Apple projected to ship nearly 65M 'iWatch' units priced at $199 in first year



  • Reply 21 of 112
    What iWatch? Apple has never mentioned they would be coming out with a smart-watch. I think these people are getting a little ahead of themselves. I doubt Apple could sell 65 million smart-watches in a few years. Of course, I have no idea what functions the iWatch would have, so I'm just being skeptical. I don't even know what type of consumer would be interested in owning an iWatch. It seems like such an unknown quantity to actually put numbers on.

    I still wear a watch. A Casio G-Shock Solar and I find it very tough and useful.
  • Reply 22 of 112
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,719member
    Analysts setting up Apple to fail by predicting unreasonable numbers on a non existing product. I can do that too. I predict Apple will sell 1 MM iCars in 2015Q3. You read it here first!
  • Reply 23 of 112
    Seriously doubt 63 m units on launch. I would expect maybe around 10 m if they can even figure out if they will be making iHealth Applications on Mac OS X/ iCloud and if it will be carrier subsidized to be available at 199 ( but I think it'll sell higher) on contracts. Another thing... If it's an iWatch will it replace my iPod if they build in a large memory? Wouldn't this affect their iPod Lines? And if they will be using flexible displays, who's going to help them make them? Sony, Samsung, LG, Sharp? You can't just claim something will happen in a year without any evidence. Just look at all the Apple TV rumors... Maybe we'll get an update this fall but the would be changes should be new iOS 7 icons redesign, iTunes Radio, Wifi AC. All of this takes time. If you think 200 developers working on an OS prototype for a smart watch is going to be ready by next year with prototype sensors, you're wrong. It'll take at least 2 years to make an iWatch and then there's the applications that will work with it. It won't be iTunes unless they actually plan on making it have a health center in it.
  • Reply 24 of 112

    There's also the 10 rings that comes with the watch for control, 2 earings for stereo audio, nose cap camera...

  • Reply 25 of 112


    Originally Posted by Smiles77 View Post

    Funny that that's the very thing Tim Cook talked about at the D11 conference:


    "[Tim Cook] said that “the wrist is interesting,” but noted that it comes with his own challenges, as evidenced by the fact that many people of younger generations don’t wear watches anymore. “For something to work here, you first have to convince people that it’s so incredible, they want to wear it,” he said."


    I was about to say almost the exact same thing.


    Didn't know Tim had said this.


    Thank you.


    [I've never worn a watch but I could be more easily convinced to wear something really cool around my wrist than wear something that resembles glasses.]

  • Reply 26 of 112


    Originally Posted by wigby View Post

    Not sure why so many have a problem understanding how Apple operates. They look at existing products and disrupt or create an entirely new market. The iWatch is obviously coming within a year or two. The key to success (which Samsung, Google, etc. will never understand) is making customers want the product they didn't even think they did. That sounds like every naysayer in this forum so I predict you will all be customers of this iWatch.

    Now how do they successfully do that? Apple needs to strike the right balance between form (jewelry) and function (connectivity). Since a wrist watch is a statement that you cannot hide in your pocket like a phone, it must be 60% jewelry and 40% iPhone peripheral. Apple has been in the digital lifestyle business for years but have not relied on anything like this before. They must sell the public on the iWatch as a fashion accessory before the technology. That is the only way to gain market penetration and win over all the people that think they don't want to wear a watch...until it becomes a fashion statement that also enhances your iPhone experience too.


    Not exactly jewelry, but techno bling... Also, I think the iPhone accessory aspect is only part of the story. This thing should be like the current iPod nano plus new biometrics/apps added on. Think about all of the expensive watches out now with biometrics built-in. A nano type device with biometrics would completely disrupt that segment. It would then extend into the new smartwatch segment where it can also crush the nascent players in that space as an iPhone accessory. If they do something new and better, it will just be that much more successful. 


    This analyst like every other, is talking out their ass. Even as a smash hit, those numbers are fantasy. 


    One feature I think might sell me on the idea of wearing a watch again is the notifications. A tingle on the wrist would get my attention. A buzz in my pocket does not and I miss so many reminders and notifications it isn't funny.

  • Reply 27 of 112
    macapfelmacapfel Posts: 517member


    Originally Posted by scotty321 View Post

    This rumor seems fake. But if it is real, maybe Apple should realize that people don't wear nor want watches anymore. Maybe they should start with 100,000 iWatches and see how it goes.


    Right, I don't wear a watch since almost 30 years. 

    But I would be very interested in buying a wrist-worn iDevice!

  • Reply 28 of 112
    analogjackanalogjack Posts: 1,071member

    I cannot believe that an item like this is going to be anything other than a niche product. Unless it has some sort of secret awesomeness but I'd be willing to bet that this is going to be a relative flop. But then I suppose they have done their market research, but my splanchnic says no.

