So what this article says is that Apple has the highest sales in a market with terrible demand? Way to go, biggest fish in a little pond.
Quite a few coworkers have the apple watch, and it was neat at first but just a glorified calendar keeper now. Rather than fishing their phone out to look at the meeting reminders they can glance down. Oh, and they can buy their cokes with the wave of a hand, that's cool actually. But not $500 cool.
What people have to remember is that this is a tech item. Meaning that other than the nostalgia factor, they will be worthless in 3 years. Or I can spend about $200 more and get an entry level real watch that will hold value forever. You can't buy a phone that won't be irrelevant with the next version, you can buy a watch that is exempt from decline as tech support for it wanes.
Give me a break, a $200 watch hold its value forever!! Are you kidding? Your not even going to get your full value if you sell it right at the store door... A $200 watch is not holding its value unless you got Taylor Swift to engrave some words for you, and give it to you...
The Apple is a fucking iPhone accessory, so comparing it 1 to 1 to iPhone sales is just stunningly idiotic. Why try to define the success/failure of a product by comparing it in sales to a COMPLETELY DIFFERENT kind of product? Because its made by the same company? The Apple Watch REQUIRES an iPhone.
You know what a sane comparison would be? Contrasting it against all the other wearables out there. But no, that would make too much sense.
Since it's a 1st gen product, contrasting it with the 1st iPhone would be reasonable too- but no, again, that makes too much sense. We should just compare it to sales of the 8th generation iPhone, a product which has increased exponentially in sales with each egeneration, and has been doing so since 2007. A product that is subsidized for so many people, and is required for them to buy.
I guess Apple's entire Mac line is a complete fucking failure too, as well as the iPad, as they don't hold a candle to iPhone sales. What a ridiculous and moronic bar to set, with the only agenda being shitting on the product, instead of intelligent analysis. We have NO CLUE what Apple Watch sales are, but when we do find out, I hope most people are sane enough to place those in proper context.
Because the Apple Watch was designed for every single unique iPhone user. Different pricing tiers, different manufacturing materials, and different color, and types of bands which is something no other smartwatch has. It was meant to attract a large swarth of buyers immediately with all the hype we saw for months, and so far that doesn't seem to be the case.
Before the Watch was even available for sale Apple said it would not be reporting any data on it because as a Cook said, competitors are looking for it and he doesn't want to give it up. Also keep in mind that this market is it it's infancy so Apple providing sales data is kind of meaningless as there's nothing really to compare it to. But I will ask the question, if Apple Watch is such a dud as many on the www proclaim, how come 3 employees intimately involved with it were recently promoted by Tim Cook? Don't employees associated with failures usually get demoted or fired not promoted?
Hopefully, the "Apple Watch is fail" fiction will keep Samsung from copying it.
Wall Street. - The expectation was far greater than actual. Apple. - The Watch was the next great "Thing" and the next "money maker". It's still the iPhone. Media. - All we heard, saw, read, listened to for the months leading to the launch was how great the AW was going to be! It would take the world by storm!! Some, maybe a bit more level set, saw the base sales as a mix of solid dedicated core Apple users and some new for the glitz. Not the "everyone will want one!" message that was marketed.
Point to the PR or quote where Apple said the apple watch would be the next iPhone. That's impossible. Is it making money? Most definitely.
WS = failed business folks who pulled numbers out of their asses.
Because the Apple Watch was designed for every single unique iPhone user. Different pricing tiers, different manufacturing materials, and different color, and types of bands which is something no other smartwatch has. It was meant to attract a large swarth of buyers immediately with all the hype we saw for months, and so far that doesn't seem to be the case.
Every single iPhone user? Even those that don't wear watches and don't care about fitness? Hyperbole much? It was design for those users who would like a fitness tracker, notifications filter, etc. Someone who wants to whip out their phone less. Anyone who wants it to replace their iPhone is just a fool.
So what this article says is that Apple has the highest sales in a market with terrible demand? Way to go, biggest fish in a little pond.
Quite a few coworkers have the apple watch, and it was neat at first but just a glorified calendar keeper now. Rather than fishing their phone out to look at the meeting reminders they can glance down. Oh, and they can buy their cokes with the wave of a hand, that's cool actually. But not $500 cool.
What people have to remember is that this is a tech item. Meaning that other than the nostalgia factor, they will be worthless in 3 years. Or I can spend about $200 more and get an entry level real watch that will hold value forever. You can't buy a phone that won't be irrelevant with the next version, you can buy a watch that is exempt from decline as tech support for it wanes.
If you only bought things that "hold their value forever," you wouldn't buy a computer or smartphone or a car. You would only own jewelry and real estate. Depreciation is simply not a valid reason you should not buy technology, like the Apple Watch. And nothing precludes an Apple Watch owner from owning other traditional watches. Rethink your arguments for not buying the Apple Watch and try again.
Every single iPhone user? Even those that don't wear watches and don't care about fitness? Hyperbole much? It was design for those users who would like a fitness tracker, notifications filter, etc. Someone who wants to whip out their phone less. Anyone who wants it to replace their iPhone is just a fool.
And I forgot in 2 different sizes, so yes every single iPhone user.
A watch, a fitness tracker, a notification filter? All I keep hearing how it's much more than that, so its appeal should be universal.
Apple didn't care how many people had previously owned smartphones before making the iPhone, and they most certainly didn't care how many people owned tablets before making the iPad. Apple has done a great job getting people to buy products they have never used before,
Well of course sales are going to slow. This device is a gimmick, Apple designed and made the best smartwatch on the planet, however it didn't reinvent it, it just made a version that didn't suck so much, it still is a relatively pointless device with little purpose beyond showing off, thats why Apple is trying to market it to the high end fashion market so badly.
This is the worst new apple product category for some time. They may have been better spending there time elsewhere, but then again i am sure it was a relatively easy market for them to enter. It's a device without a purpose and before this device all apples devices where more purposeful rather than a huge list of tech/features and me too devices which is what the rest of the market makes.
Perhaps though, it's where Apple will take this device and not where it is now the real truth is in 3-4 generations time.
Perhaps though, it's where Apple will take this device and not where it is now the real truth is in 3-4 generations time.
Apple had to get into the smart watch sector or be caught flat footed as wearables from other manufacturers were evolving quickly. Apple now owns the smart watch space and it will prove to be an integral part of their HomeKit, HealthKit, ApplePay strategies.
If Watch sales have collapsed and warehouses in Shenzhen are bursting with unsold stock, why can we in New Zealand still not pre-order the thing? This Skice report smells like a huge algorithm fail that will hurt Slice far more than AAPL.
Apple had to get into the smart watch sector or be caught flat footed as wearables from other manufacturers were evolving quickly. Apple now owns the smart watch space and it will prove to be an integral part of their HomeKit, HealthKit, ApplePay strategies.
How do you know it will be hold any value 'forever'? I would bet against you and I would likely win.
I can say without a doubt, that unless you have a milestone Apple watch (the first, the 100th, the millionth, etc) it will suffer from a depreciation rate that is much much steeper than buying and established brand entry level watch. An entry Tag for example.
If you bet against that, you would lose 100% of the time. No tech items, except collectables and the first apple watch version is not a collectible except in the instances I list above, hold their value like that. Even crap versions of reputable watch makers hold their value better.
So do your co-workers share the view that they don't consider the Watch useful anymore, or is that just your view, or your interpretation? Have they said they want to sell their Watches, or wish they had not bought them?
I agree that if someone really doesn't want to wear a "watch" at all (they are anti-watch, but thought the Apple Watch would be life changing), that they might not find the Apple Watch worth the $350-400 (USD) price. While I think of it as a watch does "much more", and hence worth the price, others might not. For me, the Apple Watch is already a watch + fitness tracker + iPod + "information at at glance". I expect it will become much more useful over the next year with WatchOS 2 and 3rd party apps. Well worth $400 to me.
I am interested to know what "regular" watch in the $700-$800 range that would retain its value over long periods of time. I understand how a Rolex (many $1000's) will retain a good portion of its value (at a price of relatively expensive regular maintenance), I doubt that for a sub-$1000 watch.
never said it wasn't useful, I said it isn't as "neato" as they thought. All the gadgets and crap it can do just doesn't get used because they have a 6 or 6+ in their pocket. Like I said, for notifications or texts it's cool. But those aren't worth the cost, especially when you figure how fast it is going to drop in value.
As to your watch comments, you know one name and guess how much they cost. Go to an actual watchmaker sometime and discuss with them what they can get you for sub-$1k. You would be surprised. Or you can just keep thinking that Rolex is the sole luxury timepiece maker and that they cost "many thousands".
Give me a break, a $200 watch hold its value forever!! Are you kidding? Your not even going to get your full value if you sell it right at the store door... A $200 watch is not holding its value unless you got Taylor Swift to engrave some words for you, and give it to you...
Someone didn't score too well in reading comprehension, I see. I never said a $200 watch, I said "spend about $200 MORE". As in instead of $500 for a watch, spend about $700.
Try actually reading before you spout off, and take Advil for the brain cramps.
It's amazing to me that an utterly unknown firm, with or without an agenda, peddling one graph, with an utterly unknown and opaque methodology, whose work is propagated via third rate business publications, can become the basis for so much discussion. Talk about building houses of sand on thin air while standing on a stilt: this is what business journalism has evolved to in 2015.
Anyone remember the bendgate video, the millions of hits and discussions, and yet how utterly 100% crap the story turned out to be? How many iPhone 6's were sold?
I predict the same will happen vis-a-vis this piece of reportorial trash and the questionable 'research' behind it. Go DED.
If you only bought things that "hold their value forever," you wouldn't buy a computer or smartphone or a car. You would only own jewelry and real estate. Depreciation is simply not a valid reason you should not buy technology, like the Apple Watch. And nothing precludes an Apple Watch owner from owning other traditional watches. Rethink your arguments for not buying the Apple Watch and try again.
I have very few options for computers, smartphones, or cars that WILL hold their value. Watches are completely different. Unless I buy a classic car to restore (or already restored) I have no options that won't depreciate. Same with computers and smartphones, since they are technology like I clearly already said.
You make such a valid argument yourself, to be telling me to rethink mine. Your argument is to buy the Apple watch, and then ALSO buy a nice timepiece that will hold value so that you have something that holds value. DERP!
Apple had to get into the smart watch sector or be caught flat footed as wearables from other manufacturers were evolving quickly. Apple now owns the smart watch space and it will prove to be an integral part of their HomeKit, HealthKit, ApplePay strategies.
This editorial is making the comparison to things like FitBit. That is really a stretch calling FitBit a smart watch. I don't ever see a watch being an integral part of the above because iPhone sales are so strong this is just another redundant product. The size limitation of a watch is also an issue.
Apple Watch apps will never be as robust as iPhone and iPad apps. I don't see a reason why the masses will buy a product that can't do nearly as much as the product they already own and the apps are not as advanced.
Also iPhone owners in their teens and twenties just don't seem to be interested in this product. Social networking is limited and will always been limited because of the size of the display. Facebook, SnapChat, Instagram and even Twitter will never function well on a smart watch compared to an iPhone.
Phone calls are limited because of size also, a speaker can only be so big and clear on a 2x2 inch device. So you need to be in an room with next to no background noise.
Trying to sell people on pulling out your iPhone has now become so cumbersome you need an Apple Watch I don't see it. I believe this is why Apple marketing pushed so hard to call this fashion because the general public just isn't into wearable technology.
From what I have seen of iOS 9 so far it looks great, the iPhone has become such a powerhouse people would be taking several steps down in function using an Apple Watch. So argue that it has to mature but as it matures the iPhone and iPad will also continue to mature.
Text messaging is another issue. People don't want to talk into a watch having others hear what they are texting or having to use canned responses. It's just less functional then what people are doing now.
Also Apple started making bigger phones because people want bigger displays. The iPhone 6 and 6 Plus have been the best selling iPhone to date. I would say most of that has to do with the increase in size. People have their iPhones on them all the time which makes a smart watch a hard sell in my opinion.
Apple is always going to get several million people to buy something, I doubt we are going to ever see iPhone numbers with the Apple Watch.
Yea, it's like those services tracking grocery sales but not including Walmart for things like Mac & cheese - making it MEANINGLESS. Since 99.9% of sales were at apple stores or at apple.com and they're not tracked - what are they measuring? NOTHING. Plus, they have 1,000 disclaimers. Why not just say guys names Joe Smith are buying fewer smartwatches for all they're covering.
Comments
I'm prepared to believe sales may be disappointing, but then, everyone, the above author included,
are speculating, and also manipulating what data there is to suit their own viewpoints.
Someone called Smartwatch Group guesstimates smart watch sales this year will total about $8.9 billion,
( http://www.smartwatchgroup.com/top-10-smartwatch-companies-sales-2014/ )
at an average of $330 per unit. IF accurate, that's roughly 27 million units in all, and IF the daily sales guessed at
by Slice is at all accurate, Apple will only sell somewhere between 10 and 20% of those...
So, IF there is any accuracy in these "estimates",
Apple Watch sales this year may be "crushing" someone else's sales from last year,
but they certainly aren't crushing the category.
Still thinking one might make a nice b-day gift for our daughter!
You went from saying you have no clue, to making a definite statement.... Hmmm...
So what this article says is that Apple has the highest sales in a market with terrible demand? Way to go, biggest fish in a little pond.
Quite a few coworkers have the apple watch, and it was neat at first but just a glorified calendar keeper now. Rather than fishing their phone out to look at the meeting reminders they can glance down. Oh, and they can buy their cokes with the wave of a hand, that's cool actually. But not $500 cool.
What people have to remember is that this is a tech item. Meaning that other than the nostalgia factor, they will be worthless in 3 years. Or I can spend about $200 more and get an entry level real watch that will hold value forever. You can't buy a phone that won't be irrelevant with the next version, you can buy a watch that is exempt from decline as tech support for it wanes.
Give me a break, a $200 watch hold its value forever!! Are you kidding? Your not even going to get your full value if you sell it right at the store door... A $200 watch is not holding its value unless you got Taylor Swift to engrave some words for you, and give it to you...
Because the Apple Watch was designed for every single unique iPhone user. Different pricing tiers, different manufacturing materials, and different color, and types of bands which is something no other smartwatch has. It was meant to attract a large swarth of buyers immediately with all the hype we saw for months, and so far that doesn't seem to be the case.
Hopefully, the "Apple Watch is fail" fiction will keep Samsung from copying it.
Point to the PR or quote where Apple said the apple watch would be the next iPhone. That's impossible. Is it making money? Most definitely.
WS = failed business folks who pulled numbers out of their asses.
Media. Haha. Haha!
Every single iPhone user? Even those that don't wear watches and don't care about fitness? Hyperbole much? It was design for those users who would like a fitness tracker, notifications filter, etc. Someone who wants to whip out their phone less. Anyone who wants it to replace their iPhone is just a fool.
If you only bought things that "hold their value forever," you wouldn't buy a computer or smartphone or a car. You would only own jewelry and real estate. Depreciation is simply not a valid reason you should not buy technology, like the Apple Watch. And nothing precludes an Apple Watch owner from owning other traditional watches. Rethink your arguments for not buying the Apple Watch and try again.
"Collapsing sales" here means destroying the competition in this space almost overnight and ruling it as the de facto choice.
if there's an issue (i.e., lack of interest), it's not an Apple Watch issue, it's a smartwatch segment issue. That much is clear.
And I forgot in 2 different sizes, so yes every single iPhone user.
A watch, a fitness tracker, a notification filter? All I keep hearing how it's much more than that, so its appeal should be universal.
Apple didn't care how many people had previously owned smartphones before making the iPhone, and they most certainly didn't care how many people owned tablets before making the iPad. Apple has done a great job getting people to buy products they have never used before,
Well of course sales are going to slow. This device is a gimmick, Apple designed and made the best smartwatch on the planet, however it didn't reinvent it, it just made a version that didn't suck so much, it still is a relatively pointless device with little purpose beyond showing off, thats why Apple is trying to market it to the high end fashion market so badly.
This is the worst new apple product category for some time. They may have been better spending there time elsewhere, but then again i am sure it was a relatively easy market for them to enter. It's a device without a purpose and before this device all apples devices where more purposeful rather than a huge list of tech/features and me too devices which is what the rest of the market makes.
Perhaps though, it's where Apple will take this device and not where it is now the real truth is in 3-4 generations time.
Perhaps though, it's where Apple will take this device and not where it is now the real truth is in 3-4 generations time.
Apple had to get into the smart watch sector or be caught flat footed as wearables from other manufacturers were evolving quickly. Apple now owns the smart watch space and it will prove to be an integral part of their HomeKit, HealthKit, ApplePay strategies.
Apple had to get into the smart watch sector or be caught flat footed as wearables from other manufacturers were evolving quickly. Apple now owns the smart watch space and it will prove to be an integral part of their HomeKit, HealthKit, ApplePay strategies.
Good point.
How do you know it will be hold any value 'forever'? I would bet against you and I would likely win.
I can say without a doubt, that unless you have a milestone Apple watch (the first, the 100th, the millionth, etc) it will suffer from a depreciation rate that is much much steeper than buying and established brand entry level watch. An entry Tag for example.
If you bet against that, you would lose 100% of the time. No tech items, except collectables and the first apple watch version is not a collectible except in the instances I list above, hold their value like that. Even crap versions of reputable watch makers hold their value better.
So do your co-workers share the view that they don't consider the Watch useful anymore, or is that just your view, or your interpretation? Have they said they want to sell their Watches, or wish they had not bought them?
I agree that if someone really doesn't want to wear a "watch" at all (they are anti-watch, but thought the Apple Watch would be life changing), that they might not find the Apple Watch worth the $350-400 (USD) price. While I think of it as a watch does "much more", and hence worth the price, others might not. For me, the Apple Watch is already a watch + fitness tracker + iPod + "information at at glance". I expect it will become much more useful over the next year with WatchOS 2 and 3rd party apps. Well worth $400 to me.
I am interested to know what "regular" watch in the $700-$800 range that would retain its value over long periods of time. I understand how a Rolex (many $1000's) will retain a good portion of its value (at a price of relatively expensive regular maintenance), I doubt that for a sub-$1000 watch.
never said it wasn't useful, I said it isn't as "neato" as they thought. All the gadgets and crap it can do just doesn't get used because they have a 6 or 6+ in their pocket. Like I said, for notifications or texts it's cool. But those aren't worth the cost, especially when you figure how fast it is going to drop in value.
As to your watch comments, you know one name and guess how much they cost. Go to an actual watchmaker sometime and discuss with them what they can get you for sub-$1k. You would be surprised. Or you can just keep thinking that Rolex is the sole luxury timepiece maker and that they cost "many thousands".
Give me a break, a $200 watch hold its value forever!! Are you kidding? Your not even going to get your full value if you sell it right at the store door... A $200 watch is not holding its value unless you got Taylor Swift to engrave some words for you, and give it to you...
Someone didn't score too well in reading comprehension, I see. I never said a $200 watch, I said "spend about $200 MORE". As in instead of $500 for a watch, spend about $700.
Try actually reading before you spout off, and take Advil for the brain cramps.
Anyone remember the bendgate video, the millions of hits and discussions, and yet how utterly 100% crap the story turned out to be? How many iPhone 6's were sold?
I predict the same will happen vis-a-vis this piece of reportorial trash and the questionable 'research' behind it. Go DED.
If you only bought things that "hold their value forever," you wouldn't buy a computer or smartphone or a car. You would only own jewelry and real estate. Depreciation is simply not a valid reason you should not buy technology, like the Apple Watch. And nothing precludes an Apple Watch owner from owning other traditional watches. Rethink your arguments for not buying the Apple Watch and try again.
I have very few options for computers, smartphones, or cars that WILL hold their value. Watches are completely different. Unless I buy a classic car to restore (or already restored) I have no options that won't depreciate. Same with computers and smartphones, since they are technology like I clearly already said.
You make such a valid argument yourself, to be telling me to rethink mine. Your argument is to buy the Apple watch, and then ALSO buy a nice timepiece that will hold value so that you have something that holds value. DERP!
Apple had to get into the smart watch sector or be caught flat footed as wearables from other manufacturers were evolving quickly. Apple now owns the smart watch space and it will prove to be an integral part of their HomeKit, HealthKit, ApplePay strategies.
This editorial is making the comparison to things like FitBit. That is really a stretch calling FitBit a smart watch. I don't ever see a watch being an integral part of the above because iPhone sales are so strong this is just another redundant product. The size limitation of a watch is also an issue.
Apple Watch apps will never be as robust as iPhone and iPad apps. I don't see a reason why the masses will buy a product that can't do nearly as much as the product they already own and the apps are not as advanced.
Also iPhone owners in their teens and twenties just don't seem to be interested in this product. Social networking is limited and will always been limited because of the size of the display. Facebook, SnapChat, Instagram and even Twitter will never function well on a smart watch compared to an iPhone.
Phone calls are limited because of size also, a speaker can only be so big and clear on a 2x2 inch device. So you need to be in an room with next to no background noise.
Trying to sell people on pulling out your iPhone has now become so cumbersome you need an Apple Watch I don't see it. I believe this is why Apple marketing pushed so hard to call this fashion because the general public just isn't into wearable technology.
From what I have seen of iOS 9 so far it looks great, the iPhone has become such a powerhouse people would be taking several steps down in function using an Apple Watch. So argue that it has to mature but as it matures the iPhone and iPad will also continue to mature.
Text messaging is another issue. People don't want to talk into a watch having others hear what they are texting or having to use canned responses. It's just less functional then what people are doing now.
Also Apple started making bigger phones because people want bigger displays. The iPhone 6 and 6 Plus have been the best selling iPhone to date. I would say most of that has to do with the increase in size. People have their iPhones on them all the time which makes a smart watch a hard sell in my opinion.
Apple is always going to get several million people to buy something, I doubt we are going to ever see iPhone numbers with the Apple Watch.