yea, thats a dive watch.
thats different. that will last after the apple watch runs out of battery and dies after 5yrs and can't recharge.
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.
Why a $7,000 Difference?
- Thread starter Caliber26
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
yea, thats a dive watch.
thats different. that will last after the apple watch runs out of battery and dies after 5yrs and can't recharge.
Oh I completely agree. I personally see zero use for the Apple watch. I just used the AP watch in my previous post to show that expensive watches with rubber straps are common. And Apple obviously (mistakenly) thinks they are a high end watch maker now.
Just imagine a platinum apple watch with a platinum bracelet. It could easily be 40k lol.Imagine if they were selling platinum watches.
Just imagine a platinum apple watch with a platinum bracelet. It could easily be 40k lol.
I really want to see a diamond apple watch that has diamonds harvested from another planet.
Seriously, Apple's new campus looks like a giant UFO mothership designed for that purpose.
that's the problem... they think they are in the same league.. those other swiss companies have earned the reputation and prestige of their pieces whereas apple tries to come in overnight and think they are a luxury watch maker? ummm, even watches in the 3k range are water resistant up to 100m. try that with your 17k iwatch. heck you can't even go in the pool with it on. i don't know what they are smokin over there in cupertino.
So will a watch for a small fraction of the price. These things are status symbols. That's it. You are not the kind of person who casually pays $17,000 for a watch, nor do you know anyone who casually pays $17,000 for a watch.
I am in that demographic. I'm a watch nut having bought over $65,000 worth of watches in the past 12 months. And so are many of my friends. And the point I've been making this whole time is that for the people I know that this is supposedly marketed for, (the Edition watch) aren't wanting it at all. They are laughing about it. Apple thinks they are a desirable product/maker in this upscale market, and they aren't.
Cause the watch prices are not that bad (edition apart), its the bands that are a total rip off
----------
Apple just misses the point why these expansive watches come with rubber bands.
They thought they could slap on a rubber band, for a watch that is shower resistant and match pricing with a real diving watch
----------
Apple just misses the point why these expansive watches come with rubber bands.
They thought they could slap on a rubber band, for a watch that is shower resistant and match pricing with a real diving watch
Cause the watch prices are not that bad (edition apart), its the bands that are a total rip off
In the luxury watch market, the bands and prices Apple has are actually a bargain. I WISH I could get an all metal bracelet for any of my watches for less than $500. And leather for less than $200. Those prices are a steal for those of us used to the typical pricing of that stuff. That's the only thing I'll give Apple credit for with what they've done with this smart watch stuff, aside from the ridiculous price of a leather band to go on the Edition watch. Even AP, PP, or Rolex doesn't charge nearly that for the equivalent.
This is the exact point I've been trying to make. I'm a watch nut on a budget and I can confidently say anyone that I've talked to who genuinely loves watches... and has money to burn has still no interest in the edition.
A lot of people who buy high end watches don't want something similar to what everyone else has, and quite frankly IMO, it's not even very attractive. You can't just cover the $350 sport version in gold and instantly become a competitor to hand crafted works of art in the $20,000 watch market.
It's nothing more than a status symbol in my eyes. The looks (I know that's subjective but I'm not the only one), price, lifespan don't justify the price tag.
I think the short answer is: to have a model for people who want a $17000 Apple Watch.
Exactly. This is what I've been trying to explain - Apple is targeting the Luxury watch market, not general consumers, with the Edition and, to an extent, the Watch.
But the apple watch is not a luxury brand. Given Apple makes consumer products and not high end luxury watches, the prices are a rip-off (in relation to the watch).
Casio bands are a complete bargain
I have few Panerai watches, and for $200-300, I can get top notch quality leather bands.
To replace the all metal band on my rolex Deepsea, will not cost me almost 50% of the value of the watch, apple is taking the piss with the band pricing. Just found a replacement band for my deepsea, 1/8 of the actual price.
----------
So what is your view of the watch edition, where the band costs almost 1/2 of the watch?
Excellent post.
And that (targeting the luxury segment with the Watch and Edition) is where I think Apple is making a huge mistake. They are attempting to waltz into an established industry and compete with companies that have established their name and prestige over decades, and even centuries. People spend $10,000, $20,000, $75,000 and more on those brands (Rolex, AP, PP, ALS, etc) because of the craftsmanship, but almost as equally, the heritage and history behind those brands. What Apple is attempting to do here is ass backwards.
The Sport watch is fine. Even if I'm not interested in it, that's the market Apple needs to play in, at least for now. The vast majority of iphone customers wouldn't even own one if it weren't for the phone being subsidized. Most people pitch a fit if they have to pay full replacement cost for an iPhone when they break it without insurance. Now Apple thinks they can just price an iPhone ACCESSORY at $600 or more and they will sell like the iPhone? Pfft...
