Who thinks the Apple Watch is too expensive?

Discussion in 'Apple Watch' started by SHNXX, Apr 11, 2015.

  1. SHNXX macrumors 68000

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2013
    #1
    Although I love watches and have several pretty nice ones (one Patek, two Rolexes, etc), I really think the Apple Watch price is quite burdensome.

    Consider this: with a mechanical non-smart watch you could use for 10-40 years without it going out of style but with an Apple Watch, the maximum use case is maybe 3-4 years and out of style within 2 years.

    So if you consider that a $15000 Rolex could be used reasonably for 30 years, that's about $500 per year with the value of the watch after 30 years likely still high whereas the stainless steel $1000 Apple Watch can be used reasonably for 3 years ($333 per year) with the value of the watch dropping probably drastically after 3 years.

    Unfortunately the Sport version is not desirable but given its toyish looks, it's quite a bit more than other similar looking watches.
     
  2. cardfan macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2012
    #2
    You have to consider that you're comparing two different things. I wouldn't waste my money on something that merely displays the time. The Apple watch has a shorter life, sure, but it does so much more to earn a spot on my wrist.
     
  3. jmmo20 macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2006
    #3
    the clear answer to your question is: yes.
    Apple is offering a 50% discount for employees. Employees have never had such massive discount before. I have a couple of close friends who work for apple HQ and they could get something like 15-20% on apple products except iphones which was full retail.

    the fact that apple is willing to give it to them for 50% cheaper means they markup is abysmal and that they are desperate for people to wear them.
     
  4. bbeagle macrumors 68040

    bbeagle

    Joined:
    Oct 19, 2010
    Location:
    Buffalo, NY
    #4
    So true.

    I've been a watch wearer for 30+ years, and never once considered a watch more than $100. Just the time (and maybe date) is not worth more than $100. My $29 Timex works just fine. A Rolex is SOOOO overpriced. I'm not into wearing jewelry - I want utility - and the Rolex fails in price/performance ratio.

    The Apple Watch is the first watch that I've even considered over $100 - because it offers so much more.
     
  5. ManicMarc macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 1, 2012
    #5
    Absolutely, if it was half the price at £150 then I'd probably get one.

    As for the steal/gold ones - I can't imagine why anyone would spend so much on what is an iPod nano with haptics and a strap.

    So I think I'll wait for the price drop. In my view, once the price drops (hopefully) - smartest route would be to get the Sport and then get a 3rd party steal bracelet when they come out.
     
  6. unclejamaal macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2010
    #6
    If it was less than £200 then I may have considered it but right now, it's too expensive and I think it's more of a fashion statement than anything at present.
     
  7. Julien macrumors G3

    Julien

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #7
    "Desperate for people to wear them"????, as in they can't even sell any of the 1st batch?:D Since Apple is so "desperate" because of the horrible pre launch sells numbers, maybe they should just cancel the :apple:Watch and cut their losses before it is too late.:eek:
     
  8. Shanghaichica macrumors 603

    Shanghaichica

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2013
    Location:
    UK
    #8
    Well £300 is the most I've ever spent on a watch but it does more than a traditional watch does.
     
  9. Ulenspiegel macrumors 68020

    Ulenspiegel

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2014
    Location:
    Land of Flanders and Elsewhere
    #9
    Opinions differ.
    Rolex is a masterpiece fulfilling its main function telling the time and date. And it does it for decades. Additionaly it keeps perfectly not only the time, but its value. It is shock and waterproof, so can be worn anywhere, anytime. And you don't need a mobile phone to use its functions properly.
    These are two absolutely different categories, the :apple: Watch being a fashionable, first generation gadget.
     
  10. Julien macrumors G3

    Julien

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2007
    Location:
    Atlanta
    #10
    I'll just add to the cost issue for me.

    :apple:Watch Sport 42mm $400.

    Resale value about $175.

    18 months ownership

    $0.41 per day cost of ownership. Sounds VERY reasonable to me.;)
     
  11. bunnicula macrumors 68040

    bunnicula

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2008
    #11
    If you search the forum, you'll find dozens of answers to the very question you are asking. Including lengthy conversations of the "I own many watches that cost tens of thousands of dollars, but..." variety. ;)
     
  12. Mr.C macrumors 601

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2011
    Location:
    London, UK.
    #12
    Exactly. It's like comparing Apples to oranges ( no pun intended ). Sure they are both watches but one is an expensive device that does more then tell the time and adds many conveniences to ones day to day life. The other one is even more expensive and a waste of money as all it does is tell the time.

