Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Edition teardown/assay, if, when and how much

Piggie said:
He's very stuck on the word hollow, which seems to have this very negative term in the jewellery industry, Hollow gold = cheap and nasty.
Click to expand...

My mom had some solid gold necklace and ear rings, but she also once bought a hollow gold necklace. It was bigger than the necklaces she usually wore (if that thing had been solid, I shudder to think how much that would have weighed!), and certainly you could tell the difference in quality between it and the solid gold chains, but it was a fun, and in its own way nice and tasteful necklace. My mom would wear it for more casual occasions than she would her solid gold ones. Oh, but I believe the most expensive thing she had was the long pearl string necklace. That thing looked very tasteful and luxurious whenever she wore it.
 
Night Spring said:
My mom had some solid gold necklace and ear rings, but she also once bought a hollow gold necklace. It was bigger than the necklaces she usually wore (if that thing had been solid, I shudder to think how much that would have weighed!), and certainly you could tell the difference in quality between it and the solid gold chains, but it was a fun, and in its own way nice and tasteful necklace. My mom would wear it for more casual occasions than she would her solid gold ones. Oh, but I believe the most expensive thing she had was the long pearl string necklace. That thing looked very tasteful and luxurious whenever she wore it.
Click to expand...

Just so you understand my views.

I don't care what someone likes.
I don't look down on someone based upon the value of their possessions.
I'm not a snob (as someone here is) and say any watch under $xx is junk any only bought by peasants (I think that's a horrid view to have of people)

I would advocate a gold plated watch for those who love the look/colour of gold, but who are not fortunate enough to have the spare cash, perhaps due to employment/ill health or family that soaks up most of their money they earn.

There are literally thousand of very nice gold plated watches out there for, let's say, normal/typical modest income normal people to buy and enjoy and I would love to see them able to have an Apple watch also in the colour they like without being looked down upon my jewellery snobs.

At the end of the day if what you choose, you buy, and you own makes you happy, then that is all that matters, and it's no one else's business to judge you for not having something up to "their so called standards"

And I'm pleased your mom has something she likes and enjoys, irrespective of how it's made or how much it cost. None of that is important.
It's the joy it brings you, that matters. :)
 
Night Spring said:
Ok, so maybe "hollow gold" isn't the right term to use. However, what Piggie was saying is that the watch as a whole isn't solid gold (or solid aluminum or stainless steel). It has to have empty space inside for the S1 chip, sensors, etc. So isn't the metal outer casing of the watch (whether it be gold, aluminum or steel) kind of like the chocolate Easter egg? It's an outer shell, with space inside.
Click to expand...

While I don't know or care what this person is now proclaiming here is some of what they have said and it is simply inaccurate, deceptive and would almost certainly violate FTC rules and regulations.

"…There is no reason why it could not be an inner steel/other metal main structure of the watch, with a thinner 18ct solid gold shell around it.

Think of a 18ct egg shell around another metal inner shell.…."

https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/19802276/

"...The actual “case" looks like it could very well be, a thin eggshell around the inner body..."
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/19809236/


Now if you want to stipulate the case is solid 18K gold as Apple has said then you are not agreeing with them. Would you say you bought a Rolex with a thin hollow egg shell gold case because it is not a solid slab of gold and actually has to have room for parts inside?

Of course not and it is also WRONG to reference the :apple:Watch as thin hollow egg shell. The Edition will likely contain 31g to 62g of gold.
 
Digging up old posts from last September.... Nice :D

Again, I've never said "IT WILL"
Only that things could be, and even to this day none of us know for sure.

We don't know what shape and what amount of "other material" will be inside the case of the Apple Watches.

And we don't know the wall thickness of the case/shell either yet.

The renders I posted up, show what a 1mm thick wall thickness would look like.
Could be more, could be less.

There, and I'm guessing, probably is something the chip, and screen ect. are attached to, which is itself fitted inside the gold case.

Or, it is possible the chip etc is screwed into drilled and tapped holes in the back of the thick gold case.

We don't know, all we can do is guess, and come up with reasonable theories.

