Swatch denies rumor it's working with Apple on 'iWatch'

Posted:
in Future Apple Hardware edited July 2014
Swiss watchmaker Swatch has moved to quickly extinguish rumors that claimed it is working with Apple on the company's hotly anticipated "iWatch."




The Swatch Group issued a statement to Reuters on Thursday to publicly say that it is not collaborating with Apple on an anticipated wrist-worn connected device. A spokeswoman reportedly said that Swatch has supplied integrated circuits and other components to some mobile phone makers, but claims of any collaboration on a full-blown watch made with Apple are false.

VentureBeat first reported on Wednesday that it was told by anonymous sources that Apple has been working with Swatch and other watchmakers to introduce multiple "iWatch" devices to the market. The strategy was said to be to offer a range of products that could appeal to a wide range of potential buyers with varying fashion tastes and budgets.

That report alleged that Apple was talking with multiple companies, and that the deal with Swatch was apparently a lock. But Swatch quickly put that claim to rest on Friday with its outright denial.

The rumor, even before it was debunked, was somewhat surprising as Swatch Chief Executive Nick Hayek Jr. said last year that he didn't think an Apple smartwatch would be a big deal. He suggested that an "interactive terminal on your wrist" would be difficult since there is limited space for an adequate display.

Swatch, along with Suunto and Fossil, previously produced watches using Microsoft's now defunct Smart Personal Object Technology (SPOT) platform, what can be considered a first-foray into the smartwatch world.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 41

    Once again, the problem with rumors.

  • Reply 2 of 41
    red oakred oak Posts: 657member
    With all this denying, Swatch is going to be the Blackberry of watches
  • Reply 3 of 41
    MacProMacPro Posts: 18,166member
    At least Swatch didn't go on record stating something along the lines of 'Apple don't know how to make a watch ... we have been making them for blah blah blah ...' Or have a mock funeral for an iWatch. :D
  • Reply 4 of 41
    asciiascii Posts: 5,941member

    Apple isn't working on an iWatch with Swatch or anyone else. They are working on the 2014 iPod which just happens to have an wrist-band form factor and biosensors.

  • Reply 5 of 41
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,438member
    smaceslin wrote: »
    Once again, the problem with rumors.

    Indeed. Why VentureBeat didn't call Swatch to verify the rumour is beyond me. Come to think of it, actually not; they rather publish this than publishing a denied rumour.
  • Reply 6 of 41

    Actually my point was not aimed toward VentureBeat, but the rest of us as consumers.  Read the 'news' on this and other sites with a full understanding that most of what we hear are rumors - not fact.  Entertaining at times - but not necessariliy true. 

  • Reply 7 of 41
    ajbdtc826ajbdtc826 Posts: 190member
    Thank goodness. But I'll echo what many have already said in that the Omega brand would have made perfect sense.
  • Reply 8 of 41
    philboogiephilboogie Posts: 7,438member
    smaceslin wrote: »
    Actually my point was not aimed toward VentureBeat, but the rest of us as consumers.  Read the 'news' on this and other sites with a full understanding that most of what we hear are rumors - not fact.  Entertaining at times - but not necessariliy true. 

    I get that, and fully agree. You know what the mantra within Apple is?

    "If it's not on Apple.com, we don't know about it"
  • Reply 9 of 41
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,283member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by sog35 View Post

     

    i knew this was total bs.

     

    Apple won't risk their empire by allowing another company to design, build, and market their hardware.  Pure silliness.  You think they would allow Sony to design the iTV?  Or Nokia to design the iPhone?


    Or car accessories.

  • Reply 10 of 41
    bobschlobbobschlob Posts: 1,074member
    Meanwhile, Swatch has never received so much free photographic advertising in it's life.
  • Reply 11 of 41
    asdasdasdasd Posts: 5,283member

    Anyway, another rumour from AppleInsider squashed by the AppleInsider rumour squashers at AppleInsider.

  • Reply 12 of 41
    negafoxnegafox Posts: 480member

    "A spokeswoman for Swatch Group said on Thursday the report was unfounded. She said the only business relationship Swatch Group had with mobile phone makers was as a supplier of integrated circuits and other electronic components."



    Technically, this statement does not rule out that Apple is being supplied parts from Swatch though.



    Their statements boil down to:

     

    1. They are not collaborating with Apple on any watch;

    2. They are supplying parts to unnamed smart phone manufacturers.

  • Reply 13 of 41
    slicksimslicksim Posts: 52member
    sog35 wrote: »
    i knew this was total bs.

    Apple won't risk their empire by allowing another company to design, build, and market their hardware.  Pure silliness.  You think they would allow Sony to design the iTV?  Or Nokia to design the iPhone?

    Well actually for a brief moment of madness Apple did get Moto to design the iPhone....it wasn't a pretty sight!
  • Reply 14 of 41
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Negafox View Post

     

    "A spokeswoman for Swatch Group said on Thursday the report was unfounded. She said the only business relationship Swatch Group had with mobile phone makers was as a supplier of integrated circuits and other electronic components."



    Technically, this statement does not rule out that Apple is being supplied parts from Swatch though.



    Their statements boil down to:

     

    1. They are not collaborating with Apple on any watch;

    2. They are supplying parts to unnamed smart phone manufacturers.


    i thought similarly to you when i read the quote. "Plausible deniability" comes to mind.

  • Reply 15 of 41
    mpantonempantone Posts: 1,375member

    This was a ridiculous rumor to begin with. Today's Apple would never concede the design process to some other company.

     

    The only thing this shows is how low some media outlets will stoop to gain page views by publishing unbelievable nonsense.

  • Reply 16 of 41
    jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,680member
    Wait, analysts/unnamed sources are wrong? Nope, Swatch is lying. That's the only logical conclusion. /s
  • Reply 17 of 41
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,755member
    red oak wrote: »
    With all this denying, Swatch is going to be the Blackberry of watches

    They are just doing the responsible thing as a publicly traded company! You can't let rumors like this hang if there is no basis what so ever for the rumor.
  • Reply 18 of 41
    kent909kent909 Posts: 709member

    I have said it before that Apple is not going to make a watch. I am however at the point that I wish they would so all the f***ing rumors would stop. Talk about beating a dead horse. But alas they all will move on to the next rumor and babble on endlessly about that one. I can't imagine a goal for myself to spend four years of my life getting a degree in journalism to get a job writing about idiotic rumors endlessly. So much time so little to talk about.

  • Reply 19 of 41
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 12,755member
    i thought similarly to you when i read the quote. "Plausible deniability" comes to mind.

    Even this part about supplying electronic parts means little. I'm not sure but I thought Swatch owned a crystal manufacture. Crystals as in components of oscillators or clock generators. Even if I'm wrong it is conceivable that they have been supplying Apple for ages with parts.
  • Reply 20 of 41
    greatrixgreatrix Posts: 95member
    Rumours will continue until the products, whatever they are, are revealed by Apple. A good marketing ploy. I hope we will be pleasantly surprised.
Sign In or Register to comment.