6 ms·

I think his $5k estimate is much stronger than his $20k estimate. An Apple Editions is not a Patek Phillippe. There is a dramatically different replacement cy

I think his $5k estimate is much stronger than his $20k estimate. An Apple Editions is not a Patek Phillippe. There is a dramatically different replacement cycle which means that any attempt to cut and paste lux strategies is going to either fail entirely, or narrow the market so thoroughly as to be indistinguishable from failure.

twoodfin 12y ago
That's assuming there's no upgrade story to be told at the launch event. I agree it would be a little weird coming from the modern Apple, but I just can't see a marketing pitch that sells even a "merely" $5,000 device that's functionally equivalent to a $350 one and essentially guaranteed to be obsolete within 5 years. Obviously there's a market that can afford to treat such a luxury as disposable, but that doesn't seem like a large enough market to justify creating the Edition line. They're going to sell these things (at least partially) through upgraded Apple Stores, and presumably those stores will have to offer (possibly off-site) jewelry-like fitting and repair services. How much of an engineering obstacle would it be, really, to guarantee that the next N generations of Watch internals will be able to be retrofitted into the Editions? Probably with a nice markup on the labor, too! After all, if there's one thing they're good at, it's continuous miniaturization. I think it would dramatically expand the market for the high end models. If it extended down to the stainless tier, I'd certainly buy a much more expensive Gen 1 version.
- guan 12y ago
  Or the watches will have significant trade-in value because they can ditch the electronics and melt down the gold.
  - aetherson 12y ago
    Gold currently sells at $1200 per oz. Looks like smart watches are typically around 2oz in weight, though presumably a gold smart watch would be heavier. On the other hand, presumably also a large amount of the weight is non-gold. And you'd obviously pay a penalty for the cost of removing the non-gold bits and recycling the gold. So, overall: The pure commodity value of the gold might significantly defray the cost of a hypothetical $5k aWatch, but not very much of the cost of a hypothetical $20k aWatch.
- sneak 12y ago
  As long as a watch powers on and shows the correct time, it is not obsolete.
- gjoeworm 12y ago
  That's absolutely right. I'm assuming that these will have extremely limited upgradability.
mstolpm 12y ago
What if the innards would be upgradable? Or owners could exchange the edition models for a newer model in store paying only a "modest" upgrade fee? I'd think Apple is aware that the edition models don't follow the one to two year upgrade cycles of a smartphone. So, some kind of investment protection would be necessary.
djrogers 12y ago
The $20k estimate is for an edition watch with a gold link bracelet, which would presumably outlive the watch itself. Without the gold bracelet his estimate is a $10k starting point, which seems crazy but China. I'd also expect one of two things to surface here - either the watch forever remains so incredibly lightweight in what it can do without the phone that upgrades are less necessary, or there will be an upgrade program for the expensive watches. If there's an upgrade program (i.e. replace the S1 with S2/3/4 and upgrade the battery yearly) then I'd actually expect these gen1 edition watches to become quite the collector's items - especially a few years from now when there are only a handful of gen1s around but far more gen2/3/4 watches.
bornabox 12y ago
You do realize, that a nice luxury watch costs easily 20k, 30, 50k or even 100k. It's a whole other category. 20K definitely doesn't sound totaly out of the ballpark for a 18K Watch with 18K Gold bracelet.

twoodfin 12y ago

That's assuming there's no upgrade story to be told at the launch event. I agree it would be a little weird coming from the modern Apple, but I just can't see a marketing pitch that sells even a "merely" $5,000 device that's functionally equivalent to a $350 one and essentially guaranteed to be obsolete within 5 years. Obviously there's a market that can afford to treat such a luxury as disposable, but that doesn't seem like a large enough market to justify creating the Edition line. They're going to sell these things (at least partially) through upgraded Apple Stores, and presumably those stores will have to offer (possibly off-site) jewelry-like fitting and repair services. How much of an engineering obstacle would it be, really, to guarantee that the next N generations of Watch internals will be able to be retrofitted into the Editions? Probably with a nice markup on the labor, too! After all, if there's one thing they're good at, it's continuous miniaturization. I think it would dramatically expand the market for the high end models. If it extended down to the stainless tier, I'd certainly buy a much more expensive Gen 1 version.

guan 12y ago
Or the watches will have significant trade-in value because they can ditch the electronics and melt down the gold.
- aetherson 12y ago
  Gold currently sells at $1200 per oz. Looks like smart watches are typically around 2oz in weight, though presumably a gold smart watch would be heavier. On the other hand, presumably also a large amount of the weight is non-gold. And you'd obviously pay a penalty for the cost of removing the non-gold bits and recycling the gold. So, overall: The pure commodity value of the gold might significantly defray the cost of a hypothetical $5k aWatch, but not very much of the cost of a hypothetical $20k aWatch.
sneak 12y ago
As long as a watch powers on and shows the correct time, it is not obsolete.
gjoeworm 12y ago
That's absolutely right. I'm assuming that these will have extremely limited upgradability.

mstolpm 12y ago

What if the innards would be upgradable? Or owners could exchange the edition models for a newer model in store paying only a "modest" upgrade fee? I'd think Apple is aware that the edition models don't follow the one to two year upgrade cycles of a smartphone. So, some kind of investment protection would be necessary.

djrogers 12y ago

The $20k estimate is for an edition watch with a gold link bracelet, which would presumably outlive the watch itself. Without the gold bracelet his estimate is a $10k starting point, which seems crazy but China. I'd also expect one of two things to surface here - either the watch forever remains so incredibly lightweight in what it can do without the phone that upgrades are less necessary, or there will be an upgrade program for the expensive watches. If there's an upgrade program (i.e. replace the S1 with S2/3/4 and upgrade the battery yearly) then I'd actually expect these gen1 edition watches to become quite the collector's items - especially a few years from now when there are only a handful of gen1s around but far more gen2/3/4 watches.

bornabox 12y ago

You do realize, that a nice luxury watch costs easily 20k, 30, 50k or even 100k. It's a whole other category. 20K definitely doesn't sound totaly out of the ballpark for a 18K Watch with 18K Gold bracelet.