Here’s a thought: Assume that the 18k gold Apple Watch Edition is several thousand dollars, as some people are currently predicting. How will Apple deliver that piece of news — which hasn’t officially been confirmed before, and remains the subject of increasingly wild speculation — to the public?
Depending on your perspective, a high price won’t be bad news for people who expect their jewelry to carry four- or five-digit price tags. But it’s going to be hard to explain why the Apple Watch Edition is priced so far apart from the entry level Apple Watch Sport… or most of Apple’s other products for that matter. Fake gold or not, golden iPhones starts at $99, and iPads at $399 or $499, just like non-gold ones.
While Apple has already started telling the story of what the Apple Watch will do for people that wear it, it has barely told the story on its own of how much it will cost and why. I believe that detail alone is worthy of a second Apple Watch event led by Tim Cook before the Watch hits the market in April.
The only official word from Apple on pricing came from Tim Cook at Apple’s September 2014 event followed by this reminder in the official press release: “Apple Watch will be available in early 2015 starting at $349 (US).”
“Apple Watch starts at only $349,” Cook says as the crowd applauds, “and it will be available early next year… and it is worth the wait.”
Assume that the Apple Watch Edition will retail upwards of $5,000 or $10,000. Once you reach these sorts of price points, it’s not important how high you actually go for this next point to be true: that’s a massive, hard to justify jump from an otherwise highly similar product selling for $349.
September was five months ago, and we’re still over a month away from the Apple Watch becoming available to purchase, as per Tim Cook. While it’s intriguing that the Apple Watch could have such a broad price range, the company has also let almost half a year go by with the phrase “starting at $349” summarizing the whole Watch lineup for consumers. While that description is limitless, typical consumers likely aren’t reading so far past that value. This sets the stage for inevitable shock.
While a jaw-dropping top-end number wouldn’t be a complete surprise at this point, it remains such an important detail about the Apple Watch (and potentially a change for Apple as a company) that the pricing reveal will historically be as critical for the company as the first unveiling of the device was back in September.
How could Apple best inform customers that one collection (Apple Watch Edition) of its Apple Watch costs many thousands of dollars while another collection (Apple Watch) costs less than a thousand dollars, and another less than $500? Even a $999 price tag for the standard Apple Watch would be a steep climb above the $349 starting price tag Cook shared for the product category as a whole.
Apple could simply issue a new press release with a release date and update its website to officially reveal the blockbuster pricing of the Watch. But that would provoke an awful lot of questions from consumers if the data is offered without the neccesary pitch.
Even at $349 for the Apple Watch Sport, iPhone users still need a reason to choose the Apple Watch and not a more capable fitness device. At around $1000, the standard Apple Watch collection could be described as a sweet spot for functionality and fashion, and I can imagine Apple comparing a potentially $5000 or $10,000 Apple Watch Edition to the existing market of Rolex and Omega luxury watches and highlighting the gains in utility (while ignoring the expense of battery life).
Some people already believe and accept that the Apple Watch and Apple Watch Edition are pieces of jewelry first, wearable gadgets second. This point, however, can be explained best and widely only by Apple. The $349 Apple Watch Sport will serve the crowd that wants a wearable that makes interacting with our iPhones more engaging first, and might not care about (or be willing to pay for) the fashion appeal.
A media blitz of interviews that will tell this story will come either way, but the pricing announcement alone at this stage is worth another media event with Tim Cook (and maybe even Jony Ive on stage this time) to share why the Apple Watch price range is so different than its other products. Without that piece of the story, a high price tag for the Apple Watch Edition is going to be even harder to swallow, and may overshadow the rest of the lineup.
Images via Apple.com
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
I can’t wait for the Apple paid extras, I mean audience members, to stand up and clap and cheer at the Apple Watch event when Tim puts the Gold watch prices on the big screen like 5 grand is a bargain.
You do know the one’s clapping at the front in Apple events are almost always Apple employees while live bloggers type away on their keyboards at the back.
Except Apple portrays them to be run of the mill tech fans who purchased tickets, but apparently you are just to swift for Apples trickery.
You want to tell me where I can buy tickets to an Apple event? You can’t. So if you assume Apple is trying to pretend the employees up front are fans who bought tickets, you might want to show me where Apple even tries to pretend that consumers can even attend the events.
The ONLY Apple event where non-journalists can attend is WWDC, and there you have to be a crazy-dedicated developer lucky enough to snag a ticket. That room is far more filled with developers than Apple employees, by a wide margin.
At the September event, I don’t think anyone tried to pretend the employees there clapping were fans. Tim kept pointing at them, clapping towards them, etc. suggesting that they were in fact the people responsible for the products he was announcing.
But go ahead, be rational why don’t you. Your negativity makes SO much sense.
“Apple portrays them to be”
How do they do that?
@Mark, you have to use your *imagination*…like chrisl84.
Apple has never done such a thing. In fact, in 50% of the events they introduce the product team who made the thing sitting in the front three rows. Move along… nothing to see here after all.
That comment is just plain dumb.
Good god it’s so easy to offend you Apple tools who worship every thing this company does and fall for every single carefully orchestrated optic they put out. I’ll just enjoy their products and not fall for their BS marketing that you tools actually think is reality. If ignorance is bliss I definitely envy your life.
I wasn’t offended. The comment just made no sense in the context of what happens in these events. If you were looking to take a dig at something about these events there are plenty of things you could make fun of, but your comment seemed to be grasping for something that wasn’t there and it rang hollow.
These events are stage-managed adverts (Apple, Microsoft, Google, Samsung etc., they’re all the same). It would be nuts to invite random people to be part of the ‘cast’ for what amounts to an infomercial. Someone would get fired.
Question: When is a company just trying to sell you something? Answer: all the time.
One thing I’ll say for Apple, though, is that they don’t have to pay people to stand in line outside their stores. (I could tell you a story about a company which does).
I never said this is exclusive to Apple. However just look at the replies I get above. These fools actually think this crap is genuine and not a carefully orchestrated illusion for promotion. That was my point and the replies I get prove most people don’t understand this.
Please look up how much a solid gold watch costs and then get back to us.
Back under your bridge, Mr Troll. It would have more impact if you had a clue what you were talking about.
Yes, just like the thousands over thousands of “paid extras” that Apple hires to stand in line for launches, lines that do not stop for months.
You are right… that make believe machine that Apple is. I am sure their stock price and cash reserves are also mere ideas.
They run the risk of being to cavalier with pricing. Remember that while profit margins on iPhones are very good, it’s not that an iPhone is several hundred dollars more expensive than other high-end smartphones. It costs roughly the same as a Galaxy S5 or HTC One M8. They just sell a *lot* of them.
The Apple Watch at $349 is already far more expensive than any other Android Wear watch and that’s the base model.
Far more expensive? Not really.
“Apple needs to…” Does it really?
If wealthy Chinese consumers are willing to pay $20,000 for the privilege of owning a gold Apple Watch, who are we to stand in their way?
Everything in the world is not priced based solely on its utility and bill of materials.
Fiji water
HDMI cables
Beats headphones
Caviar
Diamonds
Perfume
You forgot to wrap Diamonds in double quotes and the blink tab!
While there’s no shortage of luxury brands and products designed for people with more money and ego than good sense or good taste, Apple seems to be breaking some new ground here.
An Audi A8 is not just an A3 with nicer leather and gold wheels.
A Canon 1D is not just a Rebel with a sapphire shutter release button.
A closer analogy would be a high end watch company, like Rolex, which sells a steel watch for $8.5K and an identical gold model for 4X as much ($34K+).
But Apple is not Rolex. Apple products do not appreciate in value over time, and Rolex’s product line is not dominated by sub-$1000 gadgets that are replaced every two years.
Assuming the steel Apple Watch sells for about $1,000, pricing the gold version at $10K or $20k (a 10x-20x bump) would seem outrageous, even by Rolex standards.
Exactly. Apple only “needs to” tell Zac how much to start saving up for the gold watch. Other than that, they can wait until launch day.
Exactly. It’s a sad day when 9to5Mac has their own opinion piece that includes “Apple needs to …”. You’d think they’d know better.
It’s actually quite simple. How much do solid gold watches cost? I didn’t know either until “apple watch price gate”. It turns out solid gold watches start around $20,000. If you include a solid gold band, the price goes up to around $40,000.
So, @ZaC Hall, how would anyone in their right mind NOT expect solid gold Apple watches to cost thousands of dollars at least? (Very possibly over $10,000 dollars.)
Seems like a given to me.
And no, I will definitely not be buying a gold apple watch. I expect even the stainless version will be more than I want to pay. Looks like the Sport version for me.
Basically, gold apple watches are for wealthy people who like very expensive status symbols. The same type of people who might be in the market for a $20,000 gold rolex. Your average iPhone owner will NOT be in the market for a gold apple watch.
Good grief. The amount of gold in the Edition watch is probably around $500-$1000. How in the world do you get to $20-$40K?
Please don’t compare solid gold watches with mechanisms created by artisans with many years of experience to a solid gold watch which runs on a circuit board – it’s embarrassing.
You just wanted to say “artisans”.
@Aunty Troll, you could easily argue that the hardware and software in the Apple Watch is crafted by artisans with many years of experience.
Why would Apple “need to” when people like you, Zac, are already doing it for him? For all we know the Gold Apple Watch Edition was slated to be priced at $1349, or maybe even less. But thanks to folks like you perpetuating wild and rampant speculation, the public is on its way to being well-tenderized for far higher prices. $10k? Nobody was thinking those kinds of numbers before you. So by fabricating all this frenzy, you’re effectively building all the necessary groundwork for Tim to set far higher prices than he otherwise would have.
But, as an avid AAPL holder, I ain’t mad at ya …
No, it really doesn’t. They’ve already made it clear the Edition is a high-end, luxury fashion item, meant to be a solution for people who want an Apple Watch, but wouldn’t buy it unless it takes the place of a high fashion accessory.
This is NOT going to be the Apple Watch most people will even think about purchasing. Like they say, if you have to ask how much, you can’t afford it.
Just another clickbait filler Watch article. Nothing to see here.
i love the 42mm Apple Watch with milanese loop wristband, but if they trying to charge over $600 for it… i’ll save my money for something more useful
…like the Apple Watch Sport. For people like us who want something useful (or people with limited budgets – I’m one of those too), the cheapest watch will be an easy choice. The higher-priced watches are not meant for us. They’re meant for the kind of person who spends $1000 on a designer purse. There are lots of people like that, but clearly the Sport watch will be the biggest seller by a long way.
It seems inevitable that the edition watch will cost mega bucks. However, I don’t see that alone as a reason for requiring a media event. If you want an Apple Watch, you will be able to get the same functionality at $349.
What I do think that Apple needs to explain is what the upgrade path will be. I generally replace my iPhone every year. But … if someone forks over $10K for a watch, I think that Apple needs to have some way to upgrade the watch to version 2 / 3 / … without having to buy a new watch every year.
A Rolex never looks “dated”, but Apple Watch V1 is most likely going to look or feel dated once V2 comes out. This is not going to sit well with someone who forked over a lot of money for a watch. It would be nice if Apple could say that the watch will be upgraded for free for the next 5 years or some thing similar.
If some rich person would pay 5000-10,000 without having the foresight to know that Apple will update it next year, then I’m sure they don’t care and have enough cash to just buy the second gen as well.
But I do agree it will seem dated a year out
It seems incredibly likely that the SoC will be upgradeable.
How much it will cost and why? Really? Here’s the answer… Because it is made out of G O L D.
completely agree with this article. idk where $5000 prices and higher came from. i expect the gold model to be anywhere from $999 ($1500 at most) and that way the profit margins will be great as well as the customer base much supportive of purchase (esp. China)
Can you find me a new watch that is real 18k gold (not plated) for anywhere near that price??? Nope.
Those other watches also come from boutique companies 1/100 the size of Apple, with product runs 1/100 the size of the Apple Watch.
Point is, Apple isn’t going to live or die on Watch Edition profit margins like a watch company could. Heck, they could sell it at cost of at a loss, and they’d probably still benefit from the buzz/exclusivity of it. Apple probably procure huge amounts of the gold at lower costs and slimmer margins. I would honestly be surprised if it was more than $1,999.
Exactly. The Edition is meant to compete with high-end luxury wristwear, NOT the other Apple Watches.
There’s not a single watch that is 18K that’s at the price your suggesting. Most 18K gold watches *start* at $10K. Yes, $10K. That’s where this is coming from.
I am laughing now reading your both comments and will laugh again when Cook announces it on stage. like one person mentioned in comments above, Apple doesn’t want to make the profit from their low end models, most profit last Q came from 6 Plus -> so, whatever material underneath that “gold” is going to be will be adequate to call the watch “GOLD” but it may not be not purely gold in that sense. its just a fashion statement and not a true jewelry piece for 10K, ok? they want a guy like you to buy one for his wife instead of maybe a Coach bag for her bday. Apple won’t compete with Rolex because people who buy Rolex will continue to buy it and Apple won’t stop them.
Actually, Max, yours is the best explanation I’ve heard yet. I was going to go along with this Edition costing 10-15k business, but the coach bag explanation makes a lot of sense. Imagine if apple could get women coming into their stores with the same mindset as they go into a Michael Kors store… It might be a stretch, but kind of interesting to think about…
It is true gold, not plated.
Pure gold is 24k. 18k is not pure gold. It is alloyed with other metals, and is typically valued at 75% of pure gold.
An 18k Rolex President contains a little over 3 ounces of gold. So if you take today’s gold price at $1200/ounce, the pure gold value would be around $2700.
Comparatively judging the Gold Apple Watch Edition (solely from pics), one could argue it could contain as little as 1 ounce of 18k gold, which puts its pure gold value at around $900.
Nice to see an article that isn’t blind on Apple’s (rumoured) outrageous pricing on the Watch. What Gruber and his pals are suggesting Apple is doing would be an abomination if true.
what is Gruber saying?
Gruber is suggesting that Apple’s price difference between stainless steel and solid gold watches will be comparable to the price difference between every other stainless steel and solid gold watch on the market. That is, at minimum, thousands of dollars. It’s not outrageous or shocking for anyone who understands the watch market. But it may be shocking for Apple’s core customers – thus Zac’s article above.
He’s saying that Apple will not price the watch at what it’s worth or even what it’s worth plus a hefty premium, but that it will be thousands of dollars more than it needs to be because it’s “fashion” and Apple has a big brand.
In other words, he’s suggesting that apple will do what it has literally never done in the history of it’s existence, which is make a hugely expensive product for no other reason than “they can.” That they will tack on thousand of dollars *extra* to both the cost of the device and it’s rather hefty 40% profit margin, because: fashion.
Apple’s devices have always been expensive, but we have always been told that we are paying for the extra quality, for better materials, and because Apple likes to maintain a 40% margin, instead of the 10% that the rest of the world deals with. Apple has NEVER however, played the “brand game.” Apple has NEVER (so far) produced a product that has thousand of dollars extra tacked on to the price, “just because.”
This is how the fashion houses operate. If Apple goes down that road, they are saying they have purposely disconnected the prices they charge for their stuff, from any rational or design measure. It’s a complete BETRAYAL of everything Apple is supposed to stand for.
I don’t see Apple doing this. But we will find out soon enough.
The Apple Watch is the first Apple product for me that has really stood out as a rip off. They’ll be two screen sizes (at least $50 difference), different storage capacities are rumoured (easily $100 extra), then the Apple Watch itself could easily cost $100+ more than the Apple Watch Sport. You could easily be paying $600 for the Apple Watch you actually want. That’s almost the price of an iPhone 6 and way more expensive than an iPad. That’s for something that’s far less useful, functional or essential than either of those products. It also will cost far less to make.
I doubt we will see different storage capacities. Most people won’t need or want to store anything on the actual watch.
Joggers will want to store music on the watch
“It also will cost far less to make.”
Are we completely ignoring the years of R&D, tooling, etc…?
That’s the way people are these days. Ignoring everything. They want everything for free. And yeah right, they want the best payout in they job no matter how dumb they may be (when they actually have a job).
It’s the middle their – non sport , non edition, versions that needs the most explanation as those are the ones that will make or break it for . I’m fairly sure they’ll be aggressive about getting people NOT to buy sports version and try and push people into upselling to the “watch ” version. They really won’t want their main market going for that basic model and you can’t ask the majority to spend 1,000 for entering into the next tier up. I think they will ha e them at 599 and up. Depending on straps etc.
This is a stupid article. Have they ever told the press they have a version of the mac pro that runs almost $10,000. No they only said publicly it starts at $2,999. Why would the watch be any different. The people that can afford the most expensive watch will buy the most expensive watch.
And that mac pro for $9,599 you don’t even get a mouse or keyboard. THE NERVE! Apple is doomed if they do the same with the watch. Im going to sell my 92 shares before this watch comes out.
I will buy your shares not a problem get in touch if your serious
What computer can you buy for less than $3000 that is better than a Mac Pro? None.
Also, the range of Mac Pro models vary in price based on installed hardware, which in turn affects the product’s capabilities and performance. They’re not just taking the base model, slapping a gold case on it, and pricing it at 10-20X above the base model.
If the steel Apple watch is priced around $1000, following luxury watch trends an otherwise identical gold model might be priced as high as $4K or if they offer one with a gold bracelet perhaps $8K. This would not be a good value by any means, since the only difference would be the gold, and the gold isn’t worth anywhere near that much, but it would be consistent with the pricing differences between a steel Rolex and a gold one.
I still don’t get the notion of pricing these at $10-20K, just because gold watches cost that much or more. If you look at those expensive gold watches, their steel versions cost upwards of $8000, not $1000. And of course, those gold watches generally appreciate in value over time, which will not be the case for an Apple Watch.
You are right! The Mac Pro starts low (for high delivering computers) and improves its capabilities with different CPUs/GPUs/memory/disk, to go up to 10K.
But we must remember that a Mac Pro (specs were not disclosed) PAINTED IN RED
You are right! The Mac Pro starts low (for high delivering computers) and improves its capabilities with different CPUs/GPUs/memory/disk, to go up to 10K.
But we must remember that a Mac Pro (specs were not disclosed) PAINTED IN RED was bought in a PRODUCT (RED) auction for around 950.000!
And I say ‘bought’ because this was the price (like 100 times) that somebody thought was the value to help the fight agains AIDS.
I poured all this here to remember us that there are other ‘motives’ to value something… even if the ‘difference’ is only skin deep.
This is a first-generation product. If Apple wants to charge thousands of dollars for the Apple Watch as a jewelry piece, then the electronics should be completely replaceable so that when the second, third, etc. generation comes out, people could use the same body but replace the electronics (and possibly the screen). Otherwise, who in their right mind will pay thousands of dollars for a piece of jewelry that gets outdated every year? Jewelry doesn’t work like this. Expensive watches are supposed to last for decades.
Im feel very confident that if apple does charge a couple thousand dollars for the most expensive watch the band that comes with it that you can save and swap out with next years model will be really nice also. But either way Im sure apple knows what they are doing, seeing as they have more money than most countries, so even if the high end watch flops, who cares.
does not have “more money than most countries”. Please go and spend a few minutes reading up on this rather than relying on some truly clueless blog posts
sorry it has been pointed out that i don’t know what I’m talking about. i will accept that. i should have said CNN and other news agencies reported on Jan 29 2015 that apple has $178 billion dollars in the bank. and business insider did a story of 50 descent size countries and how much cash reserve they have and apple surpasses that.
Maybe! The S1 is a single chip encased in resin.
I do not see the gold edition costing that much. $5,000 to $10,000 for a watch is ludicrous! Gold only has so much value at the Apple watch internal are the same. So the gold edition should not be that much since you are only paying for the casing an date watch band. I am thinking that Angela Arhendts is the one trying to jack the price up (because of her exclusive Burberry back ground), but after 1-2 years the watch internals will be way out of date and you will be just left with the gold value of the case and the watch band. It seems like a hard sell long term.
Most people will opt for the sports watch or the stainless steel option. Stainless steel and aluminum are commodity metals and do not cost that much. The only thing that would differentiate these watches from watch currently for sale is the Apple watch electronics, sensors and the apps. That would not require a premium price difference between the sports and the classic editions.
“$5,000 to $10,000 for a watch is ludicrous!”
Rolex would beg to disagree. An 18k gold Rolex will set you back about, well, $18k.
Last year Rolex sold about 14 million time pieces. No doubt there’s a mixture of types and prices but Rolex is a very premium brand catering to a very specific clientele. So as “ludicrous” as it sounds to you spend a few months salary on a watch there are people in this world that may consider an 18k carat gold Apple Watch at $5,000 a fire sale.
Pure gold is 24k. 18k is not pure gold. It is alloyed with other metals, and is typically valued at 75% of pure gold.
An 18k Rolex President contains a little over 3 ounces of 18k gold. So if you take today’s gold price at $1200/ounce, the pure gold value would be around $2700.
Comparatively judging the Gold Apple Watch Edition (solely from pics), one could argue it could contain as little as 1 ounce of 18k gold, which puts its pure gold value at around $900.