Julien is basing his guesses based on old mechanical watch design made by other companies.

Whether you can expertly apply this to Apple and a brand new Smart Watch I don't know.
I'm sure Apple decided to make this new device they way THEY thought it should be made, and not just made it the same way as every other watch maker as "that's the way it's always been done"

Thick gold or thin gold.
No internal secondary structure (chips screwed to gold) or a secondary internal structure which holds everything and then this all fits inside a thinner gold case.

We don't know. Could be either.
Does not mean we can't come up with ideas and theory's whilst we're waiting for the real thing and see how Apple have actually done it.

Chill :)
 
Julien said:
The Edition will likely contain 31g to 62g of gold.
Click to expand...

Piggie said:
Julien is basing his guesses based on old mechanical watch design made by other companies.

Whether you can expertly apply this to Apple and a brand new Smart Watch I don't know.
I'm sure Apple decided to make this new device they way THEY thought it should be made, and not just made it the same way as every other watch maker as "that's the way it's always been done"

Thick gold or thin gold.
No internal secondary structure (chips screwed to gold) or a secondary internal structure which holds everything and then this all fits inside a thinner gold case.

We don't know. Could be either.
Does not mean we can't come up with ideas and theory's whilst we're waiting for the real thing and see how Apple have actually done it.
Click to expand...

So I'm confused. If the watch is made the same way traditional mechanical watches are made, then it doesn't look like a Easter egg? If not, what does it look like, then?

I thought all watches were basically "Easter eggs," with the working parts inside, and an outer casing to protect the components.

Also, what is your estimate of the amount of gold in the watch? Does it overlap with Julien's estimate?
 
Night Spring said:
So I'm confused. If the watch is made the same way traditional mechanical watches are made, then it doesn't look like a Easter egg? If not, what does it look like, then?

I thought all watches were basically "Easter eggs," with the working parts inside, and an outer casing to protect the components.

Also, what is your estimate of the amount of gold in the watch? Does it overlap with Julien's estimate?
Click to expand...

Here is what they have said.

"...It could be a 1 micron thick sheet of solid gold, and worth a few dollars...."
https://forums.macrumors.com/posts/20133873/
 
Piggie said:
Thick gold or thin gold.
No internal secondary structure (chips screwed to gold) or a secondary internal structure which holds everything and then this all fits inside a thinner gold case.

We don't know. Could be either.
Does not mean we can't come up with ideas and theory's whilst we're waiting for the real thing and see how Apple have actually done it.
Click to expand...

Julien is correct. For Apple to use the term "18K gold" without qualification, it cannot have an internal secondary structure consisting of another metal. The "eggshell" as you have defined it must serve as the supporting structure for the innards. That said, I don't think the term "eggshell" is inaccurate as it's just semantics but certainly no internal secondary structure consisting of another metal other than 18K gold. We can safely expect the entire watch case to be crafted from 18K gold.
 
Night Spring said:
Also, what is your estimate of the amount of gold in the watch? Does it overlap with Julien's estimate?
Click to expand...

It's all good fun us speculating :)

Let me show you actual calculations of mass and value of 18k gold taken direct from that scale model with it's 1mm thick walled solid gold shell.

(how accurate this model is to the real product is of course totally unknown)
It is just based upon all known data and images with some educated guesswork. :)

2v8obwi.jpg



And for a laugh and hope you all love it...... :p

42g60.jpg
 
1. It's either gold plated or it's not. There will be no dual-layer case that is somehow still called 18K solid gold.

2. There is really no need to screw things down to the case in the watch. If the circuit board and battery and screen, etc. are all glued or screwed together, they can pop into the watch as one unit and be held in place by the back like so many other watches.

3. I'll be very surprised if the case is 1mm thick throughout. I think the alloy will permit thinner material while maintaining strength. Other companies have done this with aluminum in their laptops and Cannonade has aluminum bikes that people describe as beer can thin. They are somewhat brittle as many would not expect from aluminum but they are strong and very light. Apple's unique alloy may be along these lines.
 
Piggie said:
If 42 grams of gold, which is the approx. number I cam up with, based upon a 1mm wall thickness, has a gold value of approx. $1200

Fitted with the same internals as a $349 model.

With the addition of a higher quality glass/sapphire front and back, let's add another $50 for that.

So, we're looking at, $1200, plus say $250 internals, plus $50 for the front/back material.

Brings us to $1500

How do you get to $5500 ?

Please Explain your method of calculations.

What's the extra $4000 for ?

Just sheer profit "Apple Fashion Tax?"
Click to expand...

Apple aren't going to sell the watch for the same amount it costs to make.

Think iphone, 200 dollars materials etc and it sells for $650? (I'm UK)

There's loads of extra costs to consider
 
Pez555 said:
...There's loads of extra costs to consider
Click to expand...
Exactly, there are tons of expenses involved in the entire precious metals supply chain that don't show in the spot price. You can't just throw a pound of Au in a box and UPS it like Al (although it does weigh a good bit less :D). Au is complicated, expensive and an extreme liability to handle. Au must be assayed, weighed and secured through out the chain. I bet even the safes Apple is installing cost over $50,000 each.

Take a simple gold band (ring) for example. Unlike the Edition it has no moving parts, no electronics and is relatively simple to manufacture and one single piece. However you will pay many times the spot gold value to buy one.
 
Piggie said:
It's all good fun us speculating :)

Let me show you actual calculations of mass and value of 18k gold taken direct from that scale model with it's 1mm thick walled solid gold shell.

(how accurate this model is to the real product is of course totally unknown)
It is just based upon all known data and images with some educated guesswork. :)

Image


And for a laugh and hope you all love it...... :p

Image
Click to expand...

I can't see how you think the Watch will have $1200 worth of gold, and cost less than $2000. That would make it one of the lowest margin products Apple makes, which is completely opposite to conventional pricing strategy. Higher end products have higher margins to make it worth it despite the lower volume.
 
kmj2318 said:
I can't see how you think the Watch will have $1200 worth of gold, and cost less than $2000. That would make it one of the lowest margin products Apple makes, which is completely opposite to conventional pricing strategy. Higher end products have higher margins to make it worth it despite the lower volume.
Click to expand...

I simply presented a possibility. I did not state what will happen.

Apple is making a nice markup/profit on the $349 model I'm sure.

So, we COULD and please note the word COULD here as there are no rules Apple has to follow.

Lets take the guess of $1200 for the gold in the body and that is just a guesstimate of course.

All we are doing is taking the $349 model, swapping the Aluminium out, which as that is not made for free, with the Gold.

We are just replacing the Value of Aluminium stock metal with the Value of Gold stock metal.

There is no reason for there to be a massive manufacturing difference in any of the metals, unless you want there to be.

You could easy, assuming the $1200 is not a million miles off, make the edition for under $2000 and still clear many hundreds of dollars clear profit.

I'm not saying this will be the case.
Only that there is no real reason why is COULD not be the case.

There is nothing magical about gold, it's just another metal, it's only as magical as you want to make it.
 
Piggie said:
I simply presented a possibility. I did not state what will happen.

Apple is making a nice markup/profit on the $349 model I'm sure.

So, we COULD and please note the word COULD here as there are no rules Apple has to follow.

Lets take the guess of $1200 for the gold in the body and that is just a guesstimate of course.

All we are doing is taking the $349 model, swapping the Aluminium out, which as that is not made for free, with the Gold.

We are just replacing the Value of Aluminium stock metal with the Value of Gold stock metal.

There is no reason for there to be a massive manufacturing difference in any of the metals, unless you want there to be.

You could easy, assuming the $1200 is not a million miles off, make the edition for under $2000 and still clear many hundreds of dollars clear profit.

I'm not saying this will be the case.
Only that there is no real reason why is COULD not be the case.

There is nothing magical about gold, it's just another metal, it's only as magical as you want to make it.
Click to expand...

This is so ignorant I don't even know where to start. The alloying process alone is different, for starters. You can discard and mill excess aluminum all day long but gold must be meticulously recovered. I doubt the manufacturing process would be remotely similar. The handling and shipping chain at every step must be far more secure to account for the high value of such materials and the finished product.

