Celebrity/Television Apple Watch Sightings

[ihonda]

Went to go see Katt Williams in Akron last week, one of the opening acts Mark Curry (Mr Cooper) had SGS. Thought it was crazy to see him opening for Katt then saw the flick of da wrist.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hangin'_with_Mr._Cooper

 

[JT2002TJ]

Agent K (spelling??) on Scorpion.

 

[Karnicopia]

Looked like Raj had a space black link on the Big Bang theory.

 

[Mac 128]

Looked like Raj had a space black link on the Big Bang theory.

That's kind of the last place you want to see it.

 

[Ludatyk]

On the show called The Player.. Cassandra King played by Charity Wakefield had one on..

 

[Mr.C]

That's kind of the last place you want to see it.

May I ask why ?

 

[Mac 128]

May I ask why ?

Because Apple is trying to downplay the whole smartwatch "geek" thing, and Raj is one of the geekiest stereotypical characters on the show, on the most watched, popular sitcom in the world. The fact that it's a black Space watch makes it even more stereotypically nerdy. People laugh at the character because he's such a geek. It only reinforces the negative image the general public has of the watch as opposed to say Charity Wakefield in the immediate example above. Character's like hers are going to expand the user base Apple has been targeting with their emphasis on luxury fashion.

 

[naasrd]

Because Apple is trying to downplay the whole smartwatch "geek" thing, and Raj is one of the geekiest stereotypical characters on the show, on the most watched, popular sitcom in the world. The fact that it's a black Space watch makes it even more stereotypically nerdy. People laugh at the character because he's such a geek. It only reinforces the negative image the general public has of the watch as opposed to say Charity Wakefield in the immediate example above. Character's like hers are going to expand the user base Apple has been targeting with their emphasis on luxury fashion.

Yeah, but he looks sooooo cool with it on that it reverses his geekiness. Mission accomplished.

 

[Mac 128]

Yeah, but he looks sooooo cool with it on that it reverses his geekiness. Mission accomplished.

You forgot the "/s" tag.

 

[WarHeadz]

Oprah wears her Edition all the time.

 

[Mac 128]

Oprah wears her Edition all the time.

I'm not sure how I feel about that. On the one hand it's great for the watch because Oprah is loved and respected across socio-economic lines, but despite her enormous wealth, I'm not sure how I feel about her decision to buy an Edition ... unless of course it was a gift from Jony Ive or Tim Cook. Otherwise, she' paying 10-17x the price of a stainless watch that is otherwise identical, which is disappointing because its sort of like irresponsible wealth -- it screams the wearer has more dollars than sense. I'm all for Apple catering to rich vanity, but Oprah is one I would hope didn't operate that way.

 

[WarHeadz]

I'm not sure how I feel about that. On the one hand it's great for the watch because Oprah is loved and respected across socio-economic lines, but despite her enormous wealth, I'm not sure how I feel about her decision to buy an Edition ... unless of course it was a gift from Jony Ive or Tim Cook. Otherwise, she' paying 10-17x the price of a stainless watch that is otherwise identical, which is disappointing because its sort of like irresponsible wealth -- it screams the wearer has more dollars than sense. I'm all for Apple catering to rich vanity, but Oprah is one I would hope didn't operate that way.

I don't see it that way. Oprah has done a lot of good for the world and she's a philanthrophist to the max. At the same time, she's a very rich woman and has made incredible sums of money in her life. I think its a lot to ask for her not to splurge on expensive things for herself. It's not about having more money than sense, sometimes you buy things just because you want it and can afford it. Not everything needs to be practical, the world would be a boring place.

 

[matrix07]

I'm not sure how I feel about that. On the one hand it's great for the watch because Oprah is loved and respected across socio-economic lines, but despite her enormous wealth, I'm not sure how I feel about her decision to buy an Edition ... unless of course it was a gift from Jony Ive or Tim Cook. Otherwise, she' paying 10-17x the price of a stainless watch that is otherwise identical, which is disappointing because its sort of like irresponsible wealth -- it screams the wearer has more dollars than sense. I'm all for Apple catering to rich vanity, but Oprah is one I would hope didn't operate that way.

It's her money. Not everyone checking CPU in devices before making a decision. Is that irresponsible? Not so. We all value different things. If she can't afford it but went ahead anyway that would be irresponsibility.

 

[douglasf13]

I'm not sure how I feel about that. On the one hand it's great for the watch because Oprah is loved and respected across socio-economic lines, but despite her enormous wealth, I'm not sure how I feel about her decision to buy an Edition ... unless of course it was a gift from Jony Ive or Tim Cook. Otherwise, she' paying 10-17x the price of a stainless watch that is otherwise identical, which is disappointing because its sort of like irresponsible wealth -- it screams the wearer has more dollars than sense. I'm all for Apple catering to rich vanity, but Oprah is one I would hope didn't operate that way.

