In fairness, I don't think you can say that until the Watch ships. However, from what I've seen thus far, I think you will most likely be proved correct.
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 Pricing to Reportedly Start at $500 for Stainless Steel, $4,000 for Gold
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
In fairness, I don't think you can say that until the Watch ships. However, from what I've seen thus far, I think you will most likely be proved correct.
I think the same.
I do see the utility of the iWatch
but wonder if the required iPhone makes most of its functionality redundant.
I said it earlier, will post again since that was pages back. The $500 price does make sense if the aluminum one is $350.
Here's why: the aluminum one @ $350 comes with a plastic band. It's reasonable to expect the stainless accessory bands to retail for $99. So if one had an aluminum watch w/ stainless band it would cost them $449. That makes the price difference for the stainless face vs the aluminum face $50, which makes sense because it costs more than aluminum at wholesale and is also more durable.
Or you could buy Beats headphones for about the same money.
True. Personally, I'd spend $350 on a set of headphones before I'd buy the Apple Watch. But I'm a music freak.
My arguments isn't that collecting stuff to sell many years later is a good strategy. Apologies if that wasn't clear. But I've seen some stupid numbers in ebay. I don't doubt a mint first gen iPod would fetch a grand right now.
Apple is hot right now. So it stands to reason their popular "originals" are inflated. In a TMNT collector (because I enjoy it, not because I want a nest egg) and orices are stupid right now since turtles are more popular than they ever have been with the fantastic new animated series. That will die down. As will Apple's reign. I'm sure of that.
As said there are a multitude of sport watches at the $300+ level. My FR 620 w/ HRM cost $400 and that was with a 10% discount. Polar, Suunto, Timex also make watches in that price range so not sure how a $350 Apple Watch is grossly overpriced. Please explain your reasoning.
I do see the utility of the iWatch
I think it's pretty obvious that they do. The watch puts select functions on your wrist and some will no doubt be cool. Following directions when walking without having to pull one's phone from one's pocket is great. But is that worth $350? Maybe you really care about counting calories and steps. Maybe you don't want to fish around in your purse for your phone when you get a new text message. But are any of these features really that compelling? I can think of much better ways to spend $350+, but to each his own.
I think the Apple Watch will be very interesting product launch, one that will have profound effects on how Apple is viewed. If it flops, it will reinforce the narrative that Apple can't innovate without Jobs. I personally plan to dump most of my stock as the release nears. Let the hype machine build. Either way, I make a profit, so I'll be happy. But I think there's a very good chance the watch will flop big time and that will seriously damage Apple's credibility. If it isn't a HUGE hit, it will knock them down quite a few pegs.
Don't forget the basic stainless steel model also comes with a plastic band (as does the gold Edition). The leather bands, steel bracelet and Milanese band options are bound to cost more, even on the more expensive models.
The difference between stainless steel and aluminium models will still be $150 with a like-for-like band, not the $50 you are trying to make it.
These watches will become ornaments all too fast, with price depreciation following it down.
Manual-winder wristwatches will experience a surge in popularity when people discover a quick few twists of the crown lasts longer than an iCharge, errrrr, iWatch.
Manual-winder wristwatches will experience a surge in popularity when people discover a quick few twists of the crown lasts longer than an iCharge, errrrr, iWatch.
For this to be successful, Apple has to sell A LOT of them. Far more than your average sport watch probably sells. I don't think that kind of market exists. Do you have to charge your FR 620 every night too? I'll admit, I'm not a big watch guy, but I took a quick look at Polar's site and I can get a sport watch WITH GPS for $250. So yeah, the Apple Watch without GPS that requires nightly charging and is dependent upon an iPhone in order to be remotely useful DOES seem overpriced compared to the competition in my mind. And I'd bet most of those sport watches are waterproof too...
Last edited:
If I'm going to spend $4-5k on a watch (I haven't worn a watch regularly in at least a decade)... my decision is going to be between something along the lines of Bell & Ross or IWC.
Obviously there are people out there that are going to drop $4-5k on a gold iGadget, but I would be surprised if that purchase was ever in lieu of a quality mechanical time piece purchase.
It's a bit like saying that I bought a smart phone instead of a pocket watch. While both tell you the time and reside in your pocket when not in use, I didn't buy a phone instead of a pocket watch or vice versa, I happen to own not only a smart phone, but several antique pocket watches.
Obviously there are people out there that are going to drop $4-5k on a gold iGadget, but I would be surprised if that purchase was ever in lieu of a quality mechanical time piece purchase.
It's a bit like saying that I bought a smart phone instead of a pocket watch. While both tell you the time and reside in your pocket when not in use, I didn't buy a phone instead of a pocket watch or vice versa, I happen to own not only a smart phone, but several antique pocket watches.
I don't know how you can set pricing at say $5000 and tell everyone this is comparable to a quality Swiss timepiece i.e. Rolex etc. The Apple Watch has no history, no demand (as of yet) and no clear target audience. You can't compare this to my Rolex Submariner for example with it's intricate, delicate but robust engine and decades of improvements. My Sub has been through two wars, dive & jump schools and looks just as good as the day I purchased it. ($3800). I'm going to jump on board and grab the fitness version so I'm a fan, but when we see the bill of materials break down that says the total cost of parts is $125, I'll have a hard time justifying the $5k selling price.(gold version)
Happens with every new product or update lol. But $500 makes sense, didn't Apple say the
Sport watch would start at $350? Or was that a rumor as well?
