I'm 29. I never wore a watch because I had a cell phone in High school. I wear a watch daily now. Kids mature into adults, and if you dress for success (which you should- regardless of your business)- then you wear a watch. There is a huge connection between dressing successful and being successful in the workplace.
In addition to never wearing a watch, I also never wore a jacket- regardless of the temperature. And id wear flip flops in November. Bottom line- kids are idiots. Hah
You have to wear a watch to "dress for success"? You equate wearing a watch with flip-flops in November. I can't agree with any of that. At this point a simple time piece is redundant. If Apple, or someone else, can make it more useful, then I'll consider it.
As for flip-flops in November, that depends on many factors. Flip-flops any time of the year at a professional job is not appropriate. Flip-flops in a tropical climate for casual wear, especially to the beach, are good year round. If you are in the Southern hemisphere then November will put you in the Summer where flip-flops are again apropos. I only wear flip-flops in the gym shower and 'at' the beach, meaning when I get to the beach. I find them to be less adequate as standard footwear as they offer less utility than standard shoes, which is the same way I feel about the utility of a typical watch compared to a smartphone or the dozens of clocks I seem to always have around me.
PS: I agree kids are idiots but I'd also say adults are idiots, too. Every time I look back on my own life I wonder what the hell I was thinking. I suspect this will occur indefinitely.
I just hope that media will stop all the speculations of the forthcoming products. The problem is that the market takes such rumors and tries to pump up the stocks and then when things doesn't happen as the fictional stories they hammer the stock away.
BTW, I am really happy with the tone Tim Cook is having at the Goldman Sachs investor conference. I am glad he is telling all the analyst and investors to keep their advise to themselves.
I just hope that media will stop all the speculations of the forthcoming products. The problem is that the market takes such rumors and tries to pump up the stocks and then when things doesn't happen as the fictional stories they hammer the stock away.
BTW, I am really happy with the tone Tim Cook is having at the Goldman Sachs investor conference. I am glad he is telling all the analyst and investors to keep their advise to themselves.
So long as Apple has all the mindshare then it won't stop. If and when Apple does come out with something revolutionary they stock will jump but then quickly they'll complain once that high wears off. Even during the dark years Apple still had a light on them but after Jobs took over and Mac line changed the focused increased. Once the iPod had taken off on Windows they had a dominate mindshare. Then the iPhone came along and something odd happened; going a half decade between a major new product category release was viewed as disappointing with comments that Apple lost it. Even with the iPad making the 2 decade old tablet market successful for the first time the media still had plenty of negative things to say about Apple. Now they're on board with the iPad but expect something else from Apple… at least until today. As of today Morgan Stanley is talking about 2 initiatives at once.
OMFG! A rumored watch and a rumored tv will produce 80 billion a year in additional revenue. Who the fu** is smoking that crack.
The average person doesn't buy a watch ,let alone a tv, every 6 months the way they do cell phones. Give me a break.
But the suckers will bite, the stock will sky rocket and then in a few days the rumors will be squashed, the stock will fall and the suckers will lose millions of dollars.
If Apple approaches the iWatch or whatever they call it not just as a technology product but also as a fashion item, they are going to make tons of money out of this. This can be the product, because of the price range it will fall in, that will give them market penetration in emerging markets far beyond anything they've ever had. The business model they need to look at, and I'm sure they are, is Swatch. Not that they should just make a dumb copy of the business model, but they should take inspiration from it.
OMFG! A rumored watch and a rumored tv will produce 80 billion a year in additional revenue. Who the fu** is smoking that crack.
The average person doesn't buy a watch ,let alone a tv, every 6 months the way they do cell phones. Give me a break.
But the suckers will bite, the stock will sky rocket and then in a few days the rumors will be squashed, the stock will fall and the suckers will lose millions of dollars.
Business as usual, huh, on Wall Street.
1) The average person didn't buy a smartphone or tablet before the iPhone and iPad came along.
2) If you are going to make stuff up you might as well go big or go home, as the saying goes.
