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.
Swiss Watchmakers Rebuff Apple's Partnership and Hiring Advances
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Possibly, but we're talking about two totally different markets. $1000 iWatch vs. $5000(0) jewelry ... Casio and the likes will adapt and I'm sure the Swatch brand (not the group) will come up with something that doesn't need charging every week. But blancpain, Cartier, IWC, Richard Mille, Harry Winston, etc. will do just fine without adding a battery
So much anger..
I find it surprising that so many people are angry that somebody had rebuffed Apple (though he says he has rebuffed many others too)..The gall of this guy refusing Apple..May he crash and burn!! Lol!
On a serious note, I do not think Apple is certain it is going to win this iWatch war, that is why every other week we see so many people joining Apple - from different fields.. If they are all working for iWatch, god help iWatch.. It seems to be trying to do too many things. Looks like they have not yet finalised even the basic functions or design of that thing since they are still trying to recruit people from basic industries. I am not sure when that iWatch is going to come out. It may be too late..
I find it surprising that so many people are angry that somebody had rebuffed Apple (though he says he has rebuffed many others too)..The gall of this guy refusing Apple..May he crash and burn!! Lol!
On a serious note, I do not think Apple is certain it is going to win this iWatch war, that is why every other week we see so many people joining Apple - from different fields.. If they are all working for iWatch, god help iWatch.. It seems to be trying to do too many things. Looks like they have not yet finalised even the basic functions or design of that thing since they are still trying to recruit people from basic industries. I am not sure when that iWatch is going to come out. It may be too late..
It seems some of these watchmakers, especially the ones making those upscale brands, are a proud lot, and are either very concerned and insecure about their long term viability, or too busy convincing themselves they're still relevant to any but the most well-heeled clients, who gladly plunk down thousands for a timepiece because they can, or perhaps to impress others.
Walk down the street, and try to spot people who still sport plain old fashioned timepieces on their wrist; they are few and far between.
Or ask a stranger politely if they could give you the correct time. Overwhelmingly, those strangers will proceed to whip out their phones, cause there's nothing on their wrist.
Sure, those watchmakers can snobbishly turn up their noses, and they certainly don't need Apple, but on the other hand, they could very well be missing out on a golden opportunity to get in on the ground floor of a collaborative effort, and a possibly very exciting future, that could infuse new life into their industry, not to mention turn out to be financially very beneficial to them, as well as to Apple.
I don't believe Apple will be deterred by this; they'll double their effort, while continuing to do their due diligence, and if history is any indication, unless this 'project' is shelved, they will most likely eventually amaze us with a great product.
Walk down the street, and try to spot people who still sport plain old fashioned timepieces on their wrist; they are few and far between.
Or ask a stranger politely if they could give you the correct time. Overwhelmingly, those strangers will proceed to whip out their phones, cause there's nothing on their wrist.
Sure, those watchmakers can snobbishly turn up their noses, and they certainly don't need Apple, but on the other hand, they could very well be missing out on a golden opportunity to get in on the ground floor of a collaborative effort, and a possibly very exciting future, that could infuse new life into their industry, not to mention turn out to be financially very beneficial to them, as well as to Apple.
I don't believe Apple will be deterred by this; they'll double their effort, while continuing to do their due diligence, and if history is any indication, unless this 'project' is shelved, they will most likely eventually amaze us with a great product.
You can buy most of the high-end swiss watches on Amazon
----------
Except that the Swiss companies have already been through the Japanese quartz revolution and a couple of decades of mobile phones with clocks on them...
It's just the usual Mac Rumors reader ego, Apple is king of all, everyone else in it's markets don't exist etc etc. I say the story has been posted just because it's Baselworld this week, and I doubt all the posters on here even know what that is.
Yes, and your Nexus 5 is double the price of a similar spec Xiaomi phone. So Nexus is overpriced as well.
The others drop in price because their demand drops once a new model is out and with Apple, they upgrade on a one year cycle while the others are in 3-4 months do to several companies competing at the android top end. It is funny that you mention the price drop. When something drops 20% in price in 2-3 months, doesn't that make it overpriced when it was introduced?
Exactly.
I actually looked up Baselworld. I never knew something like that show existed, I should have known it would though.
Moto 360?
Surprised at no mention in the article or comments (as far as I could see) of the Moto 360, which BTW, is the closest to that circular design mockup shown in the article. Unlike most other devices, the 360 is (whether you are an Apple fanboi or not), the first real wearable that blends tech with fashion and judging by the comments across the web, is going to be a hot seller if it works as hyped.
I think this may be the first time Apple are not the first to get a new concept right first time. (All said, the 360 may not be health focused, so perhaps some people will do weird and wear two watches! Which begs the question, which arm will you put each watch on? Apple on the left? Moto on the right?
Surprised at no mention in the article or comments (as far as I could see) of the Moto 360, which BTW, is the closest to that circular design mockup shown in the article. Unlike most other devices, the 360 is (whether you are an Apple fanboi or not), the first real wearable that blends tech with fashion and judging by the comments across the web, is going to be a hot seller if it works as hyped.
I think this may be the first time Apple are not the first to get a new concept right first time. (All said, the 360 may not be health focused, so perhaps some people will do weird and wear two watches! Which begs the question, which arm will you put each watch on? Apple on the left? Moto on the right?
Samsung only update the Galaxy S once a year, the Note once a year the Nexus is updated once a year etc etc etc, you perceive that they launch a new model every 5 seconds because they make more than one model. Apple don't so you only see the one iPhone, Apple deliberately artificially keep the iPhones price high, it is overpriced for what it is, it's even overpriced compared to the iPad!
The iPhone 5C 8GB costs more than the iPad Air 16GB even!
Yeah, it's more for the watch business I think where they announce new models and talk business.
All that typography and iconography looks a tad too Android to me; I just get that feeling. Wrong form and aesthetic balance for an Apple product anyway; they'd NEVER use 3 or 4 typefaces all in one UI.
I have a number of expensive watches. I bought into a particular brand because of their very close association with F1 Motorsport which is a strong interest of mine. I can't see what Apple or Google could bring to the table to add value to those timepieces.
I've no doubt that there is a market for smart-watches or whatever you want to call them, but Apple & Android certainly won't be competing in the market of timepieces that cost anything from $2000-$25,000+.
But as I said, Apple & Google can carve out a new market and tempt people who otherwise had no interest of owning a watch. But they simply won't be competing with Rolex, Omega etc. Different worlds.
The discerning gentleman that wears a Chopard Imperiale luxury timepiece, priced at a modest $53,300, would hardly perceive an iWatch as a competitor.
They're two different products entirely, the Imperiale is but one example.
The Swiss luxury analog perpetual watch business thrives. It's immune from whatever may take place in the tech space of today and the future.
I could list over a dozen other luxury brands that have long lists of buyers waiting for their handmade $80K and up timepieces to be handcrafted by just one watchmaker for them.
It's a huge very wealthy world we live in.
http://us.chopard.com/watches/imperiale/chronograph/imperiale-chrono-40-mm-watch-384211-1001
They're two different products entirely, the Imperiale is but one example.
The Swiss luxury analog perpetual watch business thrives. It's immune from whatever may take place in the tech space of today and the future.
I could list over a dozen other luxury brands that have long lists of buyers waiting for their handmade $80K and up timepieces to be handcrafted by just one watchmaker for them.
It's a huge very wealthy world we live in.
http://us.chopard.com/watches/imperiale/chronograph/imperiale-chrono-40-mm-watch-384211-1001
I've just bought two of those; one as a spare that I've tossed in a drawer, just in case - it's handy to have a backup, especially considering the bargain price.
That is undoubtedly true, but it's also a much smaller, and shrinking market, which is the point I was trying to make. Certainly, not all companies are aiming for and catering to, or even interested in, mass market appeal, and despite my post above, by providing more options for individual choice, I do consider that a good thing.
Do you have any evidence to back up your claim that it's a shrinking market? Any facts and figures you can link to? Because I only see it increasing more then anything, even more outrageously luxurious and expensive timepieces are launched every year it seems. And Omega and Rolex et al haven't shrunk their model ranges.
In other news, console maker Nintendo's CEO talks about Apple and how they were not interested in a major deal
"Nah, Apple contacted us and said they need us really badly, but we're not really interested as we're doing great on our own, and we have this huge lead in the market. Check out our Blah console BTW!"
Nintendo publicly stated almost 3.5 years ago that their biggest rival in the future would not be Sony or Microsoft, but Apple. They were very quick to realise this.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/brianca...microsoft-nintendo-of-america-president-says/
Please explain how such a function could be used as a selling point. Especially when you're trying to launch a luxury product, are you willing to accept a manufacturer pulls you back to the ground to your state of diseased being? Actually only a minority of us are diabetic.
On the other hand, I am a gen X and do wear a watch, and have done so in the past. In elementary school, it was Flik-Flak, in HS, Casio, and common metal-banded analog in college. I had my faire share of these watches, and they all ended up in the same place: a drawer. Not that I didn't like them of course, but wearing a watch is, in my opinion, forgetting about the beating they suffer. Playing sports as a kid, gets scratched when you hit the ground, or a wall, get submerged at the beach (although waterproof, they don't like sand). Riding a crowded subway, putting a heavy backpack down as straps rub down your arm and put a strain on the wristband. Or helping a horse embarking in a trailer: frightened by a noise, the horse pulled back on his rope and by the time I let go the rope not to hurt the animal, the watch got caught on the edge of the door and the effort cut the wristband, and badly indented the case.
After a period without watch, I got a used, digital Timex Ironman, inexpensive plastic-banded I always wear: band is molded in one piece, as this removes weak links to the dial. Literally always. I never remove it because it's extremely light. Essential functions: dual-time, chrono, timer and intermediate timer, along with three alarms. Although I never use the alarms because they're much too quiet to wake me up, I do the other functions. Intermediate timer is particularly useful when studying. Still, it takes a good beating day-to-day at work. Although weirdly sturdy, it still got additional scratches from handling boxes.
I still have a nice-looking watch I do put on occasion when going out, but so far I consider watches to be a thing of the past, sitting in a place far too exposed to warrant an expensive or luxury piece, unless you have to fit in a particular setting. I had a time where I wore rings. Although much sturdier, I ceased because it was impractical, especially when biking as skin could get badly pinched.
I haven't said no to wearables, and in fact I may be interested in a "watch" that would be both light, completely impervious to scratches, water, didn't get caught in forearm hair or any external obstacle and wouldn't require a recharge as frequently as a smartphone.
But I get the point. As Apple is rumored to be planning a phone with an impractically large screen, coupling it with a wearable makes sense.
Reminds me of oil companies that wouldn't invest in renewables.
I am always wondering what kind of CEO/tycoon of some sort would afford a piece costing as much as a very good car.
Like I said, Samsung and Nexus is also overpriced for what it is (see Xiaomi). Yes, they only update each model once a year, but due to multiple models and brands, the public perceives that their previous model is now 'old' and thus the demand drops. That is why they have to drop their prices.
I am sure Samsung (and every other company including Apple for that matter). would love to artificially keep their prices high as well but they can't because the sales would drop further. Your comment doesn't make sense because the demand is still strong for the iPhone up till a month before the next release. So using terms like deliberate and artificially makes no sense. It is the supply/demand that is effecting the pricing.
As for the iPhone vs iPad pricing, funny enough this is the case for all the other vendors as well if you look at their pricing for phones vs tablet. Samsung, LG, Nexus, etc all price their phones higher because the market is there.
----------
Xiaomi 3