To begin with, there was nothing particularly noteworthy to justify the $350 price. The design could be charitably described as… inoffensive. It wouldn’t trigger revulsion, but no one was going to fawn over it, either. The feature set was strictly middle-of-the-road and didn’t include support for mobile payments like the(which , we’d add) or . Many users panned the speaker, too, which made the Wear24’s signature LTE calling feature near-useless without headphones. The wearable really served as Verizon’s attempt to control smartwatch sales in its stores. It was an extra device for staff to sell to someone who was buying the Android phone du jour and looking to accessorize.
And then there’s the nature of the industry. Like it or not, Apple dominates— outside of fashion brands like Fossil, most competitors aren’t faring well. Verizon was always going to face an uphill battle selling to customers who weren’t even buying smartwatches from brands like LG and Samsung, let alone a carrier’s in-house model. Without name recognition or a huge audience for Android-powered watches, the Wear24 just wasn’t going to attract much attention.