Carphone Warehouse wants to sell Apple Watch

[Piggie]

Apple knows if they put a bunch of sensors into a product they need to have a high level of reliability so it makes sense to leave them off until the accuracy is there. Eventually I see ResearchKit being integrated with the Watch.

Let's also be 100% honest with ourselves shall we.

Apple is a company that's prime focus is to make as much money as possible.
If they can use "we care about your health" as a story to aid their money making then that's a new avenue for them to try.

If you were Apple, you want to make sure you sell the most products, and you also want to make sure, you don't give people everything in one go, and compromise future sales.

Let's say you could monitor heartbeats and, with current tech one other item. You KNOW 100% you can monitor this other item, but more than that you are not certain about yet, they may be even trickier.

So you launch a watch on the public, knowing you can "sell it with it's health story" today with just the one sensor.

So why include the second one today?

That's a guaranteed, and proven item you know, without question you can add into the next model to make the next model even more desirable.

You won't wish to give the public all you can do now, and then have less new items to include in the next model.

That would be bad business, not thinking about the future.

Apple Watch 2 is already on the drawing board, you can be sure of that.

 

[KPOM]

I wouldn't put much stock in that Wired article. It is piece put out by Apple PR, and will tell the story that Apple wants people to hear, not necessarily what actually happened. They would rather people not know that this isn't the watch they wanted to make.

It's a puff piece, but surprisingly transparent for one. It reveals that the Watch was still in conceptual form in early 2013, more than a year after Apple started working on it, and was behind schedule.

Consider that the Galaxy Gear came out in September 2013. Assuming that Samsung and Apple started at about the same time, it has taken Apple a lot longer to get to market. A lot of it is because unlike Samsung (particularly the Samsung of 2013), Apple doesn't just throw something together as quickly as it can and release it to the market. But it does seem like there were lots of hurdles to overcome.

 

[Rogifan]

I wouldn't put much stock in that Wired article. It is piece put out by Apple PR, and will tell the story that Apple wants people to hear, not necessarily what actually happened. They would rather people not know that this isn't the watch they wanted to make.

Pray tell us what watch they wanted to make. Is it this phantom watch with 10 sensors that weren't ready for prime time? Thank god Apple had sense enough not to include sensors that aren't very accurate. Look at Samsung rushing to get a fingerprint sensor in their Galaxy phone because iPhone had one rather than waiting until they could get one that worked right (all indications are the fingerprint scanner with the GS6 is much better than the one with the GS5).

 

[Cashmonee]

Pray tell us what watch they wanted to make. Is it this phantom watch with 10 sensors that weren't ready for prime time? Thank god Apple had sense enough not to include sensors that aren't very accurate. Look at Samsung rushing to get a fingerprint sensor in their Galaxy phone because iPhone had one rather than waiting until they could get one that worked right (all indications are the fingerprint scanner with the GS6 is much better than the one with the GS5).

Just to clarify, maybe it is exactly the watch they wanted, maybe not. I am just saying they wouldn't ever say that in an Apple PR piece. In fact, everything in the article would come into question knowing that Apple clearly approved it. I am sure most of it is accurate, but it can't be taken as absolute truth.

However, I do tend to believe that this is not the watch they intended to make, and only came to market with it because they feared waiting too long. There are too many signs from trusted sources that point to that being the case for it to not be at least partially true.

 

[Rogifan]

Just to clarify, maybe it is exactly the watch they wanted, maybe not. I am just saying they wouldn't ever say that in an Apple PR piece. In fact, everything in the article would come into question knowing that Apple clearly approved it. I am sure most of it is accurate, but it can't be taken as absolute truth.

However, I do tend to believe that this is not the watch they intended to make, and only came to market with it because they feared waiting too long. There are too many signs from trusted sources that point to that being the case for it to not be at least partially true.

I'm still curious to know exactly what watch you think they intended to make if not this one. Obviously priorities can change as you're going through development. Maybe the plan was for gen 1 was to have more health related sensors but accuracy wasn't there. I still think Apple was going to bring fashion into it no matter what.

 

[bunnicula]

Putting the Sport in Walmart and Best Buy automatically lowers the prestige or luxury, or whatever you want to call it, of the other two collections. It further highlights the fact that the only difference between the $349 Sport bought by the guy in a wifebeater at Walmart and the $17,000 watch bought in a velvet lined room is about $1500 in case and band materials. It would make the Edition (and even Watch) seem even more overpriced.

