Good luck finding a gold Rolex for under $10k. Why wouldn't Apple Watch hold its value? So long as a Rolex still functions it holds its value. No reason why a functioning gold Apple watch wouldn't be worth much more than $5k 10 years from now.
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
Good luck finding a gold Rolex for under $10k. Why wouldn't Apple Watch hold its value? So long as a Rolex still functions it holds its value. No reason why a functioning gold Apple watch wouldn't be worth much more than $5k 10 years from now.
all this means is the more reason for the ultra rich to re-impress everyone every year and for their leftovers to hit ebay at half price for the upper middle class to play the same game with a year later.
the problem with Rolex as a business model is there is nothing they can change every year to re-entice those who already have one. make no misconceptions about the people who will buy these... they throw down $5k per year on having their underwear pressed. to put that down every year to be seen at the forefront of fashion and technology is a no brainer impulse purchase for them. people who concern themselves with the resale value of their watch are those who will hang on to their classic watch instead and be seen with the stainless or aluminum version are not at all the same market that these will attract. to pay 20k once for a Rolex or 2k per year (depreciated) for the top of the line Apple Watch is like leasing your car instead of buying it.
$4000-$5000 for a watch that will be updated within a year with better design, better specs, better battery life, etc? Hell no. You'd be a fool to drop that much on a first generation Apple Watch.
The only way an apple watch may hold its value is if you leave it sealed in the box and sell it 10-20yrs from now to some collecter. I too really hope apple and Nike release fuelband style device next year. Not a huge fan of a apple watch even though I'll probably get one as a toy.
I am a watch guy/collector and there's no way I'd pay $4k for a gold apple watch. No way, and I own a gold Rolex.
I am a watch guy/collector and there's no way I'd pay $4k for a gold apple watch. No way, and I own a gold Rolex.
That's what your phone is for. No one is going to stop carrying a phone with them just because they have a watch for at at least another 3-5 years.
I would want to be able to use any strap with any model (except maybe the different face sizes might mean different straps...dunno).
I think I'll stick with my regular watch and pretend it's a futuristic device that can function independently on its own. That's sooo 2099 to have my watch fully functional without an iPhone.
I'm thinking the exact opposite. Why would anyone pay $4k for a Rolex when they can buy a gold Apple Watch for the same price? Rolex tells time and nothing else. Apple Watch is a computer with apps. It will do so much more than anyone realizes because it's just beginning to be developed. Meanwhile a Rolex will never do more than look ostentatious. If the Rolex stopped telling time would you really even notice?
Last edited:
True. However the apple watch won't JUST do heart rate. And while other watches can be used with the iPhone (pebble) I think the overall user experience, interoperability with the iPhone, and quality of the apple watch won't be beat.
And won't die if you don't charge it every 12hrs.
I still can't get over how thick that watch is. You know the next version is coming out in October and will be thinner.
Pass on the beta for sure.
Looks like steel for me. As for February, I wish, but I might have to go with Angela's memo on this... My guess is a March/April ship date. Either way, I'm really looking forward to this.
If I buy the Watch, it won't be to impress anyone, except myself. Also, I don't really care for gold jewelry. So, at $5000, I wouldn't be interested in the gold option. At $500, I still wouldn't be interested (assuming the internals are the same).
One thing is clear, though. The Watch is a new direction for Apple. Are they going follow the path that they have with the Mac Pro, where they release a new one every year and expect at least half of their owners to upgrade? Or will they do something more like they've done with the iPhone, where customers buy one and expect it to be expandable and to last many, many years?
Oh, wait. I think I got that backwards.
Perhaps the Watch will be something you can take to your -authorized jeweler every couple of years to have the back removed and the insides replaced, giving you a new battery, new and better sensors, new processors, new antennas (LTE, GPS), a new display, and even a new crystal if you need one, all for a few hundred bucks. (Some of the bands they sell will cost more than that!)
It won't make sense to replace the innards of the Aluminum model, and it may not even be possible/supported. If you want a new entry-level Watch, just put your four bills on the counter (virtually, of course) and you're good to go. But for the higher end models (we could see platinum and titanium, too), it's conceivable.
I don't have any inside knowledge, so this is just my musing, but there's no reason Apple has to repeat what it's done with the Mac Pro--I mean the iPhone. Just because they've always done things one way (when you ignore the times when they didn't) doesn't mean they have to do it that way in the future.
Watch, it won't be to impress anyone, except myself. Also, I don't really care for gold jewelry. So, at $5000, I wouldn't be interested in the gold option. At $500, I still wouldn't be interested (assuming the internals are the same).One thing is clear, though. The
Watch is a new direction for Apple. Are they going follow the path that they have with the Mac Pro, where they release a new one every year and expect at least half of their owners to upgrade? Or will they do something more like they've done with the iPhone, where customers buy one and expect it to be expandable and to last many, many years?Oh, wait. I think I got that backwards.
Perhaps the
Watch will be something you can take to your -authorized jeweler every couple of years to have the back removed and the insides replaced, giving you a new battery, new and better sensors, new processors, new antennas (LTE, GPS), a new display, and even a new crystal if you need one, all for a few hundred bucks. (Some of the bands they sell will cost more than that!)It won't make sense to replace the innards of the Aluminum model, and it may not even be possible/supported. If you want a new entry-level
Watch, just put your four bills on the counter (virtually, of course) and you're good to go. But for the higher end models (we could see platinum and titanium, too), it's conceivable.I don't have any inside knowledge, so this is just my musing, but there's no reason Apple has to repeat what it's done with the Mac Pro--I mean the iPhone. Just because they've always done things one way (when you ignore the times when they didn't) doesn't mean they have to do it that way in the future.
lol
Is this sarcastic?
SOLID GOLD? Really? Sorry kid, it is not solid, it is 18K and probably plated so it wears out in time for the next version.
I'll pass on the gold..
I think it will have a lot to do also which band you choose. The plastic sport strap should be less then a leather one, right?
Looking at the sport in space gray now...
I think it will have a lot to do also which band you choose. The plastic sport strap should be less then a leather one, right?
Looking at the sport in space gray now...