Is the steel version actually the cheap one?

[cmChimera]

That is actually not accurate. The original Retina MacBook Pro was priced rather high, especially since it omitted many features such as the SuperDrive, user replaceable RAM, and Ethernet. So much so, that Apple kept non-retina versions around an extra year to make sure there was a normal cost version. Aluminum iMacs have not been competitively priced in a long time. This coming from an owner of both a Retina MacBook Pro, and iMac.

I disagree entirely that the omission of those things you list devalue the product. At the time the high resolution panel was unprecedented, it came with a solid state drive, two thunderbolt ports, hdmi, and was lighter and thinner than the original. I remember doing the comparison before I bought one. Loading up a non-retina MacBook Pro to match the specs of the retina was actually MORE expensive than the retina model.

 

[eish2306]

If each version is made up as per photos and boxed the stores will have to keep 34 models in stock instead of 4 sport 4 stainless and 4 edition watches 2 colours 2 sizes and a selection of 34 or 17 bands (maybe less if the sports and SS bands are the same 30 or 15) depending on whether the straps can go on either size watch - surely it is easier to manage the straps independently to the watches? Especially when we assume you can buy separate straps so the stores would be stocking 34 watches and 34 straps with the watch comes with strap in the box idea?

 

[Julien]

If each version is made up as per photos and boxed the stores will have to keep 34 models in stock instead of 4 sport 4 stainless and 4 edition watches 2 colours 2 sizes and a selection of 34 or 17 bands (maybe less if the sports and SS bands are the same 30 or 15) depending on whether the straps can go on either size watch - surely it is easier to manage the straps independently to the watches? Especially when we assume you can buy separate straps so the stores would be stocking 34 watches and 34 straps with the watch comes with strap in the box idea?

The reverse argument is stocking 34 SKUs is far less expensive that having to pay labor to install watch bands and package the product. Also less customer inconvenience in wait time, which is worth its weight in gold.

The straps come in 38mm or 42mm sizes.

 

[eish2306]

The reverse argument is stocking 34 SKUs is far less expensive that having to pay labor to install watch bands and package the product. Also less customer inconvenience in wait time, which is worth its weight in gold.



The straps come in 38mm or 42mm sizes.

So 34 and 34 (or 30 if the SS and sport plastic straps are the same) v 12 and 34 - I'm sure in the keynotes they mentioned swapping straps so they are going to sell the straps - they are also easy to swap on and off - surely even the thickest customer will be able to slide in the chosen strap?

As for packaging have the apple watch box be H shaped the watch sits in the top and the stap box slots into the bottom - or have a draw cavity at the bottom of the watch box where the strap box slides into - would take the sales clerk two second to put together when getting your receipt and bag

I still think it will be sold with one band the White sports band, or the black if it is the darker colour - and all the other bands will be available - that way it will always be ready to go from the packet but the best way would be buy watch, buy strap?


Also how many generations until the strap dock changes?

 

[Rogifan]

Unless Apple is planning to eat the cost of the sport band they better not prepackage the watch with it. I don't want to pay for a band I'm not interested in just so it's easier to package/stock in store. Tim Cook has hired people from the luxury fashion industry who are responsible for the go to market/sales/retail strategy. One would hope they can figure out how to sell people the watch they want.

 

[cmChimera]

The sport band is included in the cost of the sport model which comes in at $350. I don't imagine including it in the other models would affect their price.

 

[Piggie]

Unless Apple is planning to eat the cost of the sport band they better not prepackage the watch with it. I don't want to pay for a band I'm not interested in just so it's easier to package/stock in store. Tim Cook has hired people from the luxury fashion industry who are responsible for the go to market/sales/retail strategy. One would hope they can figure out how to sell people the watch they want.

It's ok, I've figured it out for them

Web site.

Order watch body you want, then you are directed to the "choose your strap section" where you pick whatever strap you want, then, only when you have added one of the straps to your shopping card can you move to the checkout.

Until you have at least one strap added (and you can add more than one) you cannot progress to the online order payment stage.

There you see, I've solved it.

Think I should send Apple my bill for the simple answer

No one has to end up with a strap they don't want.

Apple does not have to guess which straps people will want with what bodies.

They are classed as separate items, but you must buy both.

Simple, Easy, Job done

 

[eish2306]

It's ok, I've figured it out for them



Web site.



Order watch body you want, then you are directed to the "choose your strap section" where you pick whatever strap you want, then, only when you have added one of the straps to your shopping card can you move to the checkout.



Until you have at least one strap added (and you can add more than one) you cannot progress to the online order payment stage.



There you see, I've solved it.



Think I should send Apple my bill for the simple answer



No one has to end up with a strap they don't want.



Apple does not have to guess which straps people will want with what bodies.



They are classed as separate items, but you must buy both.



Simple, Easy, Job done

Works for web, but what about upgrading when you have straps which would fit but want the new watch - assuming g2 take g1 straps -and if you wanted a different strap - also what about in store sales - having a large inventory of slightly different products just sounds like hell! -and would use a lot of wall space - or man hours when workers have to go out back to fetch every watch!
Also on the web could be like choosing an iPad - first which one then next line down is size and then next line down is strap
Like iPad is colour then size then wifi or 3G

 

[Piggie]

Works for web, but what about upgrading when you have straps which would fit but want the new watch - assuming g2 take g1 straps -and if you wanted a different strap - also what about in store sales - having a large inventory of slightly different products just sounds like hell! -and would use a lot of wall space - or man hours when workers have to go out back to fetch every watch!
Also on the web could be like choosing an iPad - first which one then next line down is size and then next line down is strap
Like iPad is colour then size then wifi or 3G

Well, it just seems easier to have a very large stock of straps, which will take up a tiny amount of space (very very small box) than to have customers saying "but I don't want one of those 5 straps, I want that other strap - You mean I have to buy the one I don't want, then pay extra for the one I do want on top?"

I do think you will be able to buy just to body in store.
What if you have your watch and expensive strap, and you smash the watch against something drop it, scratch against a wall.

Well sir you need to buy another strap.

No, that would be silly
It's just easier to not have bundles.

It would be like Apple saying the 128GB iPads have to be sold with 1 of these 4 case designs.

Then again, it's apple so who knows

 

[saberahul]

From the OP's first image, I'm sure OS X Yosemite is cheaper than the MacBook Air.

 

[extricated]

I give you something else to think about though, although this is also HIGHLY unlikely.

During the Keynote they announced that
Apple Watch would start at $349.

Apple Watch! Not Apple Watch Sport!

Exactly what I was thinking during the Keynote!
Also why I'm holding on to hope that the Sport comes in at a lower price point.

We can dream, right?
Soon, our dreams will either be crushed or realized.

 

[eish2306]

Exactly what I was thinking during the Keynote!

Also why I'm holding on to hope that the Sport comes in at a lower price point.



We can dream, right?

Soon, our dreams will either be crushed or realized.

I thought the same

 

[Mr. Buzzcut]

Exactly what I was thinking during the Keynote!
Also why I'm holding on to hope that the Sport comes in at a lower price point.

We can dream, right?
Soon, our dreams will either be crushed or realized.

Now why would they not get people excited with the real entry price? Have they ever announced a product and presented the pricing of higher-end models? "Mac Pro for "just" $5995!" You can dream all you want but I'll be less disappointed anticipating $350+.

Tangent alert...I have to say I really despise the word "just" next to Apple's pricing. It's a fluff word that has no meaning. It's a pitch man selling you something you don't want or need because it's "just" x and why not. All they have to do is make you want the product and the price starts to not matter in a "just take my money" sort of way.

 

[Berek]

The fitbit Surge is 249 and is nothing to write home about. There is no way the Sport will be below that.

 

[User*09]

Ok so this has been bothering me for a while now. If you go to the apple website or the store and look at any product category they are all listed from left to right, least expensive to most expensive.

Image

Image

Image

So with that being the case both during the keynote and now listed on the website they list the order as Watch, then sport, then edition.

[url=http://i.imgur.com/YmQfgwz.png]Image[/url]

If we are to believe that the sport edition is the cheap one, which is the overwhelming majority from everything I have read, then why on earth did apple all of the sudden break away from what they do in every other category and list the alleged cheap model in the center? Am I the only one that has thought this or is bothered by it?

The Apple Watch Sport will be $349. I WANT the SS Watch to be $449, but I think it will be around $500 and I think the Edition will be $949-$1050 minimum.

This watch is interesting its got it all but a heart sensor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9rgK4p3D7w

 

[eish2306]

The Apple Watch Sport will be $349. I WANT the SS Watch to be $449, but I think it will be around $500 and I think the Edition will be $949-$1050 minimum.



This watch is interesting its got it all but a heart sensor:



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9rgK4p3D7w

That does look good - a bit thick but good

 

[Piggie]

The Apple Watch Sport will be $349. I WANT the SS Watch to be $449, but I think it will be around $500 and I think the Edition will be $949-$1050 minimum.

This watch is interesting its got it all but a heart sensor:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9rgK4p3D7w

You 'could' be right with your pricing.
Though I do expect you are a bit on the low side on the Edition ones.

I'd tack on another 50% at least to that figure.

It really REALLY all depends on 2 simple factors for the Edition.

1: What is the wall thickness of the gold used for the case.
2: How much 'Luxury - Fashion Tax' will be added on top of it's actual cost to Apple to place the Edition model into the price bracket they wish it to occupy.

Only Apple knows the answers to these 2 basic points.
Well shall all have to wait and see

One thing though. I feel Apple will get the arse torn out of them if they price the Edition way WAY higher than it's value.

Yes, I know classic watch makers do this, but that's not Apple.
If the tech media upon stripping the watch down, find out it's a £349 watch with $1200 of gold, being sold for $5000 giving Apple a clear almost $3500 profit per watch it will be spattered all over the media, the newspapers etc etc about how much a con it is.

Hence I don't think Apple will do this. Unless it came with some MASSIVE bonus, like free watch upgrades for the next 10 years or something.

I could of course be wrong

----------

That does look good - a bit thick but good

There is a band also

http://youtu.be/IVCXvnuT4fI

Unfortunately, being honest I will have to say, the real life products, (that I've seen) don't match up to how nice the look in these computer renders, which is a shame

One day.... One day

 

[User*09]

You 'could' be right with your pricing.
Though I do expect you are a bit on the low side on the Edition ones.

I'd tack on another 50% at least to that figure.

It really REALLY all depends on 2 simple factors for the Edition.

1: What is the wall thickness of the gold used for the case.
2: How much 'Luxury - Fashion Tax' will be added on top of it's actual cost to Apple to place the Edition model into the price bracket they wish it to occupy.

Only Apple knows the answers to these 2 basic points.
Well shall all have to wait and see

One thing though. I feel Apple will get the arse torn out of them if they price the Edition way WAY higher than it's value.

Yes, I know classic watch makers do this, but that's not Apple.
If the tech media upon stripping the watch down, find out it's a £349 watch with $1200 of gold, being sold for $5000 giving Apple a clear almost $3500 profit per watch it will be spattered all over the media, the newspapers etc etc about how much a con it is.

Hence I don't think Apple will do this. Unless it came with some MASSIVE bonus, like free watch upgrades for the next 10 years or something.

I could of course be wrong

----------

Yeah, I did not want to go too high on my minimum guess, I was basically adding the Apple Sport and Apple Watch together and seeing how that price matched up with other watches similar in style (Gold, Stainless Steel).

I totally agree that Apple can't prove the Edition too high, if only because of battery life (which in my opinion is on par for the tech ( Apple et al) and what it can/will do).

 

[Trius]

Everyone is assuming the internals will be the same across all models. What if the sport (for example) had GPS due to it's added 'Sport' element to eliminate it's need for the iPhone for that task. This could increase the cost for the Sport version. While probably not, we don't know for sure. We've been given limited info at this point.

 

[Rogifan]

Everyone is assuming the internals will be the same across all models. What if the sport (for example) had GPS due to it's added 'Sport' element to eliminate it's need for the iPhone for that task. This could increase the cost for the Sport version. While probably not, we don't know for sure. We've been given limited info at this point.

Increased cost and reduced battery life. Sounds like a winner.

 

[balzmcfearson]

It's not necessarily that I doubt it, but more a question of why would Apple decide to do that for this one product category?

It's first because it's the one called apple watch. Not Apple watch something.

 

[Knowimagination]

It's first because it's the one called apple watch. Not Apple watch something.

So then during the keynote why did he not say "and watch sport starts at just $349"

Why just watch?

I know I am probably just over thinking this, but I really don't want to spend 500-1000 dollars for a SS with leather loop

 

[Rogifan]

So then during the keynote why did he not say "and watch sport starts at just $349"

Why just watch?

I know I am probably just over thinking this, but I really don't want to spend 500-1000 dollars for a SS with leather loop

I can't ever remember an Apple keynote where they gave a starting price that wasn't the cheapest price of said product. I'm sure when Tim said Watch he was referring to the overall product, not a specific collection.

 

[Julien]

Everyone is assuming the internals will be the same across all models. What if the sport (for example) had GPS due to it's added 'Sport' element to eliminate it's need for the iPhone for that task. This could increase the cost for the Sport version. While probably not, we don't know for sure. We've been given limited info at this point.

Because everyone is right. The Watch is almost unique in that ALL functions are on the one S1 chip. Since all Watches will have the S1 chip why would Apple 'limit' the functions of the more expensive SS/Edition's by disabling features?

Any additional features Apple might announce will probably be more wOS related. If they are hardware all will get them unless they make different S1 chip versions which is not too likely in gen 1 of this all in one chip.

 

[Jstuts5797]

Is the steel version actually the cheap one?

I rewatched the keynote last night and they were presented in this same order as well then. I'm with the OP I wouldn't be surprised if the sport was actually right in the middle. I'm sure with the right band combo the regular could probably out price the sport.... But I think if we look at just the cheapest versions of each, the sport will NOT be the cheapest. I honestly think we are going to see the biggest price differences in the bands rather than the actual watched (except for the gold.)

Also a bit off topic but does anyone else think calling the gold one "Apple Watch Edition" is kind of silly? They are ALL Apple watch editions... Unless you say it like Apple, watch edition, but then again they are all watches. It's like they left a word off the title it should be Apple Watch Gold Edition or something... But just addition sounds and looks silly.mi can't even say it without thinking I'm leaving a word out. Just makes no sense to me whatsoever. I remember commenting on it with my friend who watches the keynote with me and he had the same thoughts.