Slashdot Mirror
Swatch Co-Inventor Predicts Apple Will Bring an 'Ice Age' To Swiss Watch Market
MojoKid writes It seems that these days everything Apple touches turns to gold, hence why the company was able to post an $18 billion profit for its fiscal first quarter of 2015. Be that as it may, can Apple popularize the smartwatch market as others have been unable to do so far? Not only is that the expectation, but according to Swatch watch co-inventor Elmar Mock, Apple is going to bring about an "Ice Age" to the Swiss watch market. Elmar noted that he expects the Apple Watch to quickly reach sales of 20 million to 30 million units per year. For the sake of comparison, Switzerland exported 28.6 million watches in 2014, none of them with smart capabilities. "Apple will succeed quickly. It will put a lot of pressure on the traditional watch industry and jobs in Switzerland...I do expect an Ice Age coming toward us," Elmar said. Analysts for Barclays noted to investors that the Apple Watch launch could result in a 6 percent annual decline in Swatch Group AG's revenue. To keep up with the times and fend off Apple, there are at least three Swiss watch companies planning to make smartwatches, including Swatch Group, which will unveil a smart model sometime this year.
Watches such as the Swiss make are luxury items and are the one item of "jewelry"
a man can wear without controversy in any social circles. Also, a high-end Swiss
watch is a means of identifying yourself in a particular group, for example a Breitling
Navitimer probably means you are a professional pilot or at least you want people
to think you are. An Apple watch will never ever replace a Breitling in this market.
The Apple watch presents no threat to such Swiss watches, any more than a Tesla
car presents a threat to Porsche.
Me, I think the Apple watch is interesting but it is ten times more expensive than it should be
and is not waterproof, and these two facts mean I will never ever own one.
This guy is thinking Apple can't miss - but they often have in their history. My guess is that this will be an AppleTV moment, somewhat successful, but nothing like their other products.
These poor guys in Switzerland all worried their industry is going to go under need to take a deep breath - these are smartwatches that will become obsolete in a few years...Apple will sell some of these, but until they can replace the phone itself (that time will come) the compelling justification for them (expensive short lifed smartwatches) just isn't there., IMHO...saying that as someone who likes Apples products.
If that were true, Timex would have destroyed the Swiss watch industry. Yet Patek, AP et al are doing fine. That market isn't about telling time but making a statement. A Patek says I appreciate a finely crafted timeless design and don't need to blast "look at me" by wearing a Rolex. It's not copied by every mass market brand yet those who appreciate a fine watch knows what it is; and is a watch that you will pass down from generation to generation. In addition, people who buy numerous watches will continue to do so because they like the design and want to have a choice of waht they want in their wrist. Formal dinner? Time for the gold Cellini. Day a the beach? Seamaster. Building a fence or stone wall? The Timex that will survive the scrapes and doesn't cost $500 to replace a crystal. Apple will do fine but so will the Swiss. An Apple watch will simply be one more to add to the collection Now, if I was Motorola or Samsung? Yea, I'd be worried.
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
For info I am interested i watches, with a little collection including several vintages. Nothing truly expensive, most even cheap, I do simply like the mechanical engineering.
This being said, the Swiss watch industry has been carefully marketing its expensive mechanical watches, creating that impression of refined heirloom engineering and jewelry, while by and large you pay simply for marketing and big profits. Very little real innovation happens in the world of mechanical watches. There is the coaxial escapement from Daniels, but what else was recently introduced? The price of luxury watches goes mainly to profit, marketing (posters with Daniel Craig everywhere), boutique costs. In a way you don't get more real engineering quality in many swiss watches than in a gold apple watch.
Then comes Apple. As a watch enthusiast, while I am not yet conviced about the current utility of a smartwatch, I was immediately impressed by the attention to materials and the straps & bracelets. Barely any innovation happened in that respect in the traditional watches. Look how the lugs are easily exchanged and are ideally adapted to each strap. There is the refined bracelet that you can resize without tools. The magnetically closing milano mesh (admittedly this would not work with a mechanical watch), the way the sports band folds under (this was first done by designer Newsom in his rare Ikepod watches, no coincidence that he is on the Apple design team now). I like how Apple did not simply add a strap to a watch but truly thought it over from scratch.
Then there is the marketing, where health will become even more a cornerstone in future iterations, since they have hired people specialised in medial sensors. Everyone wants to be healthy, I think this will be the "killer app" going forward. And even in v1, there are several millions of happy iphone users who will be curious to try it, I think that it is indeed not a stretch to imagine it selling a few million pieces by EOY, with real ramp up coming from v2 onwards.
I think that the apple watch and the more refined android smartwaches will start to bring havoc to the sub $1000 segment of traditional watches from this year onwards. Luxury mechanicals will still sell, but the perception of the public about their worth may well change, I am not sure that the traditional Swiss marketing "you're looking after it until you pass it on" will have staying power.
I'm actually something of a watch nut; but collecting expensive watches is ... expensive. I collect *cheap* watches, which is in its way just as interesting. There's still that interplay between expense, features and design, but the constraining factor is low cost.
I actually think that in terms of pragmatic qualities, watches become worse as the price climbs from $30 to $100. Why? Because watches accrete features that undermine their ergonomics or have little practical value. Take water resistance. What you want in a cheap watch is 50m or 100m, which are adequate for any practical purpose. Above that you're paying for fantasy value. Watches rated at 200m and above might as well claim a gazillion meters; you'll never be the wiser.
Also as price rises, dials become more cluttered with features and design elements that actually make them harder to read. Nobody needs a second redundant hour subdial, it's only there to look expensive. And then you go from cheap and every accurate to expensive and quite a bit less accurate mechanical movements. It's a bit like paying to watch a circus act where dogs walk on their hind legs; the whole point of the act is that it's ridiculously hard.
My favorite watch is a $16 quartz analog day/date Casio "dive" style watch with a rotating bezel and day date at 3:00. The watch face is based on Rolex's classic submariner watch, which costs $10,000 and keeps worse time. Of course the submariner is a much more elegant watch, but it is in no sense any more practical. My next favorite watch is another Casio, the digital F-91W ($9), which happens to be Al Qaeda's standard issue training camp watch. They also use it for bomb detonators. It's cheap, accurate and simple and has a elegantly straightforward design -- something you get only on very cheap or very expensive watches.
I also own a Pebble, which is in my view ugly as sin and quickly developed a screen tearing problem. But in terms of combining timekeeping and notifications it'd be hard to improve upon functionally. As for the phone in my pocket I'd be less worried about it than my leg in a mishap that might break it.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
I would want to fly, but I will settle for a fast car, especially if all I got right now is an old beat up car. So if I do have to carry a phone anyway right now, not having to take it out of the bag every time, seems quite preferable. If most of the interfacing with my phone can be done through smaller display conveniently located on my wrist, it would seem like an improvement over my current situation. My phone can then stay in my laptop bag, working as a modem and occasionally come out for some of the richer apps.
If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.