Apple had precedent of over pricing first iPhone. Its not easy to set a price for a product that you never sell before. Android Wear watches is not a good comparison as they are very limited in what they can do compared to Watch. Craftsmanship alone puts in the jewelry league – jewelry is always feels “extra” to most consumers. It will all come down to properly executed marketing
Android Wear is going to be the cheap/budget brand, just like Android phones, Chromebooks, Android tablets. Google’s new motto is: “Don’t be expensive.”
From the “The New Yorker” article:
“Ive later told me that he had overheard someone saying, “I’m not going to buy a watch if I can’t stand on carpet.””
Exactly. Edition is for those people. Ive wanted to leave apple and do luxury goods. Instead Apple gave him and his friend a shot to do it inside of Apple. Edition will be expensive. And for anything to do with material costs.
the Apple watch doesn’t interest me.
some stuff it does seems neat but overall the idea is rather “ehh” to me.
Then hit with the pricing ideas (and the actual “starting at” from Apple) and I really don’t want one.
I think I stopped wearing watches around the time of smartphones…maybe a little earlier and have been fine without a watch this long.
I guess the next few years or so, the watch will look the same (liken it to the slight changes on iPhone models) and maybe they can swap the insides out. BUT…the look is less than appealing to me.
Their idea was phenomenal, they just couldn’t fully realize it, at least yet. Biosensors are the future, and highly accurate ones, in a small device, that can measure a wide array of metrics, will change the world, full stop.
The first problem is that you’re citing a gold iPhone at $99. First of all, that’s the unsubsidized price, not the actual price, which is around $700 unlocked. Also, the gold iPhone is not a “gold” iPhone and I doubt anyone with half a brain actually believes they’re holding an iPhone crafted from a slab of x-number carats of gold.
If Apple’s known for anything it’s selling devices as premium prices. The first MacBook Air — of the first laptops without an optical drive — started at $1,800. The 5K iMac starts at $2,500. The Mac Pro is over $2,000.
I agree, somewhat, that Apple should start a stronger marketing campaign for the more expensive watches but does anyone think that they can obtain an 18k carat gold “anything” for $350 or even $1,000 or even $2,000?! Doubtful. I don’t think they have to do a lot of campaigning to “warn” people that it’ll be expensive and there’s a chance they won’t even carry the gold models in the store. My guess is they’ll offer a different experience like delivering it to your home/office in a special bulletproof lock box handed to you by two Secret Service men and a Victoria Secret model.
I agree Apple needs another event to announce the watch but anyone who thinks Phil Schiller or whoever will get up on stage and provide an explanation for the pricing is nuts. I suppose Apple could do a Q&A with the media afterwards but I think that will be unlikely. Mostly I think some of the pricing suggestions are ridiculous. The mark-ups in the traditional watch space are huge. I highly doubt we’ll see that kind of mark-up from Apple.
Gold model simply cannot be cheap – look at the price of gold. You also have to realize the high price is what will attract people with money to pay. It may not be me or you, or mostly anyone on this site, but price signals quality. If Apple underprices Gold model experts will question whether it is really made of gold.
As much as I understand peoples beef with pricing. Look how expensive watches are by themselves, and I’m talking simple watches like what nixon would make.Why are those justifiable but the apple watch isn’t?
“to share why the Apple Watch price range is so different than its other products”
I’ve never worn jewelry or even a watch. It’s all senseless to me. But in those market materials are worth a lot more than just their value in weight. Grubber points out that a specific model of Rolex sells for $6,000 for the stainless steel version, the gold version, $15,000.
This is where Apple leaves tech culture in the gutter… They understand the human element of desire and they’re going to make a crap load of money catering to that group of people who love their “bling”.
Tech geeks will never understand anything other than specs. Plain and simple. That’s why we get these stupid comments about being able to get the same thing, cheaper from brand X. The fact is, you can’t. That “thing” people see or get from Apple products aren’t on a spec sheet.
It’s completely senseless to argue about it. But the techno-geeks always do and seemingly always will.
Precisely – anyone who starts comparing features of Apple products with competition do not understand what really makes Apple so successful – its a brand, status symbol for many not spec sheet
I agree with what you’re saying. The only one thing that does grind against this perception value is where this watch is being made.. China.. Not quite Geneva is it, and that may harm luxury buyers. That said I don’t think os after the watch connoisseur when it comes to the crunch – they’re adter the sport / entertainment celebs etc who will
Spread the world. The Beats type crowd. The hip, young, etc. not older executives. So I guess he origin is less important and exchange for technology capability and brand admiration.
Why would this matter? Most of us can’t and or won’t pay for the high end watch. You can buy a 20k custom iPhone if you want to but you probably didn’t. That kind of expense is simple NOT for “The Rest of Us.”
I’ve always assumed the Watch Edition was going to be in the thousands. If you look at high end watches which this is expected to target I don’t see that as outside of general range of expectations.
If basic Watch costs 1000+ they I think they have a problem and should be setting that expectation ASAP.
Please, be sincere! You are not going to buy an Apple Watch Edition. Neither I.
OK, maybe if it cost $351.- (but with full gold band).
So, all this crap about ‘telling Apple what to do’ is —as you already know— useless.
I won’t say that this is ‘to get clicks’ because I follow you from a long time ago and I know and appreciate your work.
We all need to do a catharsis… The Apple Watch took so much of us that we cannot live without it!
It is also very improbable that Apple has not decided how to price and announce the price.
The company paid Angela 78 millions because it wanted her to be in May/June. (If she stayed two more month as CEO she would be able to collect that sum from vested shares.)
Although Apple is not perfect, it is more perfect that what you show in this article.
Price is set based on supply and demand – in case of gold model is mostly demand, I am not expecting supply constraints for this model. Apple may have indeed did not know how to price the Gold model. I am sure internal marketing team is hard at work to understand potential demand with various price points
Honestly, this is a very different product than they’ve ever done before. The consumer who buys it is also very different. Apple may not need to officially announce the price along with the rest. They can simply say it will have a “premium” price. The advertising for it will focus on high fashion magazines and sites- where price isn’t important. I think having the buzz build more organically about it from more fashion- conscious folks will drive it into a more mythical product. Seeing someone with one is something you’ll tell others about (good or bad). Treating it like all the rest and tossing out the price will almost cheapen it. Sounds weird, I know.
good point – jewelry price is not typically revealed – you won’t see Rolex price until you actually go to buy one. But expectation is that Rolex is expensive
Interesting view. Not to forget that Apple Watch buyers must be iPhone users, as the watch isn’t a stand alone product. Also while Apple creates the allusive or mythical feel to new releases, they are also focused on selling as many as possible…… Janusian Thinking.
Run-of-the-mill “dumb” watches can go for just as much, it all depends on materials and quality. I don’t see this as an issue at all. The fact that it is a smartwatch is seperate.
Gruber’s gonna grube.
Hyundai sells a $15,000 car. They also sell an $80,000 car.
Opinion: Nope.
Anyone actually planning to buy the 18k gold model is going to need advance notice or encouragement.
is NOT
Why do you make such noise about this? Focus on more important topics Zac!
It is a first generation smart watch without Jobs working on it!
its called being passionate – we all here want Apple succeed – its a company dear to all of us
For me the problem will be the upgrade cycle. People who buy 10 and 20 thousand dollar watches buy them for a lifetime. I certainly wouldn’t want the first iPhone even if it was solid gold because the technology is 8 years old. They are going to have to have some sort of upgrade program for the high end watches.
Jony hates being on stage and Jobs excused him from ever needing to do that.
IMHO, this article represents the “old” Apple, whereby the standards which must be met are those set by all the preceding ones we westerners are, and have been, accustomed to. Apple “needs” to explain its behaviour so that we don’t freak out about forthcoming changes to our beloved company.
Well, there are new and massively growing markets which do not respond to western concerns, nor do they have the same questions or concerns. The iPhone 6 Plus (as well as the 6, but to lesser degree) is a clear representative for how new (read “non-western”) markets are re-shaping Apple.
So, while this lovely and well-written article does speak to its intended audience, that is not the only intended audience Apple is speaking to. For many in the international market, Apple is a super-luxury brand and shelling out massive coin isn’t a concern: it’s expected. Sticker shock will come from the cost being too low, not too high.
So, while I totally get the author’s concern over Apple’s behaviour (and have many of the same questions), we readers are not the growing buying demographic. How “we” respond to what Apple does is becoming less important by the year.
Perhaps the silence on pricing is related to supply. A gold iPhone was controversial early on, and when opinion changed last minute there was very limited supply. If there will be limited supply of gold watches, perhaps it suits Apple to have speculation of a high price, and therefore out of reach for many, for as long as possible. People have already made plans for buying that exclude the gold, based I might say, on fictional pricing jumped on by all and sundry.
Also, unlike Rolex etc, this gold watch has a life expectancy of a couple of years—I don’t think anyone will want a chunky gold watch, when a new slimmer model arrives down the track.
They don’t need to tell any story. You’re missing the point entirely. The watch is solid gold. It’s aimed at a cross-section of the population that doesn’t need justification for anything, let alone dropping $10-20+L on a watch.
Here’s my opinion on the Apple Watch Gold:
It cant and will not be too expensive. Its not made by hand like other Swiss watches and also, it WILL be dated only 1 years after.
It will be priced based on how many grams it weighs. It’s only electronics inside. No complicated hand made movement or calendar minute repeater or chimes etc…
I can afford buying the gold watch but will never. I will stick to the Aluminum. When I spend this kind of money or more, it should be on something timeless like Breguet, Patek Philippe or at least Bvulgari or Ebel etc…
This is not. It will be dated next year.
You guys are so cute–passionately speculating, demanding, and commenting on what you don’t know. It’s Friday night, nerds–go out and enjoy something non-digital for once.
I know, right?
You’re funny :).
Nonsense! That you can’t afford one is obvious. Those who can couldn’t care less what you think.
I’m the owner of 4 watches at a thousand dollars or more… i’m not rich but live well enough… Love Apple products but a $349 digital watch just seems a bit high… But I may still buy 1….lol
If I get an Apple watch, it will be solely for functionality. As for how it looks, all the models look very nice to me.
I can’t say I agree. What benefit is there for Apple announcing that early? The article makes it clear that the author and others will react negatively to a high price, so why would they be bringing that to the forefront?
If anything the models where we’d want to see pricing details are anything but the Apple Watch Edition. Those are the ones that 95% of people are likely going to be spending their money so it probably benefits more people to know how much they can get a steel version for as opposed to a gold model.
Also pricing of a gold iPhone is completely irrelevant. The phones aluminium, not made of gold. Hardly comparable.
[quote]golden iPhones starts at $99[/quote]
Which is on contract which means the price comparison makes no sense.
Gee, I think you would tell them with a price tag. If there is no price tag, and you have to ask how much… then you can’t afford it anyway.
The author of this article doesn’t understand the difference between gold spraypaint and 24 karat gold.
