As somone who isn't wealthy, who will buy the Edition Apple Watch?

[elgrecomac]

What I really can't understand is if, normally you spend $10-$20K for a watch, it is a timepiece you expect to last decades and it can be repaired if broken. I was given a rare Chopard watch from my father and I will pass it on to my grandson. It can be cleaned, repaired, the style is classic and is really elegant.
An Apple Edition watch will, over time, become obsolete. The internal battery will fail, and, like the ipad one, will have a limited life span software wise and it will not be handed down to the next generation. So it is a limited time fashion accessory.

You can say what you will, but I have to hand it to Apple's marketing team, they'll sell as many as they can make. Tim Cook said limited quantities...so its like a rare Beanie Baby doll: machine made, mass produced, but a self created scarce supply.

They'll be lined up to buy them. Apple is brilliant!

 

[bunnicula]

Most people don't take home $10,000 to $17,000 per month.

And a good many people do.

Doesn't mean they all want to drop that much on a first gen Apple Watch, but I'm sure some of them will, no problem.

----------

The CIO where I work who makes >$500,000/yr (plus indeterminate bonuses) and spends the first 20 minutes of every monthly staff meeting showing us all his newest car, or latest trip to Korea or Italy or whatever is exactly the type of person who would buy the Edition.

The following quote is real, talking to a room of his employees, all who make between 1/3rd to 1/15th of what he makes:

"My wife said I could buy myself a birthday present, and I couldn't decide between a Tesla or the new BMW i3" (showing picture of his garage which includes electric 'Smart' car, a mercedes, and another BMW)
Then lots of pictures of the new i3 and a review of all it's features, etc.

So basically, total douches.

LOL!

I'm sorry to laugh, but the VP of the business unit I used to belong to sent us all a pic of his family at Disney for Christmas not even a week after we were all informed that the company was cutting 25-30% of the workforce.

Some people are seriously stupid.

----------

Doesn't matter the income level. Anyone can buy one. It's just a matter if they want to afford it.

Heck, I can pay cash but I would rather do other things with $10,000. Besides, my wife wouldn't like it.

Indeed.

But, if you're a single person clearing $120k a year who doesn't have extravagant overheads, and if the $10k Edition floats your boat, then it's easily within reach.

The suggestions that you need to be a millionaire, or to have an income of a million a year, or even be worth eight figures, are ridiculous.

Exactly... and exactly.

----------

Not rich, but did get obsessed with mechanical watches for a brief period about 15 years ago. I might end up getting an Apple watch too, but just one of the "basic" offerings. At least I can feel my mechanical watches will last essentially forever with basic maintenance*. I would guess the Apple will be outdated annually. But I am an Apple fanboy, and must pay homage . . . And they look like fun.

*PS. A service call on a swiss watch can easily run $500 to $1000.

Yup. Even my Tag (which I rarely wear and was only 3800 dollars new... on sale) costs 250 bucks for servicing, not including any repaired parts that are not covered. This is authorized servicing that keeps the warranty from being voided. I had a scratch on the bezel and wanted it buffed out and I got quoted a minimum of 500 bucks. I kept the scratch.

 

[cube]

Let's put an Analytical Engine in a watch, and not just made by robots, then we're talking.

 

[bunnicula]

I'm a professional musician. I'm not a wealthy guy, but I spend a lot of time working for people who are. I've learned that there are many, many people out there who debate buying something like a $17,000 watch in the same way I agonize about buying a $700 iPad.

They aren't douchebags, they aren't insane, they don't have more money than brains and all the other insults I've been reading. They are perfectly normal human beings who happen to have lots of disposable income. Why does this offend and upset some people?

I don't think those people offend most other people... who are reasonable, anyway. I think it's the people who don't debate over stuff like that and love to show it off to everyone in the most inconsiderate way possible that tend to annoy.