She's worth billions and lives in a home worth more than $85 million dollars. I'm sure she has a house full of things with insane prices. The Edition cost her around .0000055% of her estimated net worth, so it's quite literally like me choosing a snickers bar over a much less expensive gummy bear.

 

[Krabba]

Rainbow on Black-ish

 

[Mac 128]

She's worth billions and lives in a home worth more than $85 million dollars. I'm sure she has a house full of things with insane prices. The Edition cost her around .0000055% of her estimated net worth, so it's quite literally like me choosing a snickers bar over a much less expensive gummy bear.

Again, it's not about whether she can afford it, or deserves it. It's about the value of the Watch. Think of it in these terms -- Apple has arbitrarily slapped a $10-17k price tag on the watch, the only difference between it and the stainless is about $1k worth of gold. But it's made the exact same way as the $350 aluminum sport, by the exact same poorly paid, overworked, Chinese workforce. So who is making all that profit?

Compare that to a quality Swiss watch that costs $20k. Has anyone ever worried that the craftsmen who assemble those watches are working in sweatshop conditions barely making enough in 18 hour days to buy the basics? No. They likely are well paid for their expertise, and live nice lives supporting their families, and that accounts for a significant part of the cost of those watches. It's all not just going to arbitrary brand luxury.

So Oprah is not only supporting the continuing workplace inequalities that persist in China, as we all are, but she's contributing significantly to the inequality by overpaying for a product which has no other justification than flaunting wealth, the profits of which are going solely to Apple, and not the people or materials who create the product. When I overpay for coffee at the grocery store, it's because I'm assured it's not only the highest quality product, but that it's produced by fair trade working conditions which properly compensate those who produce it. I don't know what other luxury items Oprah has, nor do I really care, but I do know about her Edition watch now, and I know she could have had just as nice a stainless watch, even with a Hermes band, without blatantly contributing to a class system which ignores and exploits the human rights of its workers. If Donald Trump wants to overpay for an Watch to flaunt his status, that's fine by me, because he's an idiot. Let Apple profit at his expense (Apple's culpability to this notwithstanding), but I hate to see people I respect doing it.

 

[bcaslis]

How so you know it's only a $1K worth of gold in the Edition model? Did Apple tell you? I think you are leaping to assumptions here with no basis in fact. Let Oprah buy what she wants to pete's sake.

 

[Mac 128]

How so you know it's only a $1K worth of gold in the Edition model? Did Apple tell you? I think you are leaping to assumptions here with no basis in fact. Let Oprah buy what she wants to pete's sake.

You think there's $9650 worth of gold in the $10K Edition? Maybe there's $7,000 more gold squeezed into the 38mm Modern Buckle Edition. And isn't it funny that a 42mm Classic Buckle Edition is larger yet somehow has $5,000 less gold in it?

It's been well discussed, and speculated, based on the weight differences between the Edition and the Stainless/Sport, and the current price of gold. It's not rocket surgery.

As for Oprah, when someone like her achieves a certain status, based on her philanthropic philosophies they have a responsibility to the public that brought them their wealth. She can buy whatever she likes, but she's also open to public criticism of it. If Oprah wore real fur coats, I would be equally critical of her.

 

[bcaslis]

I don't know there is that much gold just like you don't know there is so little. Your judgement of someone just because they bought an expensive watch is ridiculous. You might as well judge Apple for making it and therefore boycott them by not buying their products. But obviously you excuse yourself from any judgement by buying their products. It's a double standard, so you should get off your high horse about it.

 

[Mac 128]

I don't know there is that much gold just like you don't know there is so little. Your judgement of someone just because they bought an expensive watch is ridiculous. You might as well judge Apple for making it and therefore boycott them by not buying their products. But obviously you excuse yourself from any judgement by buying their products. It's a double standard, so you should get off your high horse about it.

Oprah is a role model, setting the standards that others follow. I'm not.

I do have problems with Apple, but they are trying more than others. If I boycott all tech firms then I will be at a significant disadvantage in society to affect the change I want.

As for the gold content, I have a brain and can make a pretty good estimation of the amount of gold and its cost. You appear to be burying your head in the sand.

 

[JT2002TJ]

As for Opra, when someone like her achieves a certain status, based on her philanthropic philosophies they have a responsibility to the public that brought them their wealth. She can buy whatever she likes, but she's also open to public criticism of it. If Opra wore real fur coats, I would be equally critical of her.

Do you think Opra flies in coach? Do you think she flies commercial? She has earned more money than the money you said she wasted on an apple watch, in the time it took for you to post in this thread. $10k means NOTHING to her, it would be like someone arguing that you are wasting a penny in a wishing pond...


http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2009/05/11/oprah-its-great-to-have-a-private-jet/

 

[BlueMoon63]

I thought they did a breakdown of the gold content in the edition watch and band and it was about $1500-$2000 based on the price of gold at the time?

