AppleCare+ protection for Apple Watch could reach $999 - report

Posted:
in Apple Watch edited April 2015
Apple has yet to reveal how much it will charge to add AppleCare+ protection to its new wearable, but new screenshots that purport to show internal pricing suggest that plans will start at $59 for Apple Watch Sport and hit as much as $999 for Apple Watch Edition.




The stainless steel Apple Watch is said to slot in the middle, adding $79 to customers' tabs. AppleCare+ will extend Sport and stainless Watch warranties to two years and cover two incidents of accidental damage, according to MacRumors, much like the extended warranty program for the iPhone and iPad.

For Edition buyers, AppleCare+ would extend the warranty to three years. They will reportedly also receive complimentary setup assistance as well as a dedicated phone support line available 24 hours per day, 7 days per week.

It remains unclear whether AppleCare+ charges will scale with the cost of the Watch. There is a $7,000 difference between the least- and most-expensive Apple Watch Edition models, and the stainless steel Watch varies by as much as $550.

In comparison, the iPad ranges from $379 to $829, a $450 difference.

Apple charges $99 to add AppleCare+ to iPhone purchases, and accidental damage claims cost $79. The base cost is the same for the iPad, but the service fee drops to $49.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 16
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,727member
    At what point would insurance be better or not I wonder?
  • Reply 2 of 16
    At what point would insurance be better or not I wonder?

    If you plan to upgrade quickly or buy multiple ones, pass on it.

    If you want to get a few years from it or have a habit of damaging watches, get it.
  • Reply 3 of 16
    $999? I think I will decline AppleCare.
  • Reply 4 of 16
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 3,063member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon View Post





    If you plan to upgrade quickly or buy multiple ones, pass on it.



    If you want to get a few years from it or have a habit of damaging watches, get it.

    Not sure AppleCare covers user inflicted damage.

     

    The usual Apple warranty is 1 year, IIRC. 17% increase in cost for the sport; up to a 5% increase for Edition. Interesting.

  • Reply 5 of 16
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by eightzero View Post

     

    Not sure AppleCare covers user inflicted damage.

     

    The usual Apple warranty is 1 year, IIRC. 17% increase in cost for the sport; up to a 5% increase for Edition. Interesting.




    Quote:


     cover two incidents of accidental damage


    It does. Watches don't have to be purposely damaged to be damaged. This is why higher-end ones have sapphire crystal, it makes them tougher and more scratch resistant.

  • Reply 6 of 16
    dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 13,002member
    If you plan to upgrade quickly or buy multiple ones, pass on it.

    If you want to get a few years from it or have a habit of damaging watches, get it.

    Wonder Woman will definitely be getting the AppleCare+. :lol:
    400
  • Reply 7 of 16

    Well, if you pay $17,000 for an Apple Watch, what's another thousand to protect it?

  • Reply 8 of 16
    eightzeroeightzero Posts: 3,063member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TheWhiteFalcon View Post

     

    It does. Watches don't have to be purposely damaged to be damaged. This is why higher-end ones have sapphire crystal, it makes them tougher and more scratch resistant.


    Ah. Interesting. That might be a first for an apple product? IIRC, there was much angst over the water sensors in iPhone. Apple had a tell tale in them. Wonder if Apple Watch has such a thing. 

  • Reply 9 of 16
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    At what point would insurance be better or not I wonder?

    Insurance and extended warranties are all about companies like Apple gambling that the majority of users will never have a problem. As such you as a buyer really have to ask if the up charge is worth it to you. Every buyer is in a different situation but for some classes of buyers AppleCare can be highly recommended.

    In this sense I often recommend that students looking for a device to get them through 4 years of college buy the extended warranty. However if you are a frequent uograder or pay cash for your hardware AppleCare doesn't really make sense. Insurance is a slightly different story again, but the same principles apply, is an insurance plan worth it?

    The more interesting aspect of this rumor is that the internals of these watches are exactly the same from what I've seen so far. This makes me wonder what additional value is in the more costly Apple Care soultions.
  • Reply 10 of 16
    aaronjaaronj Posts: 1,595member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by AppleSauce007 View Post

     

    Well, if you pay $17,000 for an Apple Watch, what's another thousand to protect it?




    Exactly what I came here to post.  

     

    OTOH, if it really is only $59 for the Sport, that's good news, as that's what I'm planning on getting.

  • Reply 11 of 16
    hittrj01hittrj01 Posts: 753member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by eightzero View Post

     

    Ah. Interesting. That might be a first for an apple product? IIRC, there was much angst over the water sensors in iPhone. Apple had a tell tale in them. Wonder if Apple Watch has such a thing. 




    AppleCare+ (as opposed to standard AppleCare, no plus) has covered accidental damage since it was initially released a few years back for iPhone. I can't remember the iPhone model they rolled it out with, but it is the same policy: covers two incidents of accidental damage, and there is a deductible for said accidental damage. If there is no accidental damage and only manufacturer defects, that is free and unlimited under the AppleCare terms.

  • Reply 12 of 16
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by eightzero View Post

     

    Ah. Interesting. That might be a first for an apple product? IIRC, there was much angst over the water sensors in iPhone. Apple had a tell tale in them. Wonder if Apple Watch has such a thing. 




    This time, they're saying the product has a degree of water resistance, so I imagine they'd have trouble claiming water damage as invalid.

  • Reply 13 of 16
    mac_128mac_128 Posts: 3,454member

    This time, they're saying the product has a degree of water resistance, so I imagine they'd have trouble claiming water damage as invalid.
    i don't see why that would matter. Since it has an IPX7 rating, then should water penetrate the case, they will know you have submerged the watch against recommendations and exceed tested rating parameters. It's still just your word as to what caused the damage whether an iPhone or an ?Watch.

    Granted the iPhone is not supposed to be exposed to water at all, whereas the watch has a rating, which could fail due to defect. Either way, it's still limited protection, and therefore not as cut and dry a situation like the iPhone, but still water in the case can just as easily point to abuse rather than failure, especially if Apple subjects each watch to any water testing prior to shipping.
  • Reply 14 of 16
    chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,543member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Suddenly Newton View Post

    $999? I think I will decline AppleCare.

    But you just spent $10K-$12K on a watch.

    What’s another $999?

  • Reply 15 of 16
    eightzero wrote: »
    Not sure AppleCare covers user inflicted damage.

    You mean like "Will It Blend"? Not covered.
  • Reply 16 of 16
    chris_ca wrote: »
    But you just spent $10K-$12K on a watch.
    What’s another $999?

    Yeah, makes sense. It guess AppleCare covers replacement under certain circumstances. I was thinking solely about manufacturing defects, wherein the cost of fixing the Watch's electronics would not be that much, but Apple has a pretty lenient replacement policy. So, yeah $999 sounds right.
Sign In or Register to comment.