TAG Heuer Announces Smartwatch Plans as Threat From Apple Watch Looms

[JGRE]

Actually, both of your points are incorrect. In the case of Rolex's "perpetual", that's exactly what it's referring to-the fact that it's self-winding. It has nothing to do with a perpetual calendar. My Deepsea says "Oyster Perpetual Date" on its face, and I assure you it isn't a perpetual calendar. It's a self-winding watch using their Oyster case with a date complication.

And a chronograph is a stophttp://cdn.macrumors.com/vb/images/editor/menupop.gif watch.

Perpetual date, doesn't this give you any thoughts? It is just that all Rolex watches are all automatic today that they do not mention this specifically, in general perpetual refers to the date/calendar function. However, not all Rolex watches are perpetual.

Just see the Rolex Celline time:http://www.rolex.com/watches/cellini-time/m50509-0005.html.

Rolex mentions that it is self-winding, but is not referred to as perpetual.

On the chronograph, your are right I should have referred to the term chronometer.

 

[Chupa Chupa]

Perplexed.

Tag markets its watches as manly car racing and diving sport watches. They are not sold as a fashion items, but a lifestyle. Apple OTOH is marketing the higher end watches as ladies fashion items. (See Ive's tour of ladies haute couture fashion shows and magazines).

So I'm not really seeing where there is much overlap in customer base that Tag would need to worry about the Apple Watch. Rather I think Tag is using Apple as an excuse for what it sees as future lower sales -- but probably more because of pressure from better brands, but it doesn't want to admit buyers would rather pay $4K for a low end Rolex than $3K for a high end Tag.

 

[Tycho24]

It's too bad Apple is so disposable-minded about their portables, because the amount of money you'd spend on at least something like this should guarantee it being hand-me-down material.

No.
Tech gets "old". There is NO "disposable-minded" about it.
Also, $10,000 watches get handed down generations... No reasonable individual buys a $350 watch & thinks "this will last a century".

 

[scott911]

I just got a nice watch for my wife, not a Tag, but one in a similar traditional style...

It never crossed my mind to even consider a smartwatch, and we are both pretty "techie". For example, we both adopted iphone 1 when it first came out and are using 6 and 6 plus' now, linked to fitness dongles, thermostats, etc...

At this point at least - I think the smart watch and traditional watch two very different categories. And that wasn't the case with other apple products.

It was clear the ipod was replacing the mp3 player, and the iphone concept was replace the flip cell phone... I don't get that feeling with the watch.

 

[69650]

You realise 75% of those Androids are very very low end Phones <$150 right Most of those don't have bluetooth 4 and as such not compatible with most smartwatches...

The apple watch will sell massively Given there are 400 million iPhones in use... And the Market forecasts are all over the place but Forbes lowest Estimate was that 10% would buy an apple watch in the first year... that's about $16billion!!!

All of the Rest of the smartwatches sold 3 million oct2013-may2014 ( 0.3 million in 2012 )

Where did you get the figure of 400m iPhones currently in use?

 

[notthedark]

TAG has a point

I received my grandfathers gold watch with jeweled movement upon his passing. This watch is over 50 years old, looks beautiful and works fantastic. Hence the term "timeless."

How many here, who do purchase an Apple Watch, are doing so knowing there is little to no chance that the thing will have any usefullness past five years. The Apple Watch is not a timepiece for life. It is a "flash fashion" accessory. Just like H&M, you will wear it today and throw it out tomorrow.

 

[Tycho24]

As the Apple Watch will be a bad watch and a good smartwatch, the Tag Heuer whatever will be a rather good watch and a bad smartwatch.

Although I upvoted your post for the rest of your comments... this one gives me pause.

Conventional watch companies claim to fame and hallmarks are precise mechanical movements, classy implementation of complications, and beautifully designed faces.

A TAG smart watch would NOT have any precise mechanics at all, it would simply be a small computer.
A TAG smart watch would NOT have classy implementation of complications... it would have the same screen as every other Android Wear device.
A TAG smart watch would NOT have a beautifully designed face because... once again, a computer screen must be there in its place.
They simply cannot make it a "good watch" as you say, because the parts necessary for it to function as a smart watch rob them of their ability to add a single item they are known for.

These companies are effectively neutered. Unless you feel like you can truthfully say "this watch company has more experience than Apple at making highly capable miniaturized computing components", how could one think their previous "experience" would even SLIGHTLY translate into them creating a good smart watch??

 

[OllyW]

Perpetual date, doesn't this give you any thoughts? It is just that all Rolex watches are all automatic today that they do not mention this specifically, in general perpetual refers to the date/calendar function. However, not all Rolex watches are perpetual.

Just see the Rolex Celline time:http://www.rolex.com/watches/cellini-time/m50509-0005.html.

Rolex mentions that it is self-winding, but is not referred to as perpetual.

On the chronograph, your are right I should have referred to the term chronometer.

Perpetual refers to the watches movement.

There are many Rolex Oyster Perpetual branded models that do not even have the date and the Celline you linked has a Perpetual, mechanical, self-winding movement.

http://www.rolex.com/watches/oyster-perpetual/m116000-0010.html

 

[69650]

2/3 of that 90% Android market don't have enough money. That's why they bought those Android junks. Do you think those will buy a smart watch?

Who knows but the remaining 1/3 represents a sizeable market.

You're missing my point. I suspect this is how it will pan out:

1. Apple with tie their Watch to the iPhone making it a linked purchase.

2. Apple will then restrict the APIs so the Apple Watch will be the only Smartwatch option for iPhone users.

3. The traditional watch makers will start forging alliances with Android smartphone manufacturers to get their devices certified for use with that brand of smartphone.

4. So the Apple Watch and TAG Smartwatch will not be direct competitors as they will operate on different platforms.

----------

The "Android market" that makes them have that 90% market share aren't exactly in the "luxury" demographics of the market though. The Swiss manufacturers are going to be sorely disappointed if they think Google riding in with their demographic of cheap/free users are going to save their luxury brands from the onslaught Apple is about to unleash on them.

Not all smart watches will be luxury brands. It will inevitably filter down to the cheaper brands as a more affordable option over time.

 

[Thanks pal]

'Perpetual' has nothing to do with self-winding, perpetual refers to the calendar mechanism. On a simple mechanical watch, you have to manual adjust for the different number of days in the month, the better-onces do this automatically, but still need manual adjustment for the 29th February every four years, the best can even handle this. The story about the automatic winding system can be found on the website of Breitling:

Quote: "In 1969, the brand took on one of the greatest 20th century watchmaking challenges by presenting the first selfwinding chronograph movement. In 1984, Breitling heralded the rebirth of the mechanical chronograph by launching the famous Chronomat, which has since become its leading model."

Btw: 'chronograph' has nothing to do with a 'stop-watch'.

"In 1931, Rolex invented and patented the world's first self-winding mechanism with a Perpetual rotor. This ingenious system, a true work of art, is today at the heart of every modern automatic watch."

http://www.rolex.com/about-rolex/rolex-history/1926-1947.html

Thanks, pal.

 

[Tycho24]

Where did you get the figure of 400m iPhones currently in use?

He's right... surprised me too!

Starting just from mid 2012 phones on... (those likely still being used), there's been over 400m sold!

http://www.statista.com/statistics/263401/global-apple-iphone-sales-since-3rd-quarter-2007/

 

[ARH1956]

Fairly comical considering the big watchmakers kept claiming that they weren't scared.

So, sensing the chatter generated by the Apple watch and making plans to start researching the possibility of bringing a competing product to market is equivalent to being scared?

 

[nando87]

Thank you, I don't know where this Tag is high end thing came from. They just recently started making their own movements not rehashing existing ones.

It's not just that, they were marketing their movements as in-house, like the 1887, when it was just a previously bought Seiko movement

 

[TimelessOne]

Apple will have nothing to fear once they drop the F-bomb (iWatch) on the world. They set the standard on smartphones and they'll do the same for smart watches.

I am on the other boat. I do not expect Apple iWatch to make any real changes to the industry. All reports I am seeing is you have to look no farther than Android wear to see most of apple features.

Will it be top selling yes because it is the only one that will work fully with iPhone and iOS. Otherwise it has nothing impressive and nothing that would make it a radical change from the status quo as the iPhone was.

