Although Apple has given us our first peek at the Apple Watch, so far we don’t know much about it, including when it will be released or how much its many versions will cost.
A new report, however, provides some possible answers to these questions. According to a French website, the Apple Watch will start at around $500 for the steel model. And gold? Gold will be even more expensive.
According to iGen.fr, the stainless steel Apple Watch in polished steel or black will cost $500 when it debuts close to Valentine’s Day of 2015. This would be a $150 premium over the anodized aluminum Sports Model, which Apple said last month would start at a price of $349.
For the gold model, expect to spend 10 times as much. According to iGen.fr’s sources, the gold Apple Watch in yellow or pink gold would cost between $4,000 and $5,000 when it goes on sale in January.
iGen.fr also suggests that the Apple Watch will rank low on the iFixIt repairability scale. They claim the only thing on the Apple Watch that will be user-replaceable is the strap, so don’t expect to be able to repair an Apple Watch the way you would a normal timepiece.
As for shipping date, iGen.fr’s sources say the Apple Watch is still on track for a February 2015 release date. That pink gold Apple Watch is looking like a pretty good Valentine’s Day present right now, isn’t it?
Source: iGen.fr
John Brownlee is a writer for Fast Company, and a contributing writer here at CoM. He has also written for Wired, Playboy, Boing Boing, Popular Mechanics, VentureBeat, and Gizmodo. He lives in Boston with his wife and two parakeets. You can follow him here on Twitter.
12 responses to “Stainless steel Apple Watch could cost just $499, but gold will be 10 times as pricey”
None of this is a big surprise. Apple is going for the high end of the smart watch market, whereas Android Wear is the low end, along with Pebble. Apple won’t sell millions right away, but if people like them, prices will come down and the normal consumer will buy tons.
Won’t be on in my future, $500 for a watch no thanks
Maybe for $200-$300 I might be tempted but not at that price out of my market….and budget. I will use my iPhone 6 plus for time like I have done with all my previous iPhones I have not worn watch in long time anyway I guess I will continue ;-)
Plus it doesn’t do anything unique, you mostly look at it. $500 for not having to take my phone out of my pocket to see notifications? No thanks.
It will be the best <$1000 watch money can buy in terms of design, and that's ignoring the fact that it will be way more useful than an analog watch.
highly objective. for a grand I’ll definitely find a nice watch easily.
Please show me where it has ever $400 of added functionality I would care about when I already have an iphone 6 in my pocket.
Very very very few watches today are about functionality. A very functional watch costs <$1 due to the cost of quarts clocks. A $100,000 dollar watch is just as functional as a $10 watch these days.
Smart watches are more functional than $100,000 watch, but the question is where on the scale of form do you want your watch to lie. That is personal preference. Some may like the hockey puck sized design of the 360, some may prefer the plastic gears, and some may prefer polished metal apple watches. Totally personal preference. The beauty of capitalism :)
I think $500 would be a nice price for what this is. However, I’ll probably get a really nice band to go with it which will cost a bit more. I can’t wait to get one though!
Does anyone realize that $4000 of gold is approximately 3.5 ounces at today’s price ($1,143). Where do you put the electronics?
Yeah, unless they’re including a 1 ct diamond with that, it’s clearly a rip off. Gold isn’t that expensive.
I wouldn’t have an issue with the five thousand dollar price tag if I knew that the unit wouldn’t quickly become yesterday’s technology.