Brikk Announces Diamond-Studded Apple Watches Costing Up to $75,000

[thekeyring]

Still? Wow, I thought things would have moved on from the iPhone 4 (first and last iPhone I ever bought). I've since had a Nokia Lumia and a BlackBerry that all do better than a single day battery life like my iPhone did, more like 3-4 days. It's kinda shocking to discover iPhone users are still coping with a single day charge life. No wonder Samsung did the whole 'wallhugger' promotion thing.

I charge my phone at night when I sleep, and use it during the day. With mixed use, it lasts around 12 hours, and it's 15 months old.

Yes, battery technology has improved since the iPhone 4, letting Apple put in smaller batteries, filling the rest of the room with processors, storage and making the phone thinner and lighter.

I don't find myself "coping" with the battery. I don't need to use the phone when I'm asleep, so I plug it in to charge. And looking at market share of Nokia and Blackberry, lots of people agree with my choice.

 

[Pilon]

Nice to see Apple appealing to the top end of its customers, instead of the tens of hundreds of thousands of people that buy their stuff. Unless it's affordable it'll be just another piece of useless electronic equipment in a couple of years time.

 

[Reason077]

Seriously, does anyone actually see the appeal in these very expensive watches that are nothing but overpriced fashion items posing as lukewarm phones with horrible battery life, more fragile materials and a day of obsoletion? Really?

Whatever.

In a thousand years time, when future archeologists are poring over artefacts from our long-dead civilisation, your Casio will only feature as a curious footnote on the path to the Apple Watch.

P.S. Maybe wash your shirt? Looks like there's some spaghetti stains on there.

 

[Wayfarer]

This is getting ridiculous.

 

[HenryDJP]

Again, you're talking about things you don't know.

Yeah and you have FACTS to back up your nonsense? Of course not.

Apple won't go against the big boys because Apple is not interested in a 1M devices per year model business..

And I repeat, you have FACTS to back up your nonsense? Of course not.

Can't you accept you don't know this market?

Ask yourself that same question while sitting on your high horse.

Selling a 10k apple watch is like selling a 3k iphone. Luxurious and high end, but stupid and not apple's business. Apple is in the affordable luxury, mainstream market, not the real high end small market. The thing is real high end market does not exist in computers, and that's why you probably don't understand it.

Hmm, I must've struck a nerve because you're so worked up. You don't have a fact to back up statements. You're coming up with own theories. It's okay though. I understand.

If you want an example, Apple is in the BMW 3-5 series-like market, not in the Ferrari 488 GTB and more market. That's not their business, they need big sales.

Yep, you think you know everything, but you really don't. Sorry that my one-liner post caused a big spike in your ego.

 

[LordBeelzebub]

Ahh, I just to save up a few more dollars and I'll have enough to buy one. Yes!!!

 

[HenryDJP]

You have no clue what they are getting into.

And neither do you.

 

[fordyingseasons]

Nice to see Apple appealing to the top end of its customers, instead of the tens of hundreds of thousands of people that buy their stuff. Unless it's affordable it'll be just another piece of useless electronic equipment in a couple of years time.

$350 is very affordable. If you have the money to spend more on an Apple Watch wrapped in fancier materials then that is your choice.

 

[nando87]

Yeah and you have FACTS to back up your nonsense? Of course not.



And I repeat, you have FACTS to back up your nonsense? Of course not.


Hmm, I must've struck a nerve because you're so worked up. You don't have a fact to back up statements. You're coming up with own theories. It's okay though. I understand.



Yep, you think you know everything, but you really don't. Sorry that my one-liner post caused a big spike in your ego.

You only have to know that the big seller of the luxury watch market is Rolex and they sell less than 1M watches per year. If apple sells a watch which has the same price as a Rolex, people with that wealth won't appear from nowhere. So, how can they achieve their sales prediction?

I know how many watches Rolex sales per year, because they're my hobby. I know how many watches the Richemont and Swatch group sale per year. I know what the ASAP, margins and sales predictions are being whispered, because that's my job, so, I have to suppose, if you are arguing with me that you also know this.

