or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Tiffany Watch
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Tiffany Watch

post #1 of 11
Thread Starter 
I really like the shape and look of this watch. I think it's very elegant and versatile, however the movement is crap. Obviously they pitch it is some high tech Quartz movement, but we all know it's not that great. I think this watch goes for $1700, but I'm not sure. I haven't see a watch company make a shape like this except for Daniel Roth. The thing is, Roth is much more expensive, and the watch face isn't as attractive. Would you do it? Tiffany Watch
post #2 of 11
I wouldn't pay $1700 for a quartz watch. The main reason I would spend a lot on a watch is to get a mechanical movement.
post #3 of 11
Thread Starter 
Quote:
I wouldn't pay $1700 for a quartz watch. The main reason I would spend a lot on a watch is to get a mechanical movement.
I realized that a while ago too, the fact that a quartz watch is a bit of a waste. But, I like the look a lot. I wish they offered it in their automatic version. They claim that some of their movements are made in house... or is it just ETA tweeking?
post #4 of 11
I don't think Tiffany makes any watches at all. Not sure who makes them. It is possible that the maker uses its own in-house movement on some. I've seen a few Tiffany watches by Patek Philippe but this isn't one of them.
post #5 of 11
Quote:
They claim that some of their movements are made in house... or is it just ETA tweeking?
I am quite certain that Tiffany does not make in-house mechanical/automatic movements. The huge majority of watch movements are made by companies such as ETA and Lemania - and if I remember correctly, both of those are now controlled by large fashion conglomerates such as LVMH and Swatch Group, which also own most of the watch companies. Only a very few watchmakers, such as Patek Phillipe and Zenith, make their own movements. Quite a few others will purchase movements from Lemania or ETA and refine them. In some cases, the refining is quite extensive, and the movement's origins are almost unrecognisable. However, more typically, the in-house treatment consists of simple cosmetic touches such as polishing and machining. With regard to the original topic, I would be hesitant to spend that kind of money on a quartz watch. However, many people would have little hesitation in spending that kind of money on a piece of jewellery, such as a ring. So, if you look at a watch as more of a piece of jewellery, rather than a small and complex machine, then it doesn't seem like such a bad idea. Cheers, JH
post #6 of 11
I agree with what's been posted here regarding that being a high price for a quartz movement. Are there quartz movements that are better than others? Yes, but who cares. I would like to chime in that an in-house movement is not necessarily better than one procured from ETA or another watchmaker. Swatch Group owns Omega, Blancpain, and Breuget, and uses modified ETA movements in all of their Omegas, and even some of their higher end watches. I would certainly stack any of these against the movements that Rolex manufactures "in-house". Additionally, JLC supplies some of their top-notch movements to other companies as well. Tiffany's history with watches is unusual. At various times in their history, up until the present, they've slapped their name on Pateks, VC's, and others, and retailed them out of their bigger stores. A few years ago they had a lot of success with a stylish and inexpensive line of women's quartz watches, which they promptly discontinued to try to move further upmarket with their current offerings. I have no idea how the current stuff is selling, but I have my suspiscions.
post #7 of 11
Thread Starter 
Thanks guys, this is all very helpful. Unfortunately I no longer think of watches are just jewelry. Even though the difference between an automatic self-winding movement and Quartz is probably not that large horologically speaking, buying a "fused suit" somehow doesn't sit right with me. Unless they offer a real chronograph I don't think I'll be in the market.
post #8 of 11
Quote:
Tiffany's history with watches is unusual.  At various times in their history, up until the present, they've slapped their name on Pateks, VC's, and others, and retailed them out of their bigger stores.  A few years ago they had a lot of success with a stylish and inexpensive line of women's quartz watches, which they promptly discontinued to try to move further upmarket with their current offerings.  I have no idea how the current stuff is selling, but I have my suspiscions.
my girlfriend wears a Tiffany quartz watch.. it was passed to her from her mother several years ago.. they have repaired it multiple times, the clasp isn't exceptional, but they've repaired and replaced parts multiple times without any charge whatsