Hacker News Reader

Comment by mullingitover | Hacker News Reader

> Apple Watch Edition is how a 55 year old lawyer in the midwest gives up his Rolex.

I have a really hard time buying this argument, because a Rolex will appreciate in value, and that 55 year old lawyer in the midwest isn't stupid, s/he knows this. Nobody in their right mind expects a consumer electronic device to appreciate in value.

View on HN

A Rolex one buys in a store today does not appreciate in value at all. They have a similar depreciation curve to cars.

I'll point out that's not true with all Rolexes. Depending on which Rolex you purchase, it may very well appreciate over time.

Rolex occasionally tweaks aspects of its various models. For example, a 2015 Submariner has larger lugs, larger hour markers, and branded rehaut compared to a 2001 Rolex. This makes newer Subs look different and, for some collectors, makes the older models more desirable.

Pepsi Subs and the Paul Newman Daytona are both good examples of watches that have become collectable and whose value today greatly exceeds initial purchase price + inflation.

I'd point out that some cars retain value, just like some watches retain value, but I think that's lost on you.

> but I think that's lost on you

No personal jabs, please. This comment makes a fine point without that.

Exactly this, though I expect it is more hold value than appreciate with current watches. Overall, when dropping a large amount on a watch you expect it to keep value and be something that lasts a lifetime if not generations. Most people wont commit massive funds for something that needs replacing every 2 or 3 years. And even if they get the first one because it's exciting, I cant see people repurchasing on a regular basis.

I don't expect consumer electronics to increase in value for the simple reason that they decay. The batteries decay, the transistors decay, the capacitors decay, etc. The watch will become non-functional and non-repairable.

Just look at what people go through trying to keep older computers running.

Particularly if history repeats itself. If the example of the iPad is anything to go by, this watch has a lifetime of a couple of years at most. Worth bearing in mind if you're going to drop tens of thousands of dollars on it.

Yes, I can't see an electronic watch being an heirloom.

The Rolex goes in the bed side cabinet, the Apple Watch goes on the wrist.

Except when that lawyer is in an important meeting. Then the roles are reversed.

And when that lawyer is 65 and retiring, it's the Rolex that he gives to his son.

Who then swiftly puts it into the drawer and continues to wear something he likes

And off the wrist in a year

Every evening, if the battery needs a daily charge.

Smart money is on less.

It might appreciate in value the same way any antique does, but eventually no one will be able to settle for a "dumb watch" the same way no one today can settle for a "dumb phone".

This bears repeating in any Apple Watch discussion: watches are socially approved jewelry for culturally Western males.

The classic and luxury appeal of jewelry is at odds with many parts of tech (eg elegance vs nerdiness, timeless heirlooms vs 1-year product cycles, etc). The Apple Watch Edition will be an interesting attempt to cross that gap. I don't see it becoming a first-tier competitor to classic watches, even in a short term wear, non-heirloom sense, but if the past decade has proven anything, Apple knows how to forecast (or shape) market demand for a product very well.

Except for most people a watch is fashion, not a tool. A phone is a tool, and you expect it to perform certain tasks that make your life easier. A smart phone is objectively superior at those things, thus you want a smart phone over a dumb phone.

A watch, on the other hand, is much more a fashion statement and status symbol than a tool. A $10k Rolex doesn't really keep time any better than a $20 Timex, but that's not why one buys the Rolex. Most teenagers _stopped wearing watches_ over the past decade or so because they use their phones to check the time, it's only when we've started dressing more professionally that we've started buying watches.

I don't buy wearable tech as the next big thing in hardware. I don't think most consumers will pay $500 to have something on their wrist that does a fraction of what the thing in their pocket does while looking worse than the "dumb watch" it replaced.

People will buy smartwatches because it adds value a rolex cannot: convenience.

Timex and Rolex have the same amount of information so they differentiate based on other aspects. Smart watches add convenience through serving more information. Not having to take out your phone, wallet, keys, etc. is a compelling selling point. The bet is:

convenience + decent design > timeless design alone

Reply on news.ycombinator.com