Fitness bands outselling all other wearables, including Apple Watch, research finds
Despite devices like the Apple Watch nominally being able to do more, dedicated fitness bands are vastly outselling other wearables in the U.S., according to a research report published on Wednesday.
Fitbit's smartwatch-like Blaze tracker.
Three out of four wearables owned by Americans are fitness trackers, said Kantar Worldpanel ComTech. The wearables market is still comparatively small however, as only 12.2 percent of Kantar's American survey group owned any such device.
Fitbit, makers of products like the Blaze and the Charge HR, controlled 61.7 percent of the U.S. install base. The Apple Watch held just 6.8 percent.
In fact, in a two-month period ending with March 2016, Fitbit reportedly achieved over 50 percent of wearable sales, with Apple and Garmin coming a distant second and third, respectively.
The balance of power was more even in four European markets surveyed -- France, Germany, Great Britain, and Italy -- although just 6.6 percent of people owned a wearable. Fitbit controlled 18.5 percent of the install base, followed by Apple at 14 percent, and Samsung at 11.6.
Kantar suggested that brand, ease of use, and functionality were the top criteria people used when picking out a wearable, relegating design and even cost to lesser concerns. While Apple is one of the world's best-known brands, most fitness trackers are not only cheaper than the Apple Watch but intentionally simpler in function and interface, meant only to check things like steps, heartrate, or the time.
In a recent interview, Fitbit CEO James Park argued that Apple was taking the wrong approach to wearables by launching a "computing platform," and thereby making things more complicated. Most smartwatch makers, he said, are trying to cram in every possible feature since people still don't know what the products are good for.
Apple has yet to reveal sales numbers for the Watch, although CEO Tim Cook did claim that the product sold more units in its first year than the iPhone did in 2007, and that March quarter sales met expectations.
Fitbit's smartwatch-like Blaze tracker.
Three out of four wearables owned by Americans are fitness trackers, said Kantar Worldpanel ComTech. The wearables market is still comparatively small however, as only 12.2 percent of Kantar's American survey group owned any such device.
Fitbit, makers of products like the Blaze and the Charge HR, controlled 61.7 percent of the U.S. install base. The Apple Watch held just 6.8 percent.
In fact, in a two-month period ending with March 2016, Fitbit reportedly achieved over 50 percent of wearable sales, with Apple and Garmin coming a distant second and third, respectively.
The balance of power was more even in four European markets surveyed -- France, Germany, Great Britain, and Italy -- although just 6.6 percent of people owned a wearable. Fitbit controlled 18.5 percent of the install base, followed by Apple at 14 percent, and Samsung at 11.6.
Kantar suggested that brand, ease of use, and functionality were the top criteria people used when picking out a wearable, relegating design and even cost to lesser concerns. While Apple is one of the world's best-known brands, most fitness trackers are not only cheaper than the Apple Watch but intentionally simpler in function and interface, meant only to check things like steps, heartrate, or the time.
In a recent interview, Fitbit CEO James Park argued that Apple was taking the wrong approach to wearables by launching a "computing platform," and thereby making things more complicated. Most smartwatch makers, he said, are trying to cram in every possible feature since people still don't know what the products are good for.
Apple has yet to reveal sales numbers for the Watch, although CEO Tim Cook did claim that the product sold more units in its first year than the iPhone did in 2007, and that March quarter sales met expectations.
Comments
Next someone will issue a press release that computers under $500 outsell those over $1000...as if
One that Wall Street has heavily bought into!
A lot of "researchers" are desperate to talk up Fitbit because they are heavily invested and they are starting to see problems.
When given a choice, I got a Fitbit Alta because it's small and provides most of the functions including time and alerts. It's also a lot cheaper and only needs to be charged every 4 days. The Apple Watch just isn't there yet. If it had dedicated GPS and better battery life, then I might consider it a good value at it's new price point.
The main point is that berating someone because they don't need a 33 function Swiss Army knife makes the berator look a bit on the rabid side. Likewise, berating someone because they had the audacity to pick something other than an Apple product looks idiotic and neurotic. I say this as a long-time Apple customer, and Apple Certified System Administrator, and iPhone user. I also keep my iPhone in a LifeProof case, since Apple declines to waterproof the phone itself, and I wear a Polar V800 because Apple Watch can not do the job I need it to do to find a place on my wrist.
So now my kid wants a Blaze. As does all of his friends. Then he saw the Moto360 and wants one of them. The real reason is because he knows no one will ever buy him a $300 Apple Watch (he's basically admitted as much).
I don't wish to take away the value of the fitbit. My wife has been using one for years and it's a nice little device, the price is right, and it keeps her on track when exercising. But at least in my limited circle, I'm seeing a bit of a blip more than anything.
BTW, I got an apple watch 2 weeks ago and love it. I see room for a lot of improvements but it is a neat device.
b) It shows that the potential for Watch is great. Never mind market share - I am talking units sold.
;/
You're being silly trying to beat life into an argument that was stillborn when you introduced it.
http://smartwatches.org/learn/here-are-the-best-gps-tracking-watches-for-kids/
Now with that out of the way I agree with you that single or dual-use wearables will give up most of the market to "smartwatches" eventually as they will only get less-expensive over the next few years. Your better wearables two years from now will be both less expensive and more fully-featured than the best Apple offers today.
As far as fitness bands being "a fad" you have to remember that the devices have been around for a long time, but were "dumb" devices called pedometers. I remember when fast food companies were giving the cheaper versions away with meals. The market for the "dumb" versions wasn't that big, but it wasn't insubstantial either; you could always see the things for sale at athletics stores, and manufacturers even built the things into shoes and such.
So calling their "smart" (or smarter) equivalents a fad when their antecedents pre-existed the iPod - and iPods used to include them! - is a bit presumptive. As is expecting a $299 device - which needs to be paired with a $599 device - to replace it. It would be one thing if Apple and their competitors designed and advertised their watches to compete with and be better versions of the fitness trackers the way that the iPhone was both a better version of the Blackberry and Microsoft style smartphones AND feature phones. They aren't. Instead, they are separate devices with fitness features thrown in as a bonus. Except that the iPhone - and smartphones generally - have those same features. So ... no reason to buy a separate device when you can just purchase a $10 exercise band, strap your iPhone in and get going. Do that and you have all of the abilities that the smartwatch has - including the ability to check the time and listen to music - and plenty that the Apple Watch doesn't i.e a GPS and the ability to receive calls.
Fitbit and its competitors are for people who for whatever reason want a better pedometer. That market isn't very big, but neither was the pedometer market that it mostly replaced. The Apple Watch, Android Wear and the rest are for people who for whatever reason want a phone - or more accurately a tablet unless you own one of the few Samsung Tizen or Android Wear devices that have 3G service - on their wrist. So before it obsoletes fitness trackers, the non-fitness tracker uses for the Apple Watch - and smart watches in general - need to be more compelling. Not least because most people who own Fitbit type devices do not own or wear watches of any sort and have no desire to.
1. Where they do compete (basically Fitbit's limited feature set), the Fitbit mostly wins on price. Where they don't (AppleWatch, or for that matter most other smartwatches), Fitbit isn't even in the running.
2. Wristwatch sales and use have been declining for years; there are other functional alternatives for telling the time and date on the market with other compelling reasons for owning; this is mostly cellphones, especially smartphones.