That's just for starters. It would be great if you listened and processed information as much as you posted.
 
rkuo said:
This is so ignorant I don't even know where to start. The alloying process alone is different, for starters. You can discard and mill excess aluminum all day long but gold must be meticulously recovered. I doubt the manufacturing process would be remotely similar. The handling and shipping chain at every step must be far more secure to account for the high value of such materials and the finished product.

That's just for starters. It would be great if you listened and processed information as much as you posted.
Click to expand...

There is no reason for there to be a massive manufacturing difference in any of the metals, unless you want there to be.

Note in BOLD

----------
rkuo said:
This is so ignorant I don't even know where to start. The alloying process alone is different, for starters. You can discard and mill excess aluminum all day long but gold must be meticulously recovered. I doubt the manufacturing process would be remotely similar. The handling and shipping chain at every step must be far more secure to account for the high value of such materials and the finished product.

That's just for starters. It would be great if you listened and processed information as much as you posted.
Click to expand...

There is no reason for there to be a massive manufacturing difference in any of the metals, unless you want there to be.

Note in BOLD

The reason you gave are all made up reasons.
I'm not suggesting you treat gold like Aluminium and throw scrap away, not that you do with Aluminium anyway as all scrap and swarf is looked after with any metal.
However it does not cost 50 cents to machine aluminium and a few thousand dollars to machine gold PLUS it's material value.

Not when there is no intricate working on it, just a rectangular blob shape
 
rkuo said:
This is so ignorant I don't even know where to start. The alloying process alone is different, for starters. You can discard and mill excess aluminum all day long but gold must be meticulously recovered. I doubt the manufacturing process would be remotely similar. The handling and shipping chain at every step must be far more secure to account for the high value of such materials and the finished product.

That's just for starters. It would be great if you listened and processed information as much as you posted.
Click to expand...

You are so correct and it is totally different. Another big difference is Au is not machine lathe cut like Al and SS. Each piece is casted to spec. Casting is a much slower process that requires lots of time and energy and is many times more complicated than auto lathe machine cutting is. It is a totally different animal that requires metallurgy skills to master.
 
Piggie said:
I simply presented a possibility. I did not state what will happen.

Apple is making a nice markup/profit on the $349 model I'm sure.

So, we COULD and please note the word COULD here as there are no rules Apple has to follow.

Lets take the guess of $1200 for the gold in the body and that is just a guesstimate of course.

All we are doing is taking the $349 model, swapping the Aluminium out, which as that is not made for free, with the Gold.

We are just replacing the Value of Aluminium stock metal with the Value of Gold stock metal.

There is no reason for there to be a massive manufacturing difference in any of the metals, unless you want there to be.

You could easy, assuming the $1200 is not a million miles off, make the edition for under $2000 and still clear many hundreds of dollars clear profit.

I'm not saying this will be the case.
Only that there is no real reason why is COULD not be the case.

There is nothing magical about gold, it's just another metal, it's only as magical as you want to make it.
Click to expand...

Are you a metallurgist?
 
Piggie said:
There is no reason for there to be a massive manufacturing difference in any of the metals, unless you want there to be.

Note in BOLD

----------



There is no reason for there to be a massive manufacturing difference in any of the metals, unless you want there to be.

Note in BOLD

The reason you gave are all made up reasons.
I'm not suggesting you treat gold like Aluminium and throw scrap away, not that you do with Aluminium anyway as all scrap and swarf is looked after with any metal.
However it does not cost 50 cents to machine aluminium and a few thousand dollars to machine gold PLUS it's material value.

Not when there is no intricate working on it, just a rectangular blob shape
Click to expand...

How do *YOU* know they are made up? You bold this text "unless you want there to be" as if you just said something with meaning. Your post is in fact totally non-responsive to points and facts you are being given and full of meaningless statements like the above. Then you follow up saying I made things up by ACTUALLY making things up like "it's just a blob it doesn't need to be different".

You think Apple uses a normal aluminum CNC mill process on gold? Oh look ... someone on the internet is wrong again. I don't know why I even bother sometimes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back