And, then, there are the people who think EVERYONE is bragging if they buy something new that they like. I hate that mentality. Not everyone is trying to make you green with envy. Sometimes, they're just excited. Don't be a buzzkill.

 

[peterdevries]

Seriously lol?

You stated, "You can bet that the value of just the gold is very high, and that recovering a big chunk of that value when the watch dies is as easy as bringing it in to a jeweler or maybe even Apple. "

People invest in gold. If you want to buy the watch and accept it's just a product then that's fine.

If you are buying with the mindset that you are going to try to recover a "big chunk of that value" when it's obsolete by selling the gold to the jeweler that implies you are seeing it as an investment that you will be looking to see a partial return on in the future.

Unfortunately, you'll be sad to see the actual value of the gold is much lower than you realize.

That's my 2 cents...

Here's another interesting read if you want to lecture CNBC on the the definition of investment too,

"The best $10K investment: Apple Watch or Rolex?"
http://www.cnbc.com/id/102502804

I think there is a misunderstanding because we seem to basically agree. What this whole Edition Watch discussion comes down to is to me the following:

This watch will have about 1% value in the electronics, 30% in materials and the rest is branding (profit) to Apple. I agree that when subsequent models will come out, the overall resale value of the watch decreases although the watch will keep running (my iPhone 3G from 2008 still runs). The only scenario where I can see this watch retain value is if you buy the absolute first model and keep it in the box. Sell it in 10 years and you might make a profit, just like it is possible with the first iPod, iPad and iPhone.

In all other scenarios it doesn't make sense to see this as an investment. You will only sell it at a loss and probably somewhere not more than the materials (gold) value, which might be somewhere between $3000 and $6000 depending on the actual compression (hence weight) they achieved.

So, if you are a normal person who works a normal job and needs to save a long time for such a watch, then you are a fool to buy it (if the goal is to make money from the value increase), because it will have lost value the moment you walk out of the store.

If you are a person who works for a living (or not) and has the disposable income to just pay this out of your current account without an impact on your other spending, then more power to you. It will likely disappear in a drawer before the next version comes out. This will also likely not be the kind of consumer that will see it as an investment to sell at a later time. (see my story here https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=20822159#post20822159 for an example of the type I mean).

That article that you quote is likely typed by an intern. It doesn't have any real information that you couldn't get from any of the watch enthusiasts here on this board. It doesn't mean that it is incorrect though. Still the article infers that it is better to invest in a Rolex. Well, I have a (rare) Rolex. It is not a good investment. I can sell it at a much higher price than I bought it at, but until I can do that (in 10 years maybe) I will have spent hundreds or even thousands on maintenance to keep it running well. I will generate a profit, but it will not be thousands on the initial price. Still, if you are looking to retain value you will be better off with a Rolex than an Edition Watch.

So, if you want to make money I suggest not to invest in watches in this price range (unless you want to be a trader, then it could work). I made more money in the past two years of my investments than my Rolex will ever generate in resale profit (I generated about 50% profit on my portfolio).

 

[papa8706]

I think there is a misunderstanding because we seem to basically agree. What this whole Edition Watch discussion comes down to is to me the following:

This watch will have about 1% value in the electronics, 30% in materials and the rest is branding (profit) to Apple. I agree that when subsequent models will come out, the overall resale value of the watch decreases although the watch will keep running (my iPhone 3G from 2008 still runs). The only scenario where I can see this watch retain value is if you buy the absolute first model and keep it in the box. Sell it in 10 years and you might make a profit, just like it is possible with the first iPod, iPad and iPhone.

In all other scenarios it doesn't make sense to see this as an investment. You will only sell it at a loss and probably somewhere not more than the materials (gold) value, which might be somewhere between $3000 and $6000 depending on the actual compression (hence weight) they achieved.

So, if you are a normal person who works a normal job and needs to save a long time for such a watch, then you are a fool to buy it (if the goal is to make money from the value increase), because it will have lost value the moment you walk out of the store.

