Concern about depreciation of the Edition

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by Manatee, Mar 13, 2015.

  1. Manatee macrumors 6502

    Manatee

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Location:
    Washington DC
    #1
    I was wondering how much the gold is worth in the Edition. I'm guessing around $1,000. It's more expensive to cast gold into a watch case than steel, I assume. And the Edition is at least $9,000 more than steel with the steel bracelet.

    The difference in markup between steel and gold is similar for a popular brand like Rolex, but... If you get even the standard discount on your Rolex, whether steel or gold, in ten years you'd be able to sell it for around what you paid for it. So if you buy a gold one, you're not losing a ton of money to depreciation.

    But with the Apple Watch, because the internals become outdated so quickly, I wonder if the Edition will quickly depreciate to somewhere close to the scrap value of the gold? If so, that's a huge hit.
     
  2. dacreativeguy macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    #2
    This doesn't seem to be a problem keeping most people on this board up at night.
     
  3. fitshaced macrumors 68000

    fitshaced

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    #3
    You don't buy a Rolex that needs charging every night. That alone is reason to not buy a 10k Edition. It's an acceptable compromise for cheaper watches.
     
  4. douglasf13 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    #4
    My $11 Casio f91w's battery lasts longer than a $600+ service interval on a Rolex or Omega every 5-7 years. I'm an Omega owner, too, but I'm just pointing out that yours is not a valid argument. If those criteria were what equated to a great watch, my G-Shock would be even more worthy than my Omega or Rolex, since it is solar powered and coordinates with the Atomic clock through the air.

    Rolex is jewelry with a mechanical movement inside, and Apple Watch is jewelry with a small computer inside. That's about it. Neither is necessarily better. From the looks of it, the quality and the case of the Apple Watch isn't drastically inferior to a Rolex, and it's certainly as nice as a lot of low-mid level Swiss watches.
     
  5. fitshaced macrumors 68000

    fitshaced

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    #5
    You made a different argument though. Charging your watch every night is not common to luxury watches. It's common to devices, mostly of first release. A luxury watch requires expensive maintenance but that's hardly the same as the chore of having to charge it every night. This is where the Rolex sets itself apart from the smart watch. If you want to show it off at a party, you don't need to make sure it's charged, it most likely is.
     
  6. douglasf13 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    #6
    That's exactly my argument. If not charging a watch every night is an argument, than you're also saying my $11 Casio is a better watch. Better timepiece? Maybe, but the Apple Watch adds a TON of extra features at the price of battery life. I charge my phone every night, anyways, so it makes no difference to also charge my watch. I also have hand wind mechanicals that I have to wind and set the time every time that I use them, too.

    My solar G-shock never has to be charged, and also has many more functions than my Rolex, so I guess that's a better watch than my Rolex? Nope. A Rolex is jewelry. There are very few functional reasons to legitimize a Rolex.
     
  7. fitshaced macrumors 68000

    fitshaced

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    #7
    I never said that the Rolex is a better watch. It's a luxury watch and with that category, you don't charge them every night. Until now.
     
  8. douglasf13 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    #8
    Who cares? Lots of luxury watches have trade offs in capability. There are some very expensive mechanical watches out there that are still hand wind.
     
  9. fitshaced macrumors 68000

    fitshaced

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    #9
    FFS, they don't have to be hand wound every morning. A watch being a watch, when someone buys a luxury watch they don't typically weigh up the compromises (other than cost). They buy the watch that looks best to them and probably favour a particular brand. Someone would buy a hand wind watch because they actually like that. Will people buy the Apple watch because they want to have to charge it every night? More people will be turned off buying an Edition because of that requirement than any other 'compromise' a luxury watch might have.
     
  10. douglasf13 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    #10
    I own several hand wind watches, and I don't wear them all every day, so, yes, I do have to wind them every time I wear them.

    That actually brings up a good point. When I do wear the same hand wind watch multiple days in a row, I still wind it every morning, even though the power reserve is longer. Same with the Pebble. I still charged it every night, even though it wasn't necessary, because I didn't want to keep track of the charge, and it's easy to charge it every night alongside my phone. Charging the Apple Watch every night won't affect me.
     
  11. fitshaced macrumors 68000

    fitshaced

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    #11
    Ok, so firstly lets agree that the Pebble is not a luxury watch. Not sure why you mentioned it.

    Hand winding is not the same as having to charge it. You can hand wind it on the train or on the street. But you bought that particular watch not despite the fact you must hand wind it but probably because you like hand wind watches. Big difference. You don't buy a watch because you like having to charge it.
     