The thing is, do you really know any of these things or I'm simply talking to someone who likes to argue?

 

[MeFromHere]

30g of 18k gold are aprox 960 USD of gold at today's prices, and the edition watches mount straps and not metal bracelets (which are much more expensive). 1000-1500 USD gold apart considering the 349 USD model has the same electronics? Oh, I think they have a HUGE, really HUGE margin selling it at 2000-2500. They are not stupid, they won't put a price to compete with Rolex, Cartier, AP, Panerai... are you crazy? Maybe you don't buy luxury, or know what I'm talking about, but it's really really stupid... That's nonsense. Everything over 3000 is absurd and won't happen.

Over here https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/20610211/, Julien makes a credible case that the leather strap with modern buckle contains at least $200 worth of gold. Maybe $450 worth of gold. And it's a very well-made strap; the labor adds to the cost.

For a well-made accessory, which is more fashion than technology, I can easily see Apple selling it on its own with a 5x markup (or more). Bundled with an Edition watch, maybe the strap only needs a markup of 2x or 3x.

It's all guesswork; I don't claim my numbers are correct. But I think it's a mistake to treat this strap as a negligible part of the overall price.

 

[HenryDJP]

You only have to know that the big seller of the luxury watch market is Rolex and they sell less than 1M watches per year. If they sell a watch which has the same price as a Rolex, people with that wealth won't appear from nowhere. So, how can they achieve their sales prediction?

I know how many watches Rolex sales per year, because they're my hobby. I know how many watches the Richemont and Swatch group sale per year. I know what the ASAP, margins and sales predictions are being whispered, because that's my job, so, I have to suppose, if you are arguing with me that you also know this.

The thing is, do you know really know any of these things or I'm simply talking to someone who likes to argue?

Ask yourself that same question. You actually began the "argument". I just stated I was going to hold on to your post. Then you fired back with a mean-spirted nose-in-the-air style reply.

 

[nando87]

Over here https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/20610211/, Julien makes a credible case that the leather strap with modern buckle contains at least $200 worth of gold. Maybe $450 worth of gold. And it's a very well-made strap; the labor adds to the cost.

For a well-made accessory, which is more fashion than technology, I can easily see Apple selling it on its own with a 5x markup (or more). Bundled with an Edition watch, maybe the strap only needs a markup of 2x or 3x.

It's all guesswork; I don't claim my numbers are correct. But I think it's a mistake to treat this strap as a negligible part of the overall price.

A Panerai 351 alligator strap+buckle is worth 400 USD, and we're talking about a 8500 USD watch from a real luxury company. A hand made, one off Ted Su strap made of original swiss ammo leather from 1910-1950 is worth 500-1000 dollars.

But come on, you tell me about this, I want to learn.

Anyway, we'll see it soon.

 

[h4ck]

obviously money can't by style and taste.

 

[peterh988]

So you're saying the more ugly a watch is, the more it costs?

Just quoting a TV show.

I think the point they were making was, it wasn't about buying it because it looked nice, it was about showing that they could afford to spend that amount of money.

 

[IbisDoc]

This is a fantastic timepiece that will stand the test of time....at least until the non-replaceable battery reaches the limits of its charging cycles, and it becomes totally useless. A definite heirloom!

 

[0007776]

Actually there is an interesting detail here, they are offering a gold apple watch with a row of diamonds for $7500. Which indicates that the price of the edition will probably be closer to $5k than $10k (based on wild estimates flying around).

They aren't working with Apple on this so they have no clue on the price of the more expensive Apple models. I think we can be 99% certain that they are going to be getting the sport, and dissembling it and then reassembling it in the new case.

 

[MeFromHere]

A Panerai 351 alligator strap+buckle is worth 400 USD, and we're talking about a 8500 USD watch from a real luxury company. A hand made, one off Ted Su strap made of original swiss ammo leather from 1910-1950 is worth 500-1000 dollars.

