Obsolete jewelry on the horizon.

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by mcdj, Mar 19, 2015.

  1. mcdj macrumors 604

    mcdj

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2007
    Location:
    NYC
    #1
    I think Apple is tempting fate with the $10k gold watch. Even the wealthiest will frown at having a solid gold watch that stops being update-able, and ultimately becomes a non functioning gold bracelet, as the software updates stop and the hardware becomes outmoded in 3-4 years.

    A $10K Rolex doesn't do that. And eventually it becomes worth more than the original purchase price, to everyone, not just hardcore fans.

    There are certain consumer goods that simply don't translate to luxury goods.

    Ask anyone with a 2007 Vertu phone.
     
  2. Armen macrumors 604

    Armen

    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2013
    Location:
    127.0.0.1
    #2

    Apple isn't gambling that people will buy the gold watch. It's advertising because people are talking about.
     
  3. dannyyankou macrumors 603

    dannyyankou

    Joined:
    Mar 2, 2012
    #3
    I don't think people who spend $17k on a watch will care about updating features. And if they have the $17k to buy it in the first place, they should have no problem buying another.

    I mean let's be real. No one is going to buy the gold Apple Watch unless they're loaded.
     
  4. CharlieCat666 macrumors regular

    CharlieCat666

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2015
    Location:
    Minneapolis, MN
    #4
    Yeah, but like literally 90% of the edition's price tag comes from the materials used in production. I'm sure Apple will have a trade in incentive and even if they don't, the gold is what you're paying for and you can sell the gold.
     
  5. mojolicious macrumors 68000

    mojolicious

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2014
    Location:
    Sarf London
    #5
    The gold value is more like 15-20% of the Edition's price.

    Re Vertu, they're doing just fine. Anyone who bought one in 2007 will probably have forgotten doing so by now. If that buyer remembers the purchase price, and regrets the purchase, then he or she wasn't in the Virtu demographic to begin with.
     
  6. Ries, Mar 19, 2015
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2015

    Ries macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    #6
    $1200 gold at best (also you won't get full gold price for selling the gold), a few $ for the rest of common materials, some piece of leather worth nothing after sale, unless you can resell it to another Apple watch user and properly $80 in electronics (worth nothing after 2 years).
     
  7. AFDoc macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Location:
    Colorado Springs USA for now
    #7
    You make me laugh!! The people that will spend 17k for the edition apple watch don't give a crap about 17k! They could toss their edition watch away every day and buy a new one.... so you're wrong... completely wrong.
     
  8. Ries, Mar 20, 2015
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2015

    Ries macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    #8
    That would be over $6 million a year. To that even be feasible, they would need to make atleast $50 million a year (or else the 6 million would be a significant amount). That would be less than 100 americans target group, scale to world wide 20.000, 1/1000 would at max buy a apple watch, so 20 apple watches edition.

    Edit : 20 apple watches edition costumers worldwide.
     
  9. BvizioN macrumors 68040

    BvizioN

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2012
    Location:
    Manchester, UK
    #9
    According to who? What kind of carculation have you used here? You could earn $200.000 a year and still be able to afford the adition.
     
  10. mojolicious macrumors 68000

    mojolicious

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2014
    Location:
    Sarf London
    #10
    $17,000 x 365.25 = $6,209,250
     
  11. OllyW Moderator

    OllyW

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 11, 2005
    Location:
    The Black Country, England
    #11
    It was an answer to this slightly ridiculous statement.

     
  12. Ries macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    #12
    One edition per day. As stated in the post i quoted.
     
  13. AFDoc macrumors 68030

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2012
    Location:
    Colorado Springs USA for now
    #13
    And? There are people that make 50 million a week....
     
  14. Piggie macrumors 604

    Piggie

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2010
    #14
    I do find is strange the general feeling by others on these forums that everyone with money is dumb and stupid and pretty much throws it away.

    I've known people with money and they are some of the most shrewd and, one could say unwilling to spend money on anything unless they really have to.

    That's mostly how they got rich in the 1st place.

    Seeing all rich people who are dumb and just throw tens of thousands away on any old junk all day long I feel is an incorrect viewpoint that most people seem to share here for some odd reason.
     
  15. Ries, Mar 20, 2015
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2015

    Ries macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    #15
    There a less than 100 US citizens than make 50 million a year, how many of those do you think makes that a week?
     
  16. TallManNY macrumors 68040

    TallManNY

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2007
    #16
    I suspect that (A) the battery will be replaceable and so the watch should work for a long time and (B) that "Editions" will be discontinued and these watches will lose less value than people are guessing. They might end up having a collectors value or some prestige.

