I wasn’t making a point, I was making a joke that you didn’t understand. But that’s Ok. What I was trying to say, is that ‘up-selling’ or not, the $300 difference between the stainless and aluminum, consumers are spending that for smart watch. I don’t care if Apple puts a stainless model watch on every display in every store, it might gravitate towards some that might like the stainless, but the majority will never pay that for an Apple Watch (let alone a smart watch), not to mention that doesn’t even include tax/AppleCare either.
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 don't carrier stores stock stainless steel model?
- Thread starter razmonster
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I wasn’t making a point, I was making a joke that you didn’t understand. But that’s Ok. What I was trying to say, is that ‘up-selling’ or not, the $300 difference between the stainless and aluminum, consumers are spending that for smart watch. I don’t care if Apple puts a stainless model watch on every display in every store, it might gravitate towards some that might like the stainless, but the majority will never pay that for an Apple Watch (let alone a smart watch), not to mention that doesn’t even include tax/AppleCare either.
its $200 more.
people who shop with their carriers are able to finance and that extra $5-10 a month doesn't usually deter them from upgrading to a nicer product. people buy what's sold to them.
people who shop with their carriers are able to finance and that extra $5-10 a month doesn't usually deter them from upgrading to a nicer product. people buy what's sold to them.
False. It’s $300 more. The entry model aluminum Model Apple Watch starts at $399 for the GPS model, where as the entry-level stainless model starts at $699. The LTE/GPS model starts at $499. The majority are opting just probably for the GPS model, it’s the most widely known/available model and LTE obviously not being the clear choice with the added costs.
I think you need to do your research a bit. It doesn’t cost ‘$5 dollars a month for LTE’, the minimum is probably around $10, with tax, rounds to about $13ish a month.
Consumers generally need to be able to validate the cost of adding another service onto an _already_ expensive carrier bill. You make it sound a bit easier than it is, when generally, it doesn’t work like that.
Last edited:
Yup. You’re right. It’s 13-15 bucks monthly. And if someone were to finance the Apple Watch, which the topic is surrounding on the Stainless Steel model... then we are talking way more monthly.
I paid for my model outright, I thought about financing it... but felt I could find it refurbished. I think that would be the better route to take... if consumers are actually interested in the Stainless Steel models, but that’s just my advice.
Why would a carrier store sell a non-LTE Watch? I don’t think they do. All they want is to sell you as many cellular devices (and lines) as possibly. So the difference in carrier stores is actually 200$. For a classier Watch with a much more scratch-resistant sapphire screen.
My carrier has both models. Keep in mind, it doesn’t have to be direct through a cell carrier, stores like Walmart/Target can also segue through your carrier by selling you the model that you want as well.
Classier, sure. But again, it’s a smart watch, I don’t think consumers are willing to spend that kind of money for something for a superfluous tech device. I own the stainless model, it’s great, but it’s obviously not for everyone given the fact that Apple charges a high premium for it just for the stainless/sapphire. Which by the way, I doubt consumers even know that even offers a sapphire display aside from the stainless casing. I don’t think that makes it any more desirable for someone outside a site like this.
Now, if the stainless model offered separate functionality over the aluminum model, then I can see there be more incentive to upgrade to that model. But they both have the exact same performance specifications. Aesthetics doesn’t really trump the software experience with the stainless watch given the up-charge.
I‘m not in the US so I can‘t really tell how the situation is in-store, but on the verizon website there are only cellular Watches available (S3 and S4, aluminium and stainless). Which makes a ton of sense, for a carrier.
Exactly. I have nothing against the stainless model, but when you factor the entire cost of financing/adding LTE, it adds up really quick, and I don’t think the price point is attractive for the average consumer who can have the _same_ Apple Watch significantly cheaper for the aluminum model. Not to mention, the stainless model has horrendous resale value for those who don’t know that.
Im only talking about LTE models being sold at verizon/att/sprint & t-mobile
and the cost for the device monthly not the service
i don't know carrier stores that sell GPS only models that doesn't make sense and again what my main point is....it would help if stores carried ONE ss display model to let people know it's available that's all
and btw people pay more for not that much of an upgrade all the time
[doublepost=1564641845][/doublepost]
and most people don't do that most consumers are uninformed and none of us on this message board falls into that category of consumer
im not doubting that the SS doesn't or wouldn't sell less im saying how much does it cost to have 1 display model available for people to decide. there's so much cramp on display at carrier stores that don't sell at all or can only be ordered
Come to think of it, I've never seen a SS model on a person in public, everyone seems to have the silver/space grey aluminium model, if that is down to price or the fact the SS isn't as advertised I have no idea.
This is my point. If it wasn't worth manufacturing Apple wouldn't do it. People going to their carriers don't know about SS until maybe during the sale the representative might mention it during checkout but by then who cares and there's no SS to compare to the aluminum
What me and @Relentless Power is explaining to you is that the average consumer would lose interest after the representative shows the price. And once the representative explains to them that there’s no difference internally and both the SS & Aluminum model functions the same, that would be all the information needed to choose the Aluminum.
I understand you’re point that carriers should stock SS to show consumers various choices, but having the space would not be beneficial for the carriers. And you’re speaking as a consumers who’s uninformed, it would be different if a consumer is knowledgable about the AW.
Additionally, the stainless casing and sapphire is not enough to sell the stainless Model (Which most have no idea what sapphire is), on top of the $10-$15 that will be added on the monthly invoice. Consumers don’t generally care about aesthetics with a smart watch (Yes, I’ve said this like four times in this thread), not when it has limited support and drops significantly in resale value. Now, a mechanical watch, totally different perspective.
Last edited:
You can repeat that as often as you like, but it is obviously not true. Apparently there are enough consumers who buy the Stainless models, otherwise why would Apple not only keep making them, but actually with the S4 sell more Stainless versions (3) than ever before?
The only valid point you could make is that the „typical“ customer in a carrier store is different from the „typical“ customer in an Apple store. Maybe so, maybe not.
The only valid point you could make is that the „typical“ customer in a carrier store is different from the „typical“ customer in an Apple store. Maybe so, maybe not.
Im not saying they need to stock it, im saying to have 1 dummy display model or even not on display just to compare with the aluminum. its a significant difference when wearing the watch that's the selling point. some people prefer a more sturdy, solid piece of jewelry than what the aluminum offers
there are PLENTY of consumers who buy the SS simply because of look/feel...its a different market of customer but we do exist just like there's a market for the hermes apple watch.
you guys are acting like most people purchase iPhone simply for ios..... very few pick the Xs over the Xr just for the better camera.... while it's a bigger difference then between watches it still the same idea
there are plenty of people who buy the more expensive model just to have the more expensive model.
In summary, there’s a few thing Razmonster is off base with during this discussion:
1.) LTE data for the watch doesn’t cost a ‘few dollars per month’, it’s more like $10-$13 a Month with taxes.
2.) The stainless model Apple Watch costs significantly more, the consumer then probably would end up financing the watch on top of the LTE cost, which is extremely unattractive on carrier bill that likely is already high to begin with. Which is why Apple uses the aluminum, because it’s the most affordable/attractive for a carrier option.
{Is the stainless model a seller? Sure...to a minor demographic. But it’s nowhere near as popular as the aluminum model, simply because the steep price point difference/terrible resale/they all perform the same functionality.}
3.) No one’s contesting that the stainless model doesn’t sell, what you continue to fail to understand, is the stainless model is nothing more than an aesthetic choice, Apples price point for the stainless is too high, (and that’s coming from someone that owns a stainless model), a smart watch doesn’t carry the value a mechanical watch does. That’s why others choose the aluminum, it’s far more affordable and performs the same functionality.
Right, Apple knows that there’s a small demographic that Purchase the stainless, but the net sales belong to the aluminum, because it’s the cheapest. It’s that simple. Apple charges a premium, because they can, but they already know the stainless doesn’t hold enough of an incentive given the influx of price/Plus the financing with the LTE cost.
I work for one of the biggest telecommunication companies in the UK, we stock most versions of the Apple Watch, Stainless Steel included.
you are not reading what i have been saying.
i said nothing about the cost of LTE data a month because i don't know what the carrier's charge only what mine does. i was talking about the cost of the device
im not denying it costs more for a SS model im saying why not have 1 dummy or display model for reference
and no i don't fail to understand that the stainless is an aesthetic choice im fully aware of that. that is why i own one
you are trying to argue points with me that you've made in your posts over and over. im simply saying that if the carrier sells the watch in SS online and over the phone--- it would be a good idea for stores to have at least 1 dummy model for reference to compare that's all
the carriers don't sell hermes edition so that doesn't even make sense. they do however sell the SS
[doublepost=1564813387][/doublepost]
yeah for whatever reason even though carriers here sell it they don't even keep a sample model in store its bizarre to me
the carriers don't sell hermes edition so that doesn't even make sense. they do however sell the SS
[doublepost=1564813387][/doublepost]
By your logic people are too dumb and lazy to do their own product research. You keep arguing that people should be made aware of a better product. Why sell them short at SS when Hermès is out there. What if one of these dumb customers you reference is a huge Hermès fan.
[doublepost=1564813387][/doublepost]
By your logic people are too dumb and lazy to do their own product research. You keep arguing that people should be made aware of a better product. Why sell them short at SS when Hermès is out there. What if one of these dumb customers you reference is a huge Hermès fan.
It’s not bizarre at all. I don’t get it how you don’t understand that it’s not beneficial for carriers to display that model. The Aluminum have 3 different models... Silver, Gray and Gold. And now, you want carriers to stock 3 additional models... SS, SpaceBlackSS, GoldSS. And for those models just to be displayed and not bought. When there’s plenty of options for a carrier to display items to interest consumers.
The Apple Watch is an accessory to the iPhone, although the Apple Watch is popular among smart watches. Not too many are willing to pay a price for an accessory to the the iPhone. And now, you’re telling a customer that this Apple Watch is even more expensive if you go with the SS model.
the carriers sell SS online and phone sales they don't sell Hermes at all
[doublepost=1564891957][/doublepost]
it doesn't have to be on display they can have a non working model in the back. it's a significant difference on your wrist from aluminum people might want to see what it feels like. I'm not saying they need to have every model available on display but how it feels on the wrist is the biggest difference and it only takes 1 to let people see that.
i know this because i experienced this myself. i wanted to see how a SS model was and there wasn't one for me to try and had the manager not had a personal one i would not have ever considered it. it sold me and that means there's plenty of people who may be the same way
and not every customer does their homework i keeping saying im talking about people who only shop in carrier stores or who may not have an apple store close by.
Circular discussion. Either way, there’s one thing that matters only in this whole thread, it’s a smart watch, it has limited support and consumers aren’t spending that type of money on a stainless model, regardless if they can see it on display or not. They don’t care. Now, maybe some see the appeal in the stainless model, the aluminum deserves the ‘shelf space’, because it also sees the most discounts, where Apple would likely never even discount the stainless model. That’s another consideration.