Moto 360

One of the things that's been up in the air about the Moto 360 has been its expected price,, though Motorola may have tipped their hand thanks to the legalese requirements of contest law. We've been looking at the Android Wear-powered smartwatch and wondering just how much Motorola planned to charge for something that's very much unlike any other smartwatch on the market at this point. But the rules that Motorola has posted for a watchface design contest for the Moto 360, with the smartwatch itself as the grand prize, gave an indication of how much they intend to charge: $249.

That number comes courtesy of the legal requirements in contests like this, where Motorola is required to lay forth the approximate retail value of prizes so that entrants can estimate their tax burden upon winning. And also so Motorola can cover their own asses in the event that something goes wrong or somebody feels wronged. But that meant that Motorola had to state outright:

One (1) grand prize winner will receive a Moto 360 (ARV $249).

That is by no means a guarantee nor official announcement of the Moto 360 pricing, though it does jive with our expectations for the smartwatch. Giving an inaccurate number on official prize rules like this could get Motorola in hot water, however. So while we caution you that this isn't an official price for the Moto 360, it's a pretty good bet that $249 will be the price when Motorola is ready to say that it is.

Source: Motorola (Google Drive)

 

Reader comments

Moto 360 valued at $249 in official Motorola contest rules

131 Comments
Sort by Rating

Boooooooo! A smartwatch shouldn't be priced higher than the Nexus 7 (2013) or Moto G. Especially for such low level tech. But it is a nice watch.

You are crazy! 250 is literally the lowest this watch could have have ever been priced and comparable to the competition of smart watches 250 is BEYOND competitive. This watch is amazing.

Did I miss something? What exactly is amazing about it? $250 is a bust as far as the average consumer is concerned. That's who they were supposed to be targeting, no?

Sorry, $250 will not get you a nice watch. Perhaps nice looking for while and/or a fake knockoff. My point was I think $250 is too high to get something like current smartwatches into the masses. I can't picture a kid convincing their parents, or anyone non-techy, that they need something that does a fraction of what the device in their pocket does for $250. I was genuinely curious if that person knew something I didn't about it being amazing. It looks good, sure. Once they tie in all of the sensors for fitness etc. and you can otherwise leave your smartphone at home you'll have mainstream interest.

Smartwatches aren't "for the masses". They're a luxury item, pure and simple. This is as good a price as anyone could have realistically hoped for.

Posted via Android Central App

Absolutely agree. That said, obviously the OEMs would like them to be mainstream. Guess we'll see. What could be better than an entire group of "kids" sitting at the same table, not talking, with their faces buried in their phones? Watches...

Why is a camera a deal breaker? It's not gonna be as good as the one on your phone (never mind a real one) and you usually have to interact with any device for at least a few seconds to take a photo so taking the phone out of your pocket isn't gonna lengthen the process... At least not like it would for simply glancing at notifications.

Sounds like a personal preference/rationalization, or you really like your Gear. I'd actually prefer they don't overburden the device (physically and computationally) with a camera, specially if it means a permanent wrist band.

I wouldn't get it if it had a camera!. One of the stupidest things I can think of to add to a smart watch. Just my opinion, but I'm so glad they left that out!.

this is my signature

Yup, no stupid camera wart, no crappy boxy design, no manufacturer specific pairing. This beats the shit out of the Galaxy Gear.

Posted via Android Central App

You may be the only person I have heard say that. Take a look at any of the galaxy gear watches..then tell me the Moto360 is ugly.

K

The Moto 360 definitely sets the bar for look and style. The Gear smart watches are bright, bulky, and ugly.

Brought to you by the Nexus M8

makes you wonder what his significant other looks like...lmaoo. Sorry Deke, just an opening for a jab. I had to take it. lol. Just ribbing you a little.

Got the GG1 on my arm as I type this and the Moto crap is one UGLY watch. {Wait until you see it up close and in person. The thing is the size of a Frisbee} There are going to be some VERY disapointed people here.