    People say the Apple watch is a fashion statement. I disagree. Yes it is typical of Apple design standards and quality but a mechanical watch like a Rolex, Movado or Brietling are far more of a fashion statement. I've been wearing watches most of my life and until I got my Pebble they typically consisted of cheap £30 or £40 watches usually Timex because all they were good for was telling the time and not worth spending more then that.

    The Pebble cost me about £150 but did a bit more and was worth it just for the notifications. The :apple:Watch does a lot more and is certainly worth the money. Would I have liked to pay less. Certainly like everyone here. Am I happy to pay what I am going to for something as well designed and manufactured with the functionality it offers absolutely.
     
  13. matrix07 macrumors 68040

    matrix07

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 2010
    #13
    I'd love for it to be cheaper but mechanical watch could never do 10% that Apple Watch does. If you want only time keeping function then goes for conventional watch but I don't agree with the sentiment that conventional watch will stay with you forever. You can use it 20 years from now, yes. But 20 years from now I don't think people will wear one-function watch anymore, so what's left you really?
     
  14. Tsuchiya macrumors 68020

    Tsuchiya

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2008
    #14
    They are lowballing that figure a bit. Employee discount can be incredibly generous.
     
  15. ardchoille50 macrumors 68020

    Joined:
    Feb 6, 2014
    #15
    Judging the Apple Watch too expensive right now would be illogical, we haven't actually used the device so any judgement right now would be baseless.
     
  16. Gooberton macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #16
    I spent 500 dollars in the last few months eating out. I could have just ate rice and bread and get this; I pooped it all out within two days!! Ugh what a waste
     
  17. AdonisSMU macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2010
    #17
    That is how I am looking at things. I use Apple Pay everywhere I can. It influences my buying habits tremendously. Now I need a starbucks app or the watch in time for launch.
     
  18. AustinIllini macrumors demi-god

    AustinIllini

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2011
    Location:
    Austin, USA
    #18



    POTY
     
  19. AdonisSMU, Apr 11, 2015
    Last edited: Apr 11, 2015

    AdonisSMU macrumors 603

    Joined:
    Oct 23, 2010
    #19
    Im sorry but I am not a fan of Rolex watches. I dont think they are particularly good looking and they only do one thing well. *Ahhhh* Could you imagine having a wife or husband like that?
     
  20. bunnicula macrumors 68040

    bunnicula

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2008
    #20
    We spent that much eating out last night. It was delicious. ;)

    Could we have eaten for less? Absolutely. And we usually do. But, some experiences are worth having. I see this Apple Watch thing the same way.
     
  21. Gooberton macrumors 65816

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2010
    #21
    Exactly , some people spend 2500 on john Lobb shoes , others wear nike and go to Paris
    Some save their money till they rot in the ground.
    This is the United States of America. Free enterprise and opportunity. Nothing is too expensive. It's all relative. Don't buy it if you can't or won't.
    A man makes his own luck
     
  22. jk4lebron23 macrumors 65816

    jk4lebron23

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2010
    Location:
    Nashville,TN
    #22
    I think they are but I still bought a SS model, I'm a watch enthusiast so I'm fine with the price combining two of my favorite things of Apple products and watches
     
  23. Rogifan macrumors P6

    Rogifan

    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2011
    #23
    How does one define expensive and cheap? Or value for money? Not everybody values the same things.
     
  24. edlex macrumors 68000

    edlex

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2010
    Location:
    Miami, FL
    #24
    Too expensive? Based on the massive demand outstripping supply I'd say they priced them according to what the market would bear. But look at the bigger picture. People were predicting that watches were on their way into extinction with the advent of the smartphone. Now watches are cool again particularly with the youth demographic. Apple entering the market only legitimizes the smart watch. Giving the employees huge discount is a very smart marketing tool as well.
     
  25. NAYo2002 macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2011
    #25
    Companies give products below cost or free to employees all the time. They gave away free iPhones at one point, did it cost nothing by your logic?
     

Share This Page