5M+ Apple Watch units to be built for launch, 18k gold 'Edition' could be Apple's most expensive pro

12467

Comments

  • Reply 61 of 126
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by pmz View Post

     

     

    Its the single greatest iPhone accessory ever made. The approximate market size is 400-500 million active users.

     

    They will sell every single Apple Watch they can produce in 2015.




    Huh, no. It will be more like the iPod Socks; or better yet, the iPod Hi-Fi's level of success.

  • Reply 62 of 126
    tummy wrote: »
    Probably not the "most expensive ever" unless it's more than the $10,000 that the initial 20th Anniversary Macs sold for in 1997 money. Adjusted for inflation, that would be nearly $15k today.

    Web Objects was $50k:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebObjects

    But if we're limiting the highest price to HW, the service contract for the Xserve was around $50k as well, just can't find a link (wish [@]Gatorguy[/@] was here a I'm terrible at searching things finding things)
  • Reply 63 of 126
    brlawyer wrote: »
    Huh, no. It will be more like the iPod Socks; or better yet, the iPod Hi-Fi's level of success.

    On that I will bet you* on a gentleman's self-imposed banning… but I want to make that for one year, not just one month.

    I say ?Watch will be the most successful "smart watch" ever sold in terms of unit sales, revenue -and- profits. That would clearly put it over the success and very short term run of iPod Socks and iPod Hi-Fi. But how do we measure that success if there are no hard unit numbers, revenue or profits in which to compare and contrast. The only simple and reasonable solution I see is if ?Watch gets a second generation build, which all successful Apple products have had, and something not shared with iPod Socks of iPod Hi-Fi.

    So, do you agree to those terms? Those terms being, if there is a new ?Watch introduced next year you will ban yourself for a year from posting on this site as your current name or under another alias?

    I'm guessing you won't so I'll sweeten the deal. I'll put up $349 for the cost of ?Watch (albeit in an Apple Store GC since buying you an ?Watch would be silly, or the charity of your choice and in your name) on top of my self-imposed PERMANENT ban from this site, against your 1 year self-imposed ban that I'm right.


    * You and only you.
  • Reply 64 of 126
    jfc1138jfc1138 Posts: 3,090member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by copeland View Post

     

    Smart watches are an interesting concept.

    But I will take a wait and see approach until they are able to work 7+days on a single charge.

    Wireless charging would also be great!




    You stare at your watch for seven straight days?

     

    Yikes.

     

    I cannot imagine what the unsurmountable burden is for plugging a device in while it's sitting unused while sleeping... and the speculated standby (while the display while asleep can easily be woken to show the time etc. along the lines of a smartphone) plus active use time clears a normal day easily. As I recall smartphones are only used 2.5 hours per day on average (I'm about halfway through my workday and my iPhone 6 Plus has 38 minutes of "usage"), how is that going to be topped by such a tiny screen?

     

    For me the wait and see is what ultimate functionality it offers, not some catchphrase about the battery. It's like Amazon touting it's Kindle can last for A MONTH!!! Then you read the fine print and that's when used for only an hour and half per day (IIRC it might have been less)... why they don't just straight up state that 45 hr number, which in and of itself is impressive, is just odd.

  • Reply 65 of 126
    [quote name="jfc1138" url="/t/184815/5m-apple-watch-units-to-be-built-for-launch-18k-gold-edition-could-be-apples-most-expensive-product-ever/40#post_2677384"]You stare at your watch for seven straight days?[/QUOTE]

    That's a strawman. The point is you can go for protracted periods of time between charging. Camping for a week would be one such example, but one that is leaning me toward the Fitbit Charge HR is the 5 days without charging.

    Now, when I had the Fitbit Force (7 day battery) I charged it during my quotidian morning shower, but perhaps I didn't shower one morning, forgot to put on the charger, or whatever; I wouldn't have ever felt that the battery was ever going to run out on me because there was enough juice to go several days between charging. This is not the case with the current ?Watch reports and rumours. If you need to charge nearly 100% of the battery every day as opposed to just 15-20% per day, can that be done during a shower or does that require longer periods of time off the wrist when it would be more useful on the wrist?

    Also, Fitbit monitors your sleep patterns. I want to know how my sleeping is doing over time. This is more important to me over steps, BMP, weight and BMI that want to see over several years and seasons. All those others are more easily remembered and noticed but I don't know if every Summer my sleep averages 8 hours per night and every Winter my sleep is only 6 hours, or if two years ago it was an average of 7 hours and now it's moved an hour more of less on average. That's long term data I would be interested in knowing, and something ?Watch can't do if I have to charge it every night. Now, if I could go 3-4 days without charging then charging during my shower for about 20-30 minutes per day would probably be enough to keep it charged and without worry of it running out of power.

    Does that help explain why people want more longevity out of ?Watch?
  • Reply 66 of 126
    solipsismy wrote: »
    What I don't understand about his betting is what he gets out of it by having those people not post. And why he thinks others would like him to not post for a month.