Bro you can't judge a watch you've never seen! You're just going overboard now!

Brought to you by the Nexus M8

That's straight up trolling, first you're saying it should have a camera, now it's too big... Those things are at odds with each other.

Of course, style is always a *huge* matter of preference. I never felt that the GG look half as ugly as a lot of people seemed to, but I (personally) think the Moto360 looks even better. If you don't, there's nothing wrong with that. But we should be careful not to get into the mentality of "that's stupid, because *I* don't like the way it looks."

I say the same thing when I see people ragging on the extra features Samsung bakes into their phones. Just because *you* don't use it, doesn't mean that it shouldn't exist.

Yeah, that's really nice but definitely not what's shown above. It looks much cheaper with a plastic/leather band. Don't be surprised if that version runs you another $100.

Totally. Here's to hoping the LG sits somewhere between $150 to open up Android Wear to folks not willing to spend that premium price (or who don't like round watches?).

This is amazing news IMO, i'll most certainly be purchasing at that price point if it sticks, heck even if it's a little more i'll be picking one up.

My desire to obtain one is steadily decreasing! I was super hyped but now the long wait without ads of coming soon or commercials of that sort destroyed my anticipation.

As long as we are speculating: $249 with a synthetic band? How much of an increase for a metal band?

Posted from my XT1080M

Where did you get that it will have a synthetic band? They've been using the words "genuine leather." Hell, Pebble comes with a real leather band, and so does a $30 Timex; I'm sure they would lambasted for using anything but genuine leather (and stainless steel) in their bands.

Not very relevant in my opinion. Buy the watch, then purchase any band of your choosing. They are interchangeable.

Posted via Android Central App

So, contest winnings are added to total income and up the tax burden? Didn't realize people actually reported that stuff.

Yup, which is why you should always "sell" your child their first car for $1, rather than "give" it to them. If it's a gift, they're legally supposed to report it as "income" when they file their taxes. Kind of a messed up tax system, isn't it?

I'm not a big fan of smartwatches but this is nice. I'd definitely wear that.

Posted via Android Central App

The more I look at this watch, the uglier it looks. I was really excited when I first saw it but it looks too big and chunky

Posted via Android Central App

Any more than $250 and it wouldn't really reach critical mass, even at that price a lot of mainstream consumers will balk. If it's well made and delivers on it's promises I'm in at $250 tho, any somewhat fancy watch would be at least half that much... Seems like $200-300 is my tipping point for a lot of things tho (cheap camera lenses, headphones, tablets, etc). YMMV

Assuming that's the price for the metal band version, I'll take one please.
Posted via Android Central App

They forgot to mention in the post that the contest will be awarded on June 24, so that's probably close to the release date.

Of all the smartwatches that are currently available or on the way, this is the only one I would consider. However, $250 is way out of my price range, so I'll just wait a year until the Moto 360+1 comes out, then buy this one for $100.

I think this price is reasonable. I mean, a "nice" watch (not Rolexes and such) can run 200-500. So 250 for a nice watch with a ton of functionality, is reasonable IMO

Time to put the Seiko' s away for a few days a week. Not a bad price at all.

Posted via Android Central App

Less than I expected, but still too much for me to dabble into the market. That is of course unless they come up with some game changing features...

Posted via Android Central App

I really like the look of the Moto 360 but I think I will wait a few generations before I jump on the wearables bandwagon. I just don't have the need for it. It's not like it is a burden to pick my phone up and look at it. We'll see, maybe they will have some feature that will really add value, but I just don't see it now.

Less than I expected, but still too much for me to dabble into the market. That is of course unless they come up with some game changing features...

Posted via Android Central App

Appearance is always subjective. On a side note, you might want to consider changing your screen name to not be your email address. Just a thought.

This is great news. Here's to not having a launch day SNAFU so people that want one can have it. I'll be getting this and the LG when they hit the street. The G/F would like a smart watch too, so we can share. She wore my Sony Smart Watch (1st Ed) for a couple days and liked it.

Now we know what and how much. Tell us WHEN........

Hmmmmmmmm.... I'm really loving my SG2 Neo (and so do all my friends), but the Moto 360 is pretty darn sexy IMHO. Maybe I'll be a two watch at time guy. ;)

Don't be *that* guy. Please, let the 80's rest in peace ;)

You *could* however alternate watches between different days.

:) I would never wear two watches at once and never knew that was ever a trend.

BTW does that mean I should stop wearing my parachute pants?

I agree, I can't imagine they cost that much to make. These prices will drop for sure in the future. Then we'll probably see alot more of these watches on peoples wrists. I won't be getting one til they come free with the $600+ I pay for my phones

Why does everyone complain about smart watches when they aren't feature rich and when they are, people complain about battery life. This watch has all of the actual needed features. I mean really, does a watch need a camera? Aren't you carrying your phone on you already? This is a bluetooth peripheral. An extension of the phone. That said, how many of you drop $150-300 on a nice set of headphones? Kinda in the same league except this isn't a one pony show.

Posted via Android Central App

Heh, I've got like three pairs of headphones in that price range (portable on ears, closed ones for living room, open ones for gaming/desk), plus a $100 pair of IEM (tho I got them on sale for half that, then spent $100 on custom molded sleeves)... So yea, in that context I guess $250 for a smartwatch isn't much, cheaper than most of my camera lenses too and I can only use one of those at a time as well...

It's all relative tho, everyone places a different value on things. I think if they're a hit these watches will definitely drop in price tho, but I don't mind paying the early adopter tax if it's sleek enough out of the gate, at least not at $250... $300+ would make me think twice about it.

Wow... I was thinking about the LG G watch, but now... This has caught my eye. $249 might be do-able.
But yet again I'll have to compare. This is like about 2/3 of my phones price (N5, 32gb). Tough decision to be made.

Posted via Android Central App

So it is right in line with the galaxy gear, and not the $99 watch everyone hoped for. THe only thing to see now is how the features add up against the LG watch and if Samsung opens the gear up now that they have real competition (no pebble was not it).

On looks alone I would go Moto, but we need the whole picture first. Not to mention see if Moto drops the price 20 times in the first 3 months (by invitation only of course)

In the other rumor threads, everyone was hoping 100-149$ because of some of the other pricing moto has done (X, G, E).

$99 might be an exaggeration, but not far off...

Aren't those low phone prices the subsidized price? I wish people would use common sense & figure out that they really pay as much (if not more) than retail price on subsidized phones.

No they are not.

$350 for the X, no contract
179 Or 199 (double storage) for the G
129 for the Moto E

$250 for the watch

$99 out of the gate for a non-Nexus device was unrealistic, tho I'm sure if they're a hit we'll see $99-150 variants a year or two later. Ultimately the BoM just can't be that high for something this small, but early on we're paying for way more than the device, we're paying for the R&D, early adopter tax, etc.

That chrome rim better be metal and not plastic as it appears. That band will be replaced so no worries on that. I'd buy one for $250. It's actually in my price range for dumb watches.

Oh Thank God, it's too expensive for me to buy. I worried it might be 150$ and I'd be 150$ poorer

250 is good. For us who work for a living it is but a pittance. :P
OK seriously I have been wondering why we have seen so very little news about the 360. they hyped it pretty good and then it got quiet. Wonder if they had a problem or?

I just hope they're gearing up for a big reveal and it's not a sign that Google's software is still very beta... It'd be a huge step back to release a janky Android powered smartphone (Gear aside) now that stock Android is so polished on phones and tablets. They really gotta think about the brand as a whole now.

The price is fine. I'm a watch junkie and I would be hard pressed to only use one watch all the time.

Posted via Android Central App