This is one of your more reasonable posts on this forum so I will try to answer your question.
Your last line states that basically we have iPhones so why do we need an Apple watch?
My answer is that I also have an iPhone and I wear a watch I received from my company on some service anniversary. I will gladly take off that watch and put the Apple Watch on because:
1. It is much more functional than my one trick pony watch.
2. I don't have to take out my iPhone and wake it up to see the time.
3. In notifications alone, the saving of time, in not having to take out the iPhone to determine who wants your attention, is significant.
4. The health benefits of monitoring your activity and getting you off your duff are significant.
5. Using Siri without taking your iPhone out is also very handy.
6. Having your airline boarding passes ready while still handling luggage with your hands is very handy (pun intended).
7. Apple Pay on your wrist is really convenient when you pay for your purchases.
.... I could go on and on but to summarize, Apple Watch gives you a beautifully designed watch which tells you the time and saves you time.
Something else to think about: <span style="line-height:1.4em;">The amount of disruption that may occur among retail jewelers in the next few years.</span>
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">The middle line </span>
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">?Watch series - with prices ranging from $549 to $1099 - hits the wristwatch sweet spot for a huge number of mall jewelry stores and standalones in mid-sized communities. These locations will still be selling rings and necklaces and bracelets and gemstones, but a hefty chunk of revenue from timepieces may evaporate for them. For those who depended on watches as a pillar of their business, it won't be pretty.</span>
Some of the big retail jewelry chains may find themselves vulnerable and going the way of the Circuit City and CompUSA businesses not so many years ago.
There will always be a market for high-end jewelry and traditional watches will continue to fill that demand. I don't think a person who spends $250,000 on a watch really needs it to tell them the time. It's an accessory.
There will always be a market for high-end jewelry and traditional watches will continue to fill that demand. I don't think a person who spends $250,000 on a watch really needs it to tell them the time. It's an accessory.
Agreed, but I was talking about the middle line - $549 to $1,099 as I specifically said.
<span style="line-height:1.4em;">The middle line </span><span style="line-height:1.4em;">?Watch series - with prices ranging from $549 to $1099 - hits the wristwatch sweet spot for a huge number of mall jewelry stores and standalones in mid-sized communities. These locations will still be selling rings and necklaces and bracelets and gemstones, but a hefty chunk of revenue from timepieces may evaporate for them.
I wonder about not having a gold-tone option in the medium price range, whether that will affect those who might otherwise buy an ?Watch, but only wear "gold" jewelry and accessories (which also match their gold iPhones, iPads and now MacBooks.)
Will people who presently buy watches as jewelry really opt for a silver $549-$1099 ?Watch when all of their other jewelry is gold?
1) How much of their revenue and profit does come from watvhes v traditional jewelry?
2) Can't they sell ?Watch? I could see them getting a boost in watch sales because of ?Watch (but perhaps in the same way Palm and Blackberry got boosts in smartphone sales because of the iPhone existing ).
1) I don't know. If display space is any clue, it varies. The last time I purchased two fine watches from a leading specialist store in the Chicago area, they were identical models for my wife and me, except that her case size was 38mm and mine was 42mm. In the store, a good 80% of the all the display cases were devoted to some two dozen of the best-known high-end brands. By contrast, many mass market mall chain outlets appear to give perhaps a third of their displays to watches, of which many of the items top out at $500. The merchandise mix is notably more expensive at the more exclusive jewelers, and the Macy's of the world seem to be all over the place. Standard watch markups appear to be in the 40% range, but the markup is often much higher for engagement rings and the like. (People may tend to pay full price for Apple goods, one should always bargain with the salespeople in a jewelry store. As they say, never pay full price!)
2) That may well happen, but I wouldn't be surprised if Apple Stores are much more successful at it. They've been strategically located in big population centers with the affluent demographics, and many Apple devotees and first adopters have come to place a premium on Apple's in-store support. As for the Sport models, it should be no surprise if they show up soon in Walmart and Target. My original post pertained to the midrange ?Watch. To the extent that the midrange ?Watch sold in non-jewelry stores cannibalizes midrange traditional timepieces, things will look tougher for Zale, Kay and and all the smaller independents.
As jewelry, high end traditional watches will be fine. But my microwave has a clock, my oven and TV have clocks. My car, my computer and phone have a clock.No need to strap one on too. But this is just the beginning. Soon we will see wrist devices dispatched to to entire police forces with dedicated apps. To warehouse workers, Everywhere. And it's not just the Swiss that need worry, Apple itself. After adoption comes commoditization. So it's a never ending loop of innovation, adaptation, commodization. Industry has to always try and stay ahead of it.