[quote name="SolipsismX" url="/t/155926/apples-iwatch-and-apple-tv-initiatives-could-drive-an-additional-80-billion-in-yearly-revenue#post_2276200"] You have to wear a watch to "dress for success"? You equate wearing a watch with flip-flops in November. I can't agree with any of that. At this point a simple time piece is redundant. If Apple, or someone else, can make it more useful, then I'll consider it.
As for flip-flops in November, that depends on many factors. Flip-flops any time of the year at a professional job is not appropriate. Flip-flops in a tropical climate for casual wear, especially to the beach, are good year round. If you are in the Southern hemisphere then November will put you in the Summer where flip-flops are again apropos. I only wear flip-flops in the gym shower and 'at' the beach, meaning when I get to the beach. I find them to be less adequate as standard footwear as they offer less utility than standard shoes, which is the same way I feel about the utility of a typical watch compared to a smartphone or the dozens of clocks I seem to always have around me.
I think he was using flip-flops in November as an example of how teenagers don't always make the best decisions. He wasn't equating it to wearing a wristwatch.
Huberty or Morgan Stanley is frelling insane! $80b/yr?
With an ASP of $1000 for a new device, Apple would have to sell 80,000,000 of them a year. That's 80 million devices per year at $1000 ASP, or 20 million a quarter at $1000. It'll get worse as a prospective Apple watch is probably going to be on the order of $200 to $300 (assuming it is an iOS device, not an iOS device accessory). They'll have to sell 50m watches at $200 just to get $10b revenue. Then, 10m TVs at $1000 to get the other $10b per quarter. Insane.
Really, how many TVs at $1000 ASP can Apple sell per quarter? And how many watches at $200 ASP can Apple sell per quarter?
This is one Apple device I will probably not buy. I gave up wearing wrist watches a long time ago. The last watch I wore was a swiss chronometer style watch which was rather heavy.
1. I rarely need to know what time it is as I don't have a set schedule, besides there are clocks all over the place.
2. I don't like having a bulky object around my wrist as it interferes with typing, especially on a MBP.
3. I have become very anti-fashion, anti-jewelery as I get older.
4. If I really do need to be somewhere promptly, I set an event on my iPhone.
As for the rest of the Apple fans, I am glad you will buy it. I'm sure you will enjoy it.
I can't wait to see the Samsung fanboy ads mocking the iWatch.
I'm so sick of these reports and articles. As if Apple desperately needs new revenue. If these things only drive an additional $78BN in revenue, will the stock drop? Such random numbers pulled out of people's asses.
If these things only drive an additional $78BN in revenue, will the stock drop? Such random numbers pulled out of people's asses.
The stock is now destined… DESTINED to drop, simply because Apple is doing neither of these things and therefore will not be receiving the $80 billion in revenue that Wall Street now DEMANDS and EXPECTS from them.
You have to wear a watch to "dress for success"? You equate wearing a watch with flip-flops in November. I can't agree with any of that. At this point a simple time piece is redundant. If Apple, or someone else, can make it more useful, then I'll consider it.
As for flip-flops in November, that depends on many factors. Flip-flops any time of the year at a professional job is not appropriate. Flip-flops in a tropical climate for casual wear, especially to the beach, are good year round. If you are in the Southern hemisphere then November will put you in the Summer where flip-flops are again apropos. I only wear flip-flops in the gym shower and 'at' the beach, meaning when I get to the beach. I find them to be less adequate as standard footwear as they offer less utility than standard shoes, which is the same way I feel about the utility of a typical watch compared to a smartphone or the dozens of clocks I seem to always have around me.
PS: I agree kids are idiots but I'd also say adults are idiots, too. Every time I look back on my own life I wonder what the hell I was thinking. I suspect this will occur indefinitely.
Solip- I was equating doing things as a kid that you don't do as an adult- like Chad said. My point was- if a high schooler doesn't wear a watch now, it doesn't mean he won't later. Just like how I would wear flip flops when it was freezing outside, or no jacket. I work with youth at my church- shorts in December is commonplace. Once you grow up, you realize that's not too smart. Some know already, some learn it earlier than others (and some never do)- but most learn it eventually.