It’s actually 18 karat, but your conclusion is totally right!
Listen, people who are buying 18 karat gold watches know that its going to be in the thousands…gold is expensive. If you dont want to buy it, you settle with the non 18K watches. Geez
Right from the announcement, it was obvious that the Edition would be expensive. I can’t think of another new product introduction from Apple where the prices of all tiers weren’t stated up front, making the aWatch’s price tiers conspicuous by their absence.
Given a six month production window of six months, it makes sense to delay the sticker shock as long as possible, since it would become cause celebre. The avalanche of bad press leading up to the release would overshadow all other discourse about the watch. Even now, at least half the commentary about the watch involves price speculation. It’s hard to imagine any responsible CEO courting that kind of preventable disaster.
We are either reaching a whole new level of internet stupid here, or people do not realize that the Edition model is made of solid gold. It’s not a gold color.
If you leave all technology aside and just melt the gold part down to a nugget, what do you think it would cost?
The proper way to tell the story is this: “here is the Apple Watch Edition, it’s $8995.”
Done.
Zac, did you just compare the gold colored iPhones to the actual gold Apple Watch, regarding pricing?
Pure gold is 24k. 18k is not pure gold. It is alloyed with other metals, and is typically valued at 75% of pure gold.
An 18k Rolex President contains a little over 3 ounces of gold. So if you take today’s gold price at $1200/ounce, the pure gold value would be around $2700.
Comparatively judging the Gold Apple Watch Edition (solely from pics), one could argue it could contain as little as 1 ounce of 18k gold, which puts its pure gold value at around $900.
Also, didn’t Apple do something to make the 18k gold stronger? Would that have any impact on the value?
@marikski Not really, Gold is very weak so you almost have to make it stronger and the materials used to do that usually aren’t very expensive…
Edition as limited edition, at my opinion this watch will be on a limited acess, in only a view shops and not in the appstore. As simple as that.
I disagree that Apple needs to tell the story of an expensively priced Watch Edition. The product will do this for itself, like every Apple product does today. The Watch Edition is a piece of jewellery foremost and a functional gadget as well, and Apple has never been in the habit of joining the race the bottom with price, like many of their competitors do. If you’re into an expensive piece of jeweller, which becomes an extension of your phone that you have to charge everyday, and you have a significant amount of disposable income, then you’ll buy it, and if you don’t, then you won’t. Regardless, Watch in general will sell like crazy.
I really don’t see the problem, it’s made out of gold, so u have to pay 10k, 15k, 20k whatever ! Its gold. Does Rolex make golden watches for free !? Don’t want it don’t buy it ! Go buy some plastic Samsung microwav… o no sorry they also make smart watches !
Not necessarily, they will when the time is ripe, not before.
Its pragmatic buyer logic applied to no pragmatic product for fashion brand oriented auditory. They chooses by attention not by specifications or comparsion but by brand power and hype amount. And hype will be HIGHER with momental anounce of price and availability in the next day. Fashion world differs from tech one and very impulsive. So they hire burberry sales / marketing professional and knows well what they doing. Intrigue with watches on covers and stars in life but price and details are still secreet. Its brilliant tactics for such not wide auditory but focused product. Lets look, what will happen, i think no need for randomlytics :-))) and advices to apple how they should sell product, they know better than almost any company in word :-)
When pricing the edition model Apple is going to have to find that “sweet spot”. They want this product to be marketed as a luxury item, pricing it below 1K would make it irrelevant to those who buy luxury items and designer jewelry. On the opposite end, Apple can not hope to compete with some of the higher end watch brands like JLC, Patek Philippe, and Rolex nor can they justify markups similar to those of high end jewelry houses like Cartier, Bvlgari, or VCA. They do not have the history that these companies have and their watches do not have the same staying power as traditional watches. I would be willing to pay 10K + for a JLC time piece because it will not be outdated in a year. It’s value will probably increase. You can’t say the same thing for an Apple Watch.
As an example, you can look at the Cartier Love bracelet. Designed by Aldo Cipullo in 1969, it has become an iconic piece of jewelry. In 2011 the bracelet cost $5,575. Now a white gold version costs $7200 before taxes. Cartier increases their prices yearly, thus the price of your preowned bracelet never truly decreases. The bracelet is about 20-ish grams of gold depending on the size. I purchased one because, as previously mentioned, it’s a classic piece of jewelry and it retains its value.
Having said all of that, Apple can not hope to compete with the 10K+ price tag of designer watches but pricing it below $1K would be suicide for the air of “luxury” they are attempting to create. I believe Apple’s sweet spot would be between $4K to $6K. At any rate it will be interesting to see how highly Apple values itself against Jewelry houses that have over 100 years of history behind them.
I really want the watch, especially a 42mm size one as I’m a big guy, but outside of the $350 starting price point i have absolutely no idea what its going to cost me and its incredibly frustrating. Ideally i want the steel one with the sapphire glass so it doesn’t get scratched, but If I’m going to be paying over $500 dollars for whats basically the exact same hardware plus a different sized and metal casing, then to me its just not worth it!
I have absolutely no desire to get the gold one and honestly to me the fact that your buying a 4000 dollar plus gold watch and actually wearing it out in public just to me says you have way to much money and not enough common sense, and it also screams ROB ME!
What sells me on the watch is the health apps and the software and from what i gather, they all work exactly the same regardless of the case and size! So to a guy like me, who wouldn’t know the definition of fashion or style if it bit me in the nose, i do think apple is going to shoot themselves in the foot if they charge outrageous premiums for the glass and metal, when outside of style, the hardware is exactly the same internally.
