Remember when quality watches where things your cherished and passed down in your family, actually increasing in value the longer they were around?
Apple just downgraded the whole thing to another trite consumer toy.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
High-End 18-Karat Gold Apple Watch Could Cost Up to $1,200
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Remember when quality watches where things your cherished and passed down in your family, actually increasing in value the longer they were around?
Apple just downgraded the whole thing to another trite consumer toy.
A diamond for the cover for the display would be ridiculously expensive. It wouldn't be good to use that and expect people to buy it.
What's interesting is that there are ways to strengthen glass with PVD ion process, which is what they are using for the non-Sapphire models on the watches and phones. It's not common knowledge, but it's quite possible that maybe they can strengthen Saphire with this process as well?
I'm sure they will be using the PVD with gold sputtering process since it only uses a very small amount of gold, the thickness is only about 2 microns thick and it's a LOT cheaper than traditional gold plating, and it's a LOT stronger of a bond which makes it more durable. Apple can also do various types of bronze finishes, black chrome, various colors, rainbow coating, etc. with PVD coating technologies.
If Apple uses PVD sputtered gold, the price difference might not be that much, so this $1200 sounds more like speculation rather than reality.
Obviously, stainless steel is more expensive than aluminum and it's more expensive to fabricate, so the material and labor is more expensive. So I don't know how Apple is going to price these watches due to sapphire, stainless steel and gold plating and strap options.
I have a self-winding chronometer (Breitling) and the case depth is 16.95mm. It easily fits under the cuff of all my (off-the-peg) shirts. Case size and shape is all down to personal preference, that's all
There are many "chunky" watches and a very few might have difficulty fitting under a shirt cuff, however none that I'm aware of where the owner couldn't have the problem solved merely by moving the cuff button a few millimetres - the work of 10 minutes with a needle and thread.
Last edited:
Don't assume that this product will be updated every 12 months. Look at the MacPro, MacMini and other models that went a LOT longer than 12 months between updates.
They might have a more expensive watch with more features and offer both for those that have different needs.
Samsung has a ton of different watches, so Apple might just be getting ready to offer a variety of products and not really discontinue this product.
I would see them dropping the price and coming out with a replacement premium watch every so often, but realistically they don't have a lot of room to cram that many additional features, so the real estate they have to work with is limited.
I think they'll probably sell between 3 and 5 million AppleWatches but I don't see much more than that for the first year. I could be wrong, but I just see this as an add on device and that not all iPhone users will be buying one.
I quite like the look of it, obviously I'd have to see it in real life to properly judge it. But at these mooted prices, this is more of a fashion/designer watch than a "quality" watch. Think more Armani/Gucci than Patek Phillipe/Panerai.
Designer watches are from about £500-£1000 and devalue the millisecond you buy them. Patek/Panerai, well, the sky's the limit but generally they will increase in value over time.
Last edited:
Cook didn't learn the lessons from Jobs about how too many SKUs are bad for business, clog up the inventory channels and make it harder for the customer to decide on what they want. Also too many SKUs are just bad business.
Jobs 2nd coming remove all of Apple's pointless SKUs. The sad thing is there will not be a 3rd coming of Jobs to remove Apples over abundance of SKUs. Apple was never about catering for everybody as it is now. Apple was always about creating the best and catering for the best. Cook has forgotten this.
Here they place the 5C to the right, so by your logic we have now "proven" that the Watch Edition is the entry level watch for $349?
http://www.apple.com/iphone/compare/
Hardened glass has a reputation for being tougher than sapphire too. Sapphire is extremely scratch resistant, but it shatters. Hardened glass is resistant to shattering, but it scratches more readily. The choice between these materials is at the split between whether you want a watch that is sports oriented, or fashion oriented.
High end manufacturers can use proprietary techniques for toughening sapphire, but that comes at a serious premium.
Even if the watch was solid 18k gold, people are assuming that it would be worthless after two years. The fact of the matter is, you will still be in possession of a 1/2oz of solid 18k gold.
But your theory about a gold coated stainless steel using ion deposition is the most likely. Apple are not marketing this watch as a heirloom grade timepiece. It is an object that shares the same design cues as a heirloom grade timepiece, but it will be priced so you can purchase a new one from the manufacturer every two years. And unlike traditional watch companies, Apple have no 'luxury' brand status in this market to undermine.
You're making the assumption that only relevant phrases are used in the marketing of this watch. What makes you sure of that?
Pretty much this, a traditional watch will last you a lifetime or even your children can inherit it, but it would be quite funny if right now we owned expensive watches with tech from the 90s. Whether we like it or not, today's gadgets go obsolete and making people overly attached to it is unnatural.
What Apple have achieved is a sort of extreme version of 'My Grandfather's axe' though. 'My iPhone' is whatever the highest storage configuration is, every two years when the contract expires.
And the experience of upgrading is increasingly seamless too. You still need to plug it into iTunes for your media, but sooner or later, your phone will be whatever device is currently logged in with your Apple ID.
Will there ever be that guy selling fake ones from the inside of his trench coat? Cause I'll buy one of those.
If it's gold plated, in many markets they would have to be explicit about that. Or they would be breaking the law. Assuming the labelling on the watch does not change, it would have to be solid 18 carat gold.
The Edition collection features six uniquely elegant expressions of Apple Watch. Each has a watch case crafted from 18-carat gold that our metallurgists have developed to be up to twice as hard as standard gold. The display is protected by polished sapphire crystal. And an exquisitely designed strap provides a striking complement.
From Apple's website. If this turned out to be gold plating they will be in a world of pain soon enough. Not just people losing faith in them, but the law coming down on them strongly.
Last edited:
This is a little shortsighted of Apple.
For a device that's likely to be upgraded yearly spending 1.2k on a gold version of it is incredibly steep. If you spend over $1k on a high end Rolex/Omega/Patek or whatever then you can expect it to last a long time or indefinitely without being superseeded by something much improved. Watches like that are ironically 'timeless'. Having an Apple Watch several generations old is going to feel dated very quickly.
Apple better offer some good trade ins or I can't see this selling well at all. Sadly smart watches are still like smartphones, they last a couple of years, perhaps 5 at most then they are at the end of their useful life. On this high end Swiss manufactures have got them beat.
Eager to see what this Watch is like in 3 years from now. But I think the far bigger news is things like Apple Pay and the continuity features between iOS and OS X.
For a device that's likely to be upgraded yearly spending 1.2k on a gold version of it is incredibly steep. If you spend over $1k on a high end Rolex/Omega/Patek or whatever then you can expect it to last a long time or indefinitely without being superseeded by something much improved. Watches like that are ironically 'timeless'. Having an Apple Watch several generations old is going to feel dated very quickly.
Apple better offer some good trade ins or I can't see this selling well at all. Sadly smart watches are still like smartphones, they last a couple of years, perhaps 5 at most then they are at the end of their useful life. On this high end Swiss manufactures have got them beat.
Eager to see what this Watch is like in 3 years from now. But I think the far bigger news is things like Apple Pay and the continuity features between iOS and OS X.
Those aren't even close to being comparable.
Gold case Rolexes cost above $20k.
Gold case new Pateks cost above $30k.
Also the target customer segment for these most likely don't care about losing the $1200-$3000 on this item.
You really can't buy much high end jewelry for that amount. Maybe a ring or something discreet from Harry Winston etc.
So this item really isn't for the average Joe.
$8000-10,000k is entry level for a Rolex. Patek starts at $20,000.
Rolex make an entry level 'tool watch' aimed at people who are more concerned with functionality over luxury, and that watch, the Tudor Pelagos, is $3800-4000. This is the Rolex equivalent of the 'sport' Apple Watch. It was likely introduced to compete with the Omega Planet Ocean, which used to go for ~$4000, but now goes for $5000-6000+ depending on edition.
But you don't need to buy the gold version. Unlike all these manufacturers, the entry level Apple Watch starts at $350.
First, this watch will not be solid 18 k gold. Not at that price point. Guaranteed. Apple already said the metal is mixed with something to make it harder than gold, hence, it is not pure gold.
Second, I am a watch collector. I have more invested in watches than I would care to mention. The watches I collect however are just that, investments. They often hold their value or many gain value over time. A consumer electronic like this will not. It will depreciate just like any consumer electronic will. And it will probably depreciate a lot more than the base watches which will all do the exact same thing as the more expensive version.
Will people still buy it? Yes, because people are foolish with their money.
Second, I am a watch collector. I have more invested in watches than I would care to mention. The watches I collect however are just that, investments. They often hold their value or many gain value over time. A consumer electronic like this will not. It will depreciate just like any consumer electronic will. And it will probably depreciate a lot more than the base watches which will all do the exact same thing as the more expensive version.
Will people still buy it? Yes, because people are foolish with their money.
Hmmmm, let's see: for that amount money I can have a gimmicky, toy watch that is dork certified and utterly worthless. Or, I can buy me a Tag Heuer, a lower end Rolex, or any other quality watch that's classy and has staying power.
Tough decision.
NOT.
Tough decision.
NOT.
At $1200, I might be interested in the Apple Watch Edition. I really thought it would be higher.