a) Why doesn't it count if it's not gold? If it's got a market at $4000 that's what it's worth, doesn't matter what metal they choose to make it out of. It's a $4000 piece of jewellery that will still be valuable in 20 years. Unlike the iToy watch accessory which will only be worth it's gold melt value in 3 years.
Because the reason for the cost of the one model is the gold. The steel model is $350. Find me a $350 Rolex, new...
b) I'd love to make a comment, but I can't even comprehend the twisted mind that would come up with than analogy or what you're even trying to say. The Gold iToy watch is marketed as jewellery on your wrist. So is the rolex. This is what apple said too, remember Jony telling Switzerland they were in a lot of trouble. It was a few days before 10 million Swiss people all laughed at Apple at once once the iToy watch was released.
It's all fun and games until you realize that Apple has higher sales per square foot of retail space than Tiffany & Co., its next nearest competitor...
My second point, however, is that if you really wanted to compare the Apple Watch to something, why are you comparing it to one of the least complex, cheapest Swiss luxury brands out there?
I mean, then why stop there? I think it's because people don't know enough about Swiss brands outside of Rolex and that there's the phenomenon of the $30,000 Millionaire we have to thank for perpetuating the narrow grasp of Swiss brands.
If you wanted to position your argument one way, you could say it's WAY more expensive than say, a Raymond Weil... also swiss, also has 18k solid gold. Costs much less than a Rolex. You could go in the other direction and compare it to a $20,000 Vacheron + Constantin that has an 18K case but leather strap and does absolutely nothing but tell time...
Yes, I can buy a steel watch that does nothing but tell time for $3750 .... How is that the most relevant comparable to a smartwatch?
That's like asking an appraiser to compare your house to every house on the market, rather than the ones that are comparable in size, neighborhood dynamics/amenities, etc.
From a financial or even logical perspective it's a patently absurd comparison. If what you want is a gold watch, Rolex will set you back around $30k. If what you want is a gold smartwatch... what other gold smartwatch is out there to compare it to?
But hey who cares about apples to apples... Pick whatever nonsensical comparison suits your presupposition I guess.
It's not as if those of us who can afford Rolexes are sitting here going, "Hmm, do I buy the Ferrari or the Volkswagen.... That Volkswagen has four wheels and a nice stereo, too, but it's a tenth the price!" People don't buy Rolexes or Ferraris or Gulfstream jets because they're investments or because they're "a better value" than an Apple ANYTHING.
People buy Rolexes because (surprise) they want other people to know they bought a Rolex. An Apple at ANY price does not fulfill that mission... Apple knows this, which is why they're not going to price it higher than $5k where you're in the realm of absurdly expensive watches people buy primarily so they can say that they can buy them.
Watch in its 2nd or 3rd generation (when the battery lasts longer and the watch doesn't constantly require an iPhone anymore) and I loved the look of the gold, as I personally never wear silver jewellery. It just doesn't look good on my complexion. 
