Is opposition to the existance of the Edition Watch class warfare?

[Rogifan]

Going back my original post, I was listening to a Core Intuition podcast shortly after John Gruber posted his thoughts on Watch pricing. Manton Reece was pretty ambivalent about the Edition Watch but Daniel Jalkut was very uncomfortable about it. It didn't matter to him that the $349 watch had the same functinality as the $10K watch. But I doubt it bothers Jalkut that a maxed out Mac Pro with 4K monitor will set one back $13K and most Apple customers could never afford that.

This is the psychology I'm trying to understand. No I can't afford a Mac Pro with 4K monitor but Apple offers me other options that are within my price range. Same with other Apple products. In my opinion the Watch is the most egalitarian product Apple has ever offered. Whether you spend $349 or $10K you're essentially getting the same product. The $10K watch doesn't have a better screen or more sensors or special software functionality. At most the person spending $10K will get a nicer box and perhaps a higher-touch service in retail stores but that's it.

 

[BvizioN]

So why do I buy things far less than I can afford ?

I could afford an iPhone 6 Plus in a blink of an eye without a seconds though, and yet, I have bought a brand new phone recently:

http://www.microsoft.com/en/mobile/phone/105/

It does phone calls, text messages and lasts almost a month on a battery.

Why would I buy such an item, when an iPhone 6+ is just a breath away ?

Wrong analogy.

Think of iPhone 6 plus made of gold, stainless steel and aluminium. All thre do exactly same thing. These 2 phones you mentioned are functionality so different.

So the difference on watches is based on the materials they are made and not on what they do. Which is a plus for us consumers. I wouldn't give a jack ass about the gold and wouldn't care of it was 100 thousands of dollars. I buy what I want our can afford, and is good to know that it does exactly what the most expensive one does.

 

[bunnicula]

Going back my original post, I was listening to a Core Intuition podcast shortly after John Gruber posted his thoughts on Watch pricing. Manton Reece was pretty ambivalent about the Edition Watch but Daniel Jalkut was very uncomfortable about it. It didn't matter to him that the $349 watch had the same functinality as the $10K watch. But I doubt it bothers Jalkut that a maxed out Mac Pro with 4K monitor will set one back $13K and most Apple customers could never afford that.

This is the psychology I'm trying to understand. No I can't afford a Mac Pro with 4K monitor but Apple offers me other options that are within my price range. Same with other Apple products. In my opinion the Watch is the most egalitarian product Apple has ever offered. Whether you spend $349 or $10K you're essentially getting the same product. The $10K watch doesn't have a better screen or more sensors or special software functionality. At most the person spending $10K will get a nicer box and perhaps a higher-touch service in retail stores but that's it.

I think this is how Ive overcame the opposition to the Edition.

 

[chris975d]

This is a really good point.

They do want to build products for everybody. They just wanted to throw in a wildcard this time around (the Edition) to see if people with a bit more discretionary income were interested in wearing something that other people either cannot afford or refuse to spend that much to buy.

As I've said many times, the psychology of this model of watch for them is fascinating.

It also makes me wonder what will happen if/when they get this Apple Electric Car initiative off the ground. You know that not everyone who can afford an iPhone will be able to afford a fully electric vehicle made by a company that's obsessed with perfection.

Maybe it'll be an "everyman's" car one day (assuming they ever launch it and it is successful), but you know it cannot start out that way. The R&D for it alone is quite high.

I do feel that this "Edition" watch HAS to be a test of sorts by Apple, given how they normally do pretty well in marketing goods. It seems like a "throw it against the wall and see if it sticks" type of thing. I DO think they are trying to see if they can be taken seriously as a watchmaker, and also to see just how much of that Asian "new money" they can get to buy this.

It's ALWAYS seemed out of character to me. That's why I'm not in agreement with it. Not because I can't buy one (I can), but can't fathom MANY people will.

 

[Piggie]

Fractionally higher? Com on! Apple computers are almost double the price of the rest.

Generally no.

I've seen the parts priced up a few times, and often there is not THAT much of a difference once you buy all the parts and a nice quality case to put them all inside.

Apple gets prices down due to sheer volume/bulk, that's how they make their money,

 

[bunnicula]

I do feel that this "Edition" watch HAS to be a test of sorts by Apple, given how they normally do pretty well in marketing goods. It seems like a "throw it against the wall and see if it sticks" type of thing. I DO think they are trying to see if they can be taken seriously as a watchmaker, and also to see just how much of that Asian "new money" they can get to buy this.

It's ALWAYS seemed out of character to me. That's why I'm not in agreement with it. Not because I can't buy one (I can), but can't fathom MANY people will.

If that guy who bought all those iPhones to (unsuccessfully) propose to his GF is any indication, this Edition model will fly off the shelves in Asia.

And, as I think we've safely concluded, I do not think they've manufactured that many of them to begin with.

I think I would've been far less surprised by this if they'd started smaller. Made these "plain" gold watches for "plain" prices. You know... sub 10k. Maybe around the 5-8k mark, depending on the band.

Why not save the higher end for ones with gold bands?

Why not see how that goes and then open this up by adding diamonds and so forth to bump up the price further in the future?

It's very unusual that they jumped from 1k to 10k like that.

I guess we shall see.

 

[Rogifan]

I do believe the quote kdarling just posted by an Apple executive helps clarify my stance...



Even a big wig from Apple states that their goal has typically been to "build products for everybody." That doesn't fit my definition of a luxury good.

I get the impression though that the resistance wasn't that the gold watch wouldn't fit the definition of luxury (or be exclusive enough) but that the gold watch is something not everyone can afford. But I think that argument is bogus considering the watch that "everybody" can afford is exactly the same as the more expensive gold one. Now it very well may be that the "rich" balk at the Edition watch because there's nothing different about it other than the gold casing. But I don't think that is the point Mansfield was making.

I think there are plenty of examples of "luxury" goods that are more expensive than their much cheaper counterpart even though the job they perform is esentially the same. Hermés sells a $450K Birkin bag. Does it do anything different than my $200 Coach purse? No. But it is ornamented with 18Kt gold and diamonds. And yeah if I was wealthy and money was no object I probably would own a Birkin bag (though not the $450K one). If that makes me look vain so be it.

 

[Arran]

I had a bit of a problem with the edition pricing, at first, because it seemed like Apple had completely lost its senses. Somewhat akin to how some sensible grown-up adults suddenly have a mid-life crisis and start doing stupid unpredictable stuff.

To explain, I've been a proponent of Apple's very thoughtful and sincere approach to the design of computing products for decades. (And when I say design, I mean functional design, not just product aesthetics - although Apple do that really well too). Over the years, I've bought tons of Apple products and - more importantly - directed many friends and relatives towards Apple products because I genuinely believed Apple would meet their needs (most are not tech savvy). I told them it was genuinely worth paying more for Apple. I staked my reputation on that.

And then this Edition "mid-life-crisis" anomaly appeared

I grappled to make sense of it as a legitimate product - but couldn't justify it's existence or understand it's purpose. It was a frivolous and ludicrously overpriced "bauble". Tacky, exceedingly bad value for money and completely out of character for Apple.

But thinking about it a bit more, I don't think it's intended to sell at all. Apple have dropped quite a few hints that they, themselves, don't consider it a serious product. It's just a $10K and a $17K placeholder that will make the Apple name appear when someone is looking for a watch in that price range. If they do sell any, I think Apple will be laughing behind the buyers' backs (and I'm sure there will be some.)

 

[chris975d]

I get the impression though that the resistance wasn't that the gold watch wouldn't fit the definition of luxury (or be exclusive enough) but that the gold watch is something not everyone can afford. But I think that argument is bogus considering the watch that "everybody" can afford is exactly the same as the more expensive gold one. Now it very well may be that the "rich" balk at the Edition watch because there's nothing different about it other than the gold casing. But I don't think that is the point Mansfield was making.

I think there are plenty of examples of "luxury" goods that are more expensive than their much cheaper counterpart even though the job they perform is esentially the same. Hermés sells a $450K Birkin bag. Does it do anything different than my $200 Coach purse? No. But it is ornamented with 18Kt gold and diamonds. And yeah if I was wealthy and money was no object I probably would own a Birkin bag (though not the $450K one). If that makes me look vain so be it.

That post of mine was toward the poster who was challenging me on my belief that Apple (in general, not just the Edition) does NOT make "luxury" products. And I think Mansfield's quote validates my belief that even Apple doesn't consider themselves a luxury good maker.

Or am I totally misreading the intent of your post?

 

[Tycho24]

Apple is like Honda in that both offer good value for the money, aren't terribly overpriced, and are damn near everywhere (iPhones wouldn't be everywhere if they were "luxury priced"). Kids have iPhones, every college aged student has an Apple laptop. That's hardly a luxury priced good. No matter how you want to attempt to spin it, nothing in Apple's regular lineup is luxury priced to anyone making a decent living. Hell, sign up for the Apple/Barclay credit card and you can 0% interest finance them all.

You just don't know what the word luxury means!!!
It seems you are defining it as: "something I can't afford". That is silliness.
I can buy a plush & luxurious bathrobe for $200. It can feel amazing and be just as good as one found in the highest top-notch spas & hotels. I could afford such an item, with a bit of saving... even if I worked part-time at McDonalds! Get it out of your skull that things are ONLY luxury if few people have access to them. If my hypothetical luxury bathrobe, through a twist of fate, suddenly became available at every Walmart in America for $29.99, would it suddenly no longer be luxurious and comfy? Would it change into burlap because a poor person owns one? No... of course not. Luxury items are such, as others have stated, if they bring comfort to you & there are not better options at similar price points.
Towards this end... Apple makes luxury electronic goods. There are NOT many options that can afford you a higher level of luxury & a more quality device at a similar price point. Similarly, Honda does NOT make luxury items. They provide a basic level of comfort with their vehicles which does not vary much from the level of comfort (read: luxury) you could obtain from any other similarly priced Toyota, Hyundai, et al.

 

[KPOM]

Fractionally higher? Com on! Apple computers are almost double the price of the rest.

How so? When you compare Windows PCs with comparable specs and build quality, the price is about the same.

 

[Rogifan]

I do feel that this "Edition" watch HAS to be a test of sorts by Apple, given how they normally do pretty well in marketing goods. It seems like a "throw it against the wall and see if it sticks" type of thing. I DO think they are trying to see if they can be taken seriously as a watchmaker, and also to see just how much of that Asian "new money" they can get to buy this.

It's ALWAYS seemed out of character to me. That's why I'm not in agreement with it. Not because I can't buy one (I can), but can't fathom MANY people will.

I agree (at least with the top paragraph). I also think though that Ive is obsessed with manufacturing and different techniques/processes and just wanted to work with gold.

 

[chris975d]

But thinking about it a bit more, I don't think it's intended to sell at all. Apple have dropped quite a few hints that they, themselves, don't consider it a serious product. It's just a $10K and a $17K placeholder that will make the Apple name appear when someone is looking for a watch in that price range. If they do sell any, I think Apple will be laughing behind the buyers' backs (and I'm sure there will be some.)

I do feel it's a test by Apple to see if they can get in the mindset of people that drop this kind of money on watches. But if that's the case, my point all along is that I feel (from being a customer in this market) that Apple hasn't figured out why people (the majority, not the "show offs") buy expensive watches.

 

[Mr. Buzzcut]

This is kind of stupid. You've got it completely wrong. Apple products aren't just fractionally better. It's like you're trying to say dumb things. Who was making computers out of aluminium before apple? Who was making unibody aluminium phones? Companies other than apple simply want to pump out cheap plastic crap. Steve Jobs is chiefly the person responsible for the amazing trend of products that aren't total crap. Apple is the company pushing everyone else forward. It isn't fractional. The gap was huge. Massive.

Aren't you aware that their products cost more? Everyone is always bitching about it...well no joke they're more expensive. They're better designed and put together. I appreciate that attention to detail. If you want crap, that's what Samsung is for. That's why they exist.

Luxury - it's stuff you don't need but really love having. Apple products are borderline luxury goods.

Companies like Dell and Sony were using aluminum, magnesium, and carbon fiber while Apple was making plastic crackbooks. Aluminum isn't necessarily expensive or luxurious but is far more recyclable than plastic.

 

[Arran]

If I can add my 2 cents to the discussion over the definition of "Luxury":

Sadly, over the last 20 or so years, manufacturers have dropped standards. Shaving a little bit of quality off here, a little bit of material off there. Over the years it compounded to the point where many mainstream products now are total crap. The don't fulfill their function particularly well and often break quickly requiring another cheap replacement.

You could say the marked demanded cheaper products and got what it asked for.

The problem now is that customers have forgotten, or - for the younger ones - never even got to know, what quality products look like.

Apple products, by and large, adhere to the old standards: Solid, workmanlike, lasting (debatable in some instances, I know) and generally something that you enjoy owning. It costs a bit more, but it's justified.

I think it's sad that nowadays, a product that is simply well-built and fit for purpose is often seen as a "luxury".

 

[Rogifan]

That post of mine was toward the poster who was challenging me on my belief that Apple (in general, not just the Edition) does NOT make "luxury" products. And I think Mansfield's quote validates my belief that even Apple doesn't consider themselves a luxury good maker.

Or am I totally misreading the intent of your post?

It might validate your belief but I took Mansfield's comment to mean there was concern if Apple made a very expensive watch it would be perceived that their products are not not for "everybody" anymore. And that's where I disagree considering there is an Watch for "everybody" that has the same functionality as the expensive one. I have my doubts the executive team concern was not being able to sell the expensive watch because Apple is considered a "mass market" company.

 

[Arran]

I do feel it's a test by Apple to see if they can get in the mindset of people that drop this kind of money on watches.

I'll bet Jony has a big bet on with Mansfield over how many Editions sell.

 

[Juan007]

It's not about class warfare -- it's about business.

Is there an "Edition" version of the iPhone that costs 20x more? Why not?

Is there an "Edition" version of the Tesla that costs 20x more? Why not?

 

[Rogifan]

But thinking about it a bit more, I don't think it's intended to sell at all. Apple have dropped quite a few hints that they, themselves, don't consider it a serious product. It's just a $10K and a $17K placeholder that will make the Apple name appear when someone is looking for a watch in that price range. If they do sell any, I think Apple will be laughing behind the buyers' backs (and I'm sure there will be some.)

I doubt Apple expects to sell a lot of Edition watches but I don't believe for one minute it's a "taking the piss" exercise. Tim Cook doesn't invest R&D in something just for a laugh.

----------

It's not about class warfare -- it's about business.

Is there an "Edition" version of the iPhone that costs 20x more? Why not?

Is there an "Edition" version of the Tesla that costs 20x more? Why not?

Because the Watch is considered fashion and jewelry and phones and cars aren't?

 

[uwdude]

I think it's an experiment by Apple. We will see how well they sell I guess. I don't think most people care if a rich person buys a solid gold watch. I don't think it's Apple's usual target market, though. I guess we shall see.

 

[chris975d]

You just don't know what the word luxury means!!!
It seems you are defining it as: "something I can't afford". That is silliness.
I can buy a plush & luxurious bathrobe for $200. It can feel amazing and be just as good as one found in the highest top-notch spas & hotels. I could afford such an item, with a bit of saving... even if I worked part-time at McDonalds! Get it out of your skull that things are ONLY luxury if few people have access to them. If my hypothetical luxury bathrobe, through a twist of fate, suddenly became available at every Walmart in America for $29.99, would it suddenly no longer be luxurious and comfy? Would it change into burlap because a poor person owns one? No... of course not. Luxury items are such, as others have stated, if they bring comfort to you & there are not better options at similar price points.
Towards this end... Apple makes luxury electronic goods. There are NOT many options that can afford you a higher level of luxury & a more quality device at a similar price point. Similarly, Honda does NOT make luxury items. They provide a basic level of comfort with their vehicles which does not vary much from the level of comfort (read: luxury) you could obtain from any other similarly priced Toyota, Hyundai, et al.

Oh lord...ok.

 

[Karnicopia]

There is already a company that offers a version of the apple watch crusted in diamonds with a gold link band for $115,000.

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/4...-watch-covered-diamonds-18k-gold-souls-10.htm

Then there's a company that will sell gold crusted iPhones for $4,000:

http://www.cio.com/article/2603530/...efore-apple-makes-device-official-images.html

Seems like there is already a market established for this kind of thing so it makes sense for Apple to want a piece especially since they want to market this as a piece of jewelry as well as a tech device. They can make some of the money these other companies have been making slapping luxury finishes on their products and they get an absurd amount of free publicity while they do it.

 

[Rogifan]

Ok I guess I have to amend my statement about Edition buyers getting nothing more than a nicer box.

http://9to5mac.com/2015/03/29/apple...ate-1-hour-appointments-no-lines/#more-371918

 

[bunnicula]

Ok I guess I have to amend my statement about Edition buyers getting nothing more than a nicer box.

http://9to5mac.com/2015/03/29/apple...ate-1-hour-appointments-no-lines/#more-371918

If you read that article all the way through, there's a bit in there about which customers get priority.

Edition, Watch, Sport.

So, basically, if you're buying an Edition, you trump all other customers, but if you're buying the Watch, those Sport buyers best wait for you.

I'm on the fence with this. I don't think anyone has ever made me wait longer buying something because someone else in the Apple store was buying something more expensive.

I dunno. Seems odd.

Why would one not be able to schedule whatever length of appointment they felt they needed? I get why the Sport only gets short appointments, because it's just a quick try on and a look at band color.

But, the Watch has SO many different bands. It could take some time to decide. The Edition has far fewer bands. I doubt it would take more time to choose an Edition than it would to choose a Watch series watch.

 

[Julien]

So the massive transfer of wealth from the middle class to the upper 1% over the last 3 decades hasn't triggered a class warfare. However Apple releasing a functionally identical product that is equally attainable to the middle class as well as offering the upper class a pretentiously visual differentiator will spark a class warfare?