In the cut-throat battle for wrist real estate, the release of the Apple Watch has been met with both praise for ushering the coming “wearable’s revolution” as well has a verbose skepticism from watch purists. In her blog, Samantha explores Apple’s rationale behind the device and asks the question “will the iWatch soon become the new symbol of status in the watch market?” to the void of cyberspace. Yet, from the seething mass of Comm 101 bloggers a single yet crystal clear voice rises to answer such a bold query. This answer is a resounding, I don’ think so.
The major rational behind my position rests with the incentives the wealthy have to purchase luxury time pieces. Samantha argues that perhaps because the Apple watch provides more functionality than luxury time pieces, the wealthy will be swayed to switch their preferences, but I would disagree. Individuals who purchase Rolex’s or Louis Vutton bags do not appear to be terribly concerned with functionality. If this we’re true, digital watches, which typically have far more features than analogue watches, would have a far larger share of the luxury market. Instead what makes brands like Omega or Breitling desirable to the rich is the prestige associated with them. While Apple products have an up-scale status associated with them, this pales in comparison with the bourgeois jingle of ‘Rolex’ or ‘Patek Philipe’ which adequately feeds the egos of the wealthy. For this reason, Apple’s iWatch makes a poor substitute for the high end timepieces of Switzerland.
The world of wearable’s is also a fairly young phenomenon and it may take considerable time for them to penetrate the market. What is even more telling for Apple is the early entry of their competitors into the market. Samsung’s Smart Watch and Motorola’s Moto 360 both released years before Apple’s product even hit the market, unlike Apple’s Iphone and Ipad which led their respective markets by releasing before competitors. This means that Apple’s competitors have an advantage in perfecting their interfaces as newer generation’s of their products can be released.
Yet even if the iWatch can solidify its position as the premiere wearable, I would still contend that it would not have the ability to usurp more prominent luxury brands. Often luxury watches are purchased as investments to be passed down family lines. Swiss made analog watches are especially adept at not requiring constant updates or needing to be frequently recharged which makes them well suited in this regard. Additionally, Apple products as well as any tech product in general tend to become obsolete fairly quickly as new and improved versions of products get released, the iPhone being the perfect example of such. Passing a luxurious but obsolete piece of technology like the Apple Watch down to the next generation would be akin to giving them a gold plated first generation iMac, which seems absurd.
At the end of the day, I think the question comes down to target segments. The Apple Watch will certainly sell an enormous number of units to Apple fans, hipsters and tech-savy millennials, but I doubt it will be a game changer for luxury time pieces. However, only time will tell.
References:
It’s an Apple Watch Revolution, stupid – Cody Willard
iWant and iWatch – Samantha Lavin
Image 1: Apple Watch
Image 2: Rolex Ad
Image 3:The iPhone Dynasty