Happens with every new product or update lol. But $500 makes sense, didn't Apple say the
The $350 starting price came from Tim Cook in the keynote, the $500 and $4,000 price points in this article are the rumours.
Other than some hearsay about what Jony Ive might have said, no one from Apple is comparing it to a Swiss timepiece. Forum posters and the media are the ones making that leap.
Apple is simply going to say, "we've made a great little computing device for your wrist. Some of them are made of gold, which is expensive."
They aren't expecting timepiece aficionados to dump their handmade watches for the Apple Watch.
You're right. The
Watch isn't an accessory, it's a necessity and will be lauded in the annals of history right there with penicillin and the light bulb! :roll eyes:Wow, some people have really drunk the cool aid...
I would have to think, even though Apple's aggressive with their pricing, this 5k one would have to come down take time... for just an accessory...
For a computer, i would say 4-5K would be ok, but not for something you need an iPhone for, since it does the exact thing as a $300 one...
You get Gold.. I guess people wanna go for that... instead of jewelery give a smart smart instead.. I dunno, will that fly ?
For a computer, i would say 4-5K would be ok, but not for something you need an iPhone for, since it does the exact thing as a $300 one...
You get Gold.. I guess people wanna go for that... instead of jewelery give a smart smart instead.. I dunno, will that fly ?
That and the fact that if you want to get really picky, Rolex is the bottom of the barrel on Swiss watches.... it's the populist brand. Solid gold Rolex? Starts around $20k now that the new designs all use solid machined center links adding a ton of mass to the volume of gold in even their "entry" level Oyster series bracelets.
You're never going to get the "real" watch snobs to drop their timepieces, who are are all about Cartier, Longines, Patek Philippe, Vacheron + Constantin, Concorde, etc. HOWEVER, they might add it to their collection, however, because $4k is a fart in the wind to someone who can drop $350-750k on a Patek....
I stand corrected - solid gold
Thanks, I checked online and it's solid gold, the problem is it houses technology that is outdated as soon as it's released in the market because it's a computer.
Also with Apple, almost every 1 generation product is never that good and updated with more features that could not get to market in time. For example, iPod 1, iPad 1 (no camera for face time), Itouch 1 (no speakers or front facing camera) and even ipad 3 (1st generation retina, needed a better processor).
Don't get me wrong, I'm a big Apple supporter, I have iPods, itouches, iPads and 2 MacBooks but I think Apple is really wrong with an expense watch.
I collect mechanical a Swiss watches and wear a digital watch as only a trash around watch and a Fitbit. I may even consider the Microsoft band due to all the added features.
Thanks, I checked online and it's solid gold, the problem is it houses technology that is outdated as soon as it's released in the market because it's a computer.
Also with Apple, almost every 1 generation product is never that good and updated with more features that could not get to market in time. For example, iPod 1, iPad 1 (no camera for face time), Itouch 1 (no speakers or front facing camera) and even ipad 3 (1st generation retina, needed a better processor).
Don't get me wrong, I'm a big Apple supporter, I have iPods, itouches, iPads and 2 MacBooks but I think Apple is really wrong with an expense watch.
I collect mechanical a Swiss watches and wear a digital watch as only a trash around watch and a Fitbit. I may even consider the Microsoft band due to all the added features.
Last edited:
Thanks, that's what I thought. So POSSIBLY a $150 markup for the small
Stainless - assuming the $350 is for the smaller screen Sport.Seems plausible. It will interesting to see the price structure and how much markup the larger screen will command.
I have a Plantronics Edge earpiece and I have more reasons to use it over a watch. With the ear piece I have audio caller ID, I can make a call using my voice, I can listen to music without my phone, I can ask Siri to read my texts to me, I can get directions spoken to me without looking at my phone. To me, an earpiece is more of an accessory to a phone than a watch.
Even with jogging or riding my bike, I rather have the earpiece to listen to music and receive a phone call or even listen to a text. I don't have to take my eyes off of what I am doing.
I don't see a point in a smart watch. It's not really that smart at all. It's just a watch that has some functions that you can already do with the phone that you have to be near to to use in the first place. and if you're holding something it's pointed down so you can't see it anyway.
Even with jogging or riding my bike, I rather have the earpiece to listen to music and receive a phone call or even listen to a text. I don't have to take my eyes off of what I am doing.
I don't see a point in a smart watch. It's not really that smart at all. It's just a watch that has some functions that you can already do with the phone that you have to be near to to use in the first place. and if you're holding something it's pointed down so you can't see it anyway.
No one forces you buy AWatch.. you can wear your 5000 dollar mechanical Tags with mechanism unchanged from 19th century.. and let others enjoy their 500 dollars modern time and communication devices ala AppleWatch
That's not how pricing works. I'm a finance analyst for a software company and I'm involved in the pricing process... It's an exercise in analyzing what the market will pay when you take into account competitive and intrinsic factors, e.g. Apple's brand could possibly carry a $4k watch, Motorola? Not if they made it out of diamonds and platinum.... Nobody outside Japan wants to buy a $75,000 Toyota which is why the Lexus brand was created out of it.
Maybe, but then look at Vertu and practically everything made by Richemont S.A. and LVMH S.A., two luxury conglomerates that make billions doing absolutely nothing but catering to that obscenely overpriced market... Apple's brand is, in consumer electronics, probably the only brand that comes close to the kind of brand image that LVMH, Richemont and Kering (formerly PPR) can command.... and their analysts probably did a lot of work to arrive at that $4k price point, much more so than sitting around on a message board and throwing around anecdotes.
Last edited: