Apple smartwatch conference - March 9th
- Thread starter mitheor
- Start date
- Status
It hurts to see you stretch to create these strawman arguments. I have never heard of an analog based HDMI cable, by the way.
Everyone here will tell you that the $100 Monster HDMI cable is more akin to a commodity than a differentiated product, and an Apple product is more on the other side of the spectrum, more akin to a differentiated product than a commodity. Or do you think that Monster's HDMI cable isn't overpriced?
Angelus Errare
Banned
So retina Macbook Air, discontinuing the non retina Macbook Pro (or turning it into something else), Apple Watch?
I won't lie... this is probably the biggest piece of bullshit I've read in a while, and I do read police shooting PR statements.
It probably is just a simple vibration and not gonna give you an orgasm.
... Now they should come out with the Apple Cockring wearable.
So you've tried one have you?
Marty Chinn
Member
Where did I say HDMI cables were analog? Monster makes various audio and video cables not just HDMI cables. A lot of their cables are analog based. Most people here consider ALL Monster cables overpriced, not just the HDMI ones. Thus, while the HDMI will have almost zero difference based on build construction, there is an argument from Monster that has some substance when it comes to their analog cables. Despite that, people will still tell you even those cables are overpriced.
Plus the point in all this is how one can perceive something is overpriced despite a successful company and business model is built around it. People see the function and performance of one product and compare it to another. One of those factors is style and build construction which costs a premium. That is something that is used to defend the high cost of Apple products all the time. If you want another example, Beats headphones is a perfect one.
We were discussing the $100 HDMI cable.
Most people here consider ALL Monster cables more akin to an undifferentiated commodity that may be substituted with another cable. A commodity is overpriced with reference to the market for duplicate commodities.
For differentiated products, an unsuccessful product will usually determine whether a product is overpriced.
There is no binary distinction of course. But most people will agree that Monster sells items that are more akin to a commodity than a differentiated product, and an Apple or even Beats product is more on the other side of the spectrum, more akin to a differentiated product than a commodity.
Ingueferroque
Banned
Dude, don't start with this shit argument.
I think most people would say that you don't get any real benefit from a Monster cable, where's there is something tangible with a MacBook over something that has the same specs and is cheaper (weight, build quality, battery life, etc.).
Once you start looking for similar Windows laptops you're in that price range. Thinking of what some of my friends have bought over the last five/six years (carbon-fibre Sony Vaio Z, Asus Zen ultra book, the latest Dell XPS 13) they've all been £1,000+
Once you start looking for similar Windows laptops you're in that price range. Thinking of what some of my friends have bought over the last five/six years (carbon-fibre Sony Vaio Z, Asus Zen ultra book, the latest Dell XPS 13) they've all been £1,000+
Dreamwriter
Member
I don't think they'd make a blatant lie about something that can (and will) be easily tested. They clearly talk about it as a feature, the ability to send positional taps to other people as a way to communicate (three taps left to right apparently means "it's time to leave the party"...) That wouldn't be possible with "a simple vibration".
It is a Apple Keynote day tradition to indulge Marty to pass the time.
Marty Chinn
Member
We were talking about Monster's business in general, not just their HDMI cable. I simply used their HDMI cable as an example of one of their products. All cables are not made equal and that even includes HDMI cables to a degree. There's a certain level of build construction that does affect the overall quality of the cable and that is an argument to defend Apple products all the time. It's a common argument that you just can't take the technical sum of the parts and compare with Apple products because the build construction and quality weigh in on that. Monster lives and sells off that premium build quality just like Apple makes it a significant factor for its products.
I mentioned Beats in my last post and most people on this forum will tell you Beats are overpriced too. Products succeed or fail based on perceived value, functionality, trust in the product and company, marketing and many other factors. A product failing isn't solely based on it being overpriced. Nor does a successful product mean that something can't be considered overpriced. Apple makes quality products but pretty much all of their products have comparable products on the market and that's what people compare it to. Otherwise, you're trying to suggest that no product out there that is successful that isn't a commodity could ever be considered overpriced by people. If you don't like Monster as an example, then Beats most certainly is one. The term Apple Tax exists for a reason.
true. It's just how apple loves to word shit in the most bullshit flowery language possible that always gives me the itches, and I generally like their stuff (although ios 7 and 8 have been a huge disappointment for me stability wise).
Our watch can vibrate and you can send morse code to other people.
which is why I'm not in marketing :3
I don't see Apple Tax used by economists, except maybe when discussing things like the Double Irish or other tax arrangements.
A product that fails because its price doesn't match its perceived value, functionality, trust in the product and company, and branding probably was overpriced.
I am not suggesting that no product out there that is successful that isn't a commodity could ever be considered overpriced by people. First, I said it was a spectrum and not a binary distinction. Second, we are talking about capitalist markets and market perceptions, not personal perceptions.
The first post you responded to, as you recall, was a discussion of capitalism, not personal perceptions.
Your desires are... unconventional
Dreamwriter
Member
There is just one form factor for the main device. There are three different case materials to choose from (Aluminum, Stainless Steel, Gold) and a number of different watchband styles, ranging from leather to plastic/rubber to standard metal links to a fancy weaved metal.
CrudeDiatribe
Member
Yeah, it's going to be terrible. We have an HP here at work that only "clicks" with the volume on; it's amazing how much I need to be fooled to have a comfortable experience using it. I actually feel physical discomfort using it with the volume off because I push too hard.
Tap-to-click is terrible. /yelling-at-clouds. Strangely, given my above comments about the HP's trackpad, I don't need the keyboard to click— though I have it on when the phone isn't silent.
The internet is a home for every proclivity.
Well, look at it this way: I could if I wanted describe a toaster that made perfect toast, gave you fashion advice and solved global warming, and make it sound like the worst, uninteresting product on earth that no one would buy because of X. People labor under the impression sometimes that a world without marketing means that everyone suddenly becomes an informed and impartial consumer.
My pie-in-the-sky hopes alongside the watch stuff: new iPod touches, discontinued 2012 Macbook Pro, new Apple TV, new Mac Pros, Macbook Air refreshes, 4K Thunderbolt display.
Chances of all those happening: 0%.
Marty Chinn
Member
Since when are we limiting this to economists? The first post I responded to asked about people in general. I explained why people in general feel that way. Even Apple fans admit there's a premium price attributed because it's Apple. I've seen them use the term Apple Tax too.
You've said it's not a binary thing and yet here you are that saying a product failing is likely because it was overpriced. There are plenty of products that are fairly priced that fail. There are plenty of products that are a good deal that fail. Failing isn't always because of something being overpriced. Now you used the quantifier probably to mean not 100% of the time, but
Again, the first post I responded to was asking why people consider it overpriced. I'll say again since you seem to be side stepping it; if you don't like Monster as an example, then Beats. Are you avoiding it since they're owned by Apple? Beats is a very popular brand of headphones that just about everyone on this forum and most certainly in the headphones thread, that Beats are overpriced. That's not a commodity either. They are very successful but they sell more based on image and branding than quality of sound. The headphones thread will point to dozens of headphones that are much higher quality and at a lower cost.
I'm not even saying whether I think Apple products are overpriced or not. I'm simply explaining how people can come to that conclusion and that a successful business model and product doesn't mean one can't come to the conclusion of a product being overpriced. There are several products out there that are successful but many consider are overpriced.
HeartlessNobody213
Member
Wow, forgot this was today.
The Elite
BOSS
This is why you need a watch with a calendar on it.
If you are only talking about people's personal perceptions, people can of course believe anything they want, and this is not an argument. The answer to any question about why people can believe a certain thing is "free will." And then that's the end of the discussion. A more meaningful discussion is about market perceptions. I can believe that some people personally believe that the ability to vote for Gerber babies will make or break the iPad, for instance, but I will not say that is the market perception.
I already addressed Beats earlier.
Does a fairly priced product really fail in a market? I think the traditional economic theory would say that a failed product was not priced properly to meet supply/demand balance. A product needs a certain amount of market to be able to succeed, which requires it to be at a price people are willing to pay. Sometimes the market sees no value in the product and the price for consumer acceptance is $0 (sometimes you need to pay consumers to use a product and somehow monetize it some other way).
At this point, it appears to be just the bands that will differ. If, like me, you think the actual watch itself is ugly as sin, you're out of luck for the time being. Or just buy one of the many competitors.
jimbobsmells
Member
Lmao, we're going to see a lot of these sort of posts aren't we.
As always, I will follow this event via http://live.twit.tv
Leo and his crew are great for [regular] moments when Apple's stream goes down.
Leo and his crew are great for [regular] moments when Apple's stream goes down.
Marty Chinn
Member
Dreamwriter
Member
I just had an interesting thought: fast forward a year - Apple Watch has sold tremendously well, and it turns out people have changed their habits to now use their watch for most things rather than their phone (I'm an optimist). In such a world, do you think Apple would release an iPhone 7W that was compact and had a low-res screen but a long battery life, since most of the time people aren't looking at the phone screen anymore anyways?
As with their every device, they will very slowly add new features and better hardware. And they will make users pay a hefty price for it.
Do stainless steel/gold bands really cost that much to justify such a large increase in price? I am asking because I honestly don't know know but if the basic watch is the same between all of the models and it is just the band that is different, would a stainless steel band really justify the price difference from $349 to $700 or even $7K for the gold option?
noscitur a sociis--you forget that he mentions capitalism right afterwards.
There is no discussion surrounding personal perceptions. People are free to believe whatever they want. If you are only talking about personal perceptions, anyone that knows will believe that people can hold any type of view.
I said I placed Beats in the same "more product than commodity" spectrum compared to Monster. There's nothing more to say about the market not treating it as a commodity product.
The product would succeed in the market if the company took a lower or negative margin, either in the form of a lower price (or free price) or extra spending on branding and marketing. It fails because the company did not (or could not, in the case of negative margins) price it properly to meet market demand.
The Elite
BOSS
The band isn't the main difference. The body of the watch is either aluminum (sports), stainless steel (Watch) or Gold (Edition).
The bands will add to the cost as an extra accessory you buy. We don't know the cost of those yet.
gold yes. stainless steel, not necessarily. you can get well made link bracelets for under 100. but luxury brands charge around 1000 for them. some people expect Apple to place themselves in that tier.
The Elite
BOSS
That would be for the Sports, I'm sure.
I am already dreading the Canadian prices. I miss parity.
LyleLanley
Banned
I predict $49.99 for the sports bands.
lol, 20. I do not see them less than 40$.
Considering the price of smart covers for iPads and even the cases for iPhones I would say $70 is the minimum.
I enjoy the Apple products I have but their markup does get a bit insane.
HUELEN10
Member
A pebble steel stainless steel link bracelet is under 30, take that as you will...
What i'm looking for during today's thing is pretty much... sell me on the full functionality touch screen smart watch concept in general.
I spent $800 on a iphone 6+ last year which has a great 5.5" inch 1080p screen. Why would I want to spend $350+ to do most of the same features on a tiny watch screen?
Too much overlap going on, which is why I've like my pebble which does enough (hey you have an appointment, hey someone is calling you).
but I'm always open to new things and am a sucker for new tech. I just need a compelling use case scenario.
I spent $800 on a iphone 6+ last year which has a great 5.5" inch 1080p screen. Why would I want to spend $350+ to do most of the same features on a tiny watch screen?
Too much overlap going on, which is why I've like my pebble which does enough (hey you have an appointment, hey someone is calling you).
but I'm always open to new things and am a sucker for new tech. I just need a compelling use case scenario.
HUELEN10
Member
What is Cupertino's most disgusting markup?
I say the iPhone 4 bumper. 29 USD guys...
Yeah, but they had to make up the cost of all the ones they had to give away for free!
Marty Chinn
Member
Sure he mentions capitalism afterward but the question he asked is why people think they're overpriced. How if you are simply going after the text book definition and what the market handles, then how can you say that a successful product can be overpriced then since you did acknowledge that this can happen. Clearly by the textbook of price/demand curve, if it is successful then it is not overpriced. Yet you even acknowledge that you can be successful and overpriced. Overpriced and successful seems to me it would fall more in line with the discussion of personal perception, not business 101.
Claiming Beats is more of a product than a commodity doesn't address the notion of it being hugely successful and the perception among many that they are overpriced. You didn't even state whether you thought they were or were not and why. It is widely accepted by many that they are overpriced.
You can't say it didn't get priced properly to meet market demand if you acknowledge that the lack of marketing could be the factor. It's not as simple as a better product that is cheaper than the competition will succeed. There are plenty of factors that go beyond that element of it. Brand recognition and public perception are a real thing that can skewer the results of a better product at a lower price point.
LostMyNarbles
Member
Those iPhone 5C cases were pretty expensive given that they were just a slim cover with holes in it.
Is the Apple Store down for anyone else? I wonder if they're adding anything in light of the conference today.
Is the Apple Store down for anyone else? I wonder if they're adding anything in light of the conference today.
The Elite
BOSS
I am still thinking about getting a pebble.
It seems to have all the same functionality that I want for a cheaper price. The problem is that the Pebble Time has brought the price point up to an amount that makes me at least consider getting the Apple Watch. $199 isn't too far removed from $349 for a Watch that will potentially do a lot more and looks a lot better.
Store being down is par for the course on conference day.
- Status