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

Fitbit Continues to Outpace Apple Watch in Broader Wearables Market

silroc said:
Love my Fitbit
Would never get Apple Watch at its size/ price. Who wants to workout in that?
Click to expand...

I think you're in the minority if Fitbit's CEO's comments and my observation of co-workers is any indication.

There is not a single person in my office who's had a Fitbit for more than a year. Apple Watch owners, on the other hand, all still wear theirs daily.

Fitbit's CEO admitted as much on an earnings call and cited lower usage of their simpler devices as the reason why they were launching a smart watch.

In the long run, I'm convinced people will want more beauty and utility on their wrists. It will replace both traditional watches and simple health trackers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ksnell and Robin4
Gasu E. said:
I doubt they care. Apple is driving for revenue share and profits. They don't care about units, especially the units of down-market products. IDC is not reporting revenue; but based on those unit tables it would seem Apple is #1, even in the larger wearable market.
[doublepost=1463419763][/doublepost]

You are right; but everyone is missing the greater point that Apple is most likely #1 in revenues.
Click to expand...

And this is exactly where it leaves Apple. Revenue down for the 1st time in 13 years, investors dumping their shares and more voices of Apple fans asking serious questions regarding the innovation and technological advancements of Apple products in comparison to similar or cheaper priced products

FitBit actually do provide a smartwatch, I just do not know how they factor into these numbers though. But it is significantly cheaper than the Apple watch and offers similar features: https://www.fitbit.com/uk/blaze

I do like Apple's stance of paying a bit more extra for a seamless amazing experience, but more than recently I have personally not felt the same regarding their products and there are numerous voices online and in real life who feel the same.

I just think this mentality lets Apple rest on their laurels, when they should be chasing the number 1 spot in revenue AND market share through the provision of world class products again

They do not create the best PCs, iPhone has been arguably passed by S7 Edge (although some tech sites do not want to admit it). They still have the upper hand on laptop design and software, but not the hardware. Smartwatch is a toss up really, but I guess a Samsung Gear paired with an S7 Edge can perform just as well as an iPhone and Apple Watch
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Stella
Dilster3k said:
Props to this company for holding their ground. Examples like this, and Spotify outdoing Apple Music is proof that Apple needs to drastically up their game.
Click to expand...

not really. you don't need to be the leader to make money. in fact, spotify is still writing red numbers. (afaik)
 
Not entirely surprised. iPhone didn't instantly make BlackBerry and Nokia irrelevant. I remember BlackBerry was still considered a serious option for a lot of my friends when the iPhone 4 was out.
[doublepost=1463433258][/doublepost]
Dilster3k said:
Props to this company for holding their ground. Examples like this, and Spotify outdoing Apple Music is proof that Apple needs to drastically up their game.
Click to expand...

You are misremembering history. See the comment of mine that's merged with this one.
[doublepost=1463433741][/doublepost]
Razeus said:
Buy Fitbit Apple. You'll have various price points covered.
Click to expand...

But everyone says Apple has too many products and that Tim Cook is the new Sculley... and then say Tim Cook should release more products. This is not something Steve Jobs would have done! Unless you count the iPod which ranged from classic to nano to cover a wide range of price points and use cases.
 
Dilster3k said:
Props to this company for holding their ground. Examples like this, and Spotify outdoing Apple Music is proof that Apple needs to drastically up their game.
Click to expand...

The only area in which Spotify is outdoing Apple Music is in operating losses. I've read numerous articles that indicate Apple Music's growth is outpacing what Spotify was doing in its first year.

How long has Spotify been around, five years? Let's compare these two services in another five years.
 
silroc said:
Do you think Apple is happy that they can't take Fitbit market share?

I bet they would love to
Click to expand...
Not if it meant giving up their margins to do so. Remember - market share is the means, but profit is the end.

When you price your product at a premium level, you have to be mentally prepared to not serve a significant portion of the potential customer base out there.

Ask anyone out there. Would they prefer the Apple Watch's profits or Fitbit's market share.
 
