David Beckham promoting Tudor watches
Discussion
mikeveal said:
In other shock news, Beckham is confirmed to drink wine, eat cornflakes and it is rumoured that he wipes his own bottom after defecating.
Presumably all things that many posters here will immediately stop doing for fear of association with the squeaky ex-footballer.
It is a bit odd isn't it, the image is all brigade, which is precisely what they are Presumably all things that many posters here will immediately stop doing for fear of association with the squeaky ex-footballer.
I buy what I like and I wouldn't buy anything because of a celebrity endorsement but neither would it put me off.
I like Tudor a lot, as they make watches I like the design of and are under the radar, hence why I buy Glycine too.
David Beckham advertising them will change that imho.
I don't mind Beckham at all, I quite like the guy, but, he has an image that is a bit brash and he does get a lot of admiration from a certain type of person I would not want to be associated with.
David Beckham advertising them will change that imho.
I don't mind Beckham at all, I quite like the guy, but, he has an image that is a bit brash and he does get a lot of admiration from a certain type of person I would not want to be associated with.
mikeveal said:
In other shock news, Beckham is confirmed to drink wine, eat cornflakes and it is rumoured that he wipes his own bottom after defecating.
Presumably all things that many posters here will immediately stop doing for fear of association with the squeaky ex-footballer.
Are you just pretending to be stupid? Presumably all things that many posters here will immediately stop doing for fear of association with the squeaky ex-footballer.
The cost of manufacturing a watch must be approximately 10% of the retail price. The other 90% is brand perception and awareness. The perception can be built on perceived quality and those associated with the brand. Tudor is sensitive to this because it has been the underdog that "intelligent buyers" bought and the main stream were not aware of. By associating with Beckham they have made the mainstream aware and Beckham is not know as an intelligent buyer.
h0b0 said:
The cost of manufacturing a watch must be approximately 10% of the retail price. The other 90% is brand perception and awareness. The perception can be built on perceived quality and those associated with the brand. Tudor is sensitive to this because it has been the underdog that "intelligent buyers" bought and the main stream were not aware of. By associating with Beckham they have made the mainstream aware and Beckham is not know as an intelligent buyer.
Are you really suggesting that those jumping on the Tudor heritage bandwagon are anything other than mainstream elitists (hipsters) who think they're better because they own a watch that Hodinkee told them is the "thinking" man's Rolex? 
VGTICE said:
Are you really suggesting that those jumping on the Tudor heritage bandwagon are anything other than mainstream elitists (hipsters) who think they're better because they own a watch that Hodinkee told them is the "thinking" man's Rolex?
What watch is it you wear? I must have missed you saying. You're obviously a big fan of watches as you post so much.
VGTICE said:
gizlaroc said:
Have you ever said anything positive..........about anything.........ever? 
Are you just pretending to be stupid? You're one of the few names on the forum that stand out with your comments, a lot.
I'm not having a pop, just every time I see your posts there seems to be some sort of put down, or saying how stupid other people are, that's all.
Edited by gizlaroc on Wednesday 28th June 17:30
gizlaroc said:
No, it was a genuine question.
You're one of the few names on the forum that stand out with your comments, a lot.
I'm not having a pop, just every time I see your posts there seems to be some sort of put down, or saying how stupid other people are, that's all.
If you're so genuinely interested do your own research. I didn't even care who you were until you made your snarky, uncalled for remark aimed at me in response to my post which stood out because it didn't follow the line of the rest of the sheeple. I think that says more about you than it does about me. What's even funnier is that you accuse me of all the negativity and rudeness yet it was you who wrote this uncalled for gem in response to another post: You're one of the few names on the forum that stand out with your comments, a lot.
I'm not having a pop, just every time I see your posts there seems to be some sort of put down, or saying how stupid other people are, that's all.
gizlaroc said:
"Are you just pretending to be stupid? "
Despite how it might seem I don't hate many things in life, I like to challenge authority and have nonconformist approach towards life. But there's one thing I can't stand - that is people who pretend to be holier than though yet what they really are is bloody hypocrites. Like you.My reply was to someone who asked if you stopped eating and s
tting because someone famous does and comparing that to being put off a product because someone becomes the face/image a product.
My comment to you was tongue in cheek, hence the smiley.
It was because I had just been reading your posts in the car finance thread. Seems you like to be a contrary as you possibly can.
tting because someone famous does and comparing that to being put off a product because someone becomes the face/image a product. My comment to you was tongue in cheek, hence the smiley.