    Anyone else guessing that the Editions are pretty close to sold out in the first few weeks and you can see them for sale on Ebay at a serious premium? I could see that happening.
     
  17. Chupa Chupa macrumors G5

    Chupa Chupa

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    #17
    My sister inherited my aunt's jewelry collection which was mostly circa 1920-70. A good portion of it is in a bank vault today because most of it is not in style today -- obsolete. So I kinda think Apple isn't inventing the concept here. Everything related to style goes becomes useless at some point, some quicker than others. Top hat anyone?

    I would suggest those here who are not gob smacking filthy rich don't presume what those who are will think about a watch that isn't updatable will think. These are people who buy $1500 custom shoes and $20K even dresses, usually only worn once or twice. $17K is one day's income.
     
  18. cardfan macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2012
    #18
    I'll pretend I'm gob smacking filthy rich. If I want to dress up or impress, I'll buy something more than a cheap 17k watch.

    If I like tech, I might buy the edition watch because hey, I'm gob smacking rich. It's pennies for me. I need something cheap to track workouts.

    Keep in mind though there just isn't a huge market of gob smacking rich people who like to throw away money or spend it on something that won't really make a statement.

    This really just looks out of place for Apple. Even Jobs dressed in jeans and turtleneck. The other executives dress very casual. Look at what Cook wore. They're nerdy guys marketing fashion but dress like slobs.

    My interest in the watch is the same I had for the iphone and other gadgets. It's a cool device. Cool in a tech sense, not fashion. I'm not going to feel a sense of importance or feel like I'm "dressing up" when I use an apple watch.

    I understand the fashion message is crucial for Apple to convey. But I don't think the high end luxury angle was the right move for them. And why in the world didn't they put their newly hired fashion VP on stage to sell this? She needed to be the face of this. Instead it was some geek named Kevin Lynch or whoever.

    The gold talk is just in the way. It distracts from selling the SS as premium. I want to see the ads with those wearing the SS watch. The ones advertising gold is just silly. The whole focus should be on SS as THE premium Apple watch. It winds up sandwiched in the middle. The middle tier. The middle child.

    You want to see the celebs and whoever wearing the SS watch. Not something you can never buy. You want customers to picture one watch when they think smartwatch. Just as they pictured the iphone when they thought smartphone. Even the sport one might've been better to intro in year two as a less expensive version once they established the SS as the reference smartwatch.
     
  19. Chupa Chupa macrumors G5

    Chupa Chupa

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    #19
    That's the problem. People here with no exposure to the truly wealthy keep pretending they understand them. They have no idea, witness by the posts here. It's not as you suggest a decision between one 17K watch and maybe a more expensive one. They'll buy both if they want. They are not limited to ONE nice watch, or even two, like upper middle-class or "well off" people who make $100 or $200K a year. They have closets the size of most people's master bedrooms and even larger. All filled with mind-blowing expensive clothes and accessories.
     
  20. Ries macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    #20
    I can say the same. You have no idea, witness by your post. Rich people (the amount of rich you claim, like lets say $1 million a year is less then 250.000 people in the US) won't just waste away money just because they can anymore than one making $200K on a sports edition.
     
  21. greytmom macrumors 68040

    greytmom

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2010
    #21
    Absolutely. Some of the wealthiest people I know would pinch a penny until it screamed.
     
  22. Zaft macrumors 68040

    Zaft

    Joined:
    Jun 16, 2009
    Location:
    NYC
    #22
    If you can afford a 10k watch then I don't think you care about updates or long it will be supported.
     
  23. rjlawrencejr macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2007
    Location:
    LA/OC/IE
    #23
    Do you know anyone with a Vertu phone?

    And to your point about a $10k Rolex, well they aren't worth it to me. (I have always preferred a computer on my wrist since my first digital many many years ago).

    I am not an expert on the appreciation of watches, but if your $10k Rolex you buy new today is still worth $10k in five years isn't that because Rolex continues to raise its prices on new models so that a resale becomes a relatively decent value?

    But in the end, why do you care? The Edition really has no bearing on the other two watch lines. It's sort of a halo piece like the the $250,000 Ford GT (not quite the same thing but I think you see where I'm going). It's not as if Apple is dedicating resources to the Edition at the peril of the other watches or other products it offers.
     
  24. dacreativeguy macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2007
    #24
    Maybe obsolete for you, but Gazelle will buy up all our worthless watches and sell them to 3rd world countries. 3-5 years those guys will be balling!
     
  25. Chupa Chupa macrumors G5

    Chupa Chupa

    Joined:
    Jul 16, 2002
    #25
    Except I do. ;) They are my clients. And yes, the .1% ers are who Apple is targeting for the Edition watches. It's not the middle or even upper middle class. It's the elite class.
     

Share This Page