Bremont

[nikaiyo2]

bobbybee said:

And it's connection to the famous Mustang, except for bits of scrap chucked inside?

The guy who makes the tea had a mate who used to own a Ford Capri, which was the European Mustang, he took someone to the imperial war museam to look at a North American Mustang once. They then took some pictures who AMV photoshopped, that's heritage, in the Bremont world.

[critical mass]

I have a Bremont Solo which I bought after weeks of dithering between that and the IWC Mk XVII and am very happy with my decision- and also happy to support a successful British company.
Obviously heritage can't be bought of the shelf- it only comes with time so as a new company it can't have the history of (say) Breguet. And heritage in itself has a dubious value- Panerai for example has plenty of heritage - but much of that producing watches for one of the 20th centuries nastiest regimes. Not sure you want to make too much of that.....

[gvij]

Their packaging is the best there is and that includes patek. I love the watch wallets.
The watches are very well styled but more like rotary than Rolex.
Theres an mb1 on ebay for 50k make of that what you will, I think its lunacy. They have nothing to do with martin baker or ejection seats other than cross licensing.
Crazy world but you have to hand it to them , great businessmen.

[critical mass]

[quote=gvij
Theres an mb1 on ebay for 50k make of that what you will, I think its lunacy. They have nothing to do with martin baker or ejection seats other than cross licensing.
Crazy world but you have to hand it to them , great businessmen.
[/quote]


The thing about the MB1 Red is that you can't buy one - Martin Baker give them to those who survive ejecting on one of their seats. So the MB connection is quite valid

[gvij]

critical mass said:

The thing about the MB1 Red is that you can't buy one - Martin Baker give them to those who survive ejecting on one of their seats. So the MB connection is quite valid

So what though if you can't buy one? All that happened there was bremont paid Mb to cross license , that's not heritage.

[Whitean3]

gvij said:

critical mass said:

The thing about the MB1 Red is that you can't buy one - Martin Baker give them to those who survive ejecting on one of their seats. So the MB connection is quite valid

So what though if you can't buy one? All that happened there was bremont paid Mb to cross license , that's not heritage.

Actually, I believe that having (successfully) used a Martin Baker ejection seat, you have the right to BUY an MB1- you don't get given it for free. You have to pay for it, but are only eligible if you ejected out of a plane (and it has to be an MB ejector seat).

[lostkiwi]

I still don't get this hang up on heritage.
Heritage is a marketing tool. Nothing more nothing less.
The important thing is how does it look? How does it feel? Is there an interesting back story? Is it well made? Is it reliable? Can it be repaired? How is the after sales service?

Anything else is just fluff and nonsense.

[anonymous-user]

lostkiwi said:

don logan said:

It's a P 51

They were £7.5k, now £12-£15k used!

I certainly don't buy watches as an investment but I'm sure it's a satisfying feeling!

That aside I LOVE the P 51

Yep - Bremonts don't hold their value do they.....?

That one might but I thought most have very poor residuals? That was what I thought after checking out second hand prices for the non limited editions I liked anyway,

[anonymous-user]

lostkiwi said:

I still don't get this hang up on heritage.
Heritage is a marketing tool. Nothing more nothing less.
The important thing is how does it look? How does it feel? Is there an interesting back story? Is it well made? Is it reliable? Can it be repaired? How is the after sales service?

Anything else is just fluff and nonsense.

If you take that view, then isn't it all "fluff and nonsense"?

Why wear a watch at all? Why do you think it looks good or feels nice? Why bother about what it looks like? Why is one watch brand worth more than another? Why do people identify with brands? The whole thing is about image and advertising and consumerism. It's all absurd really.

People buy watches for all kinds of reasons, branding and associated notions of branding like heritage, are usually fairly high on the list.

[bobbybee]

Whitean3 said:

gvij said:

critical mass said:

The thing about the MB1 Red is that you can't buy one - Martin Baker give them to those who survive ejecting on one of their seats. So the MB connection is quite valid

So what though if you can't buy one? All that happened there was bremont paid Mb to cross license , that's not heritage.

Actually, I believe that having (successfully) used a Martin Baker ejection seat, you have the right to BUY an MB1- you don't get given it for free. You have to pay for it, but are only eligible if you ejected out of a plane (and it has to be an MB ejector seat).

So you get the right to buy one?
Therefore no historical connection, just a product tie-in

[bobbybee]

lostkiwi said:

I still don't get this hang up on heritage.
Heritage is a marketing tool. Nothing more nothing less.
The important thing is how does it look? How does it feel? Is there an interesting back story? Is it well made? Is it reliable? Can it be repaired? How is the after sales service?

Anything else is just fluff and nonsense.

Is that not heritage?

[anonymous-user]

bobbybee said:

Whitean3 said:

gvij said:

critical mass said:

The thing about the MB1 Red is that you can't buy one - Martin Baker give them to those who survive ejecting on one of their seats. So the MB connection is quite valid

So what though if you can't buy one? All that happened there was bremont paid Mb to cross license , that's not heritage.

Actually, I believe that having (successfully) used a Martin Baker ejection seat, you have the right to BUY an MB1- you don't get given it for free. You have to pay for it, but are only eligible if you ejected out of a plane (and it has to be an MB ejector seat).

So you get the right to buy one?
Therefore no historical connection, just a product tie-in

It seems odd. You are in the forces or eject from an aircraft and then you have the right to buy a watch from a company that actually has nothing to do with the forces at all. I understand companies giving forces discounts or other any industry discounts but the right to buy something is a bit unusual. They then look worse than the original items by having inscriptions and stuff on the faces and case backs.

If they want to be linked to Martin baker to increase sales or some regiment, they should issue the people with that watch or sell them for a notional price. Like speedmaster and NASA or a comex Rolex. The difference is, those watches were issued as they were actually used for that purpose.

[lostkiwi]

bobbybee said:

lostkiwi said:

I still don't get this hang up on heritage.
Heritage is a marketing tool. Nothing more nothing less.
The important thing is how does it look? How does it feel? Is there an interesting back story? Is it well made? Is it reliable? Can it be repaired? How is the after sales service?

Anything else is just fluff and nonsense.

Is that not heritage?

Let take the Magrette Bronze. The back story on the Bronze is that the case was mistakenly made in trumpet brass not the advertised bronze. So Magrette offered to exchange any for the correct case if anyone objected. Or that the Bronze has a piece of NZ native Kauri timber in the back. Its a wood that was used for making ship masts back in the 1800s and has been banned from felling for a number of years and most pieces of 'modern' kauri come from swamps where it was buried for upwards of 10,000 years.

Thats an interesting back story but its not heritage.

[Lorne]

lostkiwi said:

Let take the Magrette Bronze. The back story on the Bronze is that the case was mistakenly made in trumpet brass not the advertised bronze. So Magrette offered to exchange any for the correct case if anyone objected. Or that the Bronze has a piece of NZ native Kauri timber in the back. Its a wood that was used for making ship masts back in the 1800s and has been banned from felling for a number of years and most pieces of 'modern' kauri come from swamps where it was buried for upwards of 10,000 years.

Thats an interesting back story but its not heritage.

Heels in London have whole kitchen tables made from that wood. They're a bit pricey though

[lostkiwi]

el stovey said:

lostkiwi said:

I still don't get this hang up on heritage.
Heritage is a marketing tool. Nothing more nothing less.
The important thing is how does it look? How does it feel? Is there an interesting back story? Is it well made? Is it reliable? Can it be repaired? How is the after sales service?

Anything else is just fluff and nonsense.

If you take that view, then isn't it all "fluff and nonsense"?

Why wear a watch at all? Why do you think it looks good or feels nice? Why bother about what it looks like? Why is one watch brand worth more than another? Why do people identify with brands? The whole thing is about image and advertising and consumerism. It's all absurd really.

People buy watches for all kinds of reasons, branding and associated notions of branding like heritage, are usually fairly high on the list.

I (personally) wear a watch because I appreciate fine engineering and because I like the style or there is some interesting feature. There are brands I aspire to (Patek, VC) because of the quality of engineering but equally I will happily wear watches from Bulova.

For example in my collection (30 or so watches) I have Magrette Bronze, Graham Chronofighters, Bell & Ross BR01 and BR02, Bulova Precionist, Omega Speedmaster, Seamaster and Railmaster, Longines Avigation A7 and Evidenza, a couple of Panerais, a pair of 1930s Gruens, a 1900s Henry Moser as well as watches from Citizen, Lorus and Seiko. Each of them had some feature, story or other quality I found attractive or different or interesting. Some of those have 'heritage' but thats not why I bought them. Heritage to me is very far down the list as in the main its just a marketing tool (IMO). A watch should stand by its own merits at the time of its making and not some concept of how good it used to be in the past.

[Steve McQueen]

reggie747 said:

Bremont. A company very well run by a pair of toffee nosed plum gobbed public school swindlers full of faux histoire selling THE most overpriced ETA based watches on the globe. And please, can those who've not bothered get up to speed on the in house movement bks that they spewed out a couple of years ago.
A barge pole leaps to mind.....

Overpriced ETA!? At under 3k you can get a well made, hardened steel cased Bremont watch with a certified chronometer movement. And its not massed produced! That's pretty good going IMO

[anonymous-user]

swerni said:

el stovey said:

If you take that view, then isn't it all "fluff and nonsense"?

Why wear a watch at all? Why do you think it looks good or feels nice? Why bother about what it looks like? Why is one watch brand worth more than another? Why do people identify with brands? The whole thing is about image and advertising and consumerism. It's all absurd really.

People buy watches for all kinds of reasons, branding and associated notions of branding like heritage, are usually fairly high on the list.

Odd, I tend to buy watches because I like them.
Never contemplated residuals, didn't know a a great deal about Bremont when I purchased mine and haven't on ay of the watches I've owned

Why do people insist on judging based on their own priorities?

I've made no judgements whatsoever about anyone.

[critical mass]

bobbybee said:

Whitean3 said:

gvij said:

critical mass said:

The thing about the MB1 Red is that you can't buy one - Martin Baker give them to those who survive ejecting on one of their seats. So the MB connection is quite valid

So what though if you can't buy one? All that happened there was bremont paid Mb to cross license , that's not heritage.

Actually, I believe that having (successfully) used a Martin Baker ejection seat, you have the right to BUY an MB1- you don't get given it for free. You have to pay for it, but are only eligible if you ejected out of a plane (and it has to be an MB ejector seat).

So you get the right to buy one?
Therefore no historical connection, just a product tie-in

I wasn't suggesting that this provided a "historical" connection - although obviously each piece has a unique story to it. I was merely suggesting that the very limited supply of the MB1 and the associated narrative might be a reason for the premium price on the second hand market.

[anonymous-user]

swerni said:

Other than this one?
"People buy watches for all kinds of reasons, branding and associated notions of branding like heritage, are usually fairly high on the list."

Just in case you missed it.

[nikaiyo2]

lostkiwi said:

I still don't get this hang up on heritage.
Heritage is a marketing tool. Nothing more nothing less.
The important thing is how does it look? How does it feel? Is there an interesting back story? Is it well made? Is it reliable? Can it be repaired? How is the after sales service?

Anything else is just fluff and nonsense.

I agree 100%. To be honest in my collection I have a Balihai Project and an Orsa, both brands that started in the 00's.

Certainly to me, and I think to most others, its not the lack of heritage, it's the making heritage up that sticks in the craw, it's the attempt to create a legend that is phoney.

If you want an English watch buy a Schofield.