x PhoneArena is looking for new authors! To view all available positions, click here.
  • Home
  • News
  • Analyst: Apple's iWatch may be priced at $299, could generate $17.5 billion worth of sales in 12 months

Analyst: Apple's iWatch may be priced at $299, could generate $17.5 billion worth of sales in 12 months

Posted: , by Florin T.

Tags:

Analyst: Apple's iWatch may be priced at $299, could generate $17.5 billion worth of sales in 12 months
Smart watches are still in their early days. Niche products that can’t seem to generate huge revenues. Apple, however, may think otherwise.

According to CNET, Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty recently predicted that Apple may sell $17.5 billion worth of iWatches in 12 months after the gadget’s initial release. At the moment, there’s no way of telling for certain when (or if) Apple will launch its rumored smart watch, but it could happen towards the end of 2014.

It’s hard to believe that Apple will manage to sell too many iWatches to customers who do not already own iOS devices. That’s why Katy Huberty assumes that the iWatch’s customer base will be similar to that for Apple’s iPad. Apparently, the new smartwatch might cost $299 - that’s also the price that Samsung's Galaxy Gear watch had at launch in late September 2013.

As revealed not long ago, the iWatch could have many health-related functions that will reportedly be used with a new Healthbook app which may debut on iOS 8 later this year. Other than that, the features of Apple's first smart watch remain a mystery for now.

Would you buy a $299 iWatch if it's going to be released this year?

source: CNET

51 Comments
  • Options
    Close




posted on 04 Feb 2014, 11:33 8

1. Finalflash (Posts: 1802; Member since: 23 Jul 2013)


For the question, NOPE, smart watches just serve 0 purpose. I don't need it to tell me I walked however many Km, I can already guess that. For that matter the phones usually keep track of that and so why pay another $300. These companies need to stop wasting time (lol no pun intended) with these smart watches and look into augmented reality or some kind of mind reading device. Something that is truly inspirational and makes money from providing value instead of milking idiots with more money than sense and hardcore zealots.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 13:30 6

23. SellPhones82 (Posts: 520; Member since: 11 Dec 2008)


They might serve 0 purpose for you but that doesn't mean others won't find them useful. With the world becoming more and more health conscious these smartphone health accessories are going to be big. A pedometer is really nothing. Being able to motor heart rate, blood pressure, calories burned, sleep patterns, and more is much more relevant than how many steps you took. Most of those can be monitored through various apps but why not make it much easier and let one app/device monitor it all without having to manually enter the data? Making thing easier to use in everyday life and more efficient is what most people are looking for in their busy lives.
FitBit is having success with their health wearable that run about $99 and only offer health info. We're already seeing info on Samsung's "S Health" app and you can bet that the Gear 2 will have health features added.
I think $300 is a decent retail price, especially for anything Apple. 60 Million sold in a year does seem pretty high considering the iWatch will only work with other Apple devices were Pebble and FitBit work with more than one OS. There is still more functionality that can be added like being able to monitor blood sugar for diabetics. Or what if the watch was able to call 911 for you if it notices your heart rate is incredible low or that you may have just suffered a heart attack? Seems much more useful to everyday life than augmented reality.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 13:53 2

26. darkkjedii (Posts: 11964; Member since: 05 Feb 2011)


You'd have better luck explaining that to a light pole. +1

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 15:15 1

31. Finalflash (Posts: 1802; Member since: 23 Jul 2013)


Haha, good one, lol light pole....that's... that's real funny. But at least it explains why you didn't understand it then.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 15:12 1

30. Finalflash (Posts: 1802; Member since: 23 Jul 2013)


I like how you're hopeful for it to have significant meaning so +1 anyway, but I don't think those are actual uses or good ideas.

Heart rate, blood pressure, calories burned and sleep patterns (plus whatever else you didn't mention) are far more complicated to measure than a watch can do on your wrist. It introduces way too many complicated variables that make that data useless. It can give you a very inaccurate reading based on how and where it is positioned on your wrist, but that is just irrelevant when you have to go home measure it with something serious anyway (in case it is for a serious condition).

Also, no you should not measure blood glucose with it. Anyone who becomes reliant on an inaccurate monitor can end up dying because "their watch didn't go off". Also, it will possibly not be accurate enough and lead to a whole host of false reports causing a lot of inefficiency.

Finally, calling 911 for any reason "automatically" is really stupid because that would lead to a dangerous number of false reports that will actually lead to the whole system coming under stress. The best they can do is to have an "oh s**t" button functionality but why pay $300 for that, there are cheaper ways.

What I am trying to say is that you can not trivialize medical instrumentation that easily to be able to say a watch can measure it to any degree of accuracy. That is dangerous if taken seriously and borderline useless otherwise because it makes the function a little more than for the sake of false gratification. So aside from a tiny smart phone with less functionality, it is at best jewellery.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 19:47

43. SellPhones82 (Posts: 520; Member since: 11 Dec 2008)


We're just at completely different ends of the spectrum on this one. To me, the sky's the limit on what you could with something that's strapped to your wrist as long as it has the right hardware. Also, with what the Fitbit Force and Flex can track I see absolutely no reason why a smart watch could do all that and much more. Algorithms that take into effect your current movement, position (standing or laying down) , body temp, and heart rate could paint a pretty good picture of your overall health condition.
Direct 911 calls wouldn't be the best idea but you could easily have the calls sent to a Care group that would determine whether it really is an emergency. Similar to home security systems that call Brink first and then they call police/fire if needed. There would be instances where it calls in error but I'm sure "Life Alert" has its share of false/accidental calls. Also be curious what percentage of regular calls to 911 aren't emergencies anyways.
That's all just the tip of the iceberg. Independent GPS to allow tracking of kids without given them a cell phone or even employees. We've all gotten use to pulling out our phone to get info and communicate, but being able to look at your wrist is much easier. Especially if you don't have any free hands. Only thing easier than looking at your wrist is just having "look" like you do with Glass.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 20:12

45. SellPhones82 (Posts: 520; Member since: 11 Dec 2008)


... and right on queue is the "Counting $heep" story. I'd post the link but it has the "s" word in it so PA wouldn't allow it.

posted on 05 Feb 2014, 08:48

48. suneeboy (Posts: 165; Member since: 02 Oct 2012)


30 years ago if someone told you your telephone would be able to give you turn by turn directions, or take pictures and videos someone would've said, "Why would you need a phone to do anything other than to talk on?". It's impossible to predict the direction technology will go.

To say something "isn't needed", is against the principles of technology. Something new is ALWAYS needed. Whether it works or not is a different story, but pushing the envelope is always the goal.

I think you are closing your mind to possibilities. We are at the infancy stages of what tech wearables are. You'll look back at comments like this 5 years from now (probably from your SmartWatch) and say, "What was I thinking?"

posted on 05 Feb 2014, 11:15

49. SellPhones82 (Posts: 520; Member since: 11 Dec 2008)


Well said!

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 17:38

38. InspectorGadget80 (Posts: 6584; Member since: 26 Mar 2011)


and i don't think anyone would spend 300$ on a smart watch.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 11:35 2

2. ihavenoname (Posts: 1442; Member since: 18 Aug 2013)


It's expensive, but if I remember right, Galaxy Gear costed the same when it came out. If this has better battery life, I think that this is not bad.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 12:49 2

17. Mxyzptlk (Posts: 3706; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)


Galaxy Gear's options were severely limited. It was a slap job to cash in on the smart watch phase before Apple came out with the iWatch.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 13:14 5

20. donfem (Posts: 552; Member since: 30 Mar 2011)


Always on hand to bash Galaxy and praise to the heavens iphone/ianything. Guess you are paid?

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 15:18 1

32. bigstrudel (Posts: 518; Member since: 20 Aug 2012)


He's right though the Gear was slapped together using 3 year old internals from the S2. There was no chance for Gear to even have decent battery life.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 15:33

33. Mxyzptlk (Posts: 3706; Member since: 21 Apr 2012)


Exactly. I'll wait for him to climb out the hole he dug himself into.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 15:54 5

36. willard12 (Posts: 823; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)


The Gear has 5-6 days battery life when used like a Sony Smart Watch (by pressing the button to wake). It only gets 2 days battery life when the motion sensor is used to wake the device when you lift your arm. The battery life is not as bad as was reported, especially since the update. Having to use a cradle to charge is what can be annoying. But I know 6 days isn't good enough for some people. You will usually see more complaints about the Galaxy Gear from people who have never used one for any length of time. And the complaint will be something ambiguous and not mention a problem with any specific function. For example, what does "slap job" really mean?

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 17:45 2

40. EclipseGSX (Posts: 1616; Member since: 18 Oct 2011)


It means nothing, they are just hater fan boys who will say anything and then bitch when others do the same against their beloved companies. It's quite pathetic really.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 11:41

3. taz89 (Posts: 2014; Member since: 03 May 2011)


This prediction doesn't surprise. Let's be honest there are millions of die hard apple fan boys (that's no diss) which every other oems would love to have and you know they are going to by a new Apple product regardless of anything. Those fans alone will give apple the no 1 device.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 11:45 1

4. evarod48 (Posts: 139; Member since: 30 Oct 2012)


why does this device need a slide to unlock feature??

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 12:06 2

9. Florin.T (Posts: 115; Member since: 16 Dec 2013)


That image isn't real. It's just a mock up.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 13:48

25. Klamba92 (Posts: 203; Member since: 25 Jun 2012)


Sorry if this is off topic but nexus 5 in red is officially on the play store!

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 19:56

44. evarod48 (Posts: 139; Member since: 30 Oct 2012)


oops, silly me

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 11:48 5

5. deventure (Posts: 25; Member since: 15 Apr 2012)


assuming the $300 per watch, the 17.5bn is them selling almost 60 million of them in one year, and that is an incredibly bold guess. Thats almost half as much as what they sell in iphones in a year (~150 million).

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 11:54 2

7. grahaman27 (Posts: 347; Member since: 05 Apr 2013)


Hurray for math... Yeah, that's not happening. Follow the logic?

watches are niche products.
Smart watches are niche products.
___________________________________
Everyone will want an apple smartwatch!

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 12:38 1

13. Commentator (Posts: 2436; Member since: 16 Aug 2011)


Smartphones were a niche product just a few years ago too.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 13:15

21. donfem (Posts: 552; Member since: 30 Mar 2011)


Nice analogy

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 11:51 3

6. PapaSmurf (Posts: 8696; Member since: 14 May 2012)


Not going to happen. Pebble or Sony hasn't even remotely sold over 5 combined, and for them to try to pull off 60 million to hit that target goal is impossible.

EDIT: Saw CNET's name. Dear God.

5,000TH POST!

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 12:08

10. Sauce (unregistered)


I stopped reading at Pebble and Sony lol. Apple always makes their product boom.

Congrats on 5000 :) :)

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 15:46 1

34. Finalflash (Posts: 1802; Member since: 23 Jul 2013)


Yea I see you read the recent iPhone 5C story, that was an explosive piece indeed.

posted on 05 Feb 2014, 21:46

50. Sauce (unregistered)


http://tinypic.com/r/2hxov2e/8

New viral circulating FB lol. Look at that iPhone in the photo.... x'D

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 17:39

39. InspectorGadget80 (Posts: 6584; Member since: 26 Mar 2011)


At least the SONY SMART watch is less expensive then what ever price tag the iwatch would be at.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 12:04

8. kryme (Posts: 142; Member since: 24 Oct 2013)


yea right that will happen only if samsung and the other companies play dead for that 12 months

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 12:11

11. bubbadoes (Posts: 340; Member since: 03 May 2012)


Not gonna sell. People don't even want to shell out $199.00 for a two year contract phone, none the less on some experiment by all the manufactures. Smart-watches are use-less from my perspective. Your phone can do everything your smart-watch is suppossed to do. just another money making plot!

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 12:19

12. patroni0 (Posts: 13; Member since: 26 Mar 2012)


$299??! Hell no and I am a die hard Apple geek, yes galaxy gear was $299 but it was an epic fail, I hope apple learns from that, can't have an accessory device that costs more than the iPhone.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 12:41

14. Commentator (Posts: 2436; Member since: 16 Aug 2011)


It doesn't. The iPhone costs $649.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 13:06

19. PBXtech (Posts: 980; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)


A lot of people will only look at the subsidized price, which is lower for the iPhone than this. The reality is much different, but that's marketing for you.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 12:44

15. CreeDiddy (Posts: 308; Member since: 04 Nov 2011)


One advantage to iWatch is that it will be kinetic or Solar Technology.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 12:46

16. troutsy (Posts: 279; Member since: 17 Feb 2012)


I've got a lot of good things to say about smartwatches, especially if Apple were to make an attempt at producing one. I wouldn't buy it, but I'm glad that they're doing it.

I've got a lot of bad things to say about analysts, especially if they are making predictions about Apple products.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 12:59 1

18. PBXtech (Posts: 980; Member since: 21 Oct 2013)


Not sure if even Apple's marketing can drive people to buy 60 million of these. Let's face it, $300 for a watch is out of reach for a multitude of people.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 13:23

22. Professor (Posts: 154; Member since: 02 Aug 2013)


There is now way Apple is going to make an iwatch and sell it for only $299. If Apple decides to make and sell an iphone you know Apple is going to price it at least around $499. Why? Well they need to make a profit in order to be able to have all those Apple stores...

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 13:43

24. cdgoin (Posts: 369; Member since: 28 Jul 2010)


17.5 BILLION..? Are they on crack..? They would have to sell 58.5 MILLION Of them in 12 months. That's one out of every 16 men, women and children.. There can not be that many people interesting in what amounts to a silly gadget.. ? A overpriced one at that.

A Cell phone that IS a smartwatch.. maybe. But even then it would lose the function of a HQ Camera, etc..

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 14:07

27. bossmt_2 (Posts: 436; Member since: 13 Oct 2009)


I'm not opposed to smart watches but for me they need to hit a few things.

First issue is battery, I think that having multiple ways of charging is first. Solar/motion being my favorite active recharging options. If a smartwatch can't last a day of heavy use what's the point (looking at you galaxy gear) ?

I think having a killer app is the most important thing. Right now it seems like so far the killer app of smartwatches is health tracking which can be easily gotten the same functionality in a Fitbit which the Force is 140 and shows you time as well. Syncing up texting isn't that convenient for me. though I'm sure in the not too distant future they'll have made it so it's highly functional.

Smart use of sensors. Some use this already, Having it so the screen is off at your side and then comes on when you hold your hand to look at the time or texts it automatically comes on. Vibrations also when you have alerts is important. Blinking lights, unimportant.

Use of gestures. On a screen that small you have little use for just touching your screen, using smart gestures to change apps and so on so forth.

Also need something that works for iOS, Android, WIndows, etc. Syncing up to your PC is also important.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 21:44

46. willard12 (Posts: 823; Member since: 04 Jul 2012)


"In practice, you can go at least two days without needing to charge the Galaxy Gear, and it will probably last longer than that."

http://www.techradar.com/us/reviews/gadgets/samsung-galaxy-gear-1178222/review/5

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 14:21

28. DAMONORIBELLO (Posts: 92; Member since: 18 Mar 2012)


Could generate ONE MILLION BILLION GAZILLION QUADRILLION ZIZILLION DOLLARS!!!!! Spew some more BS figures for us. Another site that has been paid off to spread sh!t for news.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 15:05

29. a_merryman (Posts: 685; Member since: 14 Dec 2011)


So long as it can go for about a week on a charge, looks good, and it has all of the fitness stuff baked in. I am so there. I hope they make it so I can respond to text with my voice through it. That is all I want, collect health data, send me the notifications, and let me update my status or tweet or check in or reply to a text using my voice and siri. I dont need a camera or speakers on it, I don't want to play games on it, etc.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 15:47

35. atlvideoguy (Posts: 41; Member since: 24 Feb 2012)


I would actually preorder this. I bought a pebble watch last year and returned it a day later. I was upset the caller id didnt push the name that was in my phonebook to the watch.

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 16:39

37. rusticguy (Posts: 2828; Member since: 11 Aug 2012)


Ok cool. Was analysts estimate met on 5S and 5C sales?

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 18:13

41. networkdood (Posts: 6274; Member since: 31 Mar 2010)


I will wait for a company to create a smartphone with an adjustable screen and one that can be transformed into a watch, rather than buy more redundant tech...

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 18:32

42. Mrmark (Posts: 153; Member since: 26 Jan 2013)


Apple is copying Samsung on price point?

posted on 04 Feb 2014, 23:25

47. Ikechukwu (Posts: 143; Member since: 03 Oct 2011)


She*p go ahead and waste money

posted on 06 Feb 2014, 02:08

51. samirsshah (Posts: 61; Member since: 10 Mar 2011)


It should be $499.

Want to comment? Please login or register.

Latest stories