Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Watch Revenue Will Likely Be Dominated by Expensive Gold Edition

Question for all!

I think its ok if you buy a 4.000usd Rolex, it will give you the time for more than 10 years. But what happens if you buy a 4.000 Apple Watch and the iOS stops updating and working just 3 years after?

Will Apple do something about it?
 
Lol $4000 is ridiculous pricing on such a product which will undoubtedly be replaced once a year. The first gen version will have poor battery life and quickly become outdated. Maybe 3-4 iterations down the line it will be worth it but not right now at launch.

For similar pricing you can get an Omega which will be timeless and increase in value over time. For the type of product it is I plan to buy the Stainless steel model and just update that each year.
 
mrhick01 said:
It will always be a watch that can effectively run the operating system that it has and display the graphics and apps that it will have available.

It will always be a wearable made of a highly precious metal, so even an "outdated" Apple Watch will maintain a premium in value...if kept in a reasonable condition, even an old watch should still be worth $1,500-$2,000.
Click to expand...


I took my 7 year old MacBook Pro to the Genius Bar to replace a bad mother board; the tech informed me Apple stops repairing their products approximately five years after manufacturing of the model has been discontinued.

What is the value going to be of a $4000 gold Apple watch seven years from now when it now longer works and the parts aren't available to repair it? The "melt" value of the case, in my opinion....
 
Last edited:
Apple pundit John Gruber of Daring Fireball believes that the expensive gold model could account for the majority of Apple Watch revenue.



Because John Gruber says so, huh? Let's add this to his list of future Claimchowder.
 
They should have just made one and only one in gold with a red strap. Then auctioned it off for RED.
 
hlfway2anywhere said:
For a device a little more powerful than the AppleTV and less functional than iPod touch, it should be priced accordingly. $249 entry level and i'd be in line on launch day. $349...it's just above my instant-buy threshold. I have to think about it.
Click to expand...

How is Apple Watch less functional than iPod Touch? It does everything an iPod Touch does and more. And when you pair it with iPhone (which all users will be doing), it does even more. The only thing lacking is the sheer amount of native and watch optimized apps at launch but that will come quickly.
 
This to me feels like the iPad did in 2010 right before launch. I couldn't find a place for it in my gadget life...That has of course since changed and I imagine over time so will this. But I can never see myself getting the Edition...I personally don't find it attractive. I could maybe see getting the Stainless model but I am in it for the technology and less the fashion. If the functionality of the $349 model matches the higher end model, then I will likely stick with that...
 
notthedark said:
I predict free product upgrade/exchange for at least four years on the $4000 model and at least one year on the $1000 model. What I mean is that with apple watch 2 or 3 or 4 comes out owners of the $4000 watch can walk in to any Apple store and exchange their watch for the new watch, for free.
Click to expand...
This sounds very good. However, based on Apple track record the next and subsequent models will be smaller and thinner which negates that theory since the inners will not fit in the first model.
 
campingsk8er said:
While it hasn't been publicly confirmed, I have friends that work at Apple who have already gone through the training for it. They have all stated that the Apple Watch is the entry model at $349, (The one with stainless steel/ sapphire display cover). The sports model is the middle of the road model. I know it should be taken with a grain of salt, but there is no reason as to why I wouldn't believe them.
Click to expand...

According to the report in the WSJ the sport model is the entry level model, not middle model. Nothing personal, but I'm going to go with WSJ's reporting since it has more "skin in the game" than hearsay from "a friend." But even common sense would lead one to thing the sport model is the least expensive w/ it's plastic band.

Honestly, given how Tim Cook has really clamped down on Apple Watch info I doubt too munch into has been given out in training sessions as to pricing. It's really not anything that "needs to be known" yet outside Apple's top marketing circles. These training sessions are likely just that -- how the watch works and how to present it to customers.
 
Apple Watch Sport - $350

Apple Watch - $650

Apple Watch Edition - $1500 - $2000 (somewhere in that range)

Remember when everyone thought the iPad would cost upwards of $1000?
 
MH01 said:
Its just a wearable, even if you have 4K, its a digital watch......
Click to expand...

And a $4,000 bottle of champagne is just an alcoholic beverage. But status-seekers buy those too... Professional athletes and Hollywood alone will gobble these up if they become trendy.
 
campingsk8er said:
It's going to be Apple Watch starting at $349. Yeah stainless steel is more expensive but according to my friends at Apple, the Sport will carry a premium because of the lightness and increased durability.
Click to expand...


Maybe the Sport version will be fabricated from titanium. This would place it a step above an entry stainless steel model and be consistent with a light weight and durable design.
 
Last edited:
hpereznoble said:
I think its ok if you buy a 4.000usd Rolex, it will give you the time for more than 10 years. But what happens if you buy a 4.000 Apple Watch and the iOS stops updating and working just 3 years after?

Will Apple do something about it?
Click to expand...

I think the 1%ers that buy it won't really care. $4K is chump change. They'll probably give it to the flight attendant on their G550 as a "thank you."
 
Zxxv said:
pricing goes like this

entry watch------$349
stainless watch--$1000
gold watch-------$4000

and you get to choose the strap that goes with the model you like. The strap costs extra. If you don't want a strap you have a pocket watch on a string.
Click to expand...

Do you think the two sizes of the entry watch will cost the same? Or maybe a $100 increase for the larger one?
I've tried printing out the .pdf models that were posted on here a few days ago, tough choice.

I want the stainless steel watch, but my wallet says maybe not for the first gen.
 
jrswizzle said:
Apple Watch Sport - $350

Apple Watch - $650

Apple Watch Edition - $1500 - $2000 (somewhere in that range)

Remember when everyone thought the iPad would cost upwards of $1000?
Click to expand...

I would agree those are realistic and reasonable price points.

I may actually lower your prediction on the normal model just a fraction, but based upon some common sense thinking and values, your numbers are were I would think they should be from a reasonable point of view.

Let's see if "we two" are right :)
 
4K to the rich is NOTHING! People keep saying, "Oh you should get a Rolex instead..." Hmm, if you are RICH, how about a get a Rolex AND a gold Apple Watch. The rich don't care about the price...the gold watch is not meant for the average customer.
 
The Apple Watch is the most aesthetically unpleasing design they have ever produced in the Jonny Ives era and I would wager the least fucntionally desirable. I am not convinced of sustained sales after the initial 6 months new Apple product buzz.
 
HurtinMinorKey said:
Very few people are going to pay $4000 for a device that will be obsolete in two years.
Click to expand...

If you have that kind of money, it doesn't really matter. It's kind of like owning a mansion, you're going (better) to have the money to heat/cool it. Same with the watch. If you have the money to buy it, you'll have the money to upgrade it.
 
newdeal said:
only way I would even consider this is if they would buy it back from you for at least the price of the gold every time you want to upgrade it so upgrades cost what the internals cost and not the whole price all over again
Click to expand...

I remember when they showed pics of the internals at the keynote, the "S1" cpu all in one module.. It looks so removable, like it is just asking to be upgraded in the future. How great would it be to be able to upgrade to the S2 without replacing the entire watch? Even if not upgradable forever, maybe 'upgrade compatible' for 2-3 years.

Pic of S1 at keynote

Hopeful this is announced at the next keynote before launch. But not really expected.
 
Not "Likely"

...if the WSJ's sources are correct, and if Apple is correctly predicting demand...
Click to expand...
And IF Gruber's guesses about price are correct...

There are a lot of ways this might not add up.

Even rounding errors are highly significant: if "half" actually means 55% and "a third" means 36%, that cuts the number of Edition watches almost in half.

My gut says there's no way it pans out like this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back