Rumor: Gold Apple Watch Edition priced up to $5,000, steel version at $500, will debut on Feb. 14

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited January 2015
A rumor on Tuesday claims Apple's upcoming Apple Watch will be priced at $500 for the mid-tier steel model and up to $5,000 for top-end gold "Edition" versions, a number much higher than previous estimates.



Citing an unnamed source, French website iGen reports Apple is looking to field the Apple Watch at a proposed retail cost of $500 for versions with stainless steel cases and between $4,000 and $5,000 for Apple Watch Edition models. This leaves the Apple Watch Sport version as Apple's lowest-priced option, which the company said would come in at $350.

While the website has been accurate in predicting recent Apple product launches, the claims are unverifiable and should be taken with a grain of salt.

Previous estimates from jewelers and industry analysts pegged high-end Apple Watch Edition models at $1,200. Edition versions are crafted from 18-karat gold, feature sapphire crystal and come with a variety of luxurious strap options. Apple has not commented on whether the entire chassis is solid gold, or merely gold plated, but the company apparently developed a variant of the metal twice as strong as the standard.

Additionally, the source claims Apple is still shooting for a launch on Valentine's Day.

Prior to the Apple Watch announcement, noted analyst Ming-Chi Kuo accurately predicted that the device would come in two sizes and multiple models spread across a wide range of price points. At the time, he speculated the wearable could cost into the "thousands of dollars."

Apple announced its anticipated first foray into the wearables market in September, saying only that pricing would start at $350. Given that the Apple Watch Sport is made from relatively low-cost materials -- aluminum, elastomer band and non-sapphire window -- many believe it to be the entry-level model.
«13456713

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 247
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 9,233member

    Sounds good to me!

     

    This watch is obviously not made for Android users.

     

    The gold version should cost many thousands of dollars!

  • Reply 2 of 247



    just like other higher end watches, Rolex, Tag, a $5000 version is obviously not being sold based on accuracy, or gold content, but based on desire.

  • Reply 3 of 247
    analogjackanalogjack Posts: 1,073member
    [quote]Citing an unnamed source....[/quote]

    Blind Freddy could have told you that $1500 for the dearest watch was laughable. I think their most expensive version will easily top $5000 because Apple has the technology to make individual watches one at a time and I'm sure they will do that too. In fact if you make the Italian chain band out of gold as well, you'd be looking at 20 grand just for the gold.
  • Reply 4 of 247
    bdkennedy1bdkennedy1 Posts: 1,459member
    And in 5 years when Apple stops supporting it and the battery won't hold a charge anymore, it will be worth $100.
  • Reply 5 of 247
    Here's my issue. Why have it as Apple Watch ($500), Apple Watch Sport ($350), Apple Watch Edition ($5000). Having the model listed in the middle as the cheap one doesn't make sense. And the Sport model is always listed in the middle.

    Going with the $350 version regardless because that's probably all I'll be able to afford next year.
  • Reply 6 of 247
    bdkennedy1 wrote: »
    And in 5 years when Apple stops supporting it and the battery won't hold a charge anymore, it will be worth $100.

    Unless you're saying that gold will have seriously dropped in value by then, you'd be mistaken.
  • Reply 7 of 247
    mpantonempantone Posts: 1,609member

    No thanks, I'd rather buy an Omega Speedmaster if I had that kind of coin. It will retain its value far more than an Apple Watch.

     

    Plus the Speedmaster is less expensive. Spend the difference on some shares of AAPL instead.

  • Reply 8 of 247
    mpantone wrote: »
    No thanks, I'd rather buy an Omega Speedmaster if I had that kind of coin. It will retain its value far more than an Apple Watch.

    Plus the Speedmaster is less expensive. Spend the difference on some shares of AAPL instead.

    Will the Speedmaster call Life Alert when you've fallen and can't get up? :D
  • Reply 9 of 247
    mpantonempantone Posts: 1,609member

    Nah, but I'll look super stylin' in my coffin. ;) 

     

    Besides, square watches = yuck.

  • Reply 10 of 247
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    I honestly don’t see how people are going to spend that much for an accessory to the iPhone if the tech will be outdated every year. The only way I see that happening is by making their S-series computer-on-a-chip replaceable, like a watch batter, so that you can update the performance and capabilities, without buying a new device.

    That is very difficult engineering, but I think it would have the added bonus of allowing Apple to create completely new looks each year that many would want to collect. I really have to think Apple knows that a luxury item that is also jewelry can’t effectively be repurchased every year, losing support in 3 years, and teetering on being obsolete within 5 years, so I am going to say that is part of the ?Watch design.
  • Reply 11 of 247
    solipsismy wrote: »
    I honestly don’t see how people are going to spend that much for an accessory to the iPhone if the tech will be outdated every year. The only way I see that happening is by making their S-series computer-on-a-chip replaceable, like a watch batter, so that you can update the performance and capabilities, without buying a new device.

