Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) Watch sales plummet 90%

The Apple Watch may not have sold as Apple expected, and has some investors worried about the future of Apple.

The Plunge

The brand new Apple Watch recently unveiled by Apple has experienced a dramatic change in sales. Since the opening release, sales have dropped 90% as claimed by a market-research study.

Apple Inc. (NASDAQ:AAPL) has been making less than 20,000  Apple Watch sales a day in the U.S. Some days the company sells less than 10,000, which was found out through information from Palo Alto, Calif.-based Slice Intelligence.

To put this into perspective, Apple sold 1.5 million watches during the first week of April 10. This is about 200,000 watches a day, which is monumental compared to the numbers they are getting right now.

To make matters worse, the watches they are currently making the most sales on happen to be the cheaper model. According to Slice, two-thirds of the sales are the “Sport” version, which flaunt a $349 price tag. The more profitable and advanced versions begin at $549.


Apple even attempted to reach out to the wealthy that could could drop a large amount of money on a watch. They released a “gold edition model” which sold for $10,000 or more. Slice states that less than 2,000 of these models have been taken off the shelf just in the U.S.

Slice gathers this information through sending electronic receipts to new customers, following their purchase. This research group directs consumer studies on numerous Fortune 500 companies.

Doubt

This plunge in sales may worry some investors, customers, and fans of the company.

However, you would have to expect the drop in sales following the opening release week. Even if Apple Watch sales go down even more, it may relieve investors knowing it is only four percent of the business. This makes it a tiny part of the bigger picture.

Still, the decrease in sales creates an alarming question. Will Apple still exceed in innovation even after their creative founder, Steve Jobs’ death? It is important to note that this is the first new product to be created and released since Jobs’ death.

Investors and customers are accustomed to seeing Apple products sell quickly, and drop steadily. However, the Apple Watch is Apple’s venture into the market of wearable technology. It has created a rivalry with Fitbit Inc. (NYSE:FIT), creating competition in the world of health monitoring.  An increase in sales is to be expected due to the mindset of needing the latest tech.

Apple has yet to make a comment on the Watch’s drop in sales. It may be too early to fully analyze this data, but investors can justify being worried.

 




SHARE
Previous articleBritain Remembers 7/7 London Bombing Victims
Next articlePujols Will Participate In The Home Run Derby
Vince Wickmann
I enjoy everything related to technology and entertainment. Anything from PC and console games to sports and movies. Love stand-up comedy, Netflix, and learning about technological advancements. Huge fan of the NY Giants, and Real Madrid.

35 COMMENTS

    • Because?
      1. You cannot afford one?
      2. You couldn’t get one?
      3. You don’t have a clue about the Watch because you never used one?
      4. You don’t have an iPhone and the Watch only works with an iPhone?

      Pick one, I am pretty sure it will be valid for you.

      • I wouldn’t say that “it sucks” but it’s obscenely overpriced for a first-gen apple product and more importantly a WATCH (few people wear watches other than for style, which the apple watch lacks entirely). Couple that with the fact that it literally will go out of date in 6 months – year when watch 2.0 comes out and you have a recipe for disaster. Frankly, I’ve been extremely disappointed in Apple’s “innovations” as of late. They continually try to dump new very expensive products in our laps with miniscule improvements over previous generations. At least when Jobs was alive the advancements were far more impressive. He would have never allowed the design of the iPhone 6 or 6s, I can guarantee that — the frickin camera lens sticks out of the back, are you kidding me!? That’s why I’m still using my IPhone 5 and a macbook pro from 2010 that is nearly as powerful as the new 2015 models.

        • “… but it’s obscenely overpriced …” – always a subjecting view

          “… for a first-gen apple product …” – so you’re expecting a 1st gen car for less than $350?

          “… and for a watch …” – It isn’t a watch. It’s a wearable computer. On the other hand it functions as a watch and has an accuracy of 50ms. Can you find any other watch, even one that is only a watch, with an accuracy of 50ms, for less than $350?

          “… style, which the apple watch lacks entirely” – back to subjective.

          “Couple that with the fact that it literally will go out of date in 6 months” – meaning? in 6 months, it will still do everything it did when new. In fact it will do more, because it will soon be running v2 of the OS. This is the first watch I’ve ever bought, that will do more, 3 months after I bought it, than it would do when it was new”

          If, by go out of date, you mean no longer be the latest product in it’s class, then at some point it will. But then that is true of pretty much every item you can buy, so you never buy anything. And then the money goes out of date.

