With the Apple Watch set to go on sale early this year, many people will be contemplating whether it’s worth shelling out hundreds of dollars for a device that is not as “timeless” as a Swiss Luxury watch. However, Neil Cybart believes that this shouldn’t be a problem for Apple since the company is positioning the Apple Watch as a “mobile computing facilitator worn on the wrist.”
Neil Cybart:
[su_quote] The Apple Watch and its strengths shouldn’t be compared to luxury watches, and more importantly, luxury watch strengths. Timelessness, or lack thereof, seems to be at the top of the list of lingering questions about Apple Watch. If a luxury watch can last the test of time and be passed down from generation to generation, how would Apple Watch compete? Who would pay thousands of dollars for a device that won’t stand the test of time? Timelessness won’t matter for Apple Watch since the Apple Watch isn’t a luxury watch. Instead, Apple Watch is a mobile computing facilitator worn on the wrist. The users will have just as much motive and desire to pass the device down to children or family as they would with an iPhone or iPad. By discussing price in context of luxury watches, I suspect many are jumping to the conclusion that the only reason someone will pay thousands of dollars for an Apple Watch is to wear it forever as a status symbol. Instead, people will pay thousands of dollars in order to have the opportunity to buy an Apple product that can be worn. The desire to upgrade to a newer, more advanced version in the future will likely be just as strong as it is with iPhone.[/su_quote]