  • Reply 29 of 112
    andysolandysol Posts: 2,506member
    If and when Apple announces an iWatch, it won't be anywhere near $199. Maybe $299-$499. They aren't going to release some "pebble" wannabe. It'll be an exercise and health focused device with biometric readers in it- in addition to all the nerdy doodads we love like notifications, etc. Measuring your oxygen and pulse isn't cheap. IWatch is gonna knock it out of the park as a premium status symbol and extremely functional watch.
  • Reply 30 of 112
    malaxmalax Posts: 1,598member

    "If Apple were to sell more than 60 million "iWatch" units in the first year, it would be a number more than 4 times above the 14.8 million iPads Apple sold in that product's first 12 months."


    Now that's analysis for you.  It's also 6 times 10 million and 30 times 2 million.  "If Apple were to sell 60 million units it would be 60 millions times the number of circular headquarters buildings they have in the works!"


    On a substantive point, kids don't wear watches because they don't need one to tell the time (since a) they don't really care what time it is and b) they have numerous other devices that serves that function).  But give them an uber-communicator that they can wear on their wrist and you'll have something.  It doesn't even have to tell the time.

  • Reply 30 of 112
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,232moderator
    65M at $200 per watch is $13B in revenue. If we assume a 20% profit margin (somewhat less than Apple's average), that equals $2.6B. At a P/E ratio of 15x (higher, given that this would be seen as a growth segment), that's an extra $39B in market cap, or $40 - $45 per share. Pretty big.

    I doubt that Apple will achieve anywhere close to 65M.

    This is another of those rumors that just get floated around for years. This one celebrates its 3rd birthday today:

    I found some stats previously during the course of the numerous threads about it showing potential numbers:

    One of the references there showed watch export numbers for 2011:

    As you'd expect, Switzerland maintains the highest average unit price and volume at 30 million units. France is 2nd at 7 million units with ASP of ~$175.

    Apple selling 65m at $199 in a year would be about half the entire premium watch industry of every country combined. It's just not realistic IMO. There's also the issue that Tim noted during an interview and someone else pointed out in the thread, which is that kids don't wear watches. Smartphones have replaced watches for people for the function of telling the time. As a piece of jewellery, a watch still has a place but this isn't the kind of thing Apple makes.

    Some of their competitors are making moves into this space but they don't look all that compelling:


    That just basically controls the phone via the watch. Looks like Samsung might be paying off the media again too because the above article says Samsung is kicking off the trend but Sony has had their watch available to buy for a while:
  • Reply 32 of 112
    jmc54jmc54 Posts: 204member

    This wouldn't replace my day to day watch, but i would wear it while out on the court or on my bike!

  • Reply 33 of 112
    Feels like stock pumping by dumping rumors with outrageously good imaginary numbers on top of the Sept 10th ones. AAPL analyst motto is, "Buy on rumor, sell on news!" so why not pack more rumors in?
  • Reply 34 of 112
    thomprthompr Posts: 1,511member


    Originally Posted by Ppietra View Post

    Clearly this guy is making wild speculations!

    That kind of revenue would represent about 30% of all watches sold in the world in value, and completely eclipse sales of other smartwatches, a market that no one knows where its going.

    The number of devices sold would represent about 40-50% of iPhone sales during the year, and since we can assume that it would require some recent iDevice to get the full experience it would also represent about 20% of all potential costumers in just the first year. That kind of market penetration would be unbelievable for something that probably needs another device and that people can live without.

    Apple will try to convince its existing customer base - very large, by the way - that they can't live without this product.  They have a pretty strong history of success with such things.



  • Reply 35 of 112
    murmanmurman Posts: 159member

    He put a decimal point in his prediction of a non product, 63.4 million, what's with the 0.4 million, is that to make it look more realistic?

  • Reply 36 of 112
    connieconnie Posts: 101member

    I do not think Apple will ever make a watch. They should focus their resources and energy and try and make a 5 inch iPhone instead.

  • Reply 37 of 112
    mstonemstone Posts: 11,510member


    Originally Posted by murman View Post

    He put a decimal point in his prediction of a non product, 63.4 million, what's with the 0.4 million, is that to make it look more realistic?

    It's a rounding error.

  • Reply 38 of 112
    thedbathedba Posts: 482member


    Originally Posted by scotty321 View Post

    This rumor seems fake. But if it is real, maybe Apple should realize that people don't wear nor want watches anymore. Maybe they should start with 100,000 iWatches and see how it goes.

    People don't wear watches like they used to. However, in Western culture at least, there is a growing number of people that run/bike/swim and there's always the ever popular golf.


    From what I've seen and experienced for myself, the offerings from Polar/Timex/Suunto are either extremely limited, complicated, bulky or ugly or any combination of the previous four. Where Apple can step in, is by offering a very subtle and well designed device, that paired along with an iPhone would give the active user a killer must have combination.


    I pretty much bet that such a device can find some 65 million clients worldwide.


    For example, Strava is a wondeful app to have on your iPhone today. Problem is, you have to take out your iPhone in the middle of a run in order to see your progress. iWatch definitely solves that problem.

  • Reply 39 of 112

    I love my iWatch. It's changed my entire mobile experience. Can't wait until the 2.0 software update in March...


    Hey... Wait a minute...

  • Reply 40 of 112
    pazuzupazuzu Posts: 1,728member

    I love my Nano sports iWatch but only when exercising. 

Sign In or Register to comment.