Posted March 13, 2018 by & filed under News, Video.

Following the underwhelming launch of its debut ‘Spectacles’, Snapchat has decided to take another step into the wearables market with Spectacles Mark 2 & 3. The Flaunt Digital team discuss the news in Episode 7 of the Industry Spotlight. Why not subscribe to our YouTube channel?

See below for the full video transcription.

 

VIDEO TRANSCRIPTION

Lee: So, Snapchat have said that they’re going to release a second version of their glasses. Based on the success of the first set, I don’t see how that decision has been come to internally, but they’re going to have another crack. Apparently, there’s going to be a lot more tech in these glasses. There’s going to be a wider application for them, in terms of using them for things like VR. The price point is a little bit higher, so it’s retailing at $300 as opposed to the first set, which was $130. Based on the demographic, I don’t really see how Snapchat are going to make…

Jamie: It’s a lot of pocket money.

Chris: There’s, like, two years’ worth of pocket money saving to do there, isn’t there really? 

Jamie: Yeah, I think it’s pretty cool from a tech point of view. You’re basically getting a pair of glasses with multiple cameras on it, by the sounds of things, water resistance. So it could be something that might be used elsewhere. I know, I think the first edition was just tied to Snapchat exclusively. I don’t think you can use it as an actual camera outside of Snapchat, I think. So if this one is a bit more open in terms of integration with other stuff, that tech, just at that price point, could be pretty cool.

You know, we were chatting before, it’s almost like when the Wii came out and people were buying Wiimotes just to use in their little pet projects. Because that had so many sensors in it, without even having a Wii, basically. So this could be the same type of situation. If it takes off and they market it right, it might get the geeks in just for the sheer amount of tech that’s on the little gadget. But 300 quid…for just a heavy Snapchat user to drop 300 quid on this, following last year’s 130 quid that no one bought. I don’t know. It’s clutching at straws isn’t it.

Chris: It’d be interesting to see what they do in terms of marketing, as well, how much they’re prepared to actually invest in it from a marketing standpoint to get it off the ground and get it there.

Jamie: They should drop a billion dollars on Kim Kardashian to wear them for a bit.

Chris: Yeah. Well, it’s pretty much going to be their own Snap audience, isn’t it, that they’re going to be wanting to attract mainly. So it’s going to be inside its own ecosystem, in a way, anyway. It’s just, I think, the affordability thing, like you said, is just going to be a massive angle. It’s only going to be, you know, kids with, you know, rich parents, that basically are going to be getting this sort of tech.

Lee: I just don’t know who they’re trying to compete with. The interesting application is augmented reality. You’ve got people like Apple and Samsung, who are introducing that native now into phones where you can do Bitmojis and stuff like that, so, if they’re going to replicate that, surely it’s just a more disconnected way of achieving that.

Jamie: Yeah, I suppose augmented reality is not necessarily what this is aimed at, though. Multiple cameras, you get the depth of stuff, don’t you, which is pretty cool in its own right, so you can do, like, head tracking and stuff in better detail, and depth perception and stuff. You can do AR with a single camera though. 

Chris: They’re trying to make it fun, though, aren’t they? It’s not as serious as that, I don’t think. I think they’re trying to make it quite an interesting, you know, faddish product to own out there. 

Lee: But I’m thinking of a 12- to 24-year-old girl, at a push 24-year-old, may not even have $300 to spend on them, though, so the practical thing to do would be to aim at the augmented reality audience, which I don’t think they’ve got there. Now, I might be way off, but…

Chris: I really don’t think people are reading into it that far though. I think it’s just a fashion statement, as well, isn’t it? I mean, obviously, you can choose from…is it three different colors or something like that. So I think for people, you know, kids at that age, I think it’ll be a fashion angle as well. Then it’ll just be the next cool thing to have it, won’t it?

Jamie: The rarity angle on the launch for the old ones didn’t go down very well, either, with the vending machines and the one store in New York, and they eventually put in Harrod’s, I think. It’s like, either, I don’t know. It’s cool, and it’s rare, but I don’t know if it really worked. 

Chris: Is it a bit of a fad? I don’t know. I don’t know how long it’ll last, if there’s any longevity in it, but I think they’re going to have to go over and above with the marketing, a lot more than they did last time. Because I didn’t even know about it the first time round, if I’m being completely honest with you. They’re going to have to do a lot more to entice that audience, I guess. Mind you, I didn’t necessarily fit into that audience segment the first time round anyway, so…

Jamie: I guess this aligns with the Snap store stuff that we talked about a few weeks ago, where they can buy Snapchat’s own branded products, I know before there was, like, hot dog t-shirts and stuff on it. But I suppose this will go straight in there and should be able to shove it right at the top of the app on there, and then no one will bat an eyelid. It should be in front of everyone’s nose. If you can transact on the app really easily, then maybe people will buy a bit more. Because I know last time, you couldn’t buy through the app at all, I don’t think. It was just these vending machines and other random places where you could buy it. I don’t think you could buy it through the app.

Chris: I don’t think they even sold out on the first generation, did they?

Jamie: It says they lost $140 million dollars. Sorry just $40 million dollars.

Lee: They need to call them Snapticles. 

Jamie: I’m amazed. They’ve got all the domains and social coverage for the word ‘spectacles’. I don’t know how much spectacles.com cost them, or the spectacles Twitter handle or whatever, but…

Chris: How has no optician got a hold of that?

Lee: They’ve got spectacles.com?

Jamie: Yeah, click on that. Spectacles. Yeah. Spectacles.com.

Lee: Are you sure that’s not just a brand, and they’re…

Jamie: Yes, there’s a Snapchat sign.

Lee: Good god. How’ve they managed that?

Jamie: Must’ve been an expensive acquisition. 

Chris: Think we could put a request in for some Flaunt branded ones?

Jamie: No.

Similar posts

Facebook Loses Users For The First Time Ever

February 22, 2018

Our Favourite Christmas Ads Of 2018

December 6, 2018