If you are a person who works for a living (or not) and has the disposable income to just pay this out of your current account without an impact on your other spending, then more power to you. It will likely disappear in a drawer before the next version comes out. This will also likely not be the kind of consumer that will see it as an investment to sell at a later time. (see my story here https://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=20822159#post20822159 for an example of the type I mean).

That article that you quote is likely typed by an intern. It doesn't have any real information that you couldn't get from any of the watch enthusiasts here on this board. It doesn't mean that it is incorrect though. Still the article infers that it is better to invest in a Rolex. Well, I have a (rare) Rolex. It is not a good investment. I can sell it at a much higher price than I bought it at, but until I can do that (in 10 years maybe) I will have spent hundreds or even thousands on maintenance to keep it running well. I will generate a profit, but it will not be thousands on the initial price. Still, if you are looking to retain value you will be better off with a Rolex than an Edition Watch.

So, if you want to make money I suggest not to invest in watches in this price range (unless you want to be a trader, then it could work). I made more money in the past two years of my investments than my Rolex will ever generate in resale profit (I generated about 50% profit on my portfolio).

I agree with you, there are much smarter things to spend your money on from an investment perspective. I think there are couple types of people that buy the watch:

1. People who have money to burn and won't lose any sleep.
2. People who really want one and convince themselves that it will retain it's value, or even better, be worth more further down the road.

The point I was trying to make is that the value of the gold is likely very marginal compared to the price tag of the watch. It's also very questionable whether or not there will ever be a market for one in the future after they become obsolete.

I could be wrong but to me it seems like it's only a "smart" purchase for someone who can absorb the hit. I think we agree for the most part, you made some solid arguments.

 

[TallManNY]

Anyone who works in personal finance will tell you that you can't really tell someone's wealth by what they purchase. There are spenders and savers. I've saved a couple million dollars over my lifetime, drive an 8 year old Toyota, have never flown anything but economy and if I decide to buy an Apple Watch it will be the cheapest one. Probably won't though unless I find an app that makes it a must-have.

Honest question, what are you saving the millions for? Is it to give an inheritance to your children? Is it for retirement?

I also save. And pretty much every year my net worth increases (exception is the stock market crash from 2007 to 2008, that temporarily lowered my net worth, but since I didn't sell any stock and in fact I bought in to the depressed prices which have since come roaring back, I'm fine). But eventually it isn't rational to accumulate larger numbers in a bank account. Eventually I should start dipping into that savings.

----------

What I really can't understand is if, normally you spend $10-$20K for a watch, it is a timepiece you expect to last decades and it can be repaired if broken. I was given a rare Chopard watch from my father and I will pass it on to my grandson. It can be cleaned, repaired, the style is classic and is really elegant.
An Apple Edition watch will, over time, become obsolete. The internal battery will fail, and, like the ipad one, will have a limited life span software wise and it will not be handed down to the next generation. So it is a limited time fashion accessory.

You can say what you will, but I have to hand it to Apple's marketing team, they'll sell as many as they can make. Tim Cook said limited quantities...so its like a rare Beanie Baby doll: machine made, mass produced, but a self created scarce supply.

They'll be lined up to buy them. Apple is brilliant!

The rumors are that the internal battery is going to be easily replaceable, maybe not by the user, but by a professional.

The original Edition might become a collectors item and hold its value better than you think. I'm going to guess that once Apple brings out a new set of Edition watches (say in two years) they will stop selling the ones you see now.

 

[KPOM]

My guess is that the target audience are nouveau riche in places like China, and wealthy professionals such as investment bankers in developed markets like the U.S. The latter are known for getting six-figure bonuses in heady years like we've had the last few years, and for working insane hours. They make up for it by buying expensive toys for themselves and their significant others. It's no accident that most models of the Edition are geared toward women (including the 2 prettiest and most expensive models).

