“We are starting to get early reads on how Apple Watch pre-order mix is trending and there are a number of surprises. It is obvious why Apple will not disclose Apple Watch revenue data. By knowing which Watch collections are selling and at what price, it would be easier for competitors to reach conclusions on customer preferences,” Neil Cybart writes for Above Avalon. “Using early pre-orders reports and a few long-standing theories, the Apple Watch will likely be loosely guided by the premise behind the 80-20 rule, where approximately 80% of Apple Watch profits will come from 20% of Apple Watch customers. In essence, the Apple Watch and Edition collections will likely account for a small portion of sales, yet play a much bigger role in terms of Apple Watch profit. The implications are significant when contemplating how management will treat the Apple Watch line in subsequent years.”
“Apple will likely dedicate significant attention and resources to updating higher-end Apple Watch models and bands,” Cybart writes. “Rumors had indicated a platinum option priced higher than the current gold Edition models. Karl Lagerfeld’s custom Apple Watch with gold link bracelet will likely be available one day for more than $50,000. Marc Newson’s schooling and experience with jewelry design will likely play a major role in this effort. Apple is now a premium mass market luxury brand.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Apple Watch Edition is the world’s first luxwearable.
We can thank Apple Watch Edition buyers for helping to keep the prices low for Apple Watch and Apple Watch Sport. — MacDailyNews, March 31, 2015
For purchasing the world’s first luxwearable… exclusive treatment for Apple Watch Edition customers is to be expected. Something would be wrong if Apple wasn’t offering it. — MacDailyNews, March 30, 2015
The $17,000 Apple Watch Edition vastly separates Apple Watch from the stupidwatches. Editions are mobile billboards and perpetual interest-generators for Apple Watch and Apple Watch Sport that also elevate the perception of quality for both of those models. — MacDailyNews Take, March 27, 2015
Not exactly rocket science. 👀💥😱😀
MDN: Please end the attempt at coining the term luxwearable. It’s been a couple of weeks and not one single person has picked it up.
How about sticking to delivering a great Apple news service, as you have been doing? The marketing types can fight over the neologisms at the pub.
Especially since I haven’t seen a good unique definition of the term luxwearable. A wearable luxury device? Heck earrings and bracelet could fall in that category. Wearabletech might make more sense, but I’m miffed about the term myself, especially without a definition.
Call me crazy, but I believe the definition is contained in the very first sentence of MacDailynews’ Take:
“Apple Watch Edition is the world’s first luxwearable.”
(Brought to you by Carl’s Jr.)
And it’s still a stupid word.
Hey Brawndo Drinker. I’d say with what you’d given me that the “Apple Watch Edition” is an example of something that is luxwearable, but still no where near being a definition. It looks like the word is a combination of luxury and wearable, and as I pointed out that can mean a large number of luxury items that can be worn. There is no distinguishing an Apple Watch Edition from a diamond ring, as both are luxurious items that can be worn.
The concept of a wearable technology that is luxurious may be worthy of a word but it should incorporate technology to give luxtech, luxweartech, techwear or something of the sort.
As it stands though the value of the word so far is as an interesting arrangement of Alphabits circling the cereal bowl.
You apparently don’t realize that it isn’t available for sale to the public until April 24th. That would be next week. With that small bit of data, do you still wonder why no one is wearing them? LOL
I actually wouldn’t be surprised if 80% of the profits came from 5% of the unit sales.
Have to say its genius to be able to distinguish an otherwise identical product by the material and bands used with it to the point where you make enormous additional profits. Its a trick competitors just won’t be able to copy to any great degree and will immediately cut off an opportunity from traditional brand conscious watch makers being able to exploit the concept for their own products entry into the market whatever agreements they may try to forge with Intel, Android et al. On this occasion it truly looks like Apple has cut off opportunities for easy competition at the pass from both the bottom and the top without having to go for thin margins.
I wonder what will happen with Apple Watch Edition (AWE) generation one prices when the generation 2 is released.
Don’t know how much good it’ll be for competitors learning what the luxury breakout percentages are since a gold plated Android watch is just a gold plated turd on your wrist with zero cool. Might as well similarly brag about owning a cheaptastic Koby or Haier device. No one cares. Brandishing geek cheaptard cluelessness does that.
I call BS. Apple won’t sell anywhere near enough Watch Editions to make a lot of money, and the Watch Sport is going to easily be the best seller. Apple doesn’t do loss leaders, and it is highly protective of its profit margins. Apple may make slightly less than its typical 37%-40% profit margin on the Watch Sport, but it would make more than that on Watch and obviously significantly more on Watch Edition. Otherwise Apple risks selling a ton of Watch Sports for little profit, and perhaps few Watches and Watch Editions to make up for its profit margins. I don’t see Apple taking that kind of risk with a major new product line.
it’s called the Paretto principle and it applies to most retail operations , not just apple. The Pareto principle (also known as the 80–20 rule, the law of the vital few, and the principle of factor sparsity) states that, for many events, roughly 80% of the effects come from 20% of the causes