  12. douglasf13 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    #12
    You also don't NOT buy a watch with lots of features that you want because you have to charge it every night. It's not a big deal to me at all. It's a trade off.
     
  13. fitshaced macrumors 68000

    fitshaced

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    #13
    But i'm not saying that people won't buy it. It's just not a compromise that comes with luxury watches and it will affect it's sales because of that.

    So this means you're buying the Apple Watch edition? Is that good business sense? Would the stainless steel not suffice?
     
  14. douglasf13 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    #14
    You're not making any sense. You're acting as if there aren't several other reasons that one would buy an Apple Watch over a luxury mechanical watch. A mechanical watch has the battery advantage, a smart watch has several other advantages, too. I've never thought to myself, I'm not going to buy these mechanicals, because my solar G-Shock has infinite battery life. It's just one feature.

    I'm not buying a gold Apple Watch because it doesn't fit my style or budget, just as I didn't buy a $35K gold Rolex over my steel Rolex for a fraction of the price.

    BTW, there is a wide range of mechanical watches in the $700-$3500 range that are all based off of the same ETA movement, and you're just paying for the difference in cases, just like with the Apple Watch.
     
  15. ninethirty macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    #15
    The moment you wear an Edition watch for the first time, it's going to take a massive hit. A year or so later, another hit. By the time you can't even upgrade the software on it anymore, it'll be worth no more than whatever the raw materials are worth at the time - maybe less depending on the motivations of the buyer.

    It's an absolute waste of money. Unless you're literally swimming in cash, it's a moronic buy. And even if you are swimming in cash, there's MUCH nicer watches you can buy for the same kind of cash.

     
  16. fitshaced macrumors 68000

    fitshaced

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    #16
    Not making any sense to you, you mean. A smart watch has advantages in the useage of it, not in the luxury watch category. The advantages of the Apple watch are found in the lower priced ones. Therefore, those functions are not luxury, they are built into a luxury design. But it's that very thing that makes it less luxury. It requires daily charging.
     
  17. douglasf13 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    #17
    If you don't combine technology and style/luxury in wearables, no one is going to buy and wear them, as Android Wear has proven.
     
  18. fitshaced macrumors 68000

    fitshaced

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    #18
    I don't disagree with that. But that wasn't my point. The Edition has no other competing luxury smart watch. But is it really competing with Rolex? Time will tell. My prediction is that other than the wanna be rappers and Kardashians, it won't have the same demand. Like I said, who wants to plug their luxury watch in every day?
     
  19. douglasf13 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    #19
    It's a limited edition model. It's not meant for mass adoption. It'll sell out quickly.

    People seem so hurt by such a silly thing. $10K is pocket change for many, many people in this world who don't care if the gold Apple Watch ends up in the back of a drawer for eternity.
     
  20. fitshaced macrumors 68000

    fitshaced

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    #20
    Limited edition? It's limited supply but that doesn't mean they won't continue production. There might even be newer versions of it next year. Yes, people can drop 10k easy. But for the folks in the market for a luxury watch that they will value, they will be less inclined to opt for the Apple Watch edition.
     
  21. douglasf13 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2010
    #21
    The Edition isn't for people doing major watch shopping. It's an add on to a cocktail dress at a high end store. You really underestimate the wealthy.
     
  22. fitshaced macrumors 68000

    fitshaced

    Joined:
    Jul 2, 2011
    #22
    No I don't. But I know that its not just the stupid wealthy buying luxury watches. Other people by Rolexes and value them. That's where Apple will fail. They won't attract enough of those. Do you think Rolex cater purely for the stupid rich?
     
  23. ninethirty macrumors 6502a

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2006
    #23
    And you misunderstand the add. It's cute that Apple fanboys and nerds think that the wealthy are going to give a **** about putting an Apple watch on their wrist, when they could wear practically anything else and get far more attention.

     
  24. Esoom macrumors 6502

    Esoom

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2010
    Location:
    Colorado
    #24
    There are ~13 million millionaires in the world, just let them buy the gold one...
     
  25. kerosene macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2008
    #25
    People on these boards don't hurt because there are too many silly people with too much money in this world who'll easily fork out $10000 - $17000 for an electronics gadget with the same functionality as the $350, that will be worthless except the approximately $1500 worth in gold in them in a very short time.

    People hurt because Apple lowered itself to make this. A huge departure from what this company used to stand for.
     

Share This Page