    Especially since the same thing can be achieved by blocking people--almost--since others can still quote them in replies.

    However, it may be a case of "Put your money where your mouth is" as in, "Do you really believe what you are saying, or are you just running your mouth off because you like provoking others?"
  • Reply 67 of 126
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post



     "Do you really believe what you are saying, or are you just running your mouth off because you like provoking others?"

     

    That would apply to both... the banee and the bannor.  :-)

  • Reply 68 of 126
    bigpicsbigpics Posts: 1,397member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jj.yuan View Post

     

    I wonder if gold price will go up and Apple gets the blame ... :)


     

    Funny, but FTR...

     

    ...physical gold coming on to the world market) is in the range of 113M Troy ounces/year, including new gold mining and recovered gold scrap. 



    ...and the Apple Watch case should use considerably less than an ounce of pure gold in its 18K casting.  One estimate I read put it at under half an ounce. 



    So a million Editions ($5B at $5,000 each, which would be a resounding success I would say) would use somewhere around half a million ounces... ...many if not most of which would have presumably been used to make other sold gold watch cases for other makers losing sales to the Apple version, but even discounting that and saying they're all new buyers... ...so about say, 0.4% of the annual demand.



    So significant in the jewelery world and nicely accretive to Apple's bottom line (this would be their highest net profit margin product if it follows traditional jewelery world mark-up logic and practices - which Apple's rep should easily support (and I was a jeweler for over a decade, so know something about this).



    But even if all the buyers popped another $3-10K for a gold band, still likely not a major gold market mover.



    Just sayin'....



    (But a solid gold Apple car? Now we're talkin', haha...)

  • Reply 69 of 126
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 2,614member

    I seem to remember that the first iPhone had a pricing gaff that Steve had to remedy. IIRC, the initial price was rethought by Apple, and they dropped it by a significant amount after many first adopters stood in line (or ordered immediately) and paid the original price. I think Apple gave store credit to them as a way to "make it right."

     

    Apple has had a few public goofs, and I think they learned from them. Maps, iDisk/MobileMe, and iOS8.1.1 spring to mind. I expect them to be careful with Apple Watch. Pretty sure there will be some sort of very, very informative media event before a "add to cart" button appears anywhere.

     

    Stories this morning are reporting a "dumbing down" of the original plans to have Apple Watch a comprehensive health device. I am impressed Apple gave this thought, and while they have experience with the FCC, the FCC is no FDA. I think it is wise they let go of that...for now.

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Crowley View Post



    Apple have sold a grand total of 0 [Apple] Watches so far. 

     

    Well...not exactly. They've already sold me on 2. I just wish they'd shut up and take my money!

  • Reply 70 of 126
    kibitzerkibitzer Posts: 1,114member
    Just wait two years when the hardware is obsolete, and QVC The Shopping Network is selling these with deep discounts on their cable channel. /s

    I saw your /s but it raises a couple good points. As you probably agree, Apple does too good a job of retail chain management to get stuck with an excess of any product in the pipeline. They're quick to adjust upward or down based on end user sales. If products wind up on QVC or Overstock or Amazon or Groupon, prices usually aren't a great deal lower unless the model is obsolescent or the channel is being cleared for a newer model introduction.

    Trade-ins and refurbishment could be a new and significant factor, however. Assuming the case design doesn't change, what about replacing the guts of an earlier model with newer? It would certainly retain value, especially for people who dropped several thousand on an original gold version. It could be that they get their same watch upgraded and polished up and Apple gives them a loaner while they're waiting. In fact, selling an ongoing upgrade subscription could be a very profitable add-on business as well as further locking in customer loyalty.

    Loaners are not an unknown concept in fine watches. I have one where the maker will give me a loaner for the time when I send in my timepiece for them to change the battery and do a light overhaul, including underwater pressure test to original specs.
  • Reply 71 of 126
    kibitzerkibitzer Posts: 1,114member
    dougd wrote: »
    I so do NOT want an Apple watch. My TAG does all I want: tells me the time and the battery lasts a couple years. Still, I'm sure plenty of "kids" will buy them. But I don't think this is an old fart (me) device.
    Doug, someone will no doubt come out with a fart detector app so the watch can alert you whenever you pass gas in a roomful of people. It will make up for the diminishing sense of smell common to many of our more senior population. Then you can do the right thing, such as apologizing, opening a window, fleeing the room entirely, or some combination thereof. See? A watch can help you to do the right thing!
  • Reply 72 of 126

    $4000+ seems completely out of line. Let's assume this weighs the same as the Moto360, so 50 grams. The price of pure 24 karat unalloyed gold is roughly $40 per gram. Even if the /entire watch/ was just an art object made from one machined block of solid gold, with no display or other components to actually make it a watch, it would only be $2000 in material cost. This thing only has a gold shell and it's 18k rather than 24k. 

