Watch brands that are all marketing?

[Bob_Defly]

Which watch brands in your opinion are more marketing than horology? So have relatively high prices for movements that don't justify the price.

Bell & Ross? Bremont? And no movements, but G-Shock?

What brands are the Beats headphones of the watch world?

[EmailAddress]

All of them, surely

[matrignano]

Hublot, IMHO

[gregs656]

Bob_Defly said:

Which watch brands in your opinion are more marketing than horology? So have relatively high prices for movements that don't justify the price.

Bell & Ross? Bremont? And no movements, but G-Shock?

What brands are the Beats headphones of the watch world?

I wouldn't agree with any of those.

It's the Daniel Wellingtons of the world that are all marketing.

Movements are only part of the cost of a watch.

[Mont Blanc]

I don't really think the movement has anything to do with it. Hundreds of good/great watches have been produced over the years and fitted with very inexpensive off-the-shelf ETA, Sellita, and so on.

Personally, I don't really give a st about movements as long as they are reasonably reliable, accurate, and serviceable. I wouldn't be bothered if my Rolex had a Casio Quartz ticking away inside it. I'm way more bothered about aesthetics/looks, the style of the watch, the quality and feel of the bracelet, the build quality, the face/hands/bezel details, finishing, the branding, and so on. The fact that it tells the time reliably is a useful bonus. Most watches are just jewellery for men, as I have read on this forum on several occasions, and I agree with that statement.

IMO the worst watch brands are 'kickstarter' and Instagram brands like Daniel Wellington, MVMT, Filippo Loretti, Camden Watch Company, LIV, Vincero, etc etc. They are all simply $30 Chinese rubbish, but pushed so incredibly hard via constant marketing on Instagram, YouTube, and so on, that they eventually start selling.

[Panamax]

EmailAddress said:

All of them, surely

Except Casio. Especially the classic Casio black plastic watch with simple white face and black numerals/hands.

[hilly10]

Mont Blanc said:

I don't really think the movement has anything to do with it. Hundreds of good/great watches have been produced over the years and fitted with very inexpensive off-the-shelf ETA, Sellita, and so on.

Personally, I don't really give a st about movements as long as they are reasonably reliable, accurate, and serviceable. I wouldn't be bothered if my Rolex had a Casio Quartz ticking away inside it. I'm way more bothered about aesthetics/looks, the style of the watch, the quality and feel of the bracelet, the build quality, the face/hands/bezel details, finishing, the branding, and so on. The fact that it tells the time reliably is a useful bonus. Most watches are just jewellery for men, as I have read on this forum on several occasions, and I agree with that statement.

IMO the worst watch brands are 'kickstarter' and Instagram brands like Daniel Wellington, MVMT, Filippo Loretti, Camden Watch Company, LIV, Vincero, etc etc. They are all simply $30 Chinese rubbish, but pushed so incredibly hard via constant marketing on Instagram, YouTube, and so on, that they eventually start selling.

Never heard that before on a watch forum for enthusiasts. Movements have nothing to do with watches.

[Voldemort]

Bob_Defly said:

Which watch brands in your opinion are more marketing than horology?

[Takes deep breath]

There are too many to list but Christopher Ward must be first named.

[Mont Blanc]

Voldemort said:

Bob_Defly said:

Which watch brands in your opinion are more marketing than horology?

[Takes deep breath]

There are too many to list but Christopher Ward must be first named.

Don’t agree.

I don’t own a CW, but I think they are good quality Swiss made watches for a very reasonable price. Not sure how you can claim they are first on the st list when you consider all the crappy ‘fashion’ and Chinese brands that are being massively pushed and sold via nothing but clever marketing and advertising.

CW now have in-house movements, and over the last 12 months they have designed and produced innovative and relatively complex models such as the Bel Canto and the Moonphase, receiving high praise.

[r159]

Brands that try and create history by association…something CW are guilty of.

Dishonourable mentions:
Bremont
Zero West
William Wood (although they do give back)
Dartmouth group (as above)

[Bob_Defly]

Mont Blanc said:

Voldemort said:

Bob_Defly said:

Which watch brands in your opinion are more marketing than horology?

[Takes deep breath]

There are too many to list but Christopher Ward must be first named.

Don’t agree.

