That's why saphire is there... But you can still pick up a smaller one if you think they'too large. The small one is actually smaller than many current men's watch. Maybe watches are just not for you.
 
I seriously always thought the Apple Watch Sport was going to be more expensive than the Apple Watch :confused: it just seems like it goes Apple Watch, Apple Watch Sport, Apple Watch Edition. Cheapest to most expensive. I just thought the sport version having the higher durability meant that it would cost more. I guess it doesn't make sense to most people, but that's just the way I see it. I would think the Apple Watch would be the base model and they'd go up from there, but I guess the Apple Watch could be the middle tier and the Sport is the cheaper alternative and the Edition is the expensive/luxury alternative?
 
levitynyc said:
Not without an iPhone, it can't.
Click to expand...

I think that is the main problem. It is not the price. Yes, I would rather spend this money on a <insert any luxury watch in that price range here>, but the problem really is the fact it needs the iPhone. Eventually software updates will turn the watch into a paperweight.

I got a $300 watch from my parents when I left Uni. That was Jan 31, 1996. Changed battery this weekend and currently wearing it.

The Apple watch is for the bin after that time.

HAVING SAID THAT. A friend of mine is minted, they spent more money on rubbish so I am sure his wife doesn't mind spending $5-10k on a gadget and throw it away again. She had an iPhone 3G Gold plated back in the day and smashed it a week after. Got a replacement the next day and gold plated again the weeks after.

So whilst most here may not agree, most people here aren't probably from the clientele who'd buy this but I am sure there is a market for it.
 
flyinmac said:
You forgot your rose colored glasses. It's not that it wears off. It's that the watch changes with age. As you wear it, it will magically transform from gold to silver to steel to aluminum to classic black (plastic).

If by chance the entire surface doesn't change at once, it's not a defect.... It's the special edition metallic rainbow version. Select users will be randomly chosen to receive this special edition.
Click to expand...

heh.. sounds like you have a lot of experience with cheap gold watches.
:)
 
Keirasplace said:
That's why saphire is there... But you can still pick up a smaller one if you think they'too large. The small one is actually smaller than many current men's watch. Maybe watches are just not for you.
Click to expand...

My 1996 Citizen Titanium has sapphire glass. Guess what, titanium casing and band scratch free after all that time. Glass also. Crown which has gold plating -scratched to bits :) There will always be components which can be damaged or scratched.

Doesn't stop me wearing them. But yea ... watches nowadays are pointless. But so is driving a supercar at 55mph speed limit :)
 
What a farce. But I suppose the fanboys will rush out and buy them. Or Apple will sell them to Karl Lagerfeld...
 
It is a good decision of Apple to release a gold version. Many celebrities will buy the gold Apple Watch and this will boost the sales of the cheaper watches. I think that most celebrities are already Apple fans, so they will definitely get one.
 
Keirasplace said:
Stainless, even good one, is 50 time ess expensive than gold. That's why. Plus it sells to a different demo, so you pay extra for that.
Click to expand...

Sorry but a rolex gold watch has not so much difference price than the stainless steel one...with the same mechanism..so where is your point?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back