5 ms·

Likewise, smart watches used to cost in the neighborhood of $100 until Apple Watch came on the scene and now everyone thinks it’s normal to pay $300 for a smart

Likewise, smart watches used to cost in the neighborhood of $100 until Apple Watch came on the scene and now everyone thinks it’s normal to pay $300 for a smart watch. It was ridiculously overpriced when it started, and it’s still ridiculous now

samatman 6y ago
And they used a bit of textbook marketing magic to do it. Remember the Apple Watch Edition? The one with a gold case that cost 17 grand? The point wasn't to sell it, although there's a stratum of customer who always get the most expensive version of whatever they're getting. The point was to make the entry-level price look reasonable, and it worked.
- jeanjogr 6y ago
  More than make the price reasonable, I would wager it was to anchor the Apple Watch in the "watch" category, rather than the "electronic gadget" category in people's mind. It's not some $XXX toy for notifications and whatever. Much like watches, it is as much about functionality as it about style. Much like watches, it both exists in a expensive, luxury form and in an everyday form. You're buying a Swatch, with Rolex available if you want - not a fitibit.
  - jiveturkey 6y ago
    on top of that, they created their own gold alloy for it. One that allowed them to use less gold at the same karat weight! For that, you paid a premium. Genius.
    - sneak 6y ago
      The melt value of the gold was well under $3000, for a $17000 watch. Even it it had been solid 24k 99.9 fine (I believe it was 14k gold), it would have been a small fraction of the cost, and a low volume item to boot. I doubt the custom alloy contributed significantly to their margin. IIRC most gold watches are 12-14k for durability.
fsflover 6y ago
That's why I have big hopes for PineTime open-source smartwatch for $25.
rootusrootus 6y ago
To be fair, those $100 smartwatches were far less than a third of the capability of an Apple Watch.
- diego_moita 6y ago
  I have 3 Pebble Time watches, 2 of them still in the box, to replace someday the one I wear for already 3 years. Paid $150.00 for each of them. I wouldn't trade any of my Pebbles for a Apple Watch. Edit: what I mean is that I consider the Pebble far superior to the AW: customizable and easier to program, with a longer lasting battery and display always on.
  - SulfurHexaFluri 6y ago
    That doesn't say anything about the parent comment. I also had the pebble time steel but now use an apple watch s6. The AW probably does 4x what the pebble did making it look like a bulky notifications window on my arm.
  - rootusrootus 6y ago
    > I consider the Pebble far superior to the AW: customizable and easier to program, with a longer lasting battery and display always on. Sure, but this argument can be easily taken to its logical absurdity. Someone who just needs a watch that shows the time & date and has a stopwatch can get a Casio which accurately does all this and has a battery that lasts years, in addition to an always-on display (note: for what it's worth, the Apple Watch also has an always-on display). From that perspective a Casio is vastly superior to both a Pebble and an Apple Watch ;-).
    - bookofjoe 6y ago
      Also, you get a frisson of recognition each time you see the star of an action movie wearing your F-91W. >Introduced in 1989, it is popular for its low price [$12.95] and long battery life. Annual production of the watch is 3 million units per year.
    - danShumway 6y ago

samatman 6y ago

And they used a bit of textbook marketing magic to do it. Remember the Apple Watch Edition? The one with a gold case that cost 17 grand? The point wasn't to sell it, although there's a stratum of customer who always get the most expensive version of whatever they're getting. The point was to make the entry-level price look reasonable, and it worked.

jeanjogr 6y ago
More than make the price reasonable, I would wager it was to anchor the Apple Watch in the "watch" category, rather than the "electronic gadget" category in people's mind. It's not some $XXX toy for notifications and whatever. Much like watches, it is as much about functionality as it about style. Much like watches, it both exists in a expensive, luxury form and in an everyday form. You're buying a Swatch, with Rolex available if you want - not a fitibit.
- jiveturkey 6y ago
  on top of that, they created their own gold alloy for it. One that allowed them to use less gold at the same karat weight! For that, you paid a premium. Genius.
  - sneak 6y ago
    The melt value of the gold was well under $3000, for a $17000 watch. Even it it had been solid 24k 99.9 fine (I believe it was 14k gold), it would have been a small fraction of the cost, and a low volume item to boot. I doubt the custom alloy contributed significantly to their margin. IIRC most gold watches are 12-14k for durability.

fsflover 6y ago

That's why I have big hopes for PineTime open-source smartwatch for $25.

rootusrootus 6y ago

To be fair, those $100 smartwatches were far less than a third of the capability of an Apple Watch.

diego_moita 6y ago
I have 3 Pebble Time watches, 2 of them still in the box, to replace someday the one I wear for already 3 years. Paid $150.00 for each of them. I wouldn't trade any of my Pebbles for a Apple Watch. Edit: what I mean is that I consider the Pebble far superior to the AW: customizable and easier to program, with a longer lasting battery and display always on.
- SulfurHexaFluri 6y ago
  That doesn't say anything about the parent comment. I also had the pebble time steel but now use an apple watch s6. The AW probably does 4x what the pebble did making it look like a bulky notifications window on my arm.
- rootusrootus 6y ago
  > I consider the Pebble far superior to the AW: customizable and easier to program, with a longer lasting battery and display always on. Sure, but this argument can be easily taken to its logical absurdity. Someone who just needs a watch that shows the time & date and has a stopwatch can get a Casio which accurately does all this and has a battery that lasts years, in addition to an always-on display (note: for what it's worth, the Apple Watch also has an always-on display). From that perspective a Casio is vastly superior to both a Pebble and an Apple Watch ;-).
  - bookofjoe 6y ago
    Also, you get a frisson of recognition each time you see the star of an action movie wearing your F-91W. >Introduced in 1989, it is popular for its low price [$12.95] and long battery life. Annual production of the watch is 3 million units per year.
  - danShumway 6y ago