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

[pgiguere1]

Do all stainless steel models automatically come with the sapphire glass ?

Yup, and they come with a ceramic back too.

Personally I don't think the Sport's aluminium case looks bad. What I can't stand however is the rubber strap. I wonder if it'll be possible to buy a metal/leather strap from the non-Sport series and attach it to the Sport.

 

[bmauter]

The Rolex watch buyer knows his watch will maintain its value for decades. There something "timeless" about luxury watches. They don't go obsolete.

Smart watches will look dated in a couple of years.

Yep. They'll just buy another in a couple years though. At $4k, they can afford it. Plus, there will be some value left in it because of the gold if they choose to sell it.

 

[Mainsail]

Ok, so you pay $5K for a smart watch that needs an iPhone to perform most of it's functions. Then, a few years down the road you upgrade your iPhone, which comes with the latest version of iOS and find out that the the watch is no longer compatible.

That would be kind of a bummer!

 

[Cayden]

I'm super excited about this. I've wanted the space grey stainless steel since day one and have not been happy about the reports of it being $1,000*. I'll happily purchase one for $500 on launch day

 

[kingtj]

Depends.... who can really say?

I completely agree with you, except for the fact it's tough to predict where Apple will take this watch thing, going forward.

I'm sure the battery can be swapped out in one of these watches somehow (just like people have done with iPod Classics and other products). Surely, if you purchased the $4000-5000 gold version, you'd have justification to spend $150 or what-not to have a battery swap done for you on it, if it started wearing out in a couple years?

IMO, it's still kind of an unknown how Apple will support the watch in years to come. Since it acts as, essentially, a remote display and remote controller for the iPhone it's paired with -- the "brains" are all in the phone. Maybe the iPhones will get upgraded for many years to come with software that can still work quite nicely with older iWatches?

Right now, I side with the people who would only cautiously buy the very cheapest version of one of these watches, and see how it works out after 2-3 years. But I think Apple has an awareness that watch sales are a bit different than computer/phone/tablet gear, and can't just be obsoleted as quickly (as they're part jewelry items for buyers). Could be wrong -- but if I am, I think it will really make future sales tank.

I have a Tag watch I bought 5-6 years ago for around $2500. If I sold it, I could probably get roughly $1500 for it now as its in near mint condition. An Apple watch with a degenerating battery that will be obsolete within 2 years will lose 95% of its value in 5 years.

I seriously don't understand the purpose of the Apple Watch...and I've owned 6 Macs, 4 Apple TVs, 7 iPhones, 5 iPods and 5 iPads.

 

[flyinmac]

I'll wait for the plastic "C" version.

 

[Paradoxally]

This would only be worthwhile if one were to buy the gold watch and then when Apple release upgrades to the watch, you only needed to upgrade the watch itself (the body, which could go for $350) and you get to keep the strap for n iterations. Same with more expensive straps.

If not, it will flop. No one in their right mind would make a $4000 purchase every year.

 

[mr.steevo]

$4000 Apple watch?

I'll take a Grand Seiko, thanks.

 

[Apple blogger]

A solid gold Rolex for $5000? In what dream world do you live where they're that cheap? Fairly certain the floor for any gold Rolex has been north of $20,000 for a long time.

And there's a reason for that. That much gold is. not. cheap. A $4000 gold Apple watch isn't something I'd ever be interested in, but the reality is if they managed to drive the price that low it'd be unheard of in the watch industry.

Nooo Not a watch.. I meant buying a piece of gold like pure gold.. Not a watch

 

[farmkittie]

Oh no. I wanted the gold watch style. I like the "silver" one in the picture for this article. Is that what the stainless could look like? If so, I like it as much as the gold.

There isn't a chance I would pay $4K for the gold watch. If I bought it at that price, every time I looked at it I would think: I could have gotten a fully loaded MacBook Pro for that money and still had a little left over.

 

[iZac]

ahahahaha ... no.

I'll stick with my $150 6th Gen iPod nano and just pretend it has a bluetooth connection to my phone, thanks.

 

[psylence2k]

who at Apple saw a hole in the market for 'gold' things?

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.

Maybe I'm wrong but I thought I remembered reading that the whole "gold" thing Apple started implementing was moreso for the Chinese and Indian markets that have a very high affinity for it.

 

[mvmanolov]

Forget Rolex, any mid range timepiece with a descent or even just interesting movement will hold better value than the gold Watch...

and really for 5k you can get an entry level auto cartier... Sure it's not gold but you can pass it down the generations..

The problem with the watch is that it can never be what watches are very good at... being timeless!

That being said however a 300-500 price tag does not try to compete with watches that are being passed down and to be quite honest i have to agree with the previous post that the gold version customer is probably someone with a few timepieces in their collection making a impulse buy of something they don't really need to save up for... more like a "why not buy" than the "i'll leave this to my kids buy"....

 

[Alimar]

Geesh! Now I won't have enough money to buy any of those engagement and wedding dresses that flooded the MR forums earlier this evening!

 

[Candlelight]

I'm more interested in the Microsoft Band at this stage. The Apple watch, while I was keenly interested, just seems silly now.

 

[SusanK]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

$4,000 for a glorified iPhone accessory that has to be charged every night and will be obsolete in 2 years. AHHHHHHHHHH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

A watch for shareholders

 

[April Knight]

People need to realize the Edition line is not meant for Joe Schmoe consumer. It's meant for somebody willing to plop down 4k to have the top of the line every generation (celebrities, other rich folk, etc).

 

[leenak]

Yup, and they come with a ceramic back too.

Personally I don't think the Sport's aluminium case looks bad. What I can't stand however is the rubber strap. I wonder if it'll be possible to buy a metal/leather strap from the non-Sport series and attach it to the Sport.

I can't imagine doing activities with a non rubber strap. I only have interest in rubber straps myself, but I will probably not buy it for a year or so.

And yes, straps are probably interchangeable.

 

[yourtoys7]

LOL, battery last 1 day, not water proof, I'll pass...

 

[mgmusicman94]

I wonder if it'll be possible to buy a metal/leather strap from the non-Sport series and attach it to the Sport.

The keynote made it seem like that was the case. I think the matte finish on the sport model would actually look good with the brushed look on the link bracelet.

 

[brock2621]

I can skip on an iPad upgrade for a year and grab the stainless one. Lookin forward to it!

 

[scbn]

Obviously the Apple Watch is not for everyone. Some people will love it, others will hate it. I think that's why Apple put it under 'other' products category.

As for depreciation, I do not believe that they will refresh the hardware every year. Battery and software will be replaced or updated. If they sell you something in the 5k range, they will have to consider retaining values over time.

 

[Vodka]

Ok, so, how much RAM does it have?

 

[mgmusicman94]

You have to know, in your heart, that Apple will put a groove into the straps so they can only be used on the watch they want you to use it on.



You simply must know that.

I see where you're coming from, but they'd also make so much in accessory sales if they allowed people with the cheaper watch to get the nicer bands! Right now people pay for $30-$40 cases for their phones and get new cases all the time. The bands would be pure profit.

 

[nagromme]

"may" and "could." This is not information.

Anyway... if Apple doesn't have a buyback program, someone else will.

And there will be plenty of 3rd-party bands too.

(Didn't someone calculate that the gold alone would cost over $10,000?)