    That is very difficult engineering, but I think it would have the added bonus of allowing Apple to create completely new looks each year that many would want to collect. I really have to think Apple knows that a luxury item that is also jewelry can’t effectively be repurchased every year, losing support in 3 years, and teetering on being obsolete within 5 years, so I am going to say that is part of the ?Watch design.

    Yep. I can't see them restricting that to the high end models either, that'd just irritate the poor people. The question becomes one of 'how much'.

    Obviously, over time people will probably buy a second (and third, and fourth...and fifth...)Watch, maybe in a different style. Also possible they introduce some more advanced models with extra sensors, but allow SOC upgrades for older models still.
  • Reply 12 of 247
    solipsismysolipsismy Posts: 5,099member
    Also possible they introduce some more advanced models with extra sensors, but allow SOC upgrades for older models still.

    Remember that's not an SoC but the entire computer on a chip. CoC? It still needs to connect to the display, buttons, battery, sensors and charging unit, but they may have designed a special interconnect for all that so the CoC can be replaced with relative ease by Apple Store employees or an authorized ?Watch jeweler.
  • Reply 13 of 247
    solipsismy wrote: »
    I honestly don’t see how people are going to spend that much for an accessory to the iPhone if the tech will be outdated every year. The only way I see that happening is by making their S-series computer-on-a-chip replaceable, like a watch batter, so that you can update the performance and capabilities, without buying a new device.

    That is very difficult engineering, but I think it would have the added bonus of allowing Apple to create completely new looks each year that many would want to collect. I really have to think Apple knows that a luxury item that is also jewelry can’t effectively be repurchased every year, losing support in 3 years, and teetering on being obsolete within 5 years, so I am going to say that is part of the ?Watch design.

    A well-reasoned post from a newbie.

    Welcome to AppleInsider!
  • Reply 14 of 247
    solipsismy wrote: »
    Remember that's not an SoC but the entire computer on a chip. CoC? It still needs to connect to the display, buttons, battery, sensors and charging unit, but they may have designed a special interconnect for all that so the CoC can be replaced with relative ease by Apple Store employees or an authorized ?Watch jeweler.

    True, CoC seems clunky but might work. My guess is that, since it's sealed, there is some simple universal connector there.

    I can't wait to see teardowns and dissection of the S1. I think that, just like the iPhone was a miniaturized Mac in a phone, the Watch will be a miniaturized iPhone in a watch.

    And I fully expect Cellular equipped models as soon as it's feasible.
  • Reply 15 of 247
    simtubsimtub Posts: 277member
    But then 12 months later "Apple Watch Air 2" thinner lighter faster and longer battery life... Another Upgrade 5000usd *cha ching*
  • Reply 16 of 247
    welshdogwelshdog Posts: 1,766member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post



    I honestly don’t see how people are going to spend that much for an accessory to the iPhone if the tech will be outdated every year. The only way I see that happening is by making their S-series computer-on-a-chip replaceable, like a watch batter, so that you can update the performance and capabilities, without buying a new device.



    That is very difficult engineering, but I think it would have the added bonus of allowing Apple to create completely new looks each year that many would want to collect. I really have to think Apple knows that a luxury item that is also jewelry can’t effectively be repurchased every year, losing support in 3 years, and teetering on being obsolete within 5 years, so I am going to say that is part of the ?Watch design.

    All of your points make sense, particularly after Ive commented on how difficult and "humbling" he found watch design to be. There is no doubt they have considered the concept of long life in expensive watches and made design decisions to accommodate.

  • Reply 17 of 247
    blazarblazar Posts: 270member
    With a watch, especially high end, they need to come up with a way to have them retain value. Something exclusive about each model year perhaps.

    Im not sure what it is, but the iphone6 "feels" special compared to past models. The way the glass and its edges look just impresses me. Call me a fanboi but I'm not so easily impressed. I hope the iwatch looks, feels, and functions as well as we all hope. Life is about turning wishes into hopes into reality. That's where the excitement lies and Apple needs ti continue that trend to be successful.
  • Reply 18 of 247
    clexmanclexman Posts: 166member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post



    a number much higher than previous estimates.

     

    Not any higher than my estimate!

  • Reply 19 of 247
    slurpyslurpy Posts: 5,317member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by SolipsismY View Post



    I honestly don’t see how people are going to spend that much for an accessory to the iPhone if the tech will be outdated every year. The only way I see that happening is by making their S-series computer-on-a-chip replaceable, like a watch batter, so that you can update the performance and capabilities, without buying a new device.



    That is very difficult engineering, but I think it would have the added bonus of allowing Apple to create completely new looks each year that many would want to collect. I really have to think Apple knows that a luxury item that is also jewelry can’t effectively be repurchased every year, losing support in 3 years, and teetering on being obsolete within 5 years, so I am going to say that is part of the ?Watch design.

     

    You know, in my experience, when someone buys something they don't really give a shit when it's going to be "outdated". It's not something on most people's minds. They buy based on desire at the time. It's only the tech geeks and are always obsessed about when something will become "obsolete" and resale value. 

  • Reply 20 of 247

    I thought $10,000 was being thrown around for the gold one... GOLD!

Sign In or Register to comment.