  • Like
Reactions: chucksav
Apple Watch was too expensive, especially with the strong dollar. Apple should have gone for volume. If people see other people wearing an Apple Watch, they are more likely to buy it. Game consoles are subsidised initially for a reason. The platform needs to get traction.

The battery only last for a day, which I find annoying for a watch. I don't understand why it needs so much power, when it is off most of the time? Perhaps notification could be turned off and only activated when you look at the watch, or every 5 minute or so.
 
From the data I was able to find, in 2015, the average price paid for a FitBit was $88. The average price paid for an Apple Watch was $529, or 6x more. So using the numbers in the above table, FitBit is selling 3.2x more units, but Apple is pulling in nearly twice the revenue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Xtremjeepn, Michael Scrip and Pufichek
Will Fitbit be able to ward off Samsung, Xiaomi and Misfit on low end commodity fitness bands? I doubt it.


Commodity products are fiercely competitive and have little profit margin.
 
chucksav said:
From the data I was able to find, in 2015, the average price paid for a FitBit was $88. The average price paid for an Apple Watch was $529, or 6x more. So using the numbers in the above table, FitBit is selling 3.2x more units, but Apple is pulling in nearly twice the revenue.
Click to expand...

Profit margins are probably much better as well.
 
musio said:
Apple really need to come out with a fitness band to compete. 30 day Battery life, sleep tracking, notifications, music control, Siri and a food database. Sold. More fitness people in the Apple ecosystem
Click to expand...

I appreciate some of your wishes you have, but if you think you are getting 30 Day battery life anytime soon, then I suggest you wait for Gen 6 of the Apple Watch, because we are nowhere near this. Maybe 7 days in the future. You can only fit a Watch battery so big into a compact device on your wrist.
[doublepost=1463444233][/doublepost]
silroc said:
Love my Fitbit
Would never get Apple Watch at its size/ price. Who wants to workout in that?
Click to expand...

I do agree with you to an extent. I work out regularly and it I would hate to damage my $600.00 Stainless. I actually considered picking up a Sport model additionally, with the aluminum and its lightweight capabilities. And the Sport model has dropped significantly.
 
The made up term "wearables" is so non-desctipive and mind bogglingly stupid that I just can't read it and not shake my head. We couldn't just come up with a new thing to call them? How about just using the words "wearable computer"? Because the word wearable can be anything. A hat, pair of jeans... hell, my copy of Stephen King's IT can technically be a wearable. It's ridiculous.
 
When, if ever, will Fitbit data seamlessly go into the Health app? I would like that very much. I just got a Withings go for the times when I want/need something that will fit into my pocket and to monitor sleep. Well, I haven't been able to successfully get it to monitor my sleep yet. For that reason, it is only needed during times when I need it in my pocket (I am a basketball official).
 
Sevendaymelee said:
The made up term "wearables" is so non-desctipive and mind bogglingly stupid that I just can't read it and not shake my head. We couldn't just come up with a new thing to call them? How about just using the words "wearable computer"? Because the word wearable can be anything. A hat, pair of jeans... hell, my copy of Stephen King's IT can technically be a wearable. It's ridiculous.
Click to expand...

All terms are made up.
 
Karma*Police said:
I think you're in the minority if Fitbit's CEO's comments and my observation of co-workers is any indication.

There is not a single person in my office who's had a Fitbit for more than a year. Apple Watch owners, on the other hand, all still wear theirs daily.

Fitbit's CEO admitted as much on an earnings call and cited lower usage of their simpler devices as the reason why they were launching a smart watch.

In the long run, I'm convinced people will want more beauty and utility on their wrists. It will replace both traditional watches and simple health trackers.
Click to expand...
I've had my surge for over a year and no intention of getting an apple watch to replace it. 4 days of battery life and Gps.
 
I bought an Apple watch and returned it to get a fitbit. The fitbit was less than half the price as the Apple watch and did everything I needed it to do in terms of fitness tracking etc.

The apple watch is just too expensive based on the functionality that it provides. The premium has always been steep on apple products but often justifiable by ease of use and integration. The apple watch had little function, was not easy to use and did little to integrate itself into my life.

If Apple gets the price down to around $200 I would consider one but at $350+ (cnd) it just isn't worth it.
 
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