“How other smart watches have done so far has no predictive value for how Apple’s smart watch will do,” Eric Jackson writes for TheStreet.
“People don’t know what they want until they use it. We can do all the surveys of potential customers that we want,” Jackson writes. “We can say: ‘Do you want to buy Apple’s iWatch, which we think will retail for $350?’ But how can anyone really answer this question? They might think they know what an iWatch is going to be, but of course they have no idea. Apple has always had it in its DNA to figure out what customers want rather than asking them what they want. It turns out that customers have no idea what they want. The only thing they know about smart watches so far are things like Pebble and Samsung’s Gear watch. But Apple’s version will probably be much different from either of those offerings.”
“Even so, there was a recent survey that said 14% of “watch wearers” would pay $350 for an iWatch,” Jackson writes. “Again, if history is a guide, once people actually see the Apple iWatch in action, they’ll find it much more appealing than they think it is going to be. Let’s assume that once folks see it, double the surveyed number will want one. That’s 28% of about one-third of the population who still wears a watch. That’s about 30 million potential iWatch sales just in the U.S.”
Much more in the full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Lone Wolf” for the heads up.]
Related articles:
After Google’s lackluster Android Wear demo, Apple’s iWatch is cleared for takeoff – June 26, 2014
Piper Jaffray survey: 14% of watch-wearers interested in hypothetical $350 Apple ‘iWatch’ – June 24, 2014
Analyst: Apple’s iWatch has round face; Apple confidently increasing their iWatch orders – May 28, 2014
If Apple had announced that their iPhone would cost over $650.00, how many would have said that they would love to have it? After seeing the iPhone release, every one’s jaw dropped and Bandroid, Samdung, Blackmary started copying iPhone next few years!
Here’s the problem with this statistic, which jumped out when I first saw it a few days ago –
They’re only talking about “watch wearers”. How many of us who quit wearing watching years ago will now want an iWatch, but aren’t even considered in this survey? I suspect there are more of us gadget guys out there who will want an iWatch than there are current watch wearers who jump over to the gadget.
I know many of you claim to have no interest. That’s fine. Some of us do, and some will even change their minds, as this article validly points out.
the watch market will be a small niche.
Do you know anything about the watch market out of interest. Because the watch market is hardly a niche as it stands and the iWatch isn’t really a watch anyway is it.
As you may have heard..
If Henry Ford had asked customers what they wanted they would have said a faster horse.
We need to wait and see what Apple actually releases and how it will fit in to our lives before we can even begin to decide if it’s something we actually want or need (or neither)
““We can say: ‘Do you want to buy Apple’s iWatch, which we think will retail for $350?’ But how can anyone really answer this question? ”
Easy, many people have stopped wearing watches because of their smart phone, though not all. A smart watch will provide the same info as the smart phone plus medical stats on the wearer. Those medical stats will have a small audience. This type of device will appeal to the curious affluent and kids. it can never be at the same level as a smart phone.
Anyone who is over 50 years old and healthy will want to stay that way.
I have a feeling the iWatch will be the ticket to longevity.
The iWatch may just become the fifth big money maker, as long as the iPod still makes big money.
“I have a feeling the iWatch will be the ticket to longevity.”
Or at least promoted as such. The baby boomers are all in that “over 50” category now (over 60, more like), and are the very definition of the market to promote to as such. That’s still a huge market, too, as it always has been. This may be the last big product targeted to that demographic. (They all already have life insurance policies in place!)
No, no and no.
A blood pressure monitor would all the tech you will need to keep an eye on vitals. Taking care of yourself with diet and exercise and seeing a doctor once in while will give much more bang for your buck.
This is exactly right. Now that I’m in my fifties I realize I’m not invulnerable nor going to live forever. Besides doing the basics, getting exercise and eating well, the biggest annoyance (and expense) is going to the doctor for tests and checkups.
If this device can even slightly reduce that it’s well worth it. Being able to show my doctor a detailed report will be a big help for both of us.
I’m especially interested in it including a UV exposure monitor. I do a lot of walking and I play golf. That has a strong overall positive effect on my health, but my father died of melanoma. Knowing how much exposure I’m potentially getting would help me strike a proper balance.
And of course just like the iPhone it will continue to improve over time, getting more comprehensive. And inventions will emerge. I would gladly have some sort of tiny sensing device implanted if it would help me monitor what’s happening inside, such as glucose and insulin levels, etc. etc. etc. The “watch” would be the hub that both collects and collates that data.
Apple is the only company i would trust with an implanted sensor, period .
It probably wouldn’t be Apple. It would be some medical device company. What do you mean by trust? Do you mean for safety or privacy? If it’s for privacy, the implant itself would only be capable of bluetooth and wouldn’t have any significant storage. It has to be very low-powered. The thing to worry about would be the device that’s reading the signals.
This may be the beginning of something new. We’ve all been asked to manage our financial futures leading up to retirement, and most of us actively manage our careers.
Apple may just show us how to manage our health. Imagine a desktop amino acid “3D printer” that can synthesize needed proteins for immediate repairs on the cellular level.
Now that’s a revolution…. but it must begin with good input. Garbage in/garbage out works at every level.
If it’ll repel mosquits, ticks, chiggers, etc., I’m in.
how about annoying untrue posts from apple haters, that would be a true repellant !-)