But come on, you tell me about this, I want to learn.

Anyway, we'll see it soon.

I failed to find list prices for a "Panerai 351 alligator strap + buckle" in the 3 minutes or so I spent looking. They seem to offer straps and buckles separately, with many options for each. Are you talking about the price of a strap with a gold buckle, a stainless steel buckle, or something else?

Please provide links with prices to aid the discussion.

And to be clear, I consider "worth" and "price" to be two different things. When you say a strap is "worth" $400, I don't know if you mean the price, or something else. But that's probably just language differences so it doesn't concern me much.

As for "a 8500 USD watch from a real luxury company", that's the whole point. Quite a few people are suggesting that Apple may be reaching for exactly this kind of market with the Apple Watch Edition.

One company sells a little box filled with ancient technology. The other sells a little box filled with modern technology. Both kinds of little boxes tell the time. Both look good (depending on personal taste). Both are expensive enough to satisfy some people's need for useless, flamboyant consumption.

Can Apple penetrate the luxury market? (Do they even want to?) I don't know. But the argument that Apple Watch Edition can't be silly-expensive because "it will be obsolete in few years" doesn't sway me. The watch will work just as well in 10 years as it does when new. It may need a new battery (and so might its companion iPhone), but that's comparable to the cleaning and lubrication that a fine mechanical watch needs periodically. In 10 years, they will both (still) be little boxes that tell the time.

There may be a new, better, more high-tech Apple watch in 10 years, that doesn't hurt the old watch's usability. A 2015 watch may seem quaint, obsolete, or stale in 2025. But the mechanical watch is already quaint, obsolete, and stale the day it's made! Aren't those the very qualities (with the help of awesome status-symbol marketing) that make fine mechanical watches so popular?

 

[Jvanleuvan]

well, then I think we can all agree that the Apple watch edition wont cost $7000. (like some had speculated)

The Brikk gold one that has .6k of diamonds is "only" $7,500

AND considering their "markup" on their other products (over Apple retail) then the Apple Watch Edition could cost quite a bit less than the predicted $7000...

 

[OllyW]

well, then I think we can all agree that the Apple watch edition wont cost $7000. (like some had speculated)

The Brikk gold one that has .6k of diamonds is "only" $7,500

AND considering their "markup" on their other products (over Apple retail) then the Apple Watch Edition could cost quite a bit less than the predicted $7000...

The Brikk isn't solid gold, it's either gold or platinum plated.

 

[nando87]

There may be a new, better, more high-tech Apple watch in 10 years, that doesn't hurt the old watch's usability. A 2015 watch may seem quaint, obsolete, or stale in 2025. But the mechanical watch is already quaint, obsolete, and stale the day it's made! Aren't those the very qualities (with the help of awesome status-symbol marketing) that make fine mechanical watches so popular?

There are a lot of vintage quartz watches which in their days were luxury watches. In fact they were high tech luxury watches because they were so precise and had a lot of functions (then geeks were saying "huh, who is going to buy a mechanical watch when this watch can keep the time with blahblahblah accuracy"). Nowadays they're worth nothing most of them. The important word for maintaining value and prestige is "mechanical". Why? Well, depends who you ask. It has to do with romanticism, intuitiveness, craftsmanship, macro technology. Why someone would want a 700hp Ferrari v12 engine? Hey there you have a Tesla with I-don't-know-how-many horsepower and the consumption of a light bulb. But the fact is...

If you want to comprehend another POVs subscribe to watches and cars forums, what can I say.

 

[nando87]

I failed to find list prices for a "Panerai 351 alligator strap + buckle" in the 3 minutes or so I spent looking. They seem to offer straps and buckles separately, with many options for each. Are you talking about the price of a strap with a gold buckle, a stainless steel buckle, or something else?

Please provide links with prices to aid the discussion.

And to be clear, I consider "worth" and "price" to be two different things. When you say a strap is "worth" $400, I don't know if you mean the price, or something else. But that's probably just language differences so it doesn't concern me much.

As for "a 8500 USD watch from a real luxury company", that's the whole point. Quite a few people are suggesting that Apple may be reaching for exactly this kind of market with the Apple Watch Edition.

One company sells a little box filled with ancient technology. The other sells a little box filled with modern technology. Both kinds of little boxes tell the time. Both look good (depending on personal taste). Both are expensive enough to satisfy some people's need for useless, flamboyant consumption.

Can Apple penetrate the luxury market? (Do they even want to?) I don't know. But the argument that Apple Watch Edition can't be silly-expensive because "it will be obsolete in few years" doesn't sway me. The watch will work just as well in 10 years as it does when new. It may need a new battery (and so might its companion iPhone), but that's comparable to the cleaning and lubrication that a fine mechanical watch needs periodically. In 10 years, they will both (still) be little boxes that tell the time.

There may be a new, better, more high-tech Apple watch in 10 years, that doesn't hurt the old watch's usability. A 2015 watch may seem quaint, obsolete, or stale in 2025. But the mechanical watch is already quaint, obsolete, and stale the day it's made! Aren't those the very qualities (with the help of awesome status-symbol marketing) that make fine mechanical watches so popular?

Of course you can't have an official price direct from the brand because they have their own boutiques, because they're elitist, because they have few clients, because those clients don't want it to feel mainstream, you see?

There's a world out there different maybe from what you're used to. What amazes me is that such a lot of people refuses to see this. I accept it, I accept I don't know or see the world as other people and don't know about other ways of living and so on, so I don't say "hey that kind of people who I don't know will do that and if they don't they're stupid", I only talk about what I know. So, if some of you don't know a thing about the luxury market, I don't know why you always talk about it. That's all.

 

[Jvanleuvan]

The Brikk isn't solid gold, it's either gold or platinum plated.

Awwww-Snap!
My Bad, I thought it was the Edition watch machined with diamonds set in the existing case.

Oh well...



But, as I said before, I'm not sure apple can tread in the deep water of luxury watches.

Just look at a Patek Philippe Calatrava 18k Yellow Gold. It cost about $450 in 1949. Today it is worth about $10,000-$15000. Based on inflation... that $450 fron 1949 would be worth $4418 today, so someone who bought that watch in 1949, more than DOUBLED their money WHILE being able to enjoy the use of the watch for 50 years! --In fact that 1949 watch's appreciation is about the same as putting that $450 in a bank account that payed 6.45% Interest for 50 years.


In 50 years an apple watch edition will not be working! The battery will long be dead and gone, and there probably wont be any equivalent replacements.
there wont exists any devices that it could connect to, Bluetooth will be a faint memory. MP4's will be forgotten. The circuit boards will probably have deteriorated. it would be utter scrap metal.

 

[akbarali.ch]

At that price, I'd expect it to outperform my Casio. Got it when I was 8 and was second hand when it was given to me. Never even had to change the battery. It's been a total trooper over the years, surviving everything I've been through.

Seriously, does anyone actually see the appeal in these very expensive watches that are nothing but overpriced fashion items posing as lukewarm phones with horrible battery life, more fragile materials and a day of obsoletion? Really?

you are seeing things from one perspective, that is from a utility point of view. Apple watch gold edition is not for people like you and me to see time. Those buyers probably are at a place where time doesn't even matter to them, they would be having people to manage their time and money. They will buy the watch and enjoy it.

 

[William Gates]

Actually there is an interesting detail here, they are offering a gold apple watch with a row of diamonds for $7500. Which indicates that the price of the edition will probably be closer to $5k than $10k (based on wild estimates flying around).

I'm pretty sure you buy the watch from apple for whatever price, then you send it to this company and pay them an additional $7500 to put diamonds in it.

 

[diddl14]

Thanks for your racist stereotypical picture.

Don't know if the guy on the picture is a racist but he sure poses stereotypical.