There's no "prestige" in the Apple Watch Sport. They're selling it to grab the crowd who'd buy the Gear and other sports watches. Unless you count the prestige of just owning Apple merchandise, but since they sell all other types of Apple merchandise in Best Buy in a special "Apple Store" area manned by Apple employees, why not sell the Sport Watch?

It's very straightforward. Not a lot of choices, band types, none of that. Really easy to stock.

Selling the Watch and Edition lines only in Apple Stores or other high-end retailers does indeed signal the buying public that these are different than the Sport model.

I don't think it takes away from the prestige factor at all.

 

[KPOM]

Just to clarify, maybe it is exactly the watch they wanted, maybe not. I am just saying they wouldn't ever say that in an Apple PR piece. In fact, everything in the article would come into question knowing that Apple clearly approved it. I am sure most of it is accurate, but it can't be taken as absolute truth.

However, I do tend to believe that this is not the watch they intended to make, and only came to market with it because they feared waiting too long. There are too many signs from trusted sources that point to that being the case for it to not be at least partially true.

It was always going to be fashion-oriented. Apple understands better than any tech company that fashion matters when selling a wearable. That's why they didn't rush to market with something like the Galaxy Gear. My guess is that things weren't quite the free-for-all as the Wired piece makes it seem in early 2013. Apple likely had already researched metals, bands, etc. They may not have decided between square and round at that point, but it seems quite quickly they decided it was going to have a crown, etc.

 

[Cashmonee]

Selling the Watch and Edition lines only in Apple Stores or other high-end retailers does indeed signal the buying public that these are different than the Sport model.

I will let you in on a little secret. They actually aren't any different. If I am paying the prices they are asking, especially for the Edition, the last thing I want to see is a functionally identical version in a Walmart circular on sale for $348.98 with a $50 gift card. It just doesn't fit the "fashion premium" image they are clearly targeting. It would be one thing if there were an actual difference between the three versions other than extremely overpriced materials, but there isn't.

I wonder what will happen when the teardowns show that the Sport and Watch are within a few dollars of each other to produce? You see Rolex, Burberry, Omega, etc don't have dozens of sites tearing down their product and estimating cost to produce. How will Apple (or the blind followers) spin it when the Sport costs $200 to build vs. $210 for the Watch. Or that the Edition costs $1200?

----------

It was always going to be fashion-oriented. Apple understands better than any tech company that fashion matters when selling a wearable. That's why they didn't rush to market with something like the Galaxy Gear. My guess is that things weren't quite the free-for-all as the Wired piece makes it seem in early 2013. Apple likely had already researched metals, bands, etc. They may not have decided between square and round at that point, but it seems quite quickly they decided it was going to have a crown, etc.

I don't disagree, I just don't think fashion was the primary focus until they realized they had nothing else to go on. Look back at the September keynote. When one of your headline features is sending your heartbeat, you know you are scraping the bottom of the barrel.

----------

I'm still curious to know exactly what watch you think they intended to make if not this one. Obviously priorities can change as you're going through development. Maybe the plan was for gen 1 was to have more health related sensors but accuracy wasn't there. I still think Apple was going to bring fashion into it no matter what.

I honestly don't know. I just believe they had higher hopes when they started out, and ran out of time. What they ended up with was a product without direction, so they had to give it one. Fashion apparently is it. I think gen 2 and 3 will be significantly different.

 

[bunnicula]

I will let you in on a little secret. They actually aren't any different. If I am paying the prices they are asking, especially for the Edition, the last thing I want to see is a functionally identical version in a Walmart circular on sale for $348.98 with a $50 gift card. It just doesn't fit the "fashion premium" image they are clearly targeting. It would be one thing if there were an actual difference between the three versions other than extremely overpriced materials, but there isn't.

I wonder what will happen when the teardowns show that the Sport and Watch are within a few dollars of each other to produce? You see Rolex, Burberry, Omega, etc don't have dozens of sites tearing down their product and estimating cost to produce. How will Apple (or the blind followers) spin it when the Sport costs $200 to build vs. $210 for the Watch. Or that the Edition costs $1200?

The inner workings are not any different. Same can be said of most "luxury" watches, too. They have a very wide range of prices in one Rolex series, but they're the same internals. Does an 18K gold Rolex cost as little as a SS Rolex from the exact same series? NOPE. It's more expensive.

Apple isn't Rolex, though. Apple is a tech company that has decided to make a wearable device.

I think most people know that they WORK the same way. The choice of which model to purchase has to to with style and how the user wishes to wear the watch. Want it just to wear with super casual clothing and to work out? You'll probably buy the Sport model.

Want to wear it to work in a corporate setting and also be able to wear it when you dress up AND wear it to work out?

You'll probably buy the Watch or the Edition line, depending on whether you like SS more or less than gold and how much money you're willing to spend for the "look" you want.

The people who send their iPhones out to be gold plated and/or diamond studded KNOW that their iPhones WORK the same as everyone else's. They were just willing to pay extra for the "look" they wanted.

That's all this is. And you're right. Nobody is tearing down luxury watches to explain that the 18k with diamonds works just like the SS model without, but it's sort of a "duh" thing, number one... and number two? They aren't Apple products. Tech stuff always gets torn down because people want to know what sort of processor is inside and how it works.

Eh. I will not be surprised to see the lower end of the Watch (the Sport) sold pretty much anywhere you could buy an iPhone, eventually. Right now, they may retain the "exclusivity" in order to get the launch to be as effective as possible, but if this becomes an established line with regular updates, it will be sold everywhere they think they can sell it.

They are in business to make money. Not everyone has an Apple Store or a high-end retailer near their home. But, most have a Best Buy or a Walmart. And if all they want is an Apple Sport Watch, why on earth should they not be able to see one in person someplace?

 

[Cashmonee]

The inner workings are not any different. Same can be said of most "luxury" watches, too. They have a very wide range of prices in one Rolex series, but they're the same internals. Does an 18K gold Rolex cost as little as a SS Rolex from the exact same series? NOPE. It's more expensive.

Apple isn't Rolex, though. Apple is a tech company that has decided to make a wearable device.

You are right, and the market has shown it will allow Rolex to get away with that, probably because even a stainless steel version is thousands of dollars. Apple plays in a different world, and we have yet to see if the market will let them get away with it. It will be tougher sell when you know there will be headlines everywhere telling of the cost to build each one.

I do agree that eventually we will probably see the Sport in other retailers. I do not think it will happen with the first gen though, unless Apple feels the need to try to boost sales. Although, I actually think they really want to sell you the Watch collection because that seems to be accessible with huge margins. Significantly higher than the Sport.

 

[bunnicula]

You are right, and the market has shown it will allow Rolex to get away with that, probably because even a stainless steel version is thousands of dollars. Apple plays in a different world, and we have yet to see if the market will let them get away with it. It will be tougher sell when you know there will be headlines everywhere telling of the cost to build each one.

I do agree that eventually we will probably see the Sport in other retailers. I do not think it will happen with the first gen though, unless Apple feels the need to try to boost sales. Although, I actually think they really want to sell you the Watch collection because that seems to be accessible with huge margins. Significantly higher than the Sport.

I don't know if we'll see this with the first gen unless they either have flagging sales or they have blockbuster sales and want to boost them further over the holidays. It may have more to do with supply, honestly.

I do think we will see the Sport available everywhere if this watch really takes off, once we get to gen 2. We may even see the Watch line (at least a few of the more popular options in that line) available in places with a dedicated Apple sales area staffed by Apple employees, like Best Buy. Maybe the SS Link model(s) and maybe the Classic buckle or some such. I wouldn't think they'd carry the whole line unless this is a runaway success.

Time will tell.

 

[Mr. Buzzcut]

If you read the Wired article that someone linked to in another thread, it seems they came out with the concept and then later figured out what it would be useful for. Does it sound like a shot in the dark? Maybe, but consider that the iPad concept actually predated the iPhone until someone at Apple figured out it could be a good platform for the phone they were interested in developing.

I don't think Apple set out to make a fitness band. Jony Ive is a huge fan of watches. He wanted to make a watch because that's where he sees the future of mobile. It might not be overnight, but he's likely right.

I didn't think they would make a fitness band, either. The article doesn't disagree with anything I said. I wouldn't expect Apple to provide that kind of inside info anyway. Wired was fed what Apple wanted to convey. They wrote an article based on that information.

I like the idea of the product but I remember how horrible my iPad 1 ended up being. They have to get the product to market but I feel like there just isn't much there yet and they are pushing the fashion aspect to meet their price point. As the product matures, things may change.