It was because I had just been reading your posts in the car finance thread. Seems you like to be a contrary as you possibly can.
Edited by gizlaroc on Wednesday 28th June 18:14
Gotta love how almost everyone here seems to know better than the multi national marketing office (and probable lengthy and involved brand awareness public engagement exercise) of an international watch brand
At a guess, I would suggest that the marketing push currently and their chosen endorser is not aimed at the main demographic that frequents these forums
At a guess, I would suggest that the marketing push currently and their chosen endorser is not aimed at the main demographic that frequents these forums
alorotom said:
Gotta love how almost everyone here seems to know better than the multi national marketing office (and probable lengthy and involved brand awareness public engagement exercise) of an international watch brand
At a guess, I would suggest that the marketing push currently and their chosen endorser is not aimed at the main demographic that frequents these forums
I'm sure they will do really well with him, I'm just not into wearing 'brand Beckham' myself. At a guess, I would suggest that the marketing push currently and their chosen endorser is not aimed at the main demographic that frequents these forums
alorotom said:
Gotta love how almost everyone here seems to know better than the multi national marketing office (and probable lengthy and involved brand awareness public engagement exercise) of an international watch brand
At a guess, I would suggest that the marketing push currently and their chosen endorser is not aimed at the main demographic that frequents these forums
Firstly, mind pointing out where someone has expressed that they know better than the "multi national marketing office"? At a guess, I would suggest that the marketing push currently and their chosen endorser is not aimed at the main demographic that frequents these forums
Secondly, a multi-national marketing office couldn't possibly get it wrong, coudln't they?
Note: I'm not saying that they have made the wrong decision, quite the opposite in fact, if you read my earlier post, you'll see that.
However, I disagree with the notion that such an office couldn't get it wrong in the first place. The size of an organisation doesn't make it immune to calling the wrong shots, imo.
gregd said:
I think Omega's Bond tie-in is far and away the best marketing tool any of the watchmakers have managed... hard to match that.
Horses for courses, I find it the single most cringeworthy tie-in imaginable. That anyone wants to buy a watch because a film character has one, I'm sorry I just imangine someone with a OO07BAD style private plate 
Having said that, JK was on top gear a month or so back wearing a watch that I have one of-haven't been able to look at it the same since
gizlaroc said:
I'm sure they will do really well with him, I'm just not into wearing 'brand Beckham' myself.
It's not 'brand Beckham', it's Rolex's subsidiary. They'll keep making same watches they did before the announcement. Those who claim to be negatively affected by this are 10x worse than those who'll buy Tudor watch only because of Beckham. The concept that watch A one day can stop being quality/appealing just because some bloke started promoting it is frankly amusing to me.gizlaroc said:
It was because I had just been reading your posts in the car finance thread. Seems you like to be a contrary as you possibly can.
Seems to me that my critical cynicism based on historical events supported by current developments doesn't fit within your mental framework. That's fine. Don't worry.TheJimi said:
I appreciated Tudor as a brand, I liked the sort of underdog status they had and that they were relatively unheard of outside of watch watch circles.
However, when I saw that Beckham was unveiled as a brand ambassador for Tudor, my heart sank.
I certainly wouldn’t be driven to buy a product – any product, not just a watch - because of ambassador / celebrity association. I may well buy the product, but the celebrity association wouldn’t be a factor.
The kicker for me is that I dislike football, and the culture that goes with it. That Beckham is now an ambassador for Tudor is really off-putting for me. However, I realise I’m in the minority, and that in marketing terms, Tudor have almost certainly pulled off a blinder her
How odd, the celeb would never encourage you to buy but would actually put you off buying a product....so the celeb cannot be positive but can be very negative influence on you?However, when I saw that Beckham was unveiled as a brand ambassador for Tudor, my heart sank.
I certainly wouldn’t be driven to buy a product – any product, not just a watch - because of ambassador / celebrity association. I may well buy the product, but the celebrity association wouldn’t be a factor.
The kicker for me is that I dislike football, and the culture that goes with it. That Beckham is now an ambassador for Tudor is really off-putting for me. However, I realise I’m in the minority, and that in marketing terms, Tudor have almost certainly pulled off a blinder her
Edited by TheJimi on Monday 26th June 10:39
I couldn't give two hoots either way, I can't think of a person endorsing a product would ever put me off buying it. Saddam Hussein washing powder...maybe?
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff