Smart Watches v The Establishment.
Discussion
Some very interesting posts here.
I have a few "high end" watches and haven't considered a digital/quartz for ages.
I would definitely be interested in a smart watch if/when they can make the battery last a few days and/or add some "ruggedness" to provide basic protection against water and impact.
My lad is 14 and when I bought him a G-shock he did say thanks but looked at me as if to say "wtf do I want this for?"
I have a few "high end" watches and haven't considered a digital/quartz for ages.
I would definitely be interested in a smart watch if/when they can make the battery last a few days and/or add some "ruggedness" to provide basic protection against water and impact.
My lad is 14 and when I bought him a G-shock he did say thanks but looked at me as if to say "wtf do I want this for?"
Spice_Weasel said:
There are some good points being made on the thread, so I thought I'd add in a few observations that come more-or-less from the horse's mouth. I work with a number of luxury brands which means that I do have contact with some of the watch manufacturers. They are interested to see where smart watches and wearable technologies might start to impact their businesses. They are worried about falling unit sales but equally they are wondering if there is an opportunity too.
Fewer younger people are wearing (or even buying) watches as their smart phone tells them the time. If this trend continues then we'll see young adults adopting the same approach (it's probably already happening) which will lead to lower watch sales. This is bad for the whole industry but also for the luxury brands as over time (a lifetime, sometimes) watch wearers do trade up. Think of all the various watches you've had over your teenage and early twenties years. You'll have bought a few and probably seen many of them as disposable (most evident at the lower-priced end of the market). Most men eventually get to a point where they want a good quality watch and generally aspire to the usual well-known brands. The challenge for these brands is getting you to that point as early as possible.
Luxury watches (for most people, not us watch obsessives) are aspirational purchases or are achievement/milestone purchases. The brands know very well when and why their watches are purchased: 18th or 21st birthdays, graduation presents, retirement gifts, promoted-at-work-self-congratulatory-rewards etc etc.
But what if fashion/culture/technology means that some of that potential market is taken away? How do you defend your territory? Do you try to compete? We've already seen the impact that the quartz revolution had and back in the seventies pretty much all the big brands launched quartz watches. Do you set up strategic partnerships to work together? An early example of this could be the partnership between JLC and Aston Martin. This has fused technologies and applications to give a watch that will remotely unlock your car. And how big is the market for a JLC/Aston Martin watch? Very small, but it's a start in understanding how to build future functionality into a mechanical watch.
HP (which in the seventies offered a digital watch) is due to launch a smart watch which will be compatible with both iOS and Android. HP has collaborated with Michael Bastian, a US fashion designer, and the watches will be available only through the Gilt luxury brands website.
Google has approached Luxotica (owners of Oakley and Ray Ban sunglasses plus a myriad of other brand names) as it believes that wearable technology needs to be stylish and fashionable. Google Glass currently is a rather uninspiring wire frame design and while I am sure it will sell in volume, wouldn't you like it to look good? Wearable technologies will have an impact on us too, as if you have a HUD projected in front of you, I'll bet it will show data such as time and date as well as temperature, direction, location and a variety of other configurable information items. Who needs a watch then?
What's interesting is the way that technology is now being perceived as luxury. In the US, the Tesla S has become a competitor to the Aston Martin Rapide, yet the Tesla is a third of the price. What if a smart watch became a direct competitor to a luxury mechanical watch? In the seventies this happened, when new-fangled digitals with high accuracy and extra functions became the must-wear item.
My gut feel is that we will see some forays into smart watches from some of the mid-tier brands. Longer term, I think the future of the mechanical watch is secure as people continue to buy them in order to appreciate (as they do today) the craftsmanship and engineering that goes into them. As our lives become ever more automated and regimented by our devices, I think we'll see more pleasure from things like mechanical watches and fountain pens
Great post that's worth having on this page as well Fewer younger people are wearing (or even buying) watches as their smart phone tells them the time. If this trend continues then we'll see young adults adopting the same approach (it's probably already happening) which will lead to lower watch sales. This is bad for the whole industry but also for the luxury brands as over time (a lifetime, sometimes) watch wearers do trade up. Think of all the various watches you've had over your teenage and early twenties years. You'll have bought a few and probably seen many of them as disposable (most evident at the lower-priced end of the market). Most men eventually get to a point where they want a good quality watch and generally aspire to the usual well-known brands. The challenge for these brands is getting you to that point as early as possible.
Luxury watches (for most people, not us watch obsessives) are aspirational purchases or are achievement/milestone purchases. The brands know very well when and why their watches are purchased: 18th or 21st birthdays, graduation presents, retirement gifts, promoted-at-work-self-congratulatory-rewards etc etc.
But what if fashion/culture/technology means that some of that potential market is taken away? How do you defend your territory? Do you try to compete? We've already seen the impact that the quartz revolution had and back in the seventies pretty much all the big brands launched quartz watches. Do you set up strategic partnerships to work together? An early example of this could be the partnership between JLC and Aston Martin. This has fused technologies and applications to give a watch that will remotely unlock your car. And how big is the market for a JLC/Aston Martin watch? Very small, but it's a start in understanding how to build future functionality into a mechanical watch.
HP (which in the seventies offered a digital watch) is due to launch a smart watch which will be compatible with both iOS and Android. HP has collaborated with Michael Bastian, a US fashion designer, and the watches will be available only through the Gilt luxury brands website.
Google has approached Luxotica (owners of Oakley and Ray Ban sunglasses plus a myriad of other brand names) as it believes that wearable technology needs to be stylish and fashionable. Google Glass currently is a rather uninspiring wire frame design and while I am sure it will sell in volume, wouldn't you like it to look good? Wearable technologies will have an impact on us too, as if you have a HUD projected in front of you, I'll bet it will show data such as time and date as well as temperature, direction, location and a variety of other configurable information items. Who needs a watch then?
What's interesting is the way that technology is now being perceived as luxury. In the US, the Tesla S has become a competitor to the Aston Martin Rapide, yet the Tesla is a third of the price. What if a smart watch became a direct competitor to a luxury mechanical watch? In the seventies this happened, when new-fangled digitals with high accuracy and extra functions became the must-wear item.
My gut feel is that we will see some forays into smart watches from some of the mid-tier brands. Longer term, I think the future of the mechanical watch is secure as people continue to buy them in order to appreciate (as they do today) the craftsmanship and engineering that goes into them. As our lives become ever more automated and regimented by our devices, I think we'll see more pleasure from things like mechanical watches and fountain pens
I think the "craftsmanship and engineering" aspect should keep the luxury watch makers roofs above their heads. There's no substitute in my mind for the elegance and refinement of a mechanical watch, particularly one with visible complications
I agree about the point that prestige watches are for the most part an aspiration arrived at when one is in their late 20s/early 30s and beyond. The younger hardcore Instagram/Vine generation will probably be all over these smart watches and I don't think there's much the prestige guys can do to enter their psyche.
I'm still not convinced that smart-watches aren't just a flash in the pan. They are very clever bits of technology but I'm not sure anyone has figured out a use for them yet. Maybe the iWatch will change that but I get the feeling they are just a stepping stone on the way to some other sort of wearable technology, be it Google Glass or something else yet to be invented.
Mr Will said:
I'm still not convinced that smart-watches aren't just a flash in the pan. They are very clever bits of technology but I'm not sure anyone has figured out a use for them yet. Maybe the iWatch will change that but I get the feeling they are just a stepping stone on the way to some other sort of wearable technology, be it Google Glass or something else yet to be invented.
That's a good point. The most successful smart devices so far have been ones to which you can direct content in a meaningful, usable form. Media players, smart phones and tablets all have this common trait. Perhaps smart watches will become a part of a modular consumer mobility solution: Google Glass or Oculus Rift for presentation, with the smart watch for sensors and controls. Your media might be stored on your phone or a phone-sized device that handles the network signal, runs the apps and stores your data. Eventually we may be able to do away with that device, and have just your watch and screen/visor managing the content and processing but with all your data held on a cloud service.Mr Will said:
I'm still not convinced that smart-watches aren't just a flash in the pan. They are very clever bits of technology but I'm not sure anyone has figured out a use for them yet. Maybe the iWatch will change that but I get the feeling they are just a stepping stone on the way to some other sort of wearable technology, be it Google Glass or something else yet to be invented.
To give Apple credit they have form for creating stuff that fills a need that people didn't realise they had. Look at tablets, pre-iPad they were pretty much totally niche nerd tools, and now secondary school kids are issued with and get their homework on them. I think there will probably be some "woo cool" stuff that they announce with the iWatch that no one anticipated.The problem I have with them I think is that smartphones aren't exactly hard to carry around, and have a much bigger screen with which to actually do stuff with. Watches that need a smartphone to work with, that pretty much just tell you "you've got a message, check your phone to read/reply to it!" seem a bit lacking.
That and the fact that I think it'll take a certain "type" of person to wear these watches. You don't wear your iPhone, and they are so ubiquitous that using one isn't noteworthy. Wearing something on your wrist though, you're literally showing off your nerdiness.
There are some really good posts on this thread. Ultimately though, IMO it boils down to this:
Will the release of the Iwatch etc make the slightest bit of difference or even enter into the thoughts of a man considering walking into a Patek boutique to buy a PP chronograph?
Short Answer: NO. WAY. EVER. EVER EVER.
Comparison:
The new Ferrari has ZERO impact on demand for pedigree Horses.
Will the release of the Iwatch etc make the slightest bit of difference or even enter into the thoughts of a man considering walking into a Patek boutique to buy a PP chronograph?
Short Answer: NO. WAY. EVER. EVER EVER.
Comparison:
The new Ferrari has ZERO impact on demand for pedigree Horses.
Murcielago_Boy said:
There are some really good posts on this thread. Ultimately though, IMO it boils down to this:
Will the release of the Iwatch etc make the slightest bit of difference or even enter into the thoughts of a man considering walking into a Patek boutique to buy a PP chronograph?
Short Answer: NO. WAY. EVER. EVER EVER.
Pretty much covers it. I'm not an apple fan anyway but a new "digital" watch is something I grew out of at about 25. Now an AP or my newly acquired Tudor sub is all together different.Will the release of the Iwatch etc make the slightest bit of difference or even enter into the thoughts of a man considering walking into a Patek boutique to buy a PP chronograph?
Short Answer: NO. WAY. EVER. EVER EVER.
However I'm in an age group that probably isn't Apple's main demographic.
I think the Apple announcement is significant. Certainly at the very top end of the market, the kind of functionality offered by complications is there for those fascinated by things mechanical, and, like the manual gear change, there will be demand.
Yet, assuming the functionality of the Apple type device is so comprehensive and includes payments, restaurant and hotel bookings, voice commands,email and messaging and so on, it seems to me it could become fashionable, and if that happens it will have a big impact. People will not wear two items on the wrist. Its easy to dismiss, but I think we may be witnessing the start of a major shift. I am not about to throw my JLC in the drawer forever, but I will probably give the new device a try ad certainly am not going to assume its a gimmick.
Yet, assuming the functionality of the Apple type device is so comprehensive and includes payments, restaurant and hotel bookings, voice commands,email and messaging and so on, it seems to me it could become fashionable, and if that happens it will have a big impact. People will not wear two items on the wrist. Its easy to dismiss, but I think we may be witnessing the start of a major shift. I am not about to throw my JLC in the drawer forever, but I will probably give the new device a try ad certainly am not going to assume its a gimmick.
TBH, I really can't figure out their market. Nearly all people in their mid 30s or upwards wear a watch, and will generally be enthusiastic about their choice, be it a tough as old boots G shock, or something Swiss and mechanical. They are also at the age when not being permanently plugged into "the grid" (or a mains charger) has it's appeal. They don't want to be dealing with "what do you mean you missed my call/calendar invite/email...it's on your bloody wrist" conversations. I doubt teens can really afford them, which leaves those in their twenties. Although trendy London types in their twenties all own an iPad, they also ride steel bikes with no gears, have big beards, drink ale, wear glasses that frankly would have got me beaten up at school, and aspire to drive 30 year old air cooled Porsches that have been made to look 40 years old. Does a highly corporate, very un-individual watch that marks you as a bit of a techie really appeal?
I actually use very, very little functionality on my iPhone, having a small screen and a tiny keyboard is a PITA, so if I need to do something I'll reach for my iPad or just do it later. Having a teeny weeny device on my wrist that I presumably can't type on with any level of one fingered speed or accuracy seems a bit of a backward step to me.
I really hope I don't sound like a "why would you need a mobile phone" OAP here, but I really just don't "get it". Having an app that shows you your partners heartbeat FFS...really? It's a bit like that machine gun simulator app, or that pint of beer, or that pretend Geiger counter...it's funny for about 40 seconds until you realise it's just a piece of trivia in your life that you really, really don't need.
Personally, I can't see the established brands "diluting" their core heritage offering by jumping into bed with smart watch vendors...it would actually put me off that brand TBH.
No doubt they will sell loads, but we've survived digital watches, calculator watches, radio/TV watches and I think regardless of whether it's quartz or mechanical, people like to see proper physical hands going round a dial.
I actually use very, very little functionality on my iPhone, having a small screen and a tiny keyboard is a PITA, so if I need to do something I'll reach for my iPad or just do it later. Having a teeny weeny device on my wrist that I presumably can't type on with any level of one fingered speed or accuracy seems a bit of a backward step to me.
I really hope I don't sound like a "why would you need a mobile phone" OAP here, but I really just don't "get it". Having an app that shows you your partners heartbeat FFS...really? It's a bit like that machine gun simulator app, or that pint of beer, or that pretend Geiger counter...it's funny for about 40 seconds until you realise it's just a piece of trivia in your life that you really, really don't need.
Personally, I can't see the established brands "diluting" their core heritage offering by jumping into bed with smart watch vendors...it would actually put me off that brand TBH.
No doubt they will sell loads, but we've survived digital watches, calculator watches, radio/TV watches and I think regardless of whether it's quartz or mechanical, people like to see proper physical hands going round a dial.
Walter Sobchak said:
I'm sure the likes of Patek and Vacheron are quaking in their boots about losing customers to Apple .
I would not write Apple off on this score, for one reason..Fashion.
Forget the functionality..if a bunch of celebs are seen wearing this thing then I think it could easily put a dent in the luxury market, just the way people slavishly name their kinds are celebrities, or every time young George is seen wearing some baby outfit they just sell out. The high end market is not about functionality in the first place. People who buy diver's or pilot's watches and the like are not all doing it because they want depth and altitude stuff...
I think that the whole tech debate was done and dusted in the 1970's when quartz first appeared. Before that, the most accurate thing you could have on your wrist was a 'superlative Swiss chronometer' like a Rolex or similar. It was about accuracy, durability, and then appearance. Then suddenly you could have a cheap Casio watch which knocked spots off it for accuracy, albeit largely needless accuracy. I thought then that the era of Rolex etc was over. I even discussed it at the time with JYS, a Rolex brand ambassador, and his comment was that they were maybe needing to engage with the latest technology. Rolex then brought out their own quartz watch as it happens, though my comment will have had damn all influence on the process. However, like the 911, the traditional item continued to sell.
Actually, the tech didn't make any difference, it was a gimmick. 40 years later, the most prestigeous thing to have on your wrist remains a Swiss or German automatic watch with a top quality mechanical movement. Quartz is the next rung down.
All this tech stuff you can get now is actually a little boring if they haven't worked out how they can make it easy and comfortable to use. It is not in any way going to challenge the big names in the business, which is not to say that they don't need to think about the style that young people want, or pay people like George Clooney or L de Caprio or D Craig to wear them.
I am a classic watch victim, in my 50's, coming into it in exactly the way the guy described earlier. I have a Longines Grand Classique dress watch, quartz, two Omega Aquaterra's, quartz,which I wear alternately every day, and an Omega Seamaster, automatic, which I use occasionally when I feel like it. The watches that appeal to me are the automatic type. My reasons for buying a watch are:-
1. Quality - Pleasure of owning a superbly made piece of craftsmanship
2. Style - it is a fantastic piece of jewellery, probably the only one it is acceptable for a man to wear
3. Reliability - They are not going to break down, period.
4. Water resistance - I want to be able to go into a swimming pool with one on
5. Accuracy - to a standard beyond which, frankly, it doesn't matter.
What appeals to me at this moment is Omega and IWC. The tech stuff is of no real interest, and I don't want to be seen wearing a 'joke' watch.
Actually, the tech didn't make any difference, it was a gimmick. 40 years later, the most prestigeous thing to have on your wrist remains a Swiss or German automatic watch with a top quality mechanical movement. Quartz is the next rung down.
All this tech stuff you can get now is actually a little boring if they haven't worked out how they can make it easy and comfortable to use. It is not in any way going to challenge the big names in the business, which is not to say that they don't need to think about the style that young people want, or pay people like George Clooney or L de Caprio or D Craig to wear them.
I am a classic watch victim, in my 50's, coming into it in exactly the way the guy described earlier. I have a Longines Grand Classique dress watch, quartz, two Omega Aquaterra's, quartz,which I wear alternately every day, and an Omega Seamaster, automatic, which I use occasionally when I feel like it. The watches that appeal to me are the automatic type. My reasons for buying a watch are:-
1. Quality - Pleasure of owning a superbly made piece of craftsmanship
2. Style - it is a fantastic piece of jewellery, probably the only one it is acceptable for a man to wear
3. Reliability - They are not going to break down, period.
4. Water resistance - I want to be able to go into a swimming pool with one on
5. Accuracy - to a standard beyond which, frankly, it doesn't matter.
What appeals to me at this moment is Omega and IWC. The tech stuff is of no real interest, and I don't want to be seen wearing a 'joke' watch.
Thought this was worth a read http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/hodinkee-apple-watch-...
Edited by twinturboz on Thursday 11th September 19:20
cardigankid said:
My reasons for buying a watch are:-
1. Quality - Pleasure of owning a superbly made piece of craftsmanship
2. Style - it is a fantastic piece of jewellery, probably the only one it is acceptable for a man to wear
3. Reliability - They are not going to break down, period.
4. Water resistance - I want to be able to go into a swimming pool with one on
5. Accuracy - to a standard beyond which, frankly, it doesn't matter.
What appeals to me at this moment is Omega and IWC. The tech stuff is of no real interest, and I don't want to be seen wearing a 'joke' watch.
All very fair points and I am in my sixties, have two Longines, a Porsche Design P6000, and a gold JLC Reverso Duo, so pretty traditional.1. Quality - Pleasure of owning a superbly made piece of craftsmanship
2. Style - it is a fantastic piece of jewellery, probably the only one it is acceptable for a man to wear
3. Reliability - They are not going to break down, period.
4. Water resistance - I want to be able to go into a swimming pool with one on
5. Accuracy - to a standard beyond which, frankly, it doesn't matter.
What appeals to me at this moment is Omega and IWC. The tech stuff is of no real interest, and I don't want to be seen wearing a 'joke' watch.
That being said, I do wonder what people in their twenties will do with the advent of the Apple. There will doubtless be a higher-end market, but I am reminded of the debates on standard shift versus the whole double-clutch paddle shift technology.
Purists predicted that there was no way manual was going away, but Mercedes had abandoned it long before, then most BMWs moved to SMG and the fastest ones were paddle-only,of course Ferrari went paddle, and (horror of horrors), even the Porsche GT3 went paddle. The days of a manual shift as an essential part of driving are over, especially as competition cars are not manual any more.
It seems to be that the Apple stuff is an important milestone. People say '"its not a watch". Of course people laughed at the first massive cell phones too. This is the very first generation of the product, so think if the original Mac to the Macbook Air for instance. I do accept that watches are to a degree male jewellery, as they do not really have any function that is more useful than a waterproof Swatch. Yes, there is the pleasure of having something that is complex in itself, but it will be interesting to see if that enough, or it will go the ways of ties and cufflinks, ( yes ,I have all that stuff too).
In any case, it will take four or five years I would think to see how this all plays out, but the functionality changes are important…no more credit or debit cards in the future I would expect. …..
RDMcG said:
I would not write Apple off on this score, for one reason.
Fashion.
Forget the functionality..if a bunch of celebs are seen wearing this thing then I think it could easily put a dent in the luxury market, just the way people slavishly name their kinds are celebrities, or every time young George is seen wearing some baby outfit they just sell out. The high end market is not about functionality in the first place. People who buy diver's or pilot's watches and the like are not all doing it because they want depth and altitude stuff...
I think they're different things which both have their place, some people obviously buy luxury watches as pieces of jewelery and for fashion, not just for the craftsmanship and design but I can see them still doing so, the Apple Watch is more for your gadget lover than your fashion conscious consumer imo, although I'm sure it will sell very well.Fashion.
Forget the functionality..if a bunch of celebs are seen wearing this thing then I think it could easily put a dent in the luxury market, just the way people slavishly name their kinds are celebrities, or every time young George is seen wearing some baby outfit they just sell out. The high end market is not about functionality in the first place. People who buy diver's or pilot's watches and the like are not all doing it because they want depth and altitude stuff...
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff