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
Hamilton Jazzmaster Viewmatic -> love the name. I guess Samsung hired the guy responsible for that naming convention for their mobile division.
Two more data points to pricing:
Jawbone just announced its newest activity tracker, the UP3. It will retail for $179, and measure HR (not constant), skin temp, respiration in addition to the other UP features. Like the other UP models it does not have a screen.
Jaybird announced its first activity tracker, Reign. It will retail for $199, and it's main selling feature is that it measures more activities than most other trackers, including swimming (100% waterproof -- to what depth I don't know, I suspect not more than a few feet). It does not have a screen, but does have progress lights like the Fitbit Flex.
Like most fitness trackers, to get the intended use of of them you must have a smart phone. Also these two, in line with almost all other fitness trackers, do not have GPS and cannot hook into GPS from a synced phone.
Another $150-170 buys you a color touch screen and being able to discretely do quick tasks like notifications, messaging, Apple Pay, music app control, and expanded utility with support for whatever ideas 3rd party developers dream up.
Whether that extra $ is worth it so someone is personal, but I think its a hard argument to make to suggest the entry Apple Watch is "overpriced," as many are saying here. It's not inexpensive, agreed. It's not for everyone; nothing is. But the price is neither out of range with what other sport bands sell for nor unaffordable, especially considering this is an Apple product, not a value brand.
Jawbone just announced its newest activity tracker, the UP3. It will retail for $179, and measure HR (not constant), skin temp, respiration in addition to the other UP features. Like the other UP models it does not have a screen.
Jaybird announced its first activity tracker, Reign. It will retail for $199, and it's main selling feature is that it measures more activities than most other trackers, including swimming (100% waterproof -- to what depth I don't know, I suspect not more than a few feet). It does not have a screen, but does have progress lights like the Fitbit Flex.
Like most fitness trackers, to get the intended use of of them you must have a smart phone. Also these two, in line with almost all other fitness trackers, do not have GPS and cannot hook into GPS from a synced phone.
Another $150-170 buys you a color touch screen and being able to discretely do quick tasks like notifications, messaging, Apple Pay, music app control, and expanded utility with support for whatever ideas 3rd party developers dream up.
Whether that extra $ is worth it so someone is personal, but I think its a hard argument to make to suggest the entry Apple Watch is "overpriced," as many are saying here. It's not inexpensive, agreed. It's not for everyone; nothing is. But the price is neither out of range with what other sport bands sell for nor unaffordable, especially considering this is an Apple product, not a value brand.
Suuuure, because athletes, pro, amateur, weekend, whatever, can't learn by knowing things like pace, cadence, HR, VO2 Max.
I think anyone who makes a statement like you make probably most resembles it.
You know, these forums have really become an uncomfortable place to hang out the last couple of years. I keep asking myself why I waste my time here. It's really a shame that there are many that just hurl around insults and snarky comments. And honestly, it's infectious and I've caught myself doing it to.
It's sad, but I think I'm done with this place.
It's not aimed at people like you. It's not even aimed at people on $200k a year who like nice watches. It's not aimed at well-off men who like to show off to their bosses. Apple Watch "Edition" is aimed at people who make $10 million a year and have instagram pages. It's aimed at Kim Kardashian, Anna Wintour and everyone in Vogue because they'll easily throw $5000 on a watch that won't hold value without even thinking about it and every person who sees them wearing it will buy the equivalent stainless steel one to be like them.
This is just how branding works. And trust me, it will work.
You're entitled to your opinion even if it is wrong.
As for people being a 'moron' trying to get healthy, I'm not sure what to say about that. The weight loss industry in the US alone is a $60+ Bn industry. Then there's tens of billions more in health and fitness, fitness aids, and so on.
Then there's the market for gadget people, Apple fans, and watch collectors.
By the time you consider the mass appeal in so many different segments, it's not hard to see why people would consider spending on the cheaper models.
Just because you don't see it, doesn't mean it is the truth. It may not be the next big thing, but they will sell millions of them, I'll bet money on that with you any day of the week.
Yeah, but the $4K unit is not for you. You are not the intended customer base.
They are aiming this at people with millions of dollars, actors, rappers, singers, reality TV stars, lottery winners, people with more money than sense.
High net worth people are not thinking about buying a used Rolex with the desperate hope it will appreciate in value or hold its value.
These people would buy this in gold just because they can, because they like to flaunt their riches.
In some cultures of Asia, gold has significant meaning too, so they will be prepared to spend stupid money for what it means to them.
So normal people will have to make that judgement call if they want to blow that kind of money. But the real buyers are the same kind of people who buy seats in first class, or don't even think about taking a private plane to wherever they are going. They certainly don't have to budget for such a small (to them) purchase.
Apple Watch Pricing to Reportedly Start at $500 for Stainless Steel, $4,000 f...
I agree with you but I think it's a stretch to think that a large portion of those people will want this watch.
Most people who can afford very expensive watches will prefer to keep wearing their very expensive watches rather than this apple watch.
Although some may spring for one just for novelty sake, I think that will be a small proportion among the very wealthy (for instance, young techy or young trendy among the very wealthy).
There's certainly going to be a market for these things but it certainly doesn't have the broad appeal among well to do like a 2014 Audemars Piguet Royal oak offshore 42mm models might.
And I say this as someone who has purchased several entry level high end wwatches last two years and has discussed the Apple watch with watch collectors whose watch collection should be worth over a million dollars.
I agree with you but I think it's a stretch to think that a large portion of those people will want this watch.
Most people who can afford very expensive watches will prefer to keep wearing their very expensive watches rather than this apple watch.
Although some may spring for one just for novelty sake, I think that will be a small proportion among the very wealthy (for instance, young techy or young trendy among the very wealthy).
There's certainly going to be a market for these things but it certainly doesn't have the broad appeal among well to do like a 2014 Audemars Piguet Royal oak offshore 42mm models might.
And I say this as someone who has purchased several entry level high end wwatches last two years and has discussed the Apple watch with watch collectors whose watch collection should be worth over a million dollars.
So on point. No one who is reading Macrumors is the target demographic for the Edition watch. Those folks you mention will get the watch, maybe several, and a few bands. The wives of rich men will get the watch, as will a few of their more pampered daughters. As you point out, you won't get the watch to show off to your Boss. But your Boss (the one who doesn't work anymore, but still owns the Company) might get the watch to show off to you or his friends.
It will also make the Stainless Steel and Aluminum versions sitting next to it at the Apple store look like a bargain. That is another way that marketing works.
I guess time will tell.
For me though, I just don't find gold attractive. Try going into a jewelry store these days, all the wedding and engagement rings are white gold or platinum. No one is buying yellow gold these days, at least not in the US.
So for me the problem is this; I don't aspire to a gold watch. Even if stainless was $500 and the gold was $501, other than scrap value of the gold, I would not pay to have it. Even if it were the same price.
This is a flop either way you look at it.the people that have the money for this watch would rather buy a high end watch and not need to brag about it.
I saw a guy wearing a platinum rolex day date blue face and had to mention to him what an amazing time piece he was wearing and looked at me and said you are the first to notice it.
Funny part is its a 80 k watch that looks like stainless steel but made from platinum so the people you are talking about would look at this apple watch and just laugh at it.
You're completely missing the point. It's not aimed at people who like watches. Or relatively rich people. It's aimed at super rich celebrities. $5000 is nothing to some people and those people tend to have Instagrams. They don't worry about "will this still work in 5 years" they buy it just to wear it and then throw it away when the new one comes out. Apple doesn't need to sell this version to a lot of people. If they sold 1000 of them to 1000 celebrities it would be worth producing it because then those celebrities will wear it and then their fans will want it and they'll buy the stainless steel/aluminum ones and buy millions of them. It's genius branding and the fact that they're producing something so unbelievably high end shows just how much they're determined to make this work.
I can understand why this might go over the heads of a lot of people on this site. We're all kinda geeky. I'm guessing some of us are pretty stereotypically geeky and genuinely aren't affected by image or lifestyle branding, but trust me. Spend 5 minutes checking out the 'explore' tab in Instagram. The vast majority of the world lusts after everything the ridiculous people on the yachts have. Kim Kardashian will wear the gold one once and her 15 million followers will all ask "where did she get that" then they'll buy the stainless steel one. I guarantee we'll see "plate your Apple Watch and make it gold" services springing up all over the shop when they release it.
This is not a tech product. This is a fashion product. Price and function will mean virtually nothing for most people. Apple would never want someone like you or me wearing Apple Watch Edition. Unless you're Harry Styles, Anna Wintour or Kim Kardashian they don't really give a **** what you think.
Honestly, it's really arrogant of you to state with such certainty that it will be a 'flop' when your guess is as good as anyone else.
It does seem odd to me that a company like Apple would invest so heavily in this space if they didn't think it could be a success. I'd like to think they have some people who are smarter than you and I who make these decisions.
You also seem to assume all rich people are the same. Warren Buffet doesn't live in a mansion, not even a very big house. Other rich people flaunt their money like crazy. So just because you met a rich man with an expensive Rolex doesn't mean you can extrapolate how everyone will react to a gold Apple Watch.
I could see rich women who like to work out wearing them. Celebrities who want to show off.
But you are also ignoring markets in Asia and Russia, where gold colored things and the flaunting of money are viewed very differently to how we see it in the west.
Apple will make plenty of the cheap sport model, and much more off people like me who like watches and think that an extra $150 for stainless and sapphire glass is a reasonable value proposition. And I'm sure they will sell thousands of the stupidly expensive ones to people who don't care about wasting a few grand.
You can keep writing about what a flop it is going to be, but you have to remember, not everyone thinks like you.
For me, while I have a very nice Planet Ocean, I'd love a watch that is atomic clock accurate and picks up whatever time zone I'm in. This week for work I'll be in Central Time, Eastern Time and this weekend Pacific Time. I like the idea of a watch that can auto adjust to that. And for $500, I might well consider it, just to see if it is something I enjoy. I hate yellow and rose gold anyway, so I have no interest in dropping $4K for that.
The bottom line here is you are doing what psychologists call 'projecting.' You are taking your personal view of the world, and imagining that your perspective is shared by others. I'll stand up as an example of one person who thinks in a completely different to you. But there are many many more.
had to look it up to see what it was exactly..
http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,731965,00.html
(note the date on the article)
Well it'll just barely get me the simple white on black Pilot's Watch which is what I like, but yeah, not much else.
It seems like you are reading too much tabloid magazine and just speculating.
Do you know these people?
Are you personally worth millions to know what it is like to be among the target for the apple gold watch?
----------
That's just your taste but in general, humans have always been interested in the shiny yellow metal since antiquity.
There's your miscalculation right there. It's not a watch in the traditional sense. It's a completely new category that's about to explode.
Wow! That is one ridiculous looking useless lump of iron. What do they pay you to wear that?
I would laugh in a guy's face if I saw him wearing that! It's like Flava Flav's chest clock.
----------
His analogy is also like saying the radio and tape player were outdated tech so the iPod wouldn't be successful. We all know that wasn't true. The new with more capability replaces the old, less capable. Just like the phone, just like the record player, just like the vcr, etc.
For everyone saying "no one wears watches anymore" or "no one wears yellow gold anymore"
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/07/f...cellphone-generation.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
http://www.jckonline.com/blogs/styl...list-what-to-buy-sell-and-stock-in-year-ahead
As the price of gold comes down, it comes back into fashion. I've even seen it used on some of the home decorating shows and I thought bright brass faucets and fixtures were gone for good.
Those huge watches also go in and out of fashion so if you want something that's always in style, it's better to go with a normal size watch.
Last edited: