Watches by fashion/clothing brands ?

Watches by fashion/clothing brands ?

Author
Discussion

J4CKO

Original Poster:

27,158 posts

141 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
I am no expert but am averse to watches by companies by fashion brands like Armani and Boss, just seems like a watch with a designer name stuck on it rather than any history of making timepieces ?

I have only recently started to take an interest but I see those brands and I just ignore them, am I just being a bit of a watch snob without much knowledge and should just look past that ?



CardShark

3,561 posts

120 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
J4CKO said:
...just seems like a watch with a designer name stuck on it rather than any history of making timepieces ?
To be frank, that's exactly what they are - watches with a designer name by a brand with no watch making history. They don't even design them let alone make any part of the watches themselves.

J4CKO said:
...am I just being a bit of a watch snob...?
Well you're probably not the only one, I wouldn't wear anything with Boss/Armarni/Michael Kors etc etc on the dial either. If I remember correctly brands such as those are made, for the most part, by two companies, Movado and the Fossil Group, and both are pretty big hitters in terms of the numbers of watches they make. Many of their watches will use commonly available mechanisms from brands such as Miyota (Citizen) so to say that they're all poorly made may be a touch unfair, though I'm also of the opinion that a £ premium is placed upon the watch because of the name on the dial and, on average, better watches can be bought for the same money.

The bottom line is that we're all drawn to different things for different reasons. I'd rather wear a Seiko than a Boss, others would rather buy into the Boss brand over a Seiko, there really isn't a right or wrong answer. If someone wants to spend their hard-earned on an Armani then so be it, I can't call them a mug when their circa £150-£200 watch does the same thing as my, for example, £2k Tudor.


Edited by CardShark on Tuesday 14th May 02:01

bristolbaron

786 posts

153 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
Boss use Swiss movements, the quality is as good as any other mid level Swiss watch, however of course you will be paying a premium for the brand.
I wouldn’t buy one for myself, but if the Mrs found one she liked I wouldn’t be put off buying it for her.

eccles

10,668 posts

163 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
CardShark said:
though I'm also of the opinion that a £ premium is placed upon the watch because of the name on the dial and, on average, better watches can be bought for the same money.
To be fair that could be said for many watch companies like Rolex, Omega, TAG, etc.

J4CKO

Original Poster:

27,158 posts

141 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
Yeah, it is personal choice, I have a quartz Tag Heuer which is probably just a slightly more expensive way to buy a quartz watch, agree on the Seiko thing.

They just aren’t watchy enough biggrin even if they aren’t bad quality and some look really smart, guess the brand and heritage are a big factor for people who like watches and for designer brand enthusiasts, they can have that brand on their watch, was looking in Selfridges at the clothing yesterday and it’s generally a lot more expensive than the watches in a lot of cases.

I think a lot of the brands mentioned on here are, to the uninitiated, pretty obscure, I thought Tudor were a make of crisps from the eighties until fairly recently (canny bag of) and knew Longines made watches but for some reason thought it was something to do with boxing, that of course is Lonsdale, durr.


Basically, doesn’t matter if you enjoy it.
Advertisement

Barchettaman

2,737 posts

73 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
The Armani automatic chronographs are great value used. As previously stated they use Fossil swiss movements, I think.

You'd have to be a special kind of mental to buy one new.

A mate of mine has a Boss quartz chrono that he got for free on a fashion shoot for the company and it's reasonably well-finished, to my untrained eye.

They're better than that Daniel Wellington junk, anyway.

CardShark

3,561 posts

120 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
eccles said:
To be fair that could be said for many watch companies like Rolex, Omega, TAG, etc.
True. I'd imagine that a £200 fashion watch has a larger mark-up due to the branding than a £200 Seiko, though.


Edited by CardShark on Tuesday 14th May 10:40

AJB88

3,768 posts

112 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
Dont Fossil make most of the watches for the brands.

J4CKO

Original Poster:

27,158 posts

141 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
eccles said:
CardShark said:
though I'm also of the opinion that a £ premium is placed upon the watch because of the name on the dial and, on average, better watches can be bought for the same money.
To be fair that could be said for many watch companies like Rolex, Omega, TAG, etc.
All of them, can get a watch for a tenner, and that company has to make a profit, as does the retailer, the haulier etc etc.

Obviously better quality the more you pay but the law of diminishing returns on functionality with watches kicks in at about £10.01

I reckon mines about a £100 watch in terms of cost to bring to market with a £950 Tag/retailer markup (On RRP)

But nobody forces anyone to buy an expensive watch, its not about need, its about want.






blue_haddock

224 posts

8 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
I've got a Boss Orange watch, it was reasonably cheap and i just liked the design.

For £79 i'm not too fussed by what movement is in it!

Mazinbrum

64 posts

119 months

Tuesday 14th May
quotequote all
I've got a Versace watch (not blingy, honest) that is well made and has an ETA mechanical movement, its the only fashion watch I've got but I do really like it!

ZesPak

19,015 posts

137 months

Wednesday 15th May
quotequote all
AJB88 said:
Dont Fossil make most of the watches for the brands.
They do armani and a load of others.

I like Fossil, they have some pretty decent watches. I would usually prefer Seiko, if you compare a 150 quid seiko to a 150 quid Fossil my general take away is that the Seiko will have a much better quality movement but will be lacking in for example the bracelet.
Seiko doesn't make as many concessions with regards to the movement but their lower end bracelets are the worst (I own at least 4 Seikos btw).
So I see why Fossil is so popular with the general public.

Armani though usually have designs very similar to what fossil has but with a decent markup.

av185

8,089 posts

68 months

Wednesday 15th May
quotequote all
J4CKO said:
But nobody forces anyone to buy an expensive watch, its not about need, its about want.
I was 'persuaded' to part with £10k for a Porsche watch to secure my GT2 RS order.

Car as expected is quality.

Shame can't say the same for the watch.

£300 at best lol.

ZesPak

19,015 posts

137 months

Wednesday 15th May
quotequote all
av185 said:
I was 'persuaded' to part with £10k for a Porsche watch to secure my GT2 RS order.
rofl
That's amazing.

NDA

15,924 posts

166 months

Thursday
quotequote all
I bought my Mrs a Chanel J12 a few years ago - a white ceramic quartz.

I regard it as jewellery rather than a watch... but she loves it, never takes it off and it has been hugely reliable in the 10 years or so she's had it. I imagine it has a decent quartz movement (there are differences between movements).

It's pointless being a 'watch snob' - really pointless. All watches tell the time - a fairly simple function. Whether it's a £10 Casio or a £30k Patek they all do the same - so you buy what brings you pleasure.


mikeveal

3,364 posts

191 months

Thursday
quotequote all
As long as your expectations are realistic, then there's nothing wrong with fashion watches.
They are Gerry Ratner's prawn sandwich. Expect them to last for as long as you expect them to remain fashionable and you won't be far off the mark. If that's all you want, and you like the watch, then why not?

As for being a watch snob, the previous poster is absolutely correct. Equally, there's no practical difference between a can of Tenant's Super and a bottle of Chateau nuef du Pape, both will get you drunk.

Barchettaman

2,737 posts

73 months

Thursday
quotequote all
mikeveal said:
Equally, there's no practical difference between a can of Tenant's Super and a bottle of Chateauneuf du Pape, both will get you drunk.
I always preferred a decent Lirac to CNdP anyway! Miles better value and just across the valley!

glazbagun

9,522 posts

138 months

Saturday
quotequote all
CardShark said:
J4CKO said:
...just seems like a watch with a designer name stuck on it rather than any history of making timepieces ?
To be frank, that's exactly what they are - watches with a designer name by a brand with no watch making history. They don't even design them let alone make any part of the watches themselves.

The bottom line is that we're all drawn to different things for different reasons. I'd rather wear a Seiko than a Boss, others would rather buy into the Boss brand over a Seiko, there really isn't a right or wrong answer. If someone wants to spend their hard-earned on an Armani then so be it, I can't call them a mug when their circa £150-£200 watch does the same thing as my, for example, £2k Tudor.
Pretty much this. Most watches by fashion brands will have astonishingly cheap movements for the price of the watch, but then many established watch brands have been selling 2824-based watches at multiple times the price of their similarly powered competition for decades, so it's not like the likes of Gucci are alone in it.

I think it's an issue with all things "luxury"- the value is in the brand and the look, and if the movement isn't required to maintain that, then why burn money on it?

There are companies like Ebel who once used El-Primeros and even designed their own calibers but never got the sales. Even Tag breifly made El-Primero based chronographs, but presumably the market doesn't care enough to reward the expense.

eccles

10,668 posts

163 months

Yesterday (09:46)
quotequote all
glazbagun said:
CardShark said:
J4CKO said:
...just seems like a watch with a designer name stuck on it rather than any history of making timepieces ?
To be frank, that's exactly what they are - watches with a designer name by a brand with no watch making history. They don't even design them let alone make any part of the watches themselves.

The bottom line is that we're all drawn to different things for different reasons. I'd rather wear a Seiko than a Boss, others would rather buy into the Boss brand over a Seiko, there really isn't a right or wrong answer. If someone wants to spend their hard-earned on an Armani then so be it, I can't call them a mug when their circa £150-£200 watch does the same thing as my, for example, £2k Tudor.
Pretty much this. Most watches by fashion brands will have astonishingly cheap movements for the price of the watch, but then many established watch brands have been selling 2824-based watches at multiple times the price of their similarly powered competition for decades, so it's not like the likes of Gucci are alone in it.

I think it's an issue with all things "luxury"- the value is in the brand and the look, and if the movement isn't required to maintain that, then why burn money on it?

There are companies like Ebel who once used El-Primeros and even designed their own calibers but never got the sales. Even Tag breifly made El-Primero based chronographs, but presumably the market doesn't care enough to reward the expense.
It's the same with automatic chronographs fitted with the 7750 movement, there's a massive difference in price charged for watches with the same movement.

"