I'm not following this thread close enough, but are we saying the Raj from Big Bang Theory sets a bad example of the target market because he plays a geek on a tv show? I assume many of us here are labeled a geek by our friends and family? I don't look anything like a geek but I consider myself a geek at my core. 🙂 It's the most popular show on tv with the target audience from 18-49 which would probably fall in the largest demographic that Apple would target.

Also, are we saying that one of the most generous woman alive (Oprah) is sending a bad example by buying the edition watch? She wears $10,000 shoes 🙂 She is an incredible woman and shouldn't be challenged by what watch she wears and her audience wouldn't know that is anything but an Apple Watch and may want one. 🙂

Anyway, not trying to argue with anyone here, but I think the above two examples are weak for "wrong target market" and "poor role model"

 

[JT2002TJ]

I mean, Opra spent $50M on one of her houses... She just bought 10% of Weight Watchers. I doubt she even knows how much the watch costs, she probably just sent someone out to get her the watch without even questioning the cost. I mean, I don't even think about the cost of a starbucks coffee, the same way she doesn't even have to think about the purchase of a car.

 

[Mac 128]

I thought they did a breakdown of the gold content in the edition watch and band and it was about $1500-$2000 based on the price of gold at the time?

I'm not following this thread close enough, but are we saying the Raj from Big Bang Theory sets a bad example of the target market because he plays a geek on a tv show? I assume many of us here are labeled a geek by our friends and family? I don't look anything like a geek but I consider myself a geek at my core. 🙂 It's the most popular show on tv with the target audience from 18-49 which would probably fall in the largest demographic that Apple would target.

Also, are we saying that one of the most generous woman alive (Oprah) is sending a bad example by buying the edition watch? She wears $10,000 shoes 🙂 She is an incredible woman and shouldn't be challenged by what watch she wears and her audience wouldn't know that is anything but an Apple Watch and may want one. 🙂

Anyway, not trying to argue with anyone here, but I think the above two examples are weak for "wrong target market" and "poor role model"

I don't think you are following this closely enough. But let me be clear on my position:

Raj is an example of the type of people who will already buy a smartwatch. However, it's the very people that have no problems embracing the smartwatch that generally put the fashion conscious off of them -- they want to avoid the geek nerd image. It's one of the reasons Star Trek doesn't do better with wide audiences. And it's the same reason they don't wear pocket protectors, or repair their black horn rimmed glasses with electrical tape. Apple is clearly trying to remove this stereotype from the watch in hopes it appeals to a much wider, more fashion conscious market, thereby expand its appeal and their sales along with it. Raj does nothing to further that. While he reaches the largest target demographic age group Apple wants to sell to, he is largely not enjoyed as a role model, rather a comedic stereotype that represents the worst aspects of the smartwatch Apple has been spending millions to eschew. The mainstream audience who sees him wearing the watch is likely going to view it as something they don't want to wear, in the same way the sale of dickeys have not skyrocketed due to Wolowitz exclusively wearing them on TBBT.

Oprah is a role model. I don't care how much she spends on anything, but overpaying large sums of money for a product that is manufactured by exploited people who will never have a shot at Oprah's dream in China, and who will never see the benefits of that extra money she paid for the watch sends a particular message. It's great for Apple's profits because it encourages other vain and shallow people to overpay to own the overpriced Edition. But from a human rights perspective it represents a travesty. She might as well wear real fur coats. At least with real fur, the cost is justified by the effort put into bringing them to market. Just because you have earned the money to buy anything you want doesn't mean you shouldn't use a little thought and restraint behind the products you support, especially when you are an international role model, because of your humanitarian efforts -- which is what built her fame and wealth. Oprah has been around long enough to know that there are consequences to every action she takes. And to the extent having a gold edition makes her happy, then she has to live with the fallout. She can handle my justified criticism.

 

[JT2002TJ]

Oprah is a role model. I don't care how much she spends on anything, but overpaying large sums of money for a product that is manufactured by exploited people who will never have a shot at Oprah's dream in China, who will never see the benefits of that extra money she paid for the watch sends a particular message. It's great for Apple's profits because it encourages other vain and shallow people to overpay to own the overpriced Edition. But from a human rights perspective it represents a travesty. She might as well wear real fur coats. At least with real fur, the cost is justified by the effort put into bringing them to market. Just because you have earned the money to buy anything you want doesn't mean you shouldn't use a little thought behind the products you support, especially when you are an international role model, because of your humanitarian efforts -- which is what built her fame and wealth.

If someone has to know if the product bought has some form of human rights violation, they will never be able to buy anything at all...

Almost every single product you buy can be brought back to some exploited group of people. Even if the product is "Made in the US", some component of the product was build overseas. If not the product itself, the computers the company uses, or the bank the company banks with, or the delivery vehicles the company uses...

If you are going to say something about the watch, you would be better off getting on her case about a private jet, the oil industry exploits WAY more than apple ever has (I grew up in the oil industry living in several countries, so I have first hand experience with big oil). Using a private jet wastes more than 10k worth of extra fuel annually...

EDIT: I will leave it at this, to prevent this from going too far off topic.