TAG Heuer increases Carrera Connected orders from 1,200 to 2,000 per week

Comments

  • vn33

    Somehow for me, I always associate expensive watches with a precise, mechanical movement (usually Swiss-made), If I buy one of these watches, I want to hand it down to my son …
    Either the the above is the same sentiment for some here, or I have been successfully brainwashed by the watch companies … (Philippe Patek, anyone ?) 🙂

    • Philosoraptor

      After the 2 year warranty is up, TAG will let you trade it in for a Carrera mechanical watch if you pay $1500 (US). It’s not exactly a steal, but better than Apple offers on its luxury models.

    • vn33

      How much is the Carrera in the first place? Wouldn’t it make sense just to buy it originally?
      I don’t have any idea, since luxury goods are appreciated, but not afforded 🙁

    • Philosoraptor

      The Carrera’s US$3000. Though, this particular Carrera is only available to the smartwatch buyers, so it’s likely to be “cheaper”. In any case, It should be worth more than $1500, otherwise what’s the point?

    • Mo Dabbas

      After two years you can trade it with a mechanical watch for 1500. Then you can hand that one to your son.

    • Brad Fortin

      “Here’s an antique, son. In a few decades, if these are still worth anything, you might be able to sell it to make my/your money back, or possibly more!”

  • ArcillaR

    If you think an apple watch can be considered a luxury watch among Swiss mechanicals, then you need to give your head a shake.

    • FlamesFan89

      Yeah, I question that first sentence as well. Has the Apple Watch Edition actually caused any disruption to the luxury watch market? I highly doubt it.

      I don’t doubt that they have sold some, but I would guess that it is people who have also bought real luxury watches, and have the money to buy as many watches as they want. The result being that Joe Moneybags now has one extra watch, as opposed to buying the Apple Watch INSTEAD of a different luxury watch.

    • It’s Me

      You might be right. Though, if you are, one has to wonder why Tag would bother with a digital watch at all. Their brand and reputation are based entirely on their mechanical movement watches, so why would they risk diluting their brand? They must see some sort of threat. The 8.5% decline in Swiss watch exports may or may not be related to rise of smart watches but it’s difficult to ignore either way.

      And while Joe Moneybags might be able to buy as many expensive watches as the want, not everyone can. You and I might be able to afford a nice watch but it’s unlikely we can afford very many of them. And if one chooses an expensive smartwatch now, then it’s that much less likely you will buy a nice mechanical at the same time.

    • FlamesFan89

      Why does Tag have to view smartwatches as a threat in order to get into the business? Couldn’t they just see it as a new market and look to take advantage of some potential additional revenue, without doing anything whatsoever to their brand or existing revenue streams?

      The decline in Swiss watch exports you mention. Over what time period is that? could that perhaps be more attributed to current economics rather than smartwatches? I’m sure that you are fully aware that correlation does not equal causation.

      Furthermore, your point about not everyone being able to afford a nice watch is a complete non sequitur. If someone is in a position where they can’t afford nice watches, of the true luxury variety, but they decide to buy a smartwatch as their one purchase, then they absolutely, most definitely, are in no position to be even considering a watch that starts at $10,000.

    • It’s Me

      I suppose they might just be getting into it as a new business. But it’s a new business they have no experience it, is completely outside of their their expertise, was one they subjected to ridicule not long ago, a business that almost no one has shown an ability to profit in yet and certainly not with the margins they are accustomed to and absolutely has the potential to diminish their brand. Consumer electronics are often a low margin business for companies that are experts in the field, so I don’t really see why a company with no experience in the industry would want to jump in other than as a response to a threat.

      As for causation, I never claimed it was. I clearly said the drop might or might not be related, but it is certainly work considering. They reported the 8.5% drop in the last quarter ending sept. This was followed by an even larger decline reported for Oct, which was their largest monthly decline in 6 years. Mostly attributed to the economy in Asia, the biggest decline was in the $500-$1000 range which happens to be where the Apple Watch is doing quite well. There may not be a direct causal relationship, but it can’t be ignored either. Well, I guess one could ignore it but only if intentionally ignoring facts that might be related fits the narrative.

      As for my non sequitur, you completely missed the point. I was responding to your point about Joe Moneybags being able to buy as many expensive watches as the want. I might be able to afford one or two but certainly not unlimited or “as many as I want”. See the difference? So, for someone that could afford to buy an expensive watch, but not an unlimited number, then yes, buying a expensive $1000 smartwatch now might mean at least delaying the expensive watch purchase for now. Joe Moneybags might have enough money to buy as many of either as they want, being able to afford one expensive watch doesn’t mean being able to afford an unlimited number of them. That simply doesn’t equate.

    • FlamesFan89

      Basically everything you just said had zero meaning. You are reaching, speculating, and have no basis for your first paragraph. And the rest is completely moot as we are talking about the Edition watch only. As in the one that costs $10,000+. Anything in the $1000 range had no bearing on the conversation.

      Oh, and whether the watch is electronic or mechanical, it’s still a watch, and if there are any players in the smartwatch game that know something about, um, watches, I’d say it is Tag, not Apple, which is why the Tag watch looks like a watch and the Apple watch looks like a child’s toy.

    • It’s Me

      Ahh, yes, sorry missed that you were talking only about the Edition model.

      As for it “still being a watch”, as a wrist worn computer that also tells time, it’s as much a watch as my wall mount TV with a clock display is a grandfather clock. Or as much as my notebook computer is a book. An old school German clock maker probably doesn’t know a lot about designing, build and selling LED TVs nor a print shop much about designing, building and selling laptops. But they could both go into new businesses for new revenue. They could both learn the business but it wouldn’t be a natural extension of their expertise. But you are right about why it looks more like a watch. Tag knows watches.

      No basis for my first paragraph? Does tag have any experience in consumer electronics or computers? No. In designing, assembling, supporting or selling CE? No. Are margins in CE anywhere close to luxury watches? No. Was Tag dismissive of smart watches? Completely. That was my first paragraph. They have no electronics expertise. They do high margins. They went from dismissive to embracing. They acknowledged a threat. None of that is speculation. That is all facts. But I get why some will ignore them. If facts are inconvenient to the narrative, ignore them.

      As for whether they see it as a threat, the top leadership has said of the Apple Watch and smart watches in general and to explain why this new entry, things along the lines of “we cannot afford lose the wrist” and “we cannot afford to ignore the tsunami coming”. You might not see a threat. They do.

    • FlamesFan89

      Your whole gobbledegook about not knowing anything about consumer electronics assumes that a 155 year old, highly successful company, which no doubt employs numerous talented engineers, as well as business minds, also knows absolutely nothing about hiring, outsourcing, or research and development. Do you assume that they said “hey look, these things are selling well, let’s not really put any real thought into this, and simply cobble some crap together, and slap our name on it”. Or perhaps, do you think they might take the approach of, this looks like a market that is growing, and is in the same space we are in. Sure we dismissed it, but they seem like they might be doing well, so let’s take all the right steps to get a piece of that pie. We should be able to leverage our name which will help”.

      No, you are right, they more likely said, “We are a highly successful, 155 year old, well respected company, with a highly recognizable name, but we are scared poopless of a competitor that is brand new to the market. They sold a bunch of watches to people who weren’t likely to be our customers anyway, so let’s head into this like chickens with our heads cut off, and not do any real research, or hire anyone to help in the areas that aren’t our bread and butter. In fact, since we don’t know a single thing about consumer electronics, let’s put a mouse running on a wheel inside the watch, and see if anyone notices.”

      I realize I am using reductio ad absurdum here, but you are essentially doing the same, as your argument is based on them not knowing anything about CE, and therefore they must be acting rashly. You keep reducing it to the concept that it must be a “threat”, when it could just as easily be reduced to a “potential new revenue stream”, or an inroads to potential new customers. There are many people who are willing to drop serious coin on CE, but don’t care about watches, so would never buy a Tag. If Tag can convince them that they can have both a cool device, AND a sweet Tag watch, well then, Tag just gained a NEW customer. Your stance completely ignores that Tag could be trying to earn NEW business, simply because it is inconvenient to YOUR narrative.

    • It’s Me

      You’re entire position of them not getting into this business as a response to a threat ignores the fact that they said they are getting in to it as a response to a threat.

      I have no doubt they are getting into this to earn new revenue. They aren’t getting into it to lose money or embarrass themselves. So, no, my narrative doesn’t require them to be getting into it in order to make fools of themselves or to lose money. It requires actually paying attention to what they’ve said and the facts.

      I am not sure their age has anything to do with how well they will do in a completely new field. Sure, they could buy the expertise that they do not have. The Bay is a very old company. Even older than Tag. They could buy themselves some expertise and release a nice mechanical watch or a car. It would be dishonest not to consider their lack of experience in the field.

      So, in order to take you stance that this isn’t a reaction to the threat of smart watches, one has to ignore that (a) they said it was a response to the threat of smart watches and (b) that it is something they aren’t experts in (acknowledging that sure, they could buy expertise in the completely new field they historically know nothing about). Obviously they are relying on their brand/industrial design skills helping to make it a success. In terms of what they bring to the table, that’s about all they can rely on. The rest they have to buy. They certainly can’t rely on their 155 years of experience in designing computers or electronics.

      They sure released it very quickly. Not sure how much effort could go into a product that was rushed out the door. Or perhaps you think a few months isn’t a rushed product. Perhaps their 155 years of being in business magically makes them able to not just produce better consumer electronics that specialists in the field but to do it much, much faster as well. I am sure they took “all the right steps to get a piece of that pie” in a few months.

    • FlamesFan89

      Blah blah blah threat blah blah blah threat blah blah blah negative blah blah blah threat.

      You keep using the word threat, and whether you intend it to or not, it has very negative connotations, that suggest that they feel that should they ignore the space, it will lead to the destruction of the company. Not just cut into profits a bit. That is how your posts read, again, whether you intend it in that manner or not.

      I have no doubt that they didn’t expect the space to do well, and now have changed their minds on that, and are responding, but I still disagree that they see it as a threat. You mention the quote “we cannot afford to lose the wrist.” Did you actually listen to that interview in context? He also stated, just prior to that line, that they “believe there is a new clientele, a new customer base” Hmmmm. that sounds eerily familiar to something someone said in this thread, it might have been me.

      He also outright dismisses the Apple Watch Edition, saying that slapping some gold on something doesn’t make it luxurious, it just makes it expensive.

    • It’s Me

      Seriously? Of course it has negative connotations. But a threat doesn’t mean something that’s going to drive them out of business. It can as easily mean something that is otherwise negative for them, whether that means cutting into profits, slowing growth, hurting their bottom line. And with that, they clearly saw smartwatches as a threat.

      And in the face of an overall slow down in their business for whatever reason, any threat that threatens to add further weakness needs to be taken seriously.

      Or they could have stuck their heads in the sand in the face of the threat they saw. Pretending a threat doesn’t exists because someone thinks threat is too negative a word to use isn’t a great business model.

    • FlamesFan89

      But therein lies the rub. All your posts generate this scenario of: Apple came along, scared the begeezers out of everyone, and now everyone is running scared and making rash decisions, and they clearly don’t have a clue what they are doing! The sky is falling, the sky is falling.

      That’s the image you seem to portray.

      My point, all along, has been, and remains, that they didn’t foresee smartwatches doing well. They likely looked at it like the next 3D TV type fad (I’m still not convinced it isn’t), but when smartwatches started selling well, they took an approach of, hey, let’s get in on that. It’s reactive yes, but more in a poop, we may have missed out on an opportunity, kind of way, and not the “The Apples are coming, The Apples are coming” way that you would present.

      Again, smartwatches don’t seem to come across as something that is actually cutting into the luxury watch business, as more it is a new space, that Tag doesn’t want to miss out on.

      Also, going back to the whole discussion on Tag knowing nothing about making CE, the reverse is also true. Apple clearly didn’t know anything about making watches before getting into that business (I mean look at that hideous thing). They didn’t know about making watch bands, about watch fashions, about demands and trends in watches and watch styles. They made a hideous watch, and sold a bunch to their faithful and to people who likely aren’t Tag customers in the first place (because if they were, they likely wouldn’t be caught dead walking around with something that looked like THAT on their wrist).

    • It’s Me

      I think you’d only read that if you were looking to read that, especially since I never wrote any such thing. I questioned why a great mechanical watch maker would want to get into a new industry whose only commonality with their experience and expertise is that it’s worn on the wrist. I wrote that they likely saw smartwatches as a threat, not Apple in particular, since they said they saw smartwatches as a threat.

      As far as them getting into it because smartwatches are doing well, well, most are not. They are a money pit. One often doesn’t take 155 years of business experience and say “hey, here’s a business that has nothing to do with us and it’s making no money at all, let’s jump it and see how we do”.

      Like I said, sneakers are doing well. Obviously not a fad. They should take “an approach of, hey, let’s get in on that”. I mean, that would make sense, right? No it wouldn’t. That would be dumb (unless the just licensed their name to Nike or Reebok, in which case they’d likely make a lot of licensing revenue).

      No one said the sky is falling. They said they saw a threat and responded to it a threat so as “not to lose the wrist”. They obviously. But the lack of sales shown by most is not what attracted them to the business either.

    • FlamesFan89

      You seem to have missed the part where this is a watch company making a watch, not a department store making a car, or a watch maker making a shoe.

      This is a watch maker, making a… *gasp* watch.

      It’s more akin to Ford deciding to make a Miata-esque sports car, or McDonalds deciding to offer steaks, or reebok making dress shoes.

    • It’s Me

      Wow. You seem to have missed the part that a mechanical watch has as much in common with a smart watch as a wall mounted TV has with a wall clock. Worn on wrist and can display the time; mounted on the wall and can display the time…not the same just because of the naming and appearance.

      In both cases, one is a mechanical device whose sole purpose is using physical mechanisms to drive movement to show the time and the other is a computer, using circuitry, semiconductors, digital displays, memory and an OS with a display that happens to be able to display the time. But both show time and have common physical locations. They are totally the same thing, right?

      A more accurate name would be wrist computer, but that doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue. But because it’s called a watch, though it shares basically nothing in common with a mechanical watch, you think it’s a watch…because of the naming and appearance.

      Hillroy should start making notebook computers using that sound logic. I mean, they make notebooks and notebook computers are called notebooks. They both fold open and close. You read and write with both of them. You even use both of them at a desk or in your hands.

      That is a notebook maker, making a…*gasp* notebook. Makes perfect sense to confuse the two.

      A notebook computer is not the same as a notebook just because they share a name a can serve some similar functions. A mechanical wall clock is not a TV just because they can both tell time and mount on the wall. A Corvette warship is not the same as a Chevy Corvette just because they share a name and both move fast. A server farm isn’t the same as a chicken farm just because they are both called farms. Your emails don’t arrive in your physical mailbox. A smartphone share more in common with your PC than with an analog rotary phone, even though they both can make phone calls. Moses didn’t come down with the 10 commandments on a tablet computer, but I can see where that could be confusing.

      Those all have as much in common with their other, as smart watches have with mechanical watches. It’s nowhere close to being like your examples.

    • FlamesFan89

      That was the most long winded way to say that you don’t understand the watch industry possible.

      I have to admit, I didn’t read it all, as it was boring, nonsensical, and well… boring.

      I suggest you buy a Timex, it would be fitting.

    • It’s Me

      I’m looking for a new TV. Should I consider the Timex? I mean they both tell time, so same thing, right?

      The nonsensical part is that someone in today’s age would confuse what’s involved in making a mechanical watch and making a smartwatch. I wouldn’t even expect that of my mom and she’s well into her 70’s. But she was never slow on the uptake.

    • FlamesFan89

      It’s a shame she didn’t pass those genes on.

    • It’s Me

      It appears she did. If I said something like “This is a watch maker, making a… *gasp* watch”, then she would be very disappointed. She’d expect better.

    • FlamesFan89

      It’s sad how mistaken you are

    • Brad Fortin

      What’s the definition of a luxury item, again? Something that only has high sales among the wealthy?

  • ArcillaR

    If this watch was under 1k, I would consider buying it because at the end of the day, you are still only getting a digital watch. Yet, there is so much potential here. There can be optional future upgrades in either digital or mechanical configurations. ie. mechanical: with or without chrono. For digital, options are endless. These options could also be available with different watch faces for each configuration. If this doesn’t happen now, someone else will make it happen in the near future.