  • Reply 73 of 126
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Kibitzer View Post



    Doug, someone will no doubt come out with a fart detector app so the watch can alert you whenever you pass gas in a roomful of people. It will make up for the diminishing sense of smell common to many of our more senior population. Then you can do the right thing, such as apologizing, opening a window, fleeing the room entirely, or some combination thereof. See? A watch can help you to do the right thing!

     

    I already have a fart detector.... my Wife!

     

    I know exactly what has just happened when she starts beating me on the arm and calling me a pig. 

  • Reply 74 of 126
    dougd wrote: »
    I so do NOT want an Apple watch. My TAG does all I want: tells me the time and the battery lasts a couple years. Still, I'm sure plenty of "kids" will buy them. But I don't think this is an old fart (me) device.


    Maybe not this iteration but wearing a device that would be able to notify the paramedics when you are about to go into defibrillation would be a huge selling point. Not too mention other possible notifications.

    AND the accelerometer in the ?Watch will call your heirs when "you've faller and can't get up." You can lay there wondering if they called 911 or are opening champaign...
  • Reply 75 of 126
    Just wait two years when the hardware is obsolete, and QVC The Shopping Network is selling these with deep discounts on their cable channel. /s

    With the exception of the battery that can wear out over time... I don't see how the first-gen Apple Watch will be "obsolete" in two years.

    It's basically a 2nd screen for an iPhone... there's not a lot of stuff happening on the watch itself.

    Apple may add new sensors and features to future Apple watches... but the first Apple Watch will continue to do what it is supposed to do: notifications, Siri, health measurements, etc.
  • Reply 76 of 126
    [quote name="Michael Scrip" url="/t/184815/5m-apple-watch-units-to-be-built-for-launch-18k-gold-edition-could-be-apples-most-expensive-product-ever/80#post_2677512"]With the exception of the battery that can wear out over time... I don't see how the first-gen Apple Watch will be "obsolete" in two years.[/QUOTE]

    I would not be surprised to see their S-series SIP to be upgradable since it's all enclosed. Perhaps even the sensors on the bottom will be upgradable, too. This would allow the same style device to become even more useful which could create a market of repeat customers being a new model ?Watch every year knowing they can always get many, many years of the latest HW features in their device with a quick visit and reasonable fee to, say, an Authorize ?Watch Repair store at a jewelry store in a mall, where watch battery replacements are typically performed.

    [QUOTE]It's basically a 2nd screen for an iPhone... there's not a lot of stuff happening on the watch itself.[/QUOTE]

    Don't confuse the WatchKit apps that are run from the iPhone with Watch OS only being used to create a secondary screen for the iPhone. ?Watch is clearly very powerful and will do a lot without an iPhone connected.
  • Reply 77 of 126
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

     

    so Apple sells things at material cost now?


     

    No, but the point was I don't think they'd sell something at such a drastic markup, since that's not their MO. If the 18 karat gold shell of the Edition was even half the weight, so an estimated 25 grams, the shell itself would only cost $750. The internal components cost maybe $250. So I would expect the Edition to then have a 100% markup to $2000, not a 300% markup to $4000.

  • Reply 78 of 126
    crowleycrowley Posts: 7,889member
    ^
    That kind of markup is standard in the luxury accessory market, even if it's a bit out of the ordinary for Apple (though their cable prices must be up there).
  • Reply 79 of 126
    solipsismy wrote: »
    I would not be surprised to see their S-series SIP to be upgradable since it's all enclosed. Perhaps even the sensors on the bottom will be upgradable, too. This would allow the same style device to become even more useful which could create a market of repeat customers being a new model ?Watch every year knowing they can always get many, many years of the latest HW features in their device with a quick visit and reasonable fee to, say, an Authorize ?Watch Repair store at a jewelry store in a mall, where watch battery replacements are typically performed.

    Apple doesn't want people upgrading their $1,000 computers... why would they let them upgrade their watch? :D

    solipsismy wrote: »
    Don't confuse the WatchKit apps that are run from the iPhone with Watch OS only being used to create a secondary screen for the iPhone. ?Watch is clearly very powerful and will do a lot without an iPhone connected.

    Oh sure. My bad.

    I mainly meant the things the Apple Watch will do on day-one will continue on day 1,000.

    People are still using iPads four years after they bought them. I suspect an Apple Watch will do everything it did at launch in four years too.

    Of course... Apple could pull the plug on old Apple Watches and force everyone to upgrade... but that's highly unlikely.

    My point was... I don't think the Apple Watch will be "obsolete" or "unable to function" in 2 years.
  • Reply 80 of 126
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 2,614member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post





    Apple doesn't want people upgrading their $1,000 computers... why would they let them upgrade their watch? image

    Well...The last few upgrades I've gotten for my Mac were all free. I think I got it with 10.5 installed, and haven't paid for an upgrade all the way to Yosemite.

     

     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Michael Scrip View Post



    My point was... I don't think the Apple Watch will be "obsolete" or "unable to function" in 2 years.

     

    Agreed. The interesting comparison is to the original iPhone: it wouldn't run third party apps on launch day. Seems kind of funny in hindsight, doesn't it? 

Sign In or Register to comment.