Tim Cook and Jony Ive have both spoken numerous times about the Apple Watch Edition being more scratch-resistant than standard 18-karat gold, describing it as ‘twice as hard’ as standard gold but but without explaining how. A patent application (via Leancrew) appears to explain this–and shows that Apple saves money on the gold into the bargain.
18-karat gold isn’t pure gold, it is defined as being 75% gold by weight. The remaining 25% of the mix is usually made up of one or more other metals, with silver and copper popular choices. The Apple patent describes mixing gold with low-density ceramic particles instead of metal.
Because weight, not volume, is what defines the karat gold standards, Apple’s watch could use less than a third the gold of a conventional alloy while still qualifying as 18-karat gold …
The company may also be planning an even more expensive Apple Watch than the $6-10,000 gold Edition model: the WSJ reports that “people familiar with the matter” say the company has studied platinum watch casings. High-end platinum watches typically sell for around three times the price of solid gold ones.
Don’t expect to see it announced today, however. The report makes no mention of Apple reaching any decision on a platinum model, merely saying that “he company isn’t expected to announce that on Monday.”
Daring Fireball‘s John Gruber is among those speculating that Apple may, though, announce a gold Link Bracelet for the Edition model, guessing that the total price of that combo may hit $20,000. His other price guesses seem a bit complex to me, but we’ll of course find out at 10am PT/1pm ET/5pm GMT.
We’ll naturally be bringing you full coverage of all the announcements.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.
Hmm…this is all speculation. Perhaps the headline should read that way.
The word “could” in the title very clearly conveys speculation.
I mentioned this last week on another article. In 2011 Hublot announced a gold alloy mixed with ceramic for some of their high end watches to make them practically indestructible. Not sure how the technique differs but they must do, or Apple wouldn’t of been awarded the patent.
It’s apatent application. I don’t think Apple has been awarded the patent yet.
Apple wouldn’t HAVE been awarded the patent
‘won’t have been awarded’ – even better
If you feel like correcting my grammar please feel free to get your own house in order. You’ve missed the period or “full stop” from the end of your sentence.
Just saying.
Sometimes minor differences can allow a very similar technique to be patented
“but but”
I’m hoping for a titanium version as it’s much less susceptible to damage from human sweat.
So is stainless steel. Both are non-corrosive. I wish they would take the SS version and PVD Titanium Nitride with Sputtered Gold. It looks like Gold, because they use enough real gold, but it doesn’t cost nearly as much as gold. That’s non-corrosive.
If this is true then, as I’ve predicted, the watch won’t be anywhere near $5000. Because how can you justify using a third of the gold and sell a watch for 5 grand.
The edition won’t be no more than $2000 and that still gives Apple a big profit margin based on the info in this story. And it makes sense cause even though Apple sells expensive products, they are not into exclusivity. They’ve always wanted to get their products in as many hands as possible. And a $5K watch doesn’t fulfill that mission.
Ya…and now how do you feel about it?
Maybe Apple’s waiting until they can ramp up production to release a Polycarb version for less than Aluminum. I’m sure they’d sell the piss out of the AppleWatch if it was made from PolyCarb and was $250/$299. That I could see down the road after they get production levels up. Platinum as another Limited Edition? Sure, why not. How about White Gold or Titanium, or Carbon Fiber.
I still think Falcon Luxury is going to take the Gold version, stick some diamonds around the perimeter of the case and jack the price up to astronomical levels to be the MOST EXPENSIVE AppleWatch.