 

[MH01]

Well, I totally agree that the lifespan of digital product is limited, mostly due to the extremely fast technology advancements that make older products obsolete. But what am saying is, I would buy smart watch rather then mechanical watch for the added features. I don't want a bulk on my wrist (regardless of how beautiful it's crafted) that simply tells me the time which now days it is accurately displayed anywhere you look. Couple of decades ago it made sense, not so much now I think.

I understand, you want added features from a accessory on your hand, as you stated, getting the exact time from a device is easy these days. For people like yourself, the iwatch concept will appeal. I guess the purists see watches as lasting a long time, while tech is disposable.

----------

It depends how isolated Apple wants to be.

At the moment anyone with any other devices can buy an iPhone, and iPod, and iPad, and iMac etc.

If Apple keep the Watch as needing to have an iPhone, and not make it work with anything else, with Android constantly outselling iOS and growing all the time, it would leave Apple more and more isolated if they kept to this policy.

I suspect in time they will make the watch work with other brands of hardware as otherwise they are limiting their market far too much.

So Apple will go the way of Sony

 

[nando87]

Although I upvoted your post for the rest of your comments... this one gives me pause.

Conventional watch companies claim to fame and hallmarks are precise mechanical movements, classy implementation of complications, and beautifully designed faces.

A TAG smart watch would NOT have any precise mechanics at all, it would simply be a small computer.
A TAG smart watch would NOT have classy implementation of complications... it would have the same screen as every other Android Wear device.
A TAG smart watch would NOT have a beautifully designed face because... once again, a computer screen must be there in its place.
They simply cannot make it a "good watch" as you say, because the parts necessary for it to function as a smart watch rob them of their ability to add a single item they are known for.

These companies are effectively neutered. Unless you feel like you can truthfully say "this watch company has more experience than Apple at making highly capable miniaturized computing components", how could one think their previous "experience" would even SLIGHTLY translate into them creating a good smart watch??

The computing elements and software from Tag Heuer I'm quite sure will be rubbish, but, talking about the watch case, its design and its appeal as jewellery I think they will beat apple (and that's not hard this time if I'm honest).

I know beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I'm a watch enthusiast BTW, but tell me what do you think, even when these are quite "strange" designs from the LMVH group:

At least they have personality. I agree with J.C. Biver when he said the apple watch is quite feminine and its design is innocuous, and design (luxurious and attractive looks) is the area of expertise of these companies. It's also true that being innocuous makes it more polyvalent, but less desirable again IMO

Then you can say but Apple can buy this or that but the fact is they can't, because some of them are private and because the swiss government would ban that. They couldn't even hire main employees from them, go figure...

IMO Tag will use an analog display, with a quartz or automatic movement, so it gives the watch virtually battery-endless time and date function, and then they will add some screen inside the dial to give you notifications.

I also think they won't sell more than 6 for being honest.

 

[MH01]

2/3 of that 90% Android market don't have enough money. That's why they bought those Android junks. Do you think those will buy a smart watch?

Boom! You just dropped the Android users a poor bomb...... ahhhh ignorance is a bliss, or is it arrogance ?

In this world of yours, are you assuming that people buying their phones outright, cause in the real world people get their phones on contracts. Very few buy outright.

And if you ever visit the so called poor neighbourhoods that should be filled with Android users, you will see iphones everywhere, and nope they are not stolen

Hate to tell you bud, its not a wealth decision these days, when people sign up to 2 year contracts, its a choice of which you prefer!

Imagine the world where poor android users can pick up an Android wear device and effort food the same week..... your living it in mate, get our from your bubble

----------

Tags had a number of watches that had digital display. One example

They can combine mechnical with digital in the future, could be a winner.

 

[calebbakerable]

How I See It

Here's the thing... There's always been two distinct battles... The function over form battle and the form over function battle. The players in these battles don't compete. TAG Heuer has had no interest in competing with Samsung in the smart watch market because they fight in separate arenas. Apple's entrance changes that dynamic because Apple started a 3rd battle. Function over Samsung's function and form over TAG Heuer's form. Which interestingly kills the original two battles and moves everyone to the middle. Let me explain...

In order for Samsung to compete with Apple they now have to consider form more than ever before. In order for TAG Heuer to compete with Apple they now have to consider additional functionality like never before. And over time I think we'll see all major players will move to this arena.

*I know someone is going to say, "Samsung considers form!!" Or, "TAG Heuer considers function. Look at all the dials!!" But seriously... come on. TAG does one thing well. Design. They aren't exactly pioneers of functionality. Their watches have been doing the same things for decades. And to the Samsung designs look good crowd... Yeah I don't really have anything to say to that.

 

[jonnysods]

The rumors around Apple building a watch started long before even the first Galaxy Gear, they were predicting a trend, really. However, I'm not sure I follow you not having seen them do something because it seemed like a trend in tech. Virtually NONE of their products weren't already a trend in tech.

----------



Sounds like the guys at Palm saying Apple could never make a smartphone better than theirs.

People had smartphones but they weren't huge trends until Apple made the iPhone.

People had tablets but they weren't huge trends until Apple made the iPad.

 

[technopimp]

Perpetual date, doesn't this give you any thoughts? It is just that all Rolex watches are all automatic today that they do not mention this specifically, in general perpetual refers to the date/calendar function. However, not all Rolex watches are perpetual.

Just see the Rolex Celline time:http://www.rolex.com/watches/cellini-time/m50509-0005.html.

Rolex mentions that it is self-winding, but is not referred to as perpetual.

On the chronograph, your are right I should have referred to the term chronometer.

I don't know what to tell you. It's not a perpetual calendar. But I guess if you want to believe that it is, that's fine. But here's straight from their website:

Oyster Perpetualoys • ter • per • pet • u • alThe quintessential Rolex Oyster.Protected by the famous waterproof Oyster case for ultimate reliability.Powered by Rolex’s self‑winding Perpetual mechanical movement with chronometer-certified precision.The most accessible path into the Rolex legend.A perfect combination of performance and style.The Rolex Way.

 

[Ping Guo]

Following Apple's Watch announcement, LVMH watch chief and TAG Heuer interim chief executive Jean-Claude Biver dismissed the smart watch, saying it was "too feminine" and looked like "it was designed by a student in their first trimester." He added that smartwatches such as the Apple Watch will soon be outdated, while "luxury always has something timeless." ​

This reminds me of what Steve Ballmer said when the iPhone was launched:
http://youtu.be/eywi0h_Y5_U

Except that MS doesn't make Swiss mechanical watches. And neither does Apple. The market share is based upon history and prestige, not features. A $10 Timex quartz watch will keep better time than an $8000 Jaeger-LeCoultre, and it means exactly nothing. Nobody will be passing down a $10 Timex to their grandchildren, and the same will hold true for Apple watches that will likely be outdated within a couple years' time, just like their other products. (No hate, just pointing out that the markets for fine mechanical watches and feature-rich "smart" watches are completely different.)

 

[cube]

It seems shortsighted to think I wouldn't notice you just literally copied and pasted the original quote.

It seems shortsighted to think that I did not do it on purpose.

 

[69650]

He's right... surprised me too!

Starting just from mid 2012 phones on... (those likely still being used), there's been over 400m sold!

http://www.statista.com/statistics/263401/global-apple-iphone-sales-since-3rd-quarter-2007/

400m sold does not mean 400m currently in use.

 

[bobob]

Here's the thing... There's always been two distinct battles... The function over form battle and the form over function battle. The players in these battles don't compete. TAG Heuer has had no interest in competing with Samsung in the smart watch market because they fight in separate arenas. Apple's entrance changes that dynamic because Apple started a 3rd battle. Function over Samsung's function and form over TAG Heuer's form. Which interestingly kills the original two battles and moves everyone to the middle.

Astute analysis!

Apple is emphasizing fashion for nothing.

 

[69650]

People had smartphones but they weren't huge trends until Apple made the iPhone.

People had tablets but they weren't huge trends until Apple made the iPad.

Sadly past performance is not necessarily an indicator of future performance.

The iPhone and iPad are essentially the same thing - portable computers. Apple had a lot of experience in this area which must have helped when developing these products. However they are new to the watch market. Will people want a computer on their wrist? Will they get fed up having to charge it every night? Only time will tell.