The first thing Android wear will copy is the haptic feedback for notifications. As with the early smart phone inventions before it, it now seems obvious. Hindsight is 50/50
The thing is that it is very hard to commoditized software/hardware integration.
Vertical integration and commoditization are kind opposed to each other.
The top of the market is still not fully commoditized in most industries; even the food industry.
There is a lot of money left (most of the money?) in the top 10% of sales demo.
Even in a "commodity" market like the PC, Apple still makes the most profit with a relatively small part of sales.
Everything Apple does tries to move it away from commodity.
I wonder about not having a gold-tone option in the medium price range, whether that will affect those who might otherwise buy an ?Watch, but only wear "gold" jewelry and accessories (which also match their gold iPhones, iPads and now MacBooks.)
Will people who presently buy watches as jewelry really opt for a silver $549-$1099 ?Watch when all of their other jewelry is gold?
I'm one of them who favors objects in gold or tan grained leather, but for sure the ?Watch Edition is way out of my league. If not gold, then a midrange ?Watch in black sure looks attractive, even though it carries a $500 premium to regular stainless. Black reminds me of Rado, whose designs I've always liked.
Obviously a solid gold case model selling in the five digits stakes out a high-end brand cachet from the git-go. But why not an aluminum model in gold, since they're already doing that with the iPhone, iPad and MacBook? It could well be the next card they drop some months down the line. I can wait!
beautiful Swiss premium mechanical watches have defined the premium market for many decades. including high fashion jewelry watches.
that's over now.
yes there will always be a few elite buyers who will pay ooga mooga for those. and jewel encrusted fashion watches for the elite. but not enough to support today's Swiss industry. maybe only just 25% of it.
the 75% rest of the high-end market will demand "smart watches" that to date the Swiss makers have not even attempted to make.
and does anyone really think some version of a premium Android Swiss watch could ever satisfy that market segment? assuming it were half-way decent to start with, which it still ain't.
No. really, no chance. Android is utterly de-classe by its very (fake) definition - "open".
Still not sure why anyone would spend $17,000 on version 1.0 of a watch that will be superseded within a year and "out of support" within five. Spend that much on a real watch and it will still be worth that much in fifty years and still be an object of desire.
Here's an automotive analogy for you Apple Watch fanboys predicting the death of the mechanical watch. If money were no object would you prefer to own this
Well for me personally I like the apple watch but nothing will replace my citizen Eco Drive atomic watch. When I fly to different time zones my watch automatically sets itself to the correct time and date through rf. So there's no wi-fi needed or phone. The battery never dies as well since it charges with sunlight. The apple watch seems to be a accessory to the iphone, If you have issues with your phone your watch loses a lot of functionality but at least it will still tell time. I don't see the Apple Watch stealing any market share from big watch companies for the simple reason that citizen for example makes most of their high end watches in Japan. This means that the reliability and durability of the product will be far superior to apples foxcon made watches in china and are a lot less prone to technical issues.
As jewelry, high end traditional watches will be fine. But my microwave has a clock, my oven and TV have clocks. My car, my computer and phone have a clock.No need to strap one on too. But this is just the beginning. Soon we will see wrist devices dispatched to to entire police forces with dedicated apps. To warehouse workers, Everywhere. And it's not just the Swiss that need worry, Apple itself. After adoption comes commoditization. So it's a never ending loop of innovation, adaptation, commodization. Industry has to always try and stay ahead of it.
The first thing Android wear will copy is the haptic feedback for notifications. As with the early smart phone inventions before it, it now seems obvious. Hindsight is 50/50
The Samsung Gear also has haptic feedback as well. Personally I think the whole smart-watch idea is silly and I truly believe once the early adapters and curious have gotten theirs, sales, like on the Google side will slow to a crawl. I might have been more respectable if they could have hidden the smart functionality onto a mechanical watch, only bring up the smart part when needed, saving battery in the process. I also would never own a piece of jewelry that millions of other people are wearing as well and at the end of the day this is a piece of jewelry, smart or otherwise, at least for a woman. As it stands though, not only do I think all of them to be extremely ugly but I also do not want to have to charge my watch every night, this thing should have at least been able to charge wirelessly.
beautiful Swiss premium mechanical watches have defined the premium market for many decades. including high fashion jewelry watches.
that's over now.
yes there will always be a few elite buyers who will pay ooga mooga for those. and jewel encrusted fashion watches for the elite. but not enough to support today's Swiss industry. maybe only just 25% of it.
the 75% rest of the high-end market will demand "smart watches" that to date the Swiss makers have not even attempted to make.
and does anyone really think some version of a premium Android Swiss watch could ever satisfy that market segment? assuming it were half-way decent to start with, which it still ain't.
No. really, no chance. Android is utterly de-classe by its very (fake) definition - "open".
ergo: iPhone sells big.
Do you really think if smart watches took off, I mean really took off that the likes of Omega or Rolex wouldn't accomadate their customers with a smart watch of their own. As there is nothing but assumptions at this point I think it would be smart to sit back and wait a little. Personally I still don't think these smart watches are ready for prime time but If I were to by one, it would be one of these https://kairoswatches.com/ which is, hey what do you know a Swiss watch and a whole lot nicer looking than what the likes of Samsung, Apple, LG or Asus have come up with thus far.
Personally I like my 250.00 Seiko kinetic watch I've had for years that never needs a battery, submerges to 300 meters and is stainless steel that will last forever as long as I don't drop it on rocks when I go camping. Why would I spend 399.00 for a aluminum sport watch that will last at best 3 years? I don't get it myself. That said I would buy a stainless steel iwatch (599.00 to 1050.00) if I could replace the electronics out every 2-3 years with advances in apple technology and recycle or keep the original case with each update. As it stands now I won't spend the money for an obsolescent watch. Just my wallet and sensibilities speaking.
Great that your like your obselete watch so much, obselete to me at least. Guess it is in the eye of the beholder then... Btw, I spend 3 times more money on coffee per year than the mid range watch... Yes, I like my coffee. So, please spare the whole spiel about expensive. If its useful to you, it is not expensive at all.
This is like saying I'd rather have a rotary phone than an iPhone6 because the iPhone6 will be obsolete once the iPhone7 comes out. Yet you fail to realize the rotary phone has been obsolete for decades.
You may think the Rolex is not obsolete because of the brain washing and propoganda by the watch industry. But the truth is a Rolex contains only technology that is DECADES OLD.
All we need is one major power outage for the rotary phone to gain relevance.
Right now - and that perception may change over time - I see traditional watches being true jewelry whereas the iWatch is a mini computer. I like the analogue mechanical nature of traditional watches more. I still don't see the added value of a smart watch when you are carrying a phone.
I agree. The iWatch is right at my price-point for watches, but I have no interest in it. Why? Because for most of the time it will be dark where as my $500 Shinola, or $400 Fossil, or $75 Citizen from eBay all have a dial that displays the time.
Watches were long deprecated as necessary time pieces by electronics, they are now jewelry that displays the time. I am not interested in wearing something that has a black screen most of the time, or having to charge it, wind it or other maintenance where my modest collection of sub $500 watches are good to go whenever I want to wear one.
Personally I like my 250.00 Seiko kinetic watch I've had for years that never needs a battery, submerges to 300 meters and is stainless steel that will last forever as long as I don't drop it on rocks when I go camping. Why would I spend 399.00 for a aluminum sport watch that will last at best 3 years? I don't get it myself. That said I would buy a stainless steel iwatch (599.00 to 1050.00) if I could replace the electronics out every 2-3 years with advances in apple technology and recycle or keep the original case with each update. As it stands now I won't spend the money for an obsolescent watch. Just my wallet and sensibilities speaking.
Yep. You can stick with your flip phone too. That's fine.
Comments
You da man!!!
There will always be a market for high-end jewelry and traditional watches will continue to fill that demand. I don't think a person who spends $250,000 on a watch really needs it to tell them the time. It's an accessory.
There will always be a market for high-end jewelry and traditional watches will continue to fill that demand. I don't think a person who spends $250,000 on a watch really needs it to tell them the time. It's an accessory.
Agreed, but I was talking about the middle line - $549 to $1,099 as I specifically said.
Will people who presently buy watches as jewelry really opt for a silver $549-$1099 ?Watch when all of their other jewelry is gold?
1) How much of their revenue and profit does come from watvhes v traditional jewelry?
2) Can't they sell ?Watch? I could see them getting a boost in watch sales because of ?Watch (but perhaps in the same way Palm and Blackberry got boosts in smartphone sales because of the iPhone existing
1) I don't know. If display space is any clue, it varies. The last time I purchased two fine watches from a leading specialist store in the Chicago area, they were identical models for my wife and me, except that her case size was 38mm and mine was 42mm. In the store, a good 80% of the all the display cases were devoted to some two dozen of the best-known high-end brands. By contrast, many mass market mall chain outlets appear to give perhaps a third of their displays to watches, of which many of the items top out at $500. The merchandise mix is notably more expensive at the more exclusive jewelers, and the Macy's of the world seem to be all over the place. Standard watch markups appear to be in the 40% range, but the markup is often much higher for engagement rings and the like. (People may tend to pay full price for Apple goods, one should always bargain with the salespeople in a jewelry store. As they say, never pay full price!)
2) That may well happen, but I wouldn't be surprised if Apple Stores are much more successful at it. They've been strategically located in big population centers with the affluent demographics, and many Apple devotees and first adopters have come to place a premium on Apple's in-store support. As for the Sport models, it should be no surprise if they show up soon in Walmart and Target. My original post pertained to the midrange ?Watch. To the extent that the midrange ?Watch sold in non-jewelry stores cannibalizes midrange traditional timepieces, things will look tougher for Zale, Kay and and all the smaller independents.
As jewelry, high end traditional watches will be fine. But my microwave has a clock, my oven and TV have clocks. My car, my computer and phone have a clock.No need to strap one on too. But this is just the beginning. Soon we will see wrist devices dispatched to to entire police forces with dedicated apps. To warehouse workers, Everywhere. And it's not just the Swiss that need worry, Apple itself. After adoption comes commoditization. So it's a never ending loop of innovation, adaptation, commodization. Industry has to always try and stay ahead of it.
The first thing Android wear will copy is the haptic feedback for notifications. As with the early smart phone inventions before it, it now seems obvious. Hindsight is 50/50
The thing is that it is very hard to commoditized software/hardware integration.
Vertical integration and commoditization are kind opposed to each other.
The top of the market is still not fully commoditized in most industries; even the food industry.
There is a lot of money left (most of the money?) in the top 10% of sales demo.
Even in a "commodity" market like the PC, Apple still makes the most profit with a relatively small part of sales.
Everything Apple does tries to move it away from commodity.
I wonder about not having a gold-tone option in the medium price range, whether that will affect those who might otherwise buy an ?Watch, but only wear "gold" jewelry and accessories (which also match their gold iPhones, iPads and now MacBooks.)
Will people who presently buy watches as jewelry really opt for a silver $549-$1099 ?Watch when all of their other jewelry is gold?
I'm one of them who favors objects in gold or tan grained leather, but for sure the ?Watch Edition is way out of my league. If not gold, then a midrange ?Watch in black sure looks attractive, even though it carries a $500 premium to regular stainless. Black reminds me of Rado, whose designs I've always liked.
Obviously a solid gold case model selling in the five digits stakes out a high-end brand cachet from the git-go. But why not an aluminum model in gold, since they're already doing that with the iPhone, iPad and MacBook? It could well be the next card they drop some months down the line. I can wait!
it's the end of an era.
beautiful Swiss premium mechanical watches have defined the premium market for many decades. including high fashion jewelry watches.
that's over now.
yes there will always be a few elite buyers who will pay ooga mooga for those. and jewel encrusted fashion watches for the elite. but not enough to support today's Swiss industry. maybe only just 25% of it.
the 75% rest of the high-end market will demand "smart watches" that to date the Swiss makers have not even attempted to make.
and does anyone really think some version of a premium Android Swiss watch could ever satisfy that market segment? assuming it were half-way decent to start with, which it still ain't.
No. really, no chance. Android is utterly de-classe by its very (fake) definition - "open".
ergo: iPhone sells big.
For their sake, lets hope it's higher than Blackberry's retention of customers that think a smartphone needs to have a physical keyboard.
If money were no object would you prefer to own this
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/56433/width/350/height/700[/IMG]
or this?
[IMG ALT=""]http://forums.appleinsider.com/content/type/61/id/56434/width/350/height/700[/IMG]
As jewelry, high end traditional watches will be fine. But my microwave has a clock, my oven and TV have clocks. My car, my computer and phone have a clock.No need to strap one on too. But this is just the beginning. Soon we will see wrist devices dispatched to to entire police forces with dedicated apps. To warehouse workers, Everywhere. And it's not just the Swiss that need worry, Apple itself. After adoption comes commoditization. So it's a never ending loop of innovation, adaptation, commodization. Industry has to always try and stay ahead of it.
