I'd have loved it if he had come out with a version of the classic Jobs quip about the Mac: "It's so amazing that even when it puts you out of business you'll want to buy one for your kids"
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.
Jony Ive On iWatch: Switzerland is in Trouble
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I'd have loved it if he had come out with a version of the classic Jobs quip about the Mac: "It's so amazing that even when it puts you out of business you'll want to buy one for your kids"
Well, the Swiss watch industry is probably only a very small part of the swiss economy. I can't tell you what percentage of the complete swiss watch business is above $4k, but I guess Swatch group probably gobbles up a big part of that pie, and the swatch line itself takes a big part of sub $200.
The true luxury brands do not rely on economies of scale and retail volume, but in stead of brand recognition and scarcity. A friend of mine just bought a bronze Panerai ($25,000) of which only 150 pieces were made. There were multiple bidders and the price went up like crazy.
My Rolex GMT Master II with blue black bezel that was bought in december last year has already gone up in price and is basically impossible to get without waiting several months. The waiting list in the local jewellery store is more than 6 months.
There is a renaissance going on of small independent luxury makers. Many small independents used to make close copies of existing top luxury brands such as IWC. A good example is Sinn from Frankfurt that makes high quality IWC copies and is now finally starting to innovate themselves.
But the availability of customisable calibres and better schools has enabled many new and small watch makers to enter the market with innovative new products.
Especially at the very high end there are some really new and inventive watch makers that make incredible pieces of art. Many of them have ridiculous functions (e.g. a watch that has built in texas hold'em and dices games) and are ugly, but they sell like hotcakes.
Last edited:
Argh, I didn't recognise that one. Can't say that I like the design of that watch. I hope it's not the inspiration for iWatch.
Are you guys really taking his words that seriously. Its obvious he's very excited about their new product and have great confidence in it's potential success. Just maybe Apple will do in the watch market what it did in the cell phone maket, who knows. This stuff is to unpredictable these days to know for sure how its going to turn out or if it will change the industry or not. No one can predict the future when it comes to technology it moves way to much. Beside the fact that todays generation of young folk is totally different than yesterdays gen of young folk makes it even more interesting to sit back and watch (no pun intended).
Jony Ive would even think a chocolate cake was amazing.. ....
The Swiss have nothing to fear..
People will buy iWatch when available, but the entire world is not gonna switch like the how Steve Jobs changed everything with the iPhone..
Jony may want it that way, but he won't get it.
The Swiss have nothing to fear..
People will buy iWatch when available, but the entire world is not gonna switch like the how Steve Jobs changed everything with the iPhone..
Jony may want it that way, but he won't get it.
Interesting, I'd like to see the "list of reasons for buying a high quality Swiss mechanical watch," and see where "telling time" is. It must be a pretty long list though, if that reason is pretty far down.
- Looks nice, i.e., Jewelry
- Telling time
- Investment (possible)
- umm...
I wear mine to tell time and look nice. I must be the exception.
I was reading that although even Swiss luxury brands have quartz models, they only represent 5% of their sales, going in the vast majority to women.
And there are nice looking ones. That tells you something about what people think about electronic watches.
And there are nice looking ones. That tells you something about what people think about electronic watches.
I was meaning about myself caring about having nicer timepieces. Even though I am most likely going to get an iwatch, it won't fully replace my other watches, because of my love for them.
Very impressive considering we're talking about watches. I would attempt to do the math if we were living in pre-iPhone days but today, 800,000 is a rounding error in both unit sales and profits for Apple.
There's nothing careful about analyzing the impact of a product you don't know anything about. That's just spouting ignorance.
Just remember that Balsillie and co argued with the same conviction as you. So many people have tried to pretend that they are in a different category and Apple will not affect them. Nokia/BB in phones, Nintendo/Sega in gaming, Rovio/Nomad in music, the various camera makers...
