“Some [Apple Watch] models will also be Apple’s most expensive products in more than 30 years,” Tim Bradshaw reports for The Financial Times. “The company is widely expected to put a price tag of at least $10,000 for the gold Apple Watch Edition when it shows off the devices at a press event in San Francisco on Monday.”
“According to the details released so far, the premium device will offer no additional features or functions above those in the aluminium Apple Watch Sport, which starts at just $350,” Bradshaw reports. “Yet the volume of gold alone in the new device’s 18-carat casing and buckle will make it Apple’s priciest gadget since the Lisa, a $10,000 computer released in 1983.”
“For some high-end customers, even $10,000 is a small price to pay for a watch; the fact it will be obsolete in two or three years merely adds to the ostentation of its purchase,” Bradshaw reports. “‘They know if you buy a gold Apple Watch that it’s not going to be a long-term investment,’ says Ariel Adams, editor of luxury timepiece site A Blog to Watch. ‘They just want to show off.'”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Watching the reactions of Joe Six Pack consumer electronics buyers to the price of the top-of-the-line Apple Watch Edition is going to be interesting, but witnessing the slack-jawed expressions quickly morph into red-faced fits of sputtering rage and resentment from the great unwashed BOGO Android settlers is going to be absolutely delectable!
I think the price will be $10,000 for the larger gold Edition Apple Watch, with a gold band. To emphasize the “luxury,” there will be no “99” pricing. And the pricing will “start” at the highest point, and go down, instead of starting at the lowest point and go up.
“Here’s the very best Apple Watch you can buy. It’s $10,000. If that’s too much for you, you can get it with a nice leather band for less… Shall we go with the top choice?”
I’m sorry, but I have to disagree. Below is a quote from apple about the steel link bracelet band. It sounds incredibly expensive. I expect a minimum price of $1,500, maybe much more. And that’s just a steel band. If Apple makes the same band in gold, I could see them charging $10,000 just for the 18ct gold link bracelet.
“Crafted from the same 316L stainless steel alloy as the case, the Link Bracelet has more than 100 components. The machining process is so precise, it takes nearly nine hours to cut the links for a single band. In part that’s because they aren’t simply a uniform size, but subtly increase in width as they approach the case. Once assembled, the links are brushed by hand to ensure that the texture follows the contours of the design. The custom butterfly closure folds neatly within the bracelet. And several links feature a simple release button, so you can add and remove links without any special tools. “
Apple did not yet announce full-yellow/pink gold bracelets for their watches.
We have to keep in mind that when we have read $10-30k price range for golden Apple Watch, that assumed version with fully golden band.
Golden watches with any other bands will cost significantly less.
I’m going to go out on a limb and say that the Apple Watch is a STOOPIT idea!
Will they still sell… yeah, and so did Pet Rocks, Milli Vanilli albums, and fanny packs, to be sure.
I own lots of Apple products and gadgets, but even for me this watch is a useless device that’s desperately in search of a vapid purpose!
Let’s say you are right, and 9 out of 10 iPhone (5 or later) owners agree with you during the first year of Apple Watch. You’d be “right,” yet absolutely wrong. Because if the remaining 1 out of 10 decides to buy an Apple Watch, Apple sells 50 million during its first year.
That’s the brilliance of how Apple has set up the situation to guarantee success, even if “only” 10% (of potential customers) decides to buy an Apple Watch. That’s 10% of existing Apple’s customers. It’s Apple preaching to its choir.
I’m going to saw off that limb and say that a Pet Rock had more sense than you. As for vapid, I would also say that your comment fits that description.
This has just come in across my desk!
Nearly 7 billion people will not buy the Apple Watch. Only a small fraction of that number will actually buy it. Maybe only as few as 20 million each year ( less than 0.3% ). How can Apple be that “STOOPIT”?
Your comment is “STOOPIT.” according to a survey of “nearly 7 billion people.”
All these pricing rumours. Seems like such BS. Apple prepping the market so they can impress us. This is Apple controlled leaks.
The watches will not be this expensive. It’s insane. Apple is a consumer company. Offering a watch for sale for $10,000 is terribly confusing for consumers. They won’t do this. And besides, for $10,000 you can get a very very nice traditional time piece. I don’t see the Apple watch getting this much of a price tag, gold or no gold.
If Apple does this, it’ll be as confusing as buying Beats and selling Beats headphones. Can you actually believe when you walk into BestBuy or FutureShop with the big Beats display that it’s an Apple product! What a bunch of BS. Beats sucks, bad. Overpriced junk. And it’s Apple folks!
Tim Cook has yet to prove himself.
Correct. Apple’s worst case is to convince the general public that they are no longer sought after as Apple customers. Make it uncomfortable to go into an Apple Store (I’ll never go into Tiffany’s or Burberry because I would feel unwelcome, or at least condescension from the wait staff and I would feel pretentious or needy if I used their products ) and people will stay away by self-selection.
You comment would make sense, IF the gold Apple Watch was the only model.
Wrong. A consumer technology watch selling a watch for $10,000 is insane and stupid. It would be by far the most expensive product they offer. And it’s just a watch. Apple makes products that appeal to the masses. This is not a product that fits or makes sense in some high end designer watch category. It is nothing of the sort. Just because you out gold on it doesn’t make it a luxury item worth $10,000.
Wait til Mondy: bet u a million bucks it won’t be near that much.
That’s why there’s a version that sells for $300-400. And another one that will probably be $500-1000, depending on selected band. Most of the Apple Watches sold will be those two versions, not the $10,000 (or whatever price) version that has gold casing.
NOTE: In my original first post, I said the “$10,000 Apple Watch” would have a gold band. Currently, there is no gold band shown as a choice on the Apple Watch web pages. A gold band would probably have twice the gold content of the Apple Watch casing. If there is no gold band as a choice (the currently shown choices are “sport” and leather), then the price of the gold Apple Watch itself is likely to be more like $4000. Adding a gold band is what makes my hypothetical “premium” choice a “$10,000 Apple Watch.”
You read my post and now backtracked on ur $10,000 prediction. You know that price is way too high after I pointed out that it’s not consistent with the company and doesn’t fit its customer base.
I’ll get even more specific. Apple may get some patents on how to make gold harder and use less of it for 18k gold. And that they may be ordering mega tons of gold this year. This implies them offering a gold watch for a competitive price to appeal to larger numbers of people to achieve economies of scale.
My prediction is the gold Apple watch will cost $2,499 or less. And come Monday, we can come back here and I’ll feed you the crow. In other words, it won’t be $4,000 either.
No, READ my first post. The one at the very top. I obviously wrote it before you wrote anything… 🙂
Your first post:
1. You are wrong, the gold watch even with a gold band will not cost $10 k.
2. You are wrong, Apple WILL follow the 99 pricing scheme and they will start from the bottom up.
3. You are wrong: the Gold Edition with gold band WILL NOT cost $4k.
Long term investment????
What does Ariel Adams know about Apple products?
You would think that he was not born when a working Apple 1 computer from 1976 was sold for $387,750 at an online auction!
That is 38 times more than the estimated $10,000 for the Gold edition of the Apple watch and that by the way is nearly half the price of another sold a month previously.
Who will rid us off shoddy desktop journalism I beg you?
http://uk.pcmag.com/cpus-components-products/14320/news/old-school-apple-1-fetches-387k-at-auction
That’s a function of rarity, not long-term investment value. 🙂 Like a rare baseball card, which is just an old piece of cardboard. Even the gold Edition Apple Watch will sell in the millions; it will never be as rare as an Apple I. But it will also never sell for less than its gold content.
Apple should have a trade-in program for the gold Edition Apple Watch. Once you buy a gold Edition Apple Watch, you’re part of an exclusive “club.” You can exchange it for a brand new one, “forever,” even if its broken, by paying a “relatively” small fee (something like $1000). It pays for reclaiming the gold in the old one, and the manufacturing cost of the new one (minus the cost of gold). This will make it more like buying something very expensive with long-term functionality.
That’s a really good idea. If I could upgrade the top of the line watch every year I would be more interested.
Buying one as a present would also make more sense, if it would have some lasting upgradable value.
If the gold has its molecules packed tighter, as we’re hearing, making the gold 50% harder… mustn’t it use more gold for the same volume?
Gold is made harder by making it an alloy with another metal. So, the harder gold alloy has LOWER gold content than pure gold. It’s not a function of “density.” You can’t pack more gold in the volume of a coin by “pounding on it.”
Ive said the following, a quote from the financial times article published today:
“Ive explains how the molecules in Apple gold are closer together, making it twice as hard as standard gold. And, in case you were wondering, Apple’s cold-forged steel is 40 per cent more durable than regular steel. ”
So…
That’s just marketing talk. “Apple gold” is 18-karat gold. That means it is 18 parts gold and 6 parts something else (or 75% gold). It’s the “something else” that provides the increased hardness. It’s possible that the alloying process arranges the gold atoms, with the other metal atoms, in a way that improves hardness, like some secret method used by ancient Japanese sword makers. But in terms of gold content, it’s still 18-karat, like gold used in jewelry.
And the second sentence of your quote is about the stainless steel alloy, not gold.
Cool. Thank you
Actually they have learned to infuse molecules into materials. Remember google glass. It is scratch resist cause of a surface infusion process.
Just saying.
Gorilla glass. Darn spell checker. Lol
I doubt that Ive is a metallurgist.
He doesn’t have to be. He is smart enough to consult the best in the world. He also bought Steve’s jet so he can just fly there.
18k gold contains the same percentage of gold (18/24, or 75%) no matter what alloy. You can alter the color and material properties of the gold alloy by changing the type and ratios of the alloy metals. I believe that copper is used to make rose gold, for instance.
It will be interesting to learn more about the gold alloy in the Edition.
There are always people who will pay for luxury and status and apple is a viable medium for that crowd’s urges. Does anyone remember the “I am Rich” app that sold for $1000? It had no functionality, just displayed an image of a gem on the iPhone screen. It was available for only a day in the app store before Apple pulled it. During its few hours it sold 8 copies! Oh, yeah… people will pay for prestige via an apple device.
Only Tim and a few others know, but certainly not the writer of this piece.
lots of apple computers have cost more than $10,000 when additional memory, disk space, bigger screen, etc. is added, not even considering inflation.
Not going to be $10k.
$2499 for the face
Pure speculation with a misleading title intended as click bait !
That’s what I love about MDN. We get the guts of the story without having to be counted as a click.
If you like a story, be sure to click on it.
Crappy article – skip it.
Wear it for 3 years and that’s just $9.13 per day!
There goes Starbucks. 😉
A souped up Mac Pro with an Apple monitor (the Lisa came with a monitor) can easily top $10,000.
It tells time too. 😉
Yeah, but have you seen the size of those wrist bands?
You’ll get an amazing arm workout whenever you raise it to check the time, too! 🙂
Yeah, but get TWO so you don’t become muscle bound in one arm.
Hulk SMASH little man!
I would not be surprised if Apple offers an upgrade for the Gold Apple watch when Apple Watch II comes out . . . someday.
NO. The highest end Apple Edition watch will NOT be $10,000. Consider me laughing and laughing. You can hit me if I’m wrong, gently. 😉
Now, if Apple included a FOREVER warranty that included replacing the computer HW & SW every year… Then you can’t hit me. 😆
Hulk SMASH anyway!