          However, while Android devices are generally out of date a couple of weeks after they launch, Apple products usually remain the latest for 12 months, and then, unlike Android products, invariably get several years worth of fully supported software updates.

          The rest, I assume, was pure rant.

  1. Apparently, so do the Samsung Galaxys. Fortunately, Apple still has the iPhone, iPad, and their laptops. They will be ok, Boltman; not so sure about you.

  2. So it is good news (according to this article) that Apple’s latest product is tanking because it is only 4% of the business? But presumably it is bad news that it is only 4% of the business because it is tanking?
    Apple needs to be more than the iPhone. Sales of the iPad are also tanking (revenue now lower than Mac revenue). If it is not the Watch that is going to rebalance away from just the iPhone, then what else do they have in the pipeline to do this?

  3. Since Apple doesn’t and hasn’t published any Watch sales numbers, this article is just a wild guess based on…a wild guess? LOL
    The Watches are still not available for immediate delivery and at many Apple stores, you don’t find any to buy or only certain models. So far, Apple has sold more Watches in two and a half months than ALL smartwatches sold worldwide over the past couple of years and this includes all Samsung and Pebble models.
    Not a success story? Oh well…

        • Did you ever asked your self; Why in heck would’t they do it?
          They are quite forthcoming when for example the iPhone sales are in question. Aren’t they?
          Now put two and two together.
          Apple didn’t had, even a vague, clue on how much watches they would sell in any time frame and of course they planed not to publish any numbers just in case the sales went south and they did.
          Believe me – If the watch was as popular as they hoped they would reveal the numbers long time ago and no one would remember what they said six months ago let alone care.

          • Did you ever ask yourself why, 6 months before release, they would state that they weren’t going to release sales figures for the watch because the information would be too useful to competitors, if that wasn’t the case?

            With the iPhone, they never stated 6 months before the launch that they wouldn’t be releasing sales figures.

            I’ve put two and two together, and unlike you, I got four.

            “Apple didn’t had, even a vague, clue on how much watches they would sell in any time frame and of course they planed not to publish any numbers just in case the sales went south”

            Your guess. I doubt that they would have invested so much in the watch with no clue about sales. Apple is generally pretty good on Market awareness. It’s generally Microsoft and Google that end up remaindering 90% of products. (see Surface and Google’s TV).

            “… and they did”

            Hmmm No.

            The substantial majority of Apple watches sold are the 42 mm version. Currently no 42 mm models are available on less than 5-7 days, many on 1-2 weeks and some on 2-3 weeks delay.

            Apple are clearly selling as many Apple watches as they can make.

            Now recently, Slice saw a big drop in the number of email receipts that they could see. And at the same time Apple started selling Apple Watch from stores.

            See if you can put two and two together and work out that if I’ve got the receipt in my hand, it’s not in my email.

            “Believe me – If the watch was as popular as they hoped they would reveal the numbers long time ago and no one would remember what they said six months ago let alone care.”

            You spend much of your day trolling articles about Apple to such an extent that I can only assume that you are paid by a competitor. Or that you’re very short Apple. So why would I believe you?

            And even then, my believing you would be predicated on the subject being something that you would have knowledge of.

            But since there is no precedent for Apple stating that they would not release figures, and then releasing them, it is unclear how you could have knowledge. You could only guess. So you ask me to believe you, and then you guess. Not a man that I will ever believe.

            However, I do feel 100% confident, that that is what you would claim.

            And I also feel 100% confident that if they had released those numbers, then you would have been in there, banging your drum, and pointing out that they had said that they weren’t going to release them.

            In any case, they sold 1.5 million Apple Watches in the first 3 hours. That’s pretty good. By your logic, they would have released that. They didn’t.

          • “because the information would be too useful to competitors”
            Right :s – probably the same way the iPhone sale numbers could be useful to competitors, w.a.m. they aren’t useful – hence they are releasing those iPhone numbers, hence there is no reason not to release the watch numbers as well.
            You write much, without a substance.

            1.5M in 3 hours – I guess you got that number from Slice as well. LOL.
            If you only knew how they extrapolate around 9000 actual watch sales to get that number.
            Divide it by two, add a couple hours or days and you will get the actual number. Additionally, it would be more precise to describe those as orders/reservations than sales.
            So yeah, Apple was not happy with the actual sales, nor are they happy now.

          • Apple gave that reason 6 months before release of the device. Why?

            You’re calling it a lie. Give evidence.

            1.5 million in 3 hours come from a wide spread of analysts views on how many devices existed to sell. Slice seem to have adopted that 1.5 million, but the fantasy that they were sold over a week simply ignores that they were sold out after 3 hours.

            You think they were available after 3 hours? How many Apple watches did you buy that day?

            “So yeah, Apple was not happy with the actual sales, nor are they happy now.”

            Cook states otherwise. But then he would.

            You surmise otherwise. But then you would.

            I observer that

            1) all 38 mm watch versions are readily immediately except the Edition.

            2) all 42 mm watches are on at least 5-7 days delivery

            Anyone that can put one and two together and get three, will see that Apple are production restricted, probably due to much higher than expected demand for the 42mm device.

            If you claim that they fake production constraints, then why no constraint faked on the 38 mm device?

            Part problems would only impact asymmetrically for the screen, and that is unlikely. The screens are very similar. There are no rumours about problems particularly on the 42 mm screen.

            So, you attack with vapour. Produce some logic. Put up or shut up.

          • No.
            Slice didn’t ADOPT those numbers from someone else. They gathered around 9000 actual watch orders from 2M “users” they are tracking, extrapolated those 9000 orders by extrapolating that user base onto the entire adult US population and voila they got the 1.5M estimate.
            Assuming that their user base is genuine representation of the whole adult US population is laughable and so is their methodology.

            Yeah – Cook states many things that don’t hold water, sometimes bordering on stupidity, so I wouldn’t count on him being as objective as you wish.

            Your argument about the demand is useless.
            It doesn’t matter what the demand is if you don’t know what the actual sales are.
            The only thing you could draw from it, is that the demand for 42mm watches is greater than production, while the demand for 38mm watches is lower than the production.
            Nothing more, nothing less.

          • “No. Slice didn’t ADOPT those numbers from someone else.”

            I was giving then the benefit of the doubt that they made some attempt to calibrate their sample against known data, but from your “No” you appear to be claiming knowledge that they didn’t do that.

            Fine. The 1.5 million from those with knowledge off the component supply is still the best reference we have, rather than a US only guesstimate based on a sample of people stupid enough to allow their email to be plundered.

            “It doesn’t matter what the demand is if you don’t know what the actual sales are.”

            I completely agree. And it’s great that you’ve finally given in and admitted that you don’t know what the actual sales are. Because until now you’ve been making statements like

            “Apple hasn’t published any Watch sales numbers because they are far lower than what Slice estimates.”

            Why do you keep embarrassing yourself?

          • No one knows the supply numbers and you treat those estimates / quesses / hopes like an empirical fact.
            The point is: there are no repercussions against those who try to estimate if their guesses turn to be wild. So they can report anything they want or worse…
            They are off the hook.
            Apple on the other hand does not have that luxury. That’s why it is so important for Apple to open its mouth and reveal the numbers. The longer they wait the less truthful the initial Slice numbers are.

          • Of all the thing’s that it’s hard to hide or keep quiet, large scale manufacturing capability and orders to a large range of component suppliers, are up at the top of the list. There are far too many places that they can leak

            So manufacturing capacity, is probably the thing that we have the best handle on. History would support this. We can also assume that Apple would have created roughly the capacity to service the demand that they expected. So until they get to their target stock level, we can deduce that they are selling more than they expected.

            Slice’s graph shows US Apple sales plunging with the first suddenly lower data point on 26 June. On 26 June, Apple in the US started selling Apple Watch in real stores and handing out paper receipts which Slice cannot see. And Slices didn’t choose to notice or acknowledge this.

            I know which source I would have more confidence in.

            “The point is: there are no repercussions against those who try to estimate if their guesses turn to be wild. So they can report anything they want or worse…”

            True. I came along to expose those statements as wild speculation. You came along to roll in a basis for attacking Apple.

            “Apple on the other hand does not have that luxury.”

            Are you going to claim to be an Apple shareholder? I think so long as Apple’s shareholders support their approach, then Apple will stick to their policy. Apple do not comment on rumours. Once they start commenting on rumours, then that falls down. The press take control. Giving in to blackmail is rarely constructive

            “That’s why it is so important for Apple to open its mouth and reveal the numbers.”

            Err, No! It’s why it’s essential to not let such garbage journalism damage disrupt their stated strategy.

            “The longer they wait the less truthful the initial Slice numbers are”

            Really? I would have thought that the initial slice numbers would remain as inaccurate as they were when stated.

            Apple are content to ignore them.

            I’m content to point out the amateurishness of slice (not noticing the 26 June discontinuity) and the dishonest nature of journalists (US not mentioned in the title)

            What’s your problem?

          • Yes, “it’s hard to hide … orders to a large range of component suppliers … far too many places that they can leak”
            and it is enough for one supplier not meeting his quota to screw up all the estimates from different suppliers. That is why I don’t buy into those type of estimates because if you just look statistically these could only exaggerate the real number of final products manufactured.

            There is no plunge around 26 of June, just a steady fall from the end of May. Slice graph shows a big 10 fold plunge of orders after the first day the watch has been available and then a steady fall as the time progresses. Mind you this plunge and the fall afterwards is a relative day by day estimate and it is, as such, statistically sound.
            Never the less Slice is still using the extrapolation method I explained before throughout the whole time period, which will give higher numbers than of those actually sold/ordered because the Slice “users” are not representative sample of the US adult population.

            To go back on your previous comment: No I don’t know how many watches are sold – the only thing I have been saying that Slice extrapolation methodology is dodgy.

            “Err, No! It’s why it’s essential to not let such garbage journalism damage or disrupt their stated strategy.”
            Easy way to shut all those “garbage journalists” is to reveal the numbers. It’s simple as that.

            “I would have thought that the initial slice numbers would remain as inaccurate as they were when stated.”
            The Slice numbers are not the unknown variable. The actual sale numbers are.

            “What’s your problem?”
            Sheep herders are my problem. J/K

          • “There is no plunge around 26 of June, just a steady fall from the end of May”

            There are no data points between so there is a straight line between. You call that steady.

            But the first suddenly lower data point is 26 June

            “Sheep herders are my problem.”

            They go and beat up Google and Samsung.

          • steady fall:

            www(dot)macobserver(dot)com
            /imgs/tmo_articles/201707_apple_watch_sales_chart(dot)jpg

  4. Slice makes its estimates my scanning email.

    Who’s email users have ‘no reasonable expectation of privacy’?

    Why would iPhone users (you need one to use Apple watch) be receiving their invoices via gmail ?

    It’s hardly rocket science!

    Just ignore the bull and cut the FUDS

    • “Slice makes its estimates my scanning email.”

      WRONG!

      Slice gathers this information through sending electronic receipts to new customers, following their purchase.

      • And exactly how do you imaging that Slice comes to be in the position of sending electronic receipts for Apple Watches.
        Hint. Almost all Apple watches are sold by Apple. Apply is not in the habit of handing over it’s customer details to slice.

  5. I have made a lot of money with silly articles like this and if you’ve followed any of my posts over the last 6+ years you have made a lot of money on Apple. I will continue to share my strategies and this is yet another great opportunity. The vast number of people who have not made money with Apple are paying attention to silly articles like this, which have cleverly turned words around to support fear. This is the time to BUY – as it has been 4x a year with Apple, which is the average number of times people panic and sell everything when they should be buying. Regarding this article, it is right on target – create a headline that is a half lie and let investors panic. Here’s the reality: – if Apple is selling “only” 10,000 watches a day, which is the WORST case scenario according to whomever, then they are on target to sell 7,200,000 watches per quarter or over 28 million watches per year, which is the higher end of all estimates. So in actuality, this article should read: “Apple right on target with all analyst estimates for the year.” Ridicule this philosophy as much as you want, but it’s a proven fact at this point, that all Apple articles are about creating eyeballs, and the only way to do this is to print something true, but make it seem dire. I feel bad for anyone who keeps succumbing to this stuff, but the bottom line is that Apple’s competition is waning and that’s the only thing that can keep Apple from rising at this point. The world laughed at Carl Icahn for 2 years now and look who is laughing now… sad really…

  6. Here’s a thought. If one is going to be a writer, one could consider learning the difference between “less” and “fewer.”

  7. Watch sales may be tanking so the naysayers are looking for the headstone for the funeral of Apple. How about remembering the last time Apple had a failure? Doesn’t that hold sway in this silly argument? Personally I will never own an iWatch even though I am an Apple supporter, but that’s simply because I don’t wear watches and have no use for one. Just like an iPad of any size won’t be in my collection of electronic thingies. Don’t need it and cannot find justification to waste the money on something I don’t need. While I know that I am becoming a dinosaur I stick with my iMacs and iPhones. They serve me well for what I need to do.

    And since my APPL holdings were purchased at $30 per share prior to the last split I am not panicking at the moment.

    • Popular pastime. Pretending to be an Apple Fanboy and they criticising their products e.g. “While I know that I am becoming a dinosaur…”
      Evidence?
      Nobody that’s been holding Apple shares since they were $30 would refer to the stock as APPL. They’re AAPL.

  8. Mr. Wickman must be new to covering Apple. The Apple supply chain analysis is rarely indicative of sales one way or another.

Leave a Reply to RussellL Cancel reply