Not sure how you thought I said to wear flip flops to work?
As for the watch- I was suggesting that none of my friends- in fact, maybe a few dozen kids in my school of 3000 wore a watch because we all had cell phones. I would venture to say most 30 year olds (which are those kid's ages now) who are in a professional realm (or not)- wear watches. It's a fashion statement, as well as a function. It doesn't always have to be functional to be fashionable. Earrings, Necklaces, bracelets. They all serve a purpose even though they're useless.
But I can't stress enough how much it would not be fashionable. Women wouldn't wear it for sure. It's like a bluetooth headset. Ya- it's super functional, but you look like a tool with it in. Same thing with a smart watch- it is brilliant and would be super functional. But it's as sexy as a calculator watch (which was also functional). It will hurt Apple's image regardless of how brilliant the device itself is.
Solip- I was equating doing things as a kid that you don't do as an adult- like Chad said. My point was- if a high schooler doesn't wear a watch now, it doesn't mean he won't later. Just like how I would wear flip flops when it was freezing outside, or no jacket. I work with youth at my church- shorts in December is commonplace. Once you grow up, you realize that's not too smart. Some know already, some learn it earlier than others (and some never do)- but most learn it eventually.
Not sure how you thought I said to wear flip flops to work?
Yeah, I didn't pick up on the segue until Chad pointed it out.
As for the watch- I was suggesting that none of my friends- in fact, maybe a few dozen kids in my school of 3000 wore a watch because we all had cell phones. I would venture to say most 30 year olds (which are those kid's ages now) who are in a professional realm (or not)- wear watches. It's a fashion statement, as well as a function. It doesn't always have to be functional to be fashionable. Earrings, Necklaces, bracelets. They all serve a purpose even though they're useless.
Funny how a few years can make all the difference. I'm not too much older than you and yet there were no cellphones in my HS, at least not with students. Sure, they existed but the costs for the tech and usage were still outrageous. They were also quite large. No one had the Zack Morris phone. Pagers were not uncommon but I never owned one.
I did own watches and wear them in HS, as did what seemed to be most students. Without a cellphone you needed something else to tell the time quickly. This is was before the iPod existed so portable CD players and horribly pathetic headphones with cheap form covers were in style. I paid a lot for a portable CD players with 60 seconds of skip protection… which was still useless for jogging. Battery didn't last long either. I think I returned it for a cassette player then used my Boom Box to record sounds my CD music to the tape.
I can't say I miss that tech. I can't seem to find an apropos antonym of nostalgia so I'll make one up: nauseatalgia.
But I can't stress enough how much it would not be fashionable. Women wouldn't wear it for sure. It's like a bluetooth headset. Ya- it's super functional, but you look like a tool with it in. Same thing with a smart watch- it is brilliant and would be super functional. But it's as sexy as a calculator watch (which was also functional). It will hurt Apple's image regardless of how brilliant the device itself is.
That depends on how it's made. Remember the smartphone/PDA before the iPhone. The WInCE devices were super geeky and the Blackberry was for the hardcore business person. Palm feel somewhat in the middle. These were not standard operating devices for the average person. The iPhone changed that. If you can make it stylish and functional you will likely have a success. If you make it iconic it'll usually become stylish as a result.
That said, I have not seen any mockup for wearable tech that would be iconic, useful and therefore not something Apple would adopt, but I do faith that if Apple decides to go this route will they consider these things in ways in far greater detail than we will on this forum.
Checking your phone is a general no-no in business world meetings or meetings in general. Checking it constantly at social gatherings has also become a faux pas. But actually, constantly checking your watch would be a distraction as well, though less of one.
I've been wearing watches since high school. Some people wear certain belts for fashion. Others wear necklaces/earrings and jewelry in general. A watch is more akin to the jewelry world than the technology world. But Apple's main focus is marrying the "arts" and technology. Anyone can see how the original iPod was functional but also a fashion statement. Same with the iPhone. It is fashionable to have Apple products. Seriously, how many companies were making white headphones before the iPod came out? The "cool" look became having an iPod with white headphones in particular to just having any white headphones in general. You can look to the Beats by Dre headphones as well. They spawned a fashion statement with their (initially) red (now colorful) headphones while being functional (though wildly overpriced in my opinion).
Circling back to the iWatch discussion it does not seem out of the realm of possibility. A functional yet stylish marrying of two industries. The previous generation iPod Nano showed that the market was there. The fact that the current Nano was redesigned and the previous is no longer being sold speaks to a possibility of a new entry.
Comments
You have to wear a watch to "dress for success"? You equate wearing a watch with flip-flops in November. I can't agree with any of that. At this point a simple time piece is redundant. If Apple, or someone else, can make it more useful, then I'll consider it.
As for flip-flops in November, that depends on many factors. Flip-flops any time of the year at a professional job is not appropriate. Flip-flops in a tropical climate for casual wear, especially to the beach, are good year round. If you are in the Southern hemisphere then November will put you in the Summer where flip-flops are again apropos. I only wear flip-flops in the gym shower and 'at' the beach, meaning when I get to the beach. I find them to be less adequate as standard footwear as they offer less utility than standard shoes, which is the same way I feel about the utility of a typical watch compared to a smartphone or the dozens of clocks I seem to always have around me.
PS: I agree kids are idiots but I'd also say adults are idiots, too. Every time I look back on my own life I wonder what the hell I was thinking. I suspect this will occur indefinitely.
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit
That don't exist and may never exist.
Apple should just keep the rumors coming... hell the stock would be over $1000 in no time.
yep you are correct...it's called stock manipulation.....
Additional $80 billion per year, so thats roughly $20 billion more revenue per quarter...$25 billion more profit each year.
With the expanded product like and increased revenue, I predict the stock will dive to about $250.
I just hope that media will stop all the speculations of the forthcoming products. The problem is that the market takes such rumors and tries to pump up the stocks and then when things doesn't happen as the fictional stories they hammer the stock away.
BTW, I am really happy with the tone Tim Cook is having at the Goldman Sachs investor conference. I am glad he is telling all the analyst and investors to keep their advise to themselves.
So long as Apple has all the mindshare then it won't stop. If and when Apple does come out with something revolutionary they stock will jump but then quickly they'll complain once that high wears off. Even during the dark years Apple still had a light on them but after Jobs took over and Mac line changed the focused increased. Once the iPod had taken off on Windows they had a dominate mindshare. Then the iPhone came along and something odd happened; going a half decade between a major new product category release was viewed as disappointing with comments that Apple lost it. Even with the iPad making the 2 decade old tablet market successful for the first time the media still had plenty of negative things to say about Apple. Now they're on board with the iPad but expect something else from Apple… at least until today. As of today Morgan Stanley is talking about 2 initiatives at once.
OMFG! A rumored watch and a rumored tv will produce 80 billion a year in additional revenue. Who the fu** is smoking that crack.
The average person doesn't buy a watch ,let alone a tv, every 6 months the way they do cell phones. Give me a break.
But the suckers will bite, the stock will sky rocket and then in a few days the rumors will be squashed, the stock will fall and the suckers will lose millions of dollars.
Business as usual, huh, on Wall Street.
If Apple approaches the iWatch or whatever they call it not just as a technology product but also as a fashion item, they are going to make tons of money out of this. This can be the product, because of the price range it will fall in, that will give them market penetration in emerging markets far beyond anything they've ever had. The business model they need to look at, and I'm sure they are, is Swatch. Not that they should just make a dumb copy of the business model, but they should take inspiration from it.
1) The average person didn't buy a smartphone or tablet before the iPhone and iPad came along.
2) If you are going to make stuff up you might as well go big or go home, as the saying goes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightknight
I have an iPhone. It's always less than a meter from me. It's my alarm clock and my iPod and my Mail.app, only mobile.
I feel seriously stressed when I don't have my watch to check the time. ...
Ah, the perils of being a type A.
You have to wear a watch to "dress for success"? You equate wearing a watch with flip-flops in November. I can't agree with any of that. At this point a simple time piece is redundant. If Apple, or someone else, can make it more useful, then I'll consider it.
As for flip-flops in November, that depends on many factors. Flip-flops any time of the year at a professional job is not appropriate. Flip-flops in a tropical climate for casual wear, especially to the beach, are good year round. If you are in the Southern hemisphere then November will put you in the Summer where flip-flops are again apropos. I only wear flip-flops in the gym shower and 'at' the beach, meaning when I get to the beach. I find them to be less adequate as standard footwear as they offer less utility than standard shoes, which is the same way I feel about the utility of a typical watch compared to a smartphone or the dozens of clocks I seem to always have around me.
I think he was using flip-flops in November as an example of how teenagers don't always make the best decisions. He wasn't equating it to wearing a wristwatch.
Huberty or Morgan Stanley is frelling insane! $80b/yr?
With an ASP of $1000 for a new device, Apple would have to sell 80,000,000 of them a year. That's 80 million devices per year at $1000 ASP, or 20 million a quarter at $1000. It'll get worse as a prospective Apple watch is probably going to be on the order of $200 to $300 (assuming it is an iOS device, not an iOS device accessory). They'll have to sell 50m watches at $200 just to get $10b revenue. Then, 10m TVs at $1000 to get the other $10b per quarter. Insane.
Really, how many TVs at $1000 ASP can Apple sell per quarter? And how many watches at $200 ASP can Apple sell per quarter?
If their history of new product launches holds the answer would be: all of them.
This is one Apple device I will probably not buy. I gave up wearing wrist watches a long time ago. The last watch I wore was a swiss chronometer style watch which was rather heavy.
1. I rarely need to know what time it is as I don't have a set schedule, besides there are clocks all over the place.
2. I don't like having a bulky object around my wrist as it interferes with typing, especially on a MBP.
3. I have become very anti-fashion, anti-jewelery as I get older.
4. If I really do need to be somewhere promptly, I set an event on my iPhone.
As for the rest of the Apple fans, I am glad you will buy it. I'm sure you will enjoy it.
I can't wait to see the Samsung fanboy ads mocking the iWatch.
I'm so sick of these reports and articles. As if Apple desperately needs new revenue. If these things only drive an additional $78BN in revenue, will the stock drop? Such random numbers pulled out of people's asses.
Originally Posted by Slurpy
If these things only drive an additional $78BN in revenue, will the stock drop? Such random numbers pulled out of people's asses.
The stock is now destined… DESTINED to drop, simply because Apple is doing neither of these things and therefore will not be receiving the $80 billion in revenue that Wall Street now DEMANDS and EXPECTS from them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX
You have to wear a watch to "dress for success"? You equate wearing a watch with flip-flops in November. I can't agree with any of that. At this point a simple time piece is redundant. If Apple, or someone else, can make it more useful, then I'll consider it.
As for flip-flops in November, that depends on many factors. Flip-flops any time of the year at a professional job is not appropriate. Flip-flops in a tropical climate for casual wear, especially to the beach, are good year round. If you are in the Southern hemisphere then November will put you in the Summer where flip-flops are again apropos. I only wear flip-flops in the gym shower and 'at' the beach, meaning when I get to the beach. I find them to be less adequate as standard footwear as they offer less utility than standard shoes, which is the same way I feel about the utility of a typical watch compared to a smartphone or the dozens of clocks I seem to always have around me.
PS: I agree kids are idiots but I'd also say adults are idiots, too. Every time I look back on my own life I wonder what the hell I was thinking. I suspect this will occur indefinitely.
Solip- I was equating doing things as a kid that you don't do as an adult- like Chad said. My point was- if a high schooler doesn't wear a watch now, it doesn't mean he won't later. Just like how I would wear flip flops when it was freezing outside, or no jacket. I work with youth at my church- shorts in December is commonplace. Once you grow up, you realize that's not too smart. Some know already, some learn it earlier than others (and some never do)- but most learn it eventually.
Not sure how you thought I said to wear flip flops to work?
As for the watch- I was suggesting that none of my friends- in fact, maybe a few dozen kids in my school of 3000 wore a watch because we all had cell phones. I would venture to say most 30 year olds (which are those kid's ages now) who are in a professional realm (or not)- wear watches. It's a fashion statement, as well as a function. It doesn't always have to be functional to be fashionable. Earrings, Necklaces, bracelets. They all serve a purpose even though they're useless.
But I can't stress enough how much it would not be fashionable. Women wouldn't wear it for sure. It's like a bluetooth headset. Ya- it's super functional, but you look like a tool with it in. Same thing with a smart watch- it is brilliant and would be super functional. But it's as sexy as a calculator watch (which was also functional). It will hurt Apple's image regardless of how brilliant the device itself is.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jragosta
2. Many companies have policies against phone use. Even if there's no policy, pulling your phone out during a meeting is a faux pas.
Even looking at your wrist watch during a meeting can be considered rude as it conveys that you are disinterested in what is being discussed.
I usually take my iPad to meetings and it has the time displayed. iPads are perfectly acceptable to bring to meetings, at least in our company.
Yeah, I didn't pick up on the segue until Chad pointed it out.
Funny how a few years can make all the difference. I'm not too much older than you and yet there were no cellphones in my HS, at least not with students. Sure, they existed but the costs for the tech and usage were still outrageous. They were also quite large. No one had the Zack Morris phone. Pagers were not uncommon but I never owned one.
I did own watches and wear them in HS, as did what seemed to be most students. Without a cellphone you needed something else to tell the time quickly. This is was before the iPod existed so portable CD players and horribly pathetic headphones with cheap form covers were in style. I paid a lot for a portable CD players with 60 seconds of skip protection… which was still useless for jogging. Battery didn't last long either. I think I returned it for a cassette player then used my Boom Box to record sounds my CD music to the tape.
I can't say I miss that tech. I can't seem to find an apropos antonym of nostalgia so I'll make one up: nauseatalgia.
That depends on how it's made. Remember the smartphone/PDA before the iPhone. The WInCE devices were super geeky and the Blackberry was for the hardcore business person. Palm feel somewhat in the middle. These were not standard operating devices for the average person. The iPhone changed that. If you can make it stylish and functional you will likely have a success. If you make it iconic it'll usually become stylish as a result.
That said, I have not seen any mockup for wearable tech that would be iconic, useful and therefore not something Apple would adopt, but I do faith that if Apple decides to go this route will they consider these things in ways in far greater detail than we will on this forum.
Checking your phone is a general no-no in business world meetings or meetings in general. Checking it constantly at social gatherings has also become a faux pas. But actually, constantly checking your watch would be a distraction as well, though less of one.
I've been wearing watches since high school. Some people wear certain belts for fashion. Others wear necklaces/earrings and jewelry in general. A watch is more akin to the jewelry world than the technology world. But Apple's main focus is marrying the "arts" and technology. Anyone can see how the original iPod was functional but also a fashion statement. Same with the iPhone. It is fashionable to have Apple products. Seriously, how many companies were making white headphones before the iPod came out? The "cool" look became having an iPod with white headphones in particular to just having any white headphones in general. You can look to the Beats by Dre headphones as well. They spawned a fashion statement with their (initially) red (now colorful) headphones while being functional (though wildly overpriced in my opinion).
Circling back to the iWatch discussion it does not seem out of the realm of possibility. A functional yet stylish marrying of two industries. The previous generation iPod Nano showed that the market was there. The fact that the current Nano was redesigned and the previous is no longer being sold speaks to a possibility of a new entry.
Arguing that the current discount on Apple shares factor in a significant deceleration in revenue and earnings growth....
...the current discount ... factorS in...
Subject-verb agreement is 2nd-grade. Accuracy=credibility.
(Not that this seems to apply to analysts, of course.)