I don’t own a CW, but I think they are good quality Swiss made watches for a very reasonable price. Not sure how you can claim they are first on the st list when you consider all the crappy ‘fashion’ and Chinese brands that are being massively pushed and sold via nothing but clever marketing and advertising.

CW now have in-house movements, and over the last 12 months they have designed and produced innovative and relatively complex models such as the Bel Canto and the Moonphase, receiving high praise.

I wouldn't say CW are luxury, or over-rated, I'd say they (used to be anyways) perfectly rated. I.e. you could get a nicely designed watch with an ETA7750 movement for a fairly low price. I'm not sure how the value prop adds up right now, haven't looked.

[Bob_Defly]

Mont Blanc said:

I don't really think the movement has anything to do with it. Hundreds of good/great watches have been produced over the years and fitted with very inexpensive off-the-shelf ETA, Sellita, and so on.

Personally, I don't really give a st about movements as long as they are reasonably reliable, accurate, and serviceable. I wouldn't be bothered if my Rolex had a Casio Quartz ticking away inside it. I'm way more bothered about aesthetics/looks, the style of the watch, the quality and feel of the bracelet, the build quality, the face/hands/bezel details, finishing, the branding, and so on. The fact that it tells the time reliably is a useful bonus. Most watches are just jewellery for men, as I have read on this forum on several occasions, and I agree with that statement.

IMO the worst watch brands are 'kickstarter' and Instagram brands like Daniel Wellington, MVMT, Filippo Loretti, Camden Watch Company, LIV, Vincero, etc etc. They are all simply $30 Chinese rubbish, but pushed so incredibly hard via constant marketing on Instagram, YouTube, and so on, that they eventually start selling.

I was really thinking about the £1K+ space, not the DW / MVMT's of this world. I agree, they are definitely all crap. That's why I mention movements, as anything >£1K should have a decent movement.

[Stick Legs]

Rolex.

The whole BS around actually trying to get one, then bringing out Tudor as a ‘Rolex you can buy without fellating your AD’ brand.

It’s so cynical and undoes any engineering prowess that exists.

IMHO (very biased) the Omega 2531.80 Seamaster is a high water mark in terms of cost vs performance of a mechanical watch.

Anything over £5k is just fluff.



Full disclosure I also own a Heuer Monaco CAW211P
which is a fashion piece and only comes out for ’events’.

The Seamaster is an actual proper tool watch that works day in day out.

[blueg33]

Rolex, Omega, Tag are my starters for marketing led brands.

[Thankyou4calling]

Michael Kors.

A lot of people think they are a high quality watch.

[grumbledoak]

Stick Legs said:

Rolex.

The whole BS around actually trying to get one, then bringing out Tudor as a ‘Rolex you can buy without fellating your AD’ brand.

I am amazed that wasn't the second post.

Sucking up to a salesman to try to get up a list? Buying things you don't want to get preferential treatment? Windows full of things you can't buy?

It's hilarious.

Very profitable, obviously.

[Kuwahara]

Thankyou4calling said:

Michael Kors.

A lot of people think they are a high quality watch.

I was just going to post similar,I would add Boss/Armani and the likes, total garbage marketed as luxury somehow.

I recently bought an IWC and the missus thought it was way too much money however I love the engineering and feel on the wrist it feels like an occasion when I wear it.

She has an Armani that she constantly moans about as the hands are almost the same colour as the dial and are difficult to see…!!!! there is nothing wrong with these brands per se but they’re not luxury or quality items but are marketed as such.

[YorkshireStu]

Watches like Casio, Garmin, CWC and smart watches below £1000 are useful tools.

Watches like Rolex and all other luxury brands are jewellery for peacocks to strut about with and suffer from varying degrees of clickbait marketing precisely because of what they are and whom they are aimed at.

I say this as someone with Garmin, G-Shock, Apple, Tag and Rolex. Albeit I only ever use the Apple sometimes, not touched the others in years.

[Louis Balfour]

Bremont is the first name that springs to mind.

[blueg33]

grumbledoak said:

Stick Legs said:

Rolex.

The whole BS around actually trying to get one, then bringing out Tudor as a ‘Rolex you can buy without fellating your AD’ brand.

I am amazed that wasn't the second post.

Sucking up to a salesman to try to get up a list? Buying things you don't want to get preferential treatment? Windows full of things you can't buy?

It's hilarious.

Very profitable, obviously.

Interesting that IIRC Rolex are a “not for profit “ organisation