NEW YORK (TheStreet) -- iWatch, iWatch, iWatch. That's all that seemed relevant in the conversations surrounding Apple (AAPL) until the recent iPhone refresh. Oh yeah, and hedge fund manager Carl Icahn's recent position.
But by all measures, the iWatch has garnered quite a bit of attention -- especially since it's never been confirmed by Apple. Maybe I'm the only one that has any sort of issue with it. It's not that I don't think the device could be successful, but I'm certainly leery of it.
Maybe it's because I don't think I'll wear an iWatch or a pair of Google (GOOG) Glasses, the latter of which admittedly could be big, especially if they look cool and fashionable. But perhaps the potential iWatch can do something that we're not yet aware of, although it doesn't seem likely.
And the way Samsung rushed into the space with subpar products, just seems amateurish. It makes me feel like this all just a fad. While Apple wasn't the first company to the smartphone, mp3 player or tablet market, it was the first company to get it right. Maybe it'll be same story this time around. Let me be clear: I don't doubt Apple's ability to make incredible products. But I cease to be amazed by an iWatch idea thus far. It just doesn't seem like a game-changer to me. I guess, it doesn't need to be. As Apple has proved in the past, evolutionary products work, but it's the revolutionary ones that make the big bucks and allow for valuation and margin expansion. [Read: Dramatic 48-Hour Shift in Apple Sentiment] I suppose every new product or idea has to start somewhere. Look at the Apple Newton, which ultimately led to the Palm Pilot and then to smartphones and tablets. First generation products generally suck, but in the future they could be great, as long as someone can make them incredible -- which has been Apple's task now for about a decade, although that idea is now being challenged. [Read: This Unlikely Thief Could Steal Your Retirement] We keep hearing, "Apple can't innovate anymore, but an iWatch would change that." But I have to ask, how? This product alone, regardless of how it looks, operates or sells, is the only thing that analysts, investors and the tech world need to see for Apple to 'prove' itself worthy of innovation?
News flash: Apple doesn't give a damn. They know they can innovate and they're going to take their sweet time doing things how they always have: Their way.
Back to the iWatch. Health and wellness are one of the many up and coming trends that are likely here to stay. As a result, we see companies like FitBit and Nike (NKE) coming out with wearable technologies to track movement, distance and even sleep. [Read: Google's Android Tablets: The Achilles Heel]
So an iWatch could contribute significantly to that crowd. I know these chips are powerful, especially for mobile check-ins with merchants, healthcare and improved integration with technology down the road. If it actually looks cool, it could be an accessory or fashion piece, but I just don't see that catching on like wildfire.
Don't get me wrong: I want the iWatch to be successful. Hell, I'm a shareholder, so of course I want it to. But I just don't think it will be out-of-this-world great. If it can contribute to the bottom-line, then sure, let's go with it. But Apple will need something much bigger and much more significant going forward, like in the living room. Even based on optimistic estimates, the iWatch would 'only' add about $10 billion to $15 billion a year to Apple's annual sales figure, according to most estimates. I say "only" because Apple's annual sales are simply massive. For the iWatch to matter, it will have to have colossal sales, even though the optimistic $15 billion per year would be quite amazing for most companies. [Read: Red Hat's Growth Strategies Deserve a Tip of the Cap] So, while I want the iWatch to do well -- trust me, I do -- I'm not convinced it will be anything close to a game-changer, assuming it exists. But if for some reason, the introduction of it somehow convinces the market that this company can all of a sudden innovate, then sure, let's see it. -- Written by Bret Kenwell in Petoskey, Mich. . At the time of publication the author is long AAPL. Follow @BretKenwell This article is commentary by an independent contributor, separate from TheStreet's regular news coverage.
Bret Kenwell currently writes, blogs and also contributes to Robert Weinstein's Weekly Options Newsletter. Focuses on short-to-intermediate-term trading opportunities that can be exposed via options. He prefers to use debit trades on momentum setups and credit trades on support/resistance setups. He also focuses on building long-term wealth by searching for consistent, quality dividend paying companies and long-term growth companies. He considers himself the surfer, not the wave, in relation to the market and himself. He has no allegiance to either the bull side or the bear side.
No comments:
Post a Comment