The Fitbit Air has rapidly gained popularity in the wearable market, selling out at multiple retailers and potentially sparking a new trend of screenless fitness tracker bands, despite the longstanding presence of brands like Whoop.
Google’s success with this product can be attributed to a couple of strategic decisions, even without considering their collaboration with basketball star Steph Curry as a Performance Advisor. Firstly, the Fitbit Air is priced affordably at £84.99/$99, making it a more accessible option compared to competitors like Whoop.
Additionally, the Fitbit brand continues to hold significant influence, despite a lengthy gap between the release of the Air and its predecessor, and Google’s previous statements about the Pixel Watch models replacing Fitbit devices.
The initial success and buzz surrounding the Fitbit Air present Google with a prime opportunity to expand its presence in the wearable technology space. It seems logical for the company to follow the Air with a Fitbit smart ring.
I have long anticipated a Pixel Ring from Google (the image above is one of the design concepts provided by Gemini, which I find quite appealing), but it now appears more sensible to introduce it as a Fitbit Ring.
The rationale for this, in addition to the Fitbit brand’s association with fitness trackers, is compelling.
Use the Fitbit Air as the Basis
With the Fitbit Air already established, Google needs only to adapt the technology from the small device (pictured below) into a smart ring format.
Thomas Deehan / Foundry
Creating such a product should be straightforward for Google, especially given the existing smart rings in the market that can serve as references. These devices typically incorporate sensors, a battery, and wireless connectivity.
Google just needs to incorporate these elements into a metal ring.
Undercut the Competition
With a price tag under £100/$100, the Fitbit Air is a very appealing option for many consumers. Investing significantly more in a competitor requires careful consideration, whereas the strong brand recognition and trust associated with Fitbit greatly enhance its appeal.
A Fitbit smart ring priced similarly would likely achieve high sales. It would be substantially cheaper than the more luxurious Oura Ring 5, significantly less expensive than the Samsung Galaxy Ring, and even more affordable than the current budget-friendly smart rings.
Thomas Deehan / Foundry
Moreover, inexpensive devices like the Air don’t need to generate massive profits, especially when the goal is to attract more users to subscribe to Google Health.
This is an opportunity in the market that Google should seize quickly.
It Doesn’t Need to Rival the Fitbit Air
Some might argue that those who already own a Fitbit Air wouldn’t require a smart ring. However, the two devices don’t have to be mutually exclusive. They could function together, similar to how the Air works with a Pixel Watch, providing more precise data and potentially extending battery life, as demonstrated by the Galaxy Ring when paired with a Galaxy Watch.
Alternatively, users could choose between the two based on different activities and settings, depending on their preferences and needs.
Chris Martin / Foundry
For instance, one could wear the Air during a tennis match and switch to the smart ring for a dinner outing, allowing for an analogue watch to be worn. It could also serve as an excellent addition for those who own a Pixel Watch but seek passive tracking without the need for a Fitbit Air.
Conclusion
Introducing a Fitbit Ring is a logical step forward. By adopting the data-centric, screen-free approach of the Air and offering it in an affordable smart ring, Google could make a significant impact on the market.
This addition would fill a noticeable gap in Google’s wearable offerings and wouldn’t just appeal to those without a Fitbit Air or Pixel Watch. It could complement existing devices and potentially boost subscriptions to Google Health.
Google, are you listening?