 

[GGJstudios]

As somone who isn't wealthy, who will buy the Edition Apple Watch?

Someone who is.

 

[McDaddio]

What I really can't understand is if, normally you spend $10-$20K for a watch, it is a timepiece you expect to last decades and it can be repaired if broken. I was given a rare Chopard watch from my father and I will pass it on to my grandson. It can be cleaned, repaired, the style is classic and is really elegant.
An Apple Edition watch will, over time, become obsolete.

Oh please! Not this silly comparison again.

Obsolete: Your Chopard watch is already obsolete (as in outdated vs. alternatives). It doesn't change time zones automatically when you travel, it probably doesn't even change for DST, and I would be curious how accurate it is vs. the time on an iWatch (especially after you have to manually adjust it if you travel).

Utility: Do you think your grandson will actually use it for it's intended purpose, you know, wear it on a daily basis to tell time? Do you?

Value: The Chopard will be far more valuable in 10 years from now, as long as you maintain it and find someone who actually wants to buy it. So what?

Experience: People buy these, the iPhone and other tech gadgets for the experience, how do you think your grandson will experience the Chopard?

People who will easily spend money on this also may decide to spend $30k/night for a suite at the Plaza, or $100k on Jag (that loses a lot more than $10k when it is driven off the lot), or $20k on a dinner party with friends (hello expensive wine!) It is about the experience and they aren't sitting there thinking or caring that it won't be worth it since their grandson would rather eventually wear the Apple Watch 7 with holographic display.

 

[elgrecomac]

Oh please! Not this silly comparison again.

Obsolete: Your Chopard watch is already obsolete (as in outdated vs. alternatives). It doesn't change time zones automatically when you travel, it probably doesn't even change for DST, and I would be curious how accurate it is vs. the time on an iWatch (especially after you have to manually adjust it if you travel).

Utility: Do you think your grandson will actually use it for it's intended purpose, you know, wear it on a daily basis to tell time? Do you?

Value: The Chopard will be far more valuable in 10 years from now, as long as you maintain it and find someone who actually wants to buy it. So what?

Experience: People buy these, the iPhone and other tech gadgets for the experience, how do you think your grandson will experience the Chopard?

People who will easily spend money on this also may decide to spend $30k/night for a suite at the Plaza, or $100k on Jag (that loses a lot more than $10k when it is driven off the lot), or $20k on a dinner party with friends (hello expensive wine!) It is about the experience and they aren't sitting there thinking or caring that it won't be worth it since their grandson would rather eventually wear the Apple Watch 7 with holographic display.

What YOU are missing is that fashion is cyclical. Remember wide lapels versus narrow lapels versus no lapels.wide ties, skinny ties, bowties to never wear a tie.what about short skirts versus mid length skirt versus long skirts. High heels versus pumps versus flat & sandals . Fashion is cyclical. So classic watches, being a fashion accessory, will survive.

A classic handmade watch IS fashion and like a vintage car (which a guy like you would never buy apparently) maintains its value and even increases due to rarity and exclusivity. But the apple edition watch in 10 years probably won't even function. It'll be a paperweight. And a $17k version of the apple watch will be the stuff that joke are made of ...probably in jokes where the word douchebag is the punchline It won't be as bad as google glass but in the same ballpark. Let me be clear I'm not talking about a $400 apple watch just the edition ones. the less expensive ones are really a consumer electronics item which is meant to be disposed of over time.

 

[ninethirty]

This guy gets it.

What YOU are missing is that fashion is cyclical. Remember wide lapels versus narrow lapels versus no lapels.wide ties, skinny ties, bowties to never wear a tie.what about short skirts versus mid length skirt versus long skirts. High heels versus pumps versus flat & sandals . Fashion is cyclical. So classic watches, being a fashion accessory, will survive.

A classic handmade watch IS fashion and like a vintage car (which a guy like you would never buy apparently) maintains its value and even increases due to rarity and exclusivity. But the apple edition watch in 10 years probably won't even function. It'll be a paperweight. And a $17k version of the apple watch will be the stuff that joke are made of ...probably in jokes where the word douchebag is the punchline It won't be as bad as google glass but in the same ballpark. Let me be clear I'm not talking about a $400 apple watch just the edition ones. the less expensive ones are really a consumer electronics item which is meant to be disposed of over time.

 

[McDaddio]

What YOU are missing is that fashion is cyclical. Fashion is cyclical. So classic watches, being a fashion accessory, will survive.

A classic handmade watch IS fashion and like a vintage car (which a guy like you would never buy apparently) maintains its value and even increases due to rarity and exclusivity. But the apple edition watch in 10 years probably won't even function. It'll be a paperweight. And a $17k version of the apple watch will be the stuff that joke are made of ...probably in jokes where the word douchebag is the punchline It won't be as bad as google glass but in the same ballpark. Let me be clear I'm not talking about a $400 apple watch just the edition ones. the less expensive ones are really a consumer electronics item which is meant to be disposed of over time.

This is nonsense.
1. You are implying that all classic watches are immune to fashion cyclicality. Let me pull out my pocket watch and check the last time those were in fashion (yes, I know some hipsters still use them). Besides, many of the "classic" watches have derivative designs and their appeal is subjective.

2. I never said or implied that the Apple Watch will have some timeless longevity and I said that a classic watch will probably increase in value. But to that I added, "so what"?

3. People who buy the high end Apple watches are not doing so because they are comparing it the inherent value of a 1962 Rolex. They are buying it because it has a utility for them and spending $15k is half the price of a high end suite at the Plaza, or the price of a great meal with friends.

4. The further nonsense is that some people seem to equate the behaviors of a person who can easily drop $15k on a watch, knowing that they may get another one next year and the year after, with someone who gets a hand-me-down classic watch, that they probably only wear on special occasions, keep in a special container and plan to hand down to their grandkid one day. That grandkid will be wearing a Apple Watch 7 with holographic display, and will sell that hand me down watch to some rich dentist so he can put a down payment on his house.

5. Oh, and I have a classic car. But for everyday driving, I like the utility of my newer car since I can plug in my iPhone, play my playlists and get calls. I didn't buy that newer car thinking it would appreciate like my classic.

 

[elgrecomac]

'Silly' then 'nonsense'. So a divergent view from yours is wrong? Wow. You must be s fun person to live or work with.

Also a lot of anger.

It time for a timeout, MaDaddio. You need to cool off ...

 

[McDaddio]

'Silly' then 'nonsense'. So a divergent view from yours is wrong?

It time for a timeout, MaDaddio. You need to cool off ...

This coming from the guy who says "which a guy like you would never buy apparently". You know nothing about me.

No, I never said a divergent view is wrong, I said that it was silly and pointed out how you completely missed the point. I never said that a classic watch would not increase in value, in fact, I said the exact opposite, so your strawman is invalid. I never said the apple watch would retain value over time, only said it has a very different utility than a classic watch, so your second strawman is invalid.

 

[rkuo]

Honest question, what are you saving the millions for? Is it to give an inheritance to your children? Is it for retirement?

I also save. And pretty much every year my net worth increases (exception is the stock market crash from 2007 to 2008, that temporarily lowered my net worth, but since I didn't sell any stock and in fact I bought in to the depressed prices which have since come roaring back, I'm fine). But eventually it isn't rational to accumulate larger numbers in a bank account. Eventually I should start dipping into that savings.

----------



The rumors are that the internal battery is going to be easily replaceable, maybe not by the user, but by a professional.

The original Edition might become a collectors item and hold its value better than you think. I'm going to guess that once Apple brings out a new set of Edition watches (say in two years) they will stop selling the ones you see now.

I agree that if the new Edition is limited enough, it could be valuable just by virtue of not everyone being able to buy one. That is a value proposition on top of just the "jewelry" aspects. Really hard to make a call on that tho.

Also we know that the internal electronics must be well under 350 to produce, which is honestly less than most mechanical watches cost to service. not a stretch to get your watch "serviced" every few years by Apple as an upgrade. Who knows what they will do on this front tho.

 

[TallManNY]

I agree that if the new Edition is limited enough, it could be valuable just by virtue of not everyone being able to buy one. That is a value proposition on top of just the "jewelry" aspects. Really hard to make a call on that tho.

Also we know that the internal electronics must be well under 350 to produce, which is honestly less than most mechanical watches cost to service. not a stretch to get your watch "serviced" every few years by Apple as an upgrade. Who knows what they will do on this front tho.

Right. This is where the Ivy quote about high end watch companies *****ing themselves makes a bit of sense. If the wrist is too useful a place to put a computer to leave it occupied by a mechanical automatic watch, then the old school watch manufacturers are in deep d_d_.

Honestly, once I can find out the weather just by glancing at my wrist, I think I'm going to be sold on this technology. And I'm suspecting the smartphone on my wrist is going to do a lot more than that.

 

[Phightinphils]

Not to mention its hideously ugly in my opinion...

 

[addictzz]

if you can think up of people who spend thousands of dollars for an LV, Prada, Celine, Gucci, or maybe tens of thousands for a Hermes, you can think up people who spends $10k for a GOLD watch.

Hey...at least it is made out of pure gold, so not much lose in investment right away compared to leather fashion statement.

 

[peterdevries]

Honestly, once I can find out the weather just by glancing at my wrist, I think I'm going to be sold on this technology. And I'm suspecting the smartphone on my wrist is going to do a lot more than that.

This is where I'm torn. I'm an absolute technology enthusiast and will enjoy monitoring health and other things using a smartwatch. However, I also have three reasonably valuable watches that I wear on rotation and I don't want to put those away. I'm not yet sold on the design of the Apple Watch, so need to see it in real life to decide.

 

[MH01]

For me the only people buying it will be big Apple fans with lots of money . Anyone else who can pick up a watch that is far classier and unique compared to a gold version of a $350 watch.

If my Rolex had the guts of a $350 watch, I would would not be owning one.

It's a watch for that geek, who loves Apple. For most vain rich people, it does not have the bling of a $10k watch, and the really rich, they don't buy cheap $10k watches....

----------

Right. This is where the Ivy quote about high end watch companies *****ing themselves makes a bit of sense. If the wrist is too useful a place to put a computer to leave it occupied by a mechanical automatic watch, then the old school watch manufacturers are in deep d_d_.

Honestly, once I can find out the weather just by glancing at my wrist, I think I'm going to be sold on this technology. And I'm suspecting the smartphone on my wrist is going to do a lot more than that.

But ivy is full of BS at times, he had lots of highend mechanical watches and drives a Bentley, he seems old school when it comes to what he considers class over functionality just saying.

 

[TallManNY]

This is where I'm torn. I'm an absolute technology enthusiast and will enjoy monitoring health and other things using a smartwatch. However, I also have three reasonably valuable watches that I wear on rotation and I don't want to put those away. I'm not yet sold on the design of the Apple Watch, so need to see it in real life to decide.

I'm torn in the same way. I have a nice Hamilton Jazzmaster (about a $800 watch) that I like quite a bit and wear all the time (as in it basically only comes of my wrist when I play basketball). The 42mm SS watch will cost $699 and that is a lot to pay unless I'm going to wear it as a daily driver. The $399 Sport might not look good enough to wear as a daily driver, but the usefulness might be so high that once I start using the watch I want it as always available.

 

[mchoffa]

If you make $50k per year and consider buying the $1099 Black SS watch, that's the same percentage wise as someone making $500k/year buying the Edition, but in reality, you probably have a higher percentage of disposable income at $500k than you would at $50k.