The first thing Android wear will copy is the haptic feedback for notifications. As with the early smart phone inventions before it, it now seems obvious. Hindsight is 50/50
The Samsung Gear also has haptic feedback as well. Personally I think the whole smart-watch idea is silly and I truly believe once the early adapters and curious have gotten theirs, sales, like on the Google side will slow to a crawl. I might have been more respectable if they could have hidden the smart functionality onto a mechanical watch, only bring up the smart part when needed, saving battery in the process. I also would never own a piece of jewelry that millions of other people are wearing as well and at the end of the day this is a piece of jewelry, smart or otherwise, at least for a woman. As it stands though, not only do I think all of them to be extremely ugly but I also do not want to have to charge my watch every night, this thing should have at least been able to charge wirelessly.
it's the end of an era.
beautiful Swiss premium mechanical watches have defined the premium market for many decades. including high fashion jewelry watches.
that's over now.
yes there will always be a few elite buyers who will pay ooga mooga for those. and jewel encrusted fashion watches for the elite. but not enough to support today's Swiss industry. maybe only just 25% of it.
the 75% rest of the high-end market will demand "smart watches" that to date the Swiss makers have not even attempted to make.
and does anyone really think some version of a premium Android Swiss watch could ever satisfy that market segment? assuming it were half-way decent to start with, which it still ain't.
No. really, no chance. Android is utterly de-classe by its very (fake) definition - "open".
ergo: iPhone sells big.
Do you really think if smart watches took off, I mean really took off that the likes of Omega or Rolex wouldn't accomadate their customers with a smart watch of their own. As there is nothing but assumptions at this point I think it would be smart to sit back and wait a little. Personally I still don't think these smart watches are ready for prime time but If I were to by one, it would be one of these https://kairoswatches.com/ which is, hey what do you know a Swiss watch and a whole lot nicer looking than what the likes of Samsung, Apple, LG or Asus have come up with thus far.
Personally I like my 250.00 Seiko kinetic watch I've had for years that never needs a battery, submerges to 300 meters and is stainless steel that will last forever as long as I don't drop it on rocks when I go camping. Why would I spend 399.00 for a aluminum sport watch that will last at best 3 years? I don't get it myself. That said I would buy a stainless steel iwatch (599.00 to 1050.00) if I could replace the electronics out every 2-3 years with advances in apple technology and recycle or keep the original case with each update. As it stands now I won't spend the money for an obsolescent watch. Just my wallet and sensibilities speaking.
Great that your like your obselete watch so much, obselete to me at least. Guess it is in the eye of the beholder then... Btw, I spend 3 times more money on coffee per year than the mid range watch... Yes, I like my coffee. So, please spare the whole spiel about expensive. If its useful to you, it is not expensive at all.
All we need is one major power outage for the rotary phone to gain relevance.
Right now - and that perception may change over time - I see traditional watches being true jewelry whereas the iWatch is a mini computer. I like the analogue mechanical nature of traditional watches more. I still don't see the added value of a smart watch when you are carrying a phone.
I agree. The iWatch is right at my price-point for watches, but I have no interest in it. Why? Because for most of the time it will be dark where as my $500 Shinola, or $400 Fossil, or $75 Citizen from eBay all have a dial that displays the time.
Watches were long deprecated as necessary time pieces by electronics, they are now jewelry that displays the time. I am not interested in wearing something that has a black screen most of the time, or having to charge it, wind it or other maintenance where my modest collection of sub $500 watches are good to go whenever I want to wear one.
There's plenty of 19th century tech that you use daily. The toilet bowl for one.
Personally I like my 250.00 Seiko kinetic watch I've had for years that never needs a battery, submerges to 300 meters and is stainless steel that will last forever as long as I don't drop it on rocks when I go camping. Why would I spend 399.00 for a aluminum sport watch that will last at best 3 years? I don't get it myself. That said I would buy a stainless steel iwatch (599.00 to 1050.00) if I could replace the electronics out every 2-3 years with advances in apple technology and recycle or keep the original case with each update. As it stands now I won't spend the money for an obsolescent watch. Just my wallet and sensibilities speaking.
Yep. You can stick with your flip phone too. That's fine.