----------
But the apple watch is not a luxury brand. Given Apple makes consumer products and not high end luxury watches, the prices are a rip-off (in relation to the watch).
/QUOTE]
I'm just saying that for a quality metal bracelet, $450 or so isn't terrible. I MIGHT (big, loose "might") put the Watch model in the category of a maker like Marathon or maybe even Sinn (in terms of bracelet and case construction quality), and that's about what I'd pay for a metal bracelet from them.
And to the Deepsea bracelet comment, no, you certainly won't pay half the cost of the watch to replace the bracelet. But you will pay about $1100 for the GlideLock clasp alone.
[/COLOR]But the apple watch is not a luxury brand. Given Apple makes consumer products and not high end luxury watches, the prices are a rip-off (in relation to the watch).
/QUOTE]
I'm just saying that for a quality metal bracelet, $450 or so isn't terrible. I MIGHT (big, loose "might") put the Watch model in the category of a maker like Marathon or maybe even Sinn (in terms of bracelet and case construction quality), and that's about what I'd pay for a metal bracelet from them.
And to the Deepsea bracelet comment, no, you certainly won't pay half the cost of the watch to replace the bracelet. But you will pay about $1100 for the GlideLock clasp alone.
Well lets see how it plays out.
I am hoping that aftermarket strap makers come out with some excellent choices.
Just 7K for a leather band if hard for me to swallow.....
This.
The buckle is made from the same 18k gold as the watch, and as you can see the buckle is quite large. Now is it worth $7000? That's another question. But if the watch is $10000, then by comparison $7000 for the band is reasonable because it contains a lot of gold as well.
Even Louis purses don't cost $7k. Chanel purses don't even cost $7k (although they can get close...)
you didn't know the stainless version is made from thors hammer and the leather is made from unicorns. silly kid.
Cause the watch prices are not that bad (edition apart), its the bands that are a total rip off
----------
Apple just misses the point why these expansive watches come with rubber bands.
They thought they could slap on a rubber band, for a watch that is shower resistant and match pricing with a real diving watch
I think maybe we've gotten Apple's intentions almost completely backwards. Several posters here have mentioned how difficult it would be for a "newcomer" to compete in the luxury watch market. That's a valid point.
Maybe Apple is looking at this as a completely new product category. There are already a number of so-called smart watches out there, but Apple doesn't think any of them are very good. So they're making the best offering they can, pouring their expertise in miniature electronics, software, and user experience into the project. This is where Apple is strongest. They are arguably the best company in the world at this today. They figured out how to mass-produce it, with Apple's usual balance between entry-level pricing and better-than-most quality. That is, it seems expensive compared to the competition, but there are dozens of "little" reasons why people are willing to pay the premium. The result of this process is the Apple Watch Sport.
The sport is the best Apple can do today, in terms of technology and user experience. They think it's the "sweet spot" for a general-purpose smart watch. There are better running watches, better swimming watches, but Apple has targeted a broad market, not a speciality.
What about people who want the "best" smart watch -- which Apple thinks is their Sport Watch -- but also want something fancier looking? My guess is Apple thinks there's a good opportunity there, and they think "fancier looking" is defined by typical features of fine watches. A stainless steel case, sapphire crystal, top-notch (but still mass-produced) build quality. Bands and straps which rival, in both appearance and user-friendly functionality, anything the watch industry offers in the price range. This is well within Apple's ability. This is the stainless steel Apple Watch line.
The Apple Watch Edition is the extreme expression of the thinking that led to the stainless steel Apple Watch. The best smart watch experience -- which you can only get from Apple -- that at the same time satisfies your desire for really expensive, conspicuous luxury. You can only get it from Apple, and they're going to make you pay through the nose for it. If you "need" luxury and want a no-compromise smart watch, Apple is the only choice. If there was no Apple Watch Edition, you'd have nothing. (On the other hand, if you "need" luxury and want a "watch", buy a Rolex or something. Apple doesn't mind, since they aren't in the "dumb watch" market.) I think this kind of product will do best in the "new money" culture that has emerged in some Asian countries.
In short, Apple is not trying to compete with fine watches, which are (by definition) little boxes of gears, bearings, and springs, and where prices are mainly determined by expertise and reputation in those "old" technologies. Instead, Apple is making a new market in fine "smart watches", which are little boxes of electronics, software, and user experience. In this market (if it really exists), prices will be determined by expertise and reputation in these "modern" technologies. Apple is either first, or first among equals, in the new technologies. Apple asks top price because Apple thinks they are the best brand, with the best product, in the category.