Now there's a good example for you to ignore since it doesn't fit your world view. Point and shoot camera makers and their fans used to insist that they were in a different category from smartphones. They weren't, and are dying. SLR fans then said that for sure 100% they aren't in the same category as phones because they are 1000 times better and have tons of features not found on phones. Well, they aren't immune- some fairly large newspapers are now ditching photographers in favor of just having journalists use their cell phones. Some SLR makers are declining, others have had to cut prices and improve performance to stay where they are. None have been able to put their feet up and relax. You see, even the tiniest shred of overlap can have a big impact.
So where's the overlap? Two huge places-
1) Features. High-end watches are not just jewelry, if they were there would be no need for the hands to turn. Their users insist on features, starting with the ability to tell time and going from there. If their users care about features, then features are going to be a vulnerability for any old-school watchmaker going forward.
2) Fashion. You don't see a lot of Elizabethan collar stores doing well these days. Fashions change, and Apple is quite capable of changing them. There are plenty of billionaires who use iPhones. If there are no young people with Swiss watches, and no celebrities with them, they risk turning into the opposite of fashion- old man watches.
Easily done.
You will never concede based on arguments. You are driven entirely by emotion. You like expensive watches. I get that. You probably keep an eye out for them at garage sales and have some online buddies to chat about them, maybe you even scraped together enough to buy one. You want to believe that watches are some special case unlike all the others. Well, that may be true, but logic suggests that when countless others have tried your whole "company X is in a different category and untouchable!!!" nonsense and failed, you will be no different. As for the quality of your arguments, you make assumptions about products that don't yet exist. You know what happens to those who make assumptions, right?
The desire for horology or the mindset of a WIS cannot be compartmentalized.
If it was, we'd all be wearing quartz watches.
The desire for horology is founded on something that cannot be fundamentally be re-produced with an electronic gadget. I think this is the key reason if you want to understand the passion of some of "old folks" who buy and collect Swiss watch.
For many of us, we like watches because we look at as an artform.
The manufacture and actual making of ornate, complex machinery by human hands.
It is this appreciation for the human labour that we value and actually put a price on. That affinity and appreciation is like enjoying a well made meal in the hands of a good chef or admiring an abstract Rothko painting. Or you value the fundamental designs. I value products that are the "archetype" of their genre and I'm willing to pay and save for it.
That can never be re-produced in any electronic form. You can never do a Rothko with Photoshop. Simply, we take awe at the actual historical methods of watch making. Most watch collectors and luxury buyers get giddy at seeing the intricate moving parts or feeling the pulsating glide of 36,000 bph sweeps of the hand.
Secondly, we perceive the timepiece as an extension of life. It is a device that literally beats it's own heart. It breathes so to speak. It is a piece of machinery with life. I am wearing a watch that I bough 23 years ago. I view it as a life long companion. I can't part with a newer, better model.
Thus, it isn't a matter of time-keeping if you want to rationalize purchase habits. There is no features. Sure, I like my Chronographs, my chronometers, my diving watch, my GMT timezone. I don't rationalize a GMT Master over an Omega Speedmaster; both of which have different featuresets. I value them both on different emotional attached levels.
In terms of fashion. Old guys like myself don't do fashion.
I've been wearing the same stuff for over 30 years; not because of fashion. Everything I purchased that are long-term; big purchases are not based on fashion but pedigree, lineage, study of the arts. In other words, I prefer tried and true tested icons. Iconic design and executed products that have endured decades of changing fads. As a result, my personal choices tend to withstand cyclical fads. I'm an old guy who collects Rolex/Omega, Leica cameras, and high end Eames furniture. I've been doing it for the long time that the young kids think it is hip. The stuff I like and have can be a timecapsule from 1960, 1974, 1981, 1999, or 2014. Simply because they are timeless. If you have designs that endure 60 years, they are by default iconic classic. Apple will never do this. They will never do an iWatch and keep the exact same design for 20 years non-stop.
You can tell from his pictures that he thinks he's just about the coolest, baddest mofo to walk the planet.
All well and good. I'm sure you will continue to buy Swiss watches. But you aren't 100% of their target audience, so that doesn't make them invulnerable. Lots of people do buy them for features or fashion. Remember, not every BB fan switched to iPhone. Not every Kodak fan, not every Nintendo fan. They all suffered nonetheless.