Its why i never understood those apple fanatics who went out and re bought a whole new phone or tablet simply because it came in a different color when the hardware itself is exactly the same!
p118 of the New York Times Style Magazine has a Dior dress listed for $10,000. “whether a cotton eyelet nightshirt or a button-down mini, the effect is one of crisp purism.”
That’s 10k for a cotton nighty. Listed in a magazine where $1,000 for pants is normal. There are things for $300 too. I mean it all depends on the designer and how much they want to add artificial value to something. 10k for the only gold smart watch fashion people will even consider is a bargain!
Then you want to talk about tech being outdated in a year? Fashion is dated in a season.
Welcome to insane world of luxury goods. The only point I see to Apple offering the edition is to break into this market. These aren’t tech people and they aren’t for fitness people. These are for the people that won’t buy a watch unless the floor is carpeted.
I think the rest of the world really isn’t stressing over this like the tech people are. They will announce it when they announce it.
OK… Apple Watch (standard) will not be more than $550… Seriously, I thought it was logical that they would price it at about $100 more than the Sports Collection like they do with every product, but that people think of $1,000 just isn’t understandable to me. The Sports doesn’t look so much different as that this would make sense and sapphire and stainless steel aren’t that expensive materials either way… It’s not Gold…
Also, just to highlight how absurd this price point would be: That wouldn’t only be almost 3x Apple Watch Sports, but the Top-of-the-line iPhone 6 Plus… This is ridiculous…
I would like to know about the custom alloys Apple spoke about. 50% harder 18KT gold and stainless steel I believe. Developed in-house? With 3rd party like LQMT? Any patents filed? Seems this is a detail that got lost in the shuffle and no one has asked.
Because it doesn’t really matter… who cares if it is 50% stronger 18k gold, then it’s 50% stronger 18k gold… :D
This article is dumb. I get speculating on upcoming product and price, but to be critical of any company based on pure speculation is lame.
The problem is you can’t get out of your technology paradigm. The gold Apple watch is a fashion item, therefore it has little justifiable comparisons to anything.
The comparison to Rolex is equally unjustified, Rolex a bling watch, has always been a marketing gimmic for status wannabes. If you really like fine watches most will opt for aquality mid tier mechanical regardless of case material etc.
I find the Gold Apple watch precisely in the same category as a Rolex each with features that offset one another, neither with any justification for their prices.
The speculation I’m taking issue with is the suggestion that the “Apple Watch” line itself will cost in excess of $1k. That is absolutely ridiculous. Major stainless steel kitchen appliances retail for less than that. I can’t see Apple letting the “standard” version of the device (at least in terms of namesake) climb up to or over $1,000. And the suggestions that all these straps will create dozens of price points… Come on folks. This is Apple. They will keep it simple and easy to process.
It doesn’t matter what they price the Edition at, it doesn’t exist to shift units….just like the Mac Pro, it’s not *for* every tom dick and harry.
It’s obvious most of you who disparage Rolex don’t understand their intrinsic value and reputation for quality just like Apple is respected for quality and innovation.
See this link: http://www.forbes.com/sites/arieladams/2014/04/14/why-rolex-watches-are-the-most-reputable-consumer-products-in-the-world-according-to-industry-study/
“How could Apple best inform customers that one collection (Apple Watch Edition) of its Apple Watch costs many thousands of dollars while another collection (Apple Watch) costs less than a thousand dollars, and another less than $500?”
They pretty much did that when they announced the different materials that would be used in different models. Anyone who is expecting a gold watch(not plated or filled or gold colored, but actually gold) to not be a helluva lot more than an aluminum watch is exceptionally ignorant when it comes to precious metals or is a complete airhead in general.
Before one of the trolls jumps in and claims I’m trying to make excuses because I’m one of the people who will gladly pay Apple thousands for a gold watch, sorry, nope. I don’t even wear my gold and platinum wedding band(purchased when both metals were a fraction of their current cost) except on very special occasions. I sport a titanium band most of the time. I would never buy myself a gold watch, smart or otherwise and if I were given one, it would be very rare that I would wear it, if ever. Stainless steel would be my preference(or even titanium, that would be real nice, but it’s a pain to work with and would carry a premium over stainless or aluminum for that reason). I’m just not, in any way shape or form, the target market for a gold anything. I’d rather drop 10k building a Darwin-OP, than buying a watch or jewelry.
The author of this opinion piece and some of the posters here should spend some time reading up on “precious metals” as well as pricing 18k gold watches(don’t even look at the big name brands, go look at cheap Chinese made ones if you think they’re expensive just because of the brands). If you’re bummed about dropping thousands on a gold watch, then real gold anything probably isn’t in your future. It’s not in mine, except as part of my long term financial holdings.
The story is simple, gold is currently $1,200/oz. Just the casing is worth nearly 3.5x the entry level variety.
The $350 version is targeted at the technologist, whereas the Edition version is targeted at the horologist. Those who appreciate horology have no issue spending $3k+ on a timepiece. The difference between a real timepiece and a smartwatch is that a mechanical timepiece will retain its value for years to come whereas a smartwatch will only be worth it’s value as scrap metal in a couple years.
Uh….the Apple Watch Edition is literally made of gold. ACTUAL GOLD. Why does Apple owe you or anyone an explanation for a high price? And why is it somehow a moral outrage?