

Apple Watch sales down 90% since the opening week - jmduke
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/apple-watch-may-not-be-ticking-with-customers-2015-07-07

======
bobajeff
"Once everyone has a smartphone, they are supposed to go out and get a smart
watch, followed by smart eyeglasses, and so on. Or, at least, so goes the
theory."

That sounds like a very ill gotten theory. Do companies really expect people
to go out and by accessories that cost in the hundreds and add more stuff for
people to hull around that do roughly the same things?

No, If I'm buying a smart device it's because either the cost is so cheap it's
like buying extra USB cables or it's something to replace my other smart
device.

~~~
melling
History repeats itself and people start rattling off the basic litany of
complaints.

It's a first generation device for Apple. The first iPhone had to be plugged
into a computer. This watch is for early adopters, you know the 10-50 million
people who'd shell out the money.

The watch's abilities will greatly improve over time, thus becoming more
useful to another 500 million people.

~~~
adventured
500 million people who also won't want to pay $400-$600 for another smart
gadget when they have already paid $600 for their iPhone.

At that price point, smart watches will remain a very niche market. Just as
niche as $600 watches are today for consumers globally.

Android will end up dominating smart watches. They'll be made in China, and
they'll cost $50-$99. That will drive adoption in the hundreds of millions
globally.

~~~
melling
Yes, we _already know_ that Android will dominate wearables, as they do
smartphones. Android simply sells cheaper options. It's a bit irrelevant
though because Apple simply needs to cater to its current "small" market and
remain highly profitable.

As for the size of the market, I'd expect almost everyone on the planet to
want a wearable when you can use one to better monitor your health (heart,
blood pressure, sleep, etc), use it as a credit card, remote for lights and
garage door opener, key for house, etc.

7 billion people, 7 billion wearables.

~~~
eveningcoffee
Count me out. 7 billion minus 1. First I do not like watches, I have not used
one for more than 15 years. Second I do not like single companies to try to
steal more and more of our private information. So I do not like single
company to monitor my health, my credit card nor my garage door. Pop.

~~~
melling
You're a rounding error. A few hundred thousand more people became consumers
today.

[http://www.worldometers.info/world-
population/](http://www.worldometers.info/world-population/)

8 billion by 2025.

------
scottmwinters
To clarify, I'm not remotely an apple fanboy..but I dont think anybody
excepted to continue 20k watches/week. They have sold a lot. The initial sales
are done and thats fine.

Apple has a way with new versions of selling a lot all over again.

------
matt_s
How many people wear watches regularly now? After getting an iPhone I tended
to stop wearing a watch.

It just seems like there may be very niche uses but most features are already
on my phone so why bother? What would be the "killer" app that would generate
more sales, assuming they open up the platform?

~~~
wvenable
I wear a watch (Pebble) because I have an iPhone. The primary feature is my
phone can be always on silent.

~~~
matt_s
Just curious what use case this is? Is it that you want to see really
important email/texts when you are involved in a setting where having your
phone make noises is not preferred?

~~~
pfooti
I have a pebble. It's a lot less disruptive to glance at my watch when
something happens than it is to get out the phone. With my phone in my pocket,
I'm less likely to fidget with it. And yeah- with my watch vibrating, I can
leave the phone on silent all the time. If I want to disconnect, I just take
off the watch. It works really well for that.

------
leanthonyrn
I really wish Apple would have focused on some type of e-Strap. One that would
coordinate with my $1000 mechanical Robert Weil watch. If the e-strap came
from Montblanc, Google, Apple, or pebble I would not mind. As long as it
matched my R. Weil style and gave me usable functionality. Also, when I sent
it in to Robert Weil for service, they respected the e-Strap, even if it was
from Montblanc.

[http://techcrunch.com/2015/03/03/heres-a-closer-look-at-
the-...](http://techcrunch.com/2015/03/03/heres-a-closer-look-at-the-
montblanc-smart-band-for-fancy-watches/)

~~~
forgottenpass
I really really like the idea of a smart watch band for a handful of reasons,
but a smart watch is going to move more units.

A fitness tracker with a watchband form factor and can vibrate for phone
notifications would satisfy most of my smart watch desires (I wouldn't even
need a screen on it). I'd buy one of those in addition to the smartwatch I
have now, as I still wear my nice watch when I need to dress up. My smartwatch
is uglier than the apple watch, but don't think a black LED screen on a wrist
is ever a good look.

But smartphones have made many people stop wearing watches in general, and
fitness trackers aren't the most popular products either. And a secondary
screen (like in your link) for someone who doesn't want a timepiece in the
first place doesn't make sense, just give prime placement to one really nice
display.

Plus branding. People don't just want smart functionality in a good looking
watch, they want to be seen wearing an Apple Watch.

------
jpeggg
Not surprised. Tried an Apple Watch (Sport) for a week or so before returning
it for a refund. I just couldn't really work out what it was good for, apart
from delivering notifications to my wrist. I also wasn't particularly
impressed by the battery life, I think I'd need 2 days (for days where I
didn't have the chance to charge it overnight) to feel confident using it.

------
shiftpgdn
This isn't surprising. Development for the watch is still heavily locked down.
Once the Apple watch is opened up more and has a "system seller" I feel like
sales will rebound.

------
rcconf
I found the Apple Watch to be too expensive and it's the only reason I haven't
bought one.

If it was around 299 for the non sport edition, I think I'd be sold.

~~~
astrodust
If it was $299 for the non-sport edition, the watch market would implode.

Apple's doing a lot of companies a favour by keeping prices high enough for
there to be room for competition.

------
evadem
Good. Apple isn't as original as it used to be, but it remains just as
restrictive. They can now demonstrate to the world that their previous
successes were in spite of their impulse to be controlling, and companies such
as Microsoft can stop aping every single Apple restriction and money grubbing
$99 fee in cargo-cultish attempts to gain Apple profitability.

------
eonw
this doesn't come as a surprise to me. they are over priced, have to be
charged too often and do too little to improve the users life.