Now until this conversation, I would have agreed that Swiss watchmakers may get off the hook here. However, you've convinced me that they have the two things that precede every fall- arrogance and a willingness to let others do the innovating. So I'm starting to think they might be sitting ducks.
Ive is misdirecting on watch face licenses
I'd like a virtual Romain Jerome without the $30K hit to my bank. Apple may surpirse with some virtual watch face licenses.
That would help sell the real deals and also boost the watch's cred as a fine timekeeper.
I'd like a virtual Romain Jerome without the $30K hit to my bank. Apple may surpirse with some virtual watch face licenses.
That would help sell the real deals and also boost the watch's cred as a fine timekeeper.Above 4K should be a pretty sizable portion among Swiss watches.
Rolex, which sells watches mostly above $4k revenue, accounted for an estimated 2012 revenue of around $7 bn out of $23 bn Swiss watch industry revenue.
Other big players such as the Swatch group, Richemont group, etc are all heavily invested in high end and middle end watches.
----------
all this talk about high end watch buyers from non buyers...
Rolex, which sells watches mostly above $4k revenue, accounted for an estimated 2012 revenue of around $7 bn out of $23 bn Swiss watch industry revenue.
Other big players such as the Swatch group, Richemont group, etc are all heavily invested in high end and middle end watches.
----------
all this talk about high end watch buyers from non buyers...
HA HA!
Its good to have a friday joke. Im sure: Tissot, Omega, Breitling, Rolex, Oris, Tah, Hublot, and Longines just to name a few, are worried.
Its good to have a friday joke. Im sure: Tissot, Omega, Breitling, Rolex, Oris, Tah, Hublot, and Longines just to name a few, are worried.
I do think that this poses a serious thread to the lower tier below $1000 segment.
I just posted a poll on WUS about it.
----------
Rolex and Hublot definitely not.
I think Tissot, Omega, Oris, Longines all have some watches in the below $2k category which could see some hit on sales.
I just posted a poll on WUS about it.
----------
Rolex and Hublot definitely not.
I think Tissot, Omega, Oris, Longines all have some watches in the below $2k category which could see some hit on sales.
I think you are confused...Vintage watches are a hot trend right now. Vintage Rolex particularly are selling at the highest prices in history. A 30-50 year old Rolex sells for more than a new one. A 70's Sub that sold for under $1000 not that many years ago, now regularly fetch upwards of $10k.
Omegas are also hot...a 70's pre-moon watch sells for $4k-10k...and sells fast.
If you have one for sale...you can turn it into cash instantly.
Most consumers of luxury conspicuous consumption items don't even know why they actually buy and show or wear expensive stuff. Their minds have been influenced by long evolved social pressures and sophisticated marketing. Sometimes even a bit of mania. Rare tulips bulbs were once a coveted luxury item. What are today's equivalents?
Kodak, Blackberry, and Nintendo do not make luxury products.
This applies to every luxury segment when new players enter their markets.
IKEA may have cheaper, more environmentally friendly, more youth friendly cloth recliners for $300 but that isn't going to deter someone who will spend $7,000 or an Knolll Saarinen Womb Chair drop $11,000 on a Mies van der Rohe daybed. Those buyers still withstood attack from low-end contenders for over 80 years.
Same analogy with watches.
Most luxury buyers don't want to see their big purchase devalue in such a short time; we are discussing 2 year upgrade cycles of electronics. Many want to buy something they think will be trendy, in style for 10,15,20,30 years.
Thats why you have Chanel purses and LV suitcases that sell as much as a Toyota Prius. Kate Spade and Coach doesn't even encroach on the entrenched players.
These are examples from history. We are talking examples spanning decades.
What form of electronic product appreciate in price the longer you keep it and use it?
----------
Rolex barely sells any $3K plain SS datejusts. The cheapest in their line. Even the Air Kings are 4K now. I remember they used to be $2K 10 years ago.
I'm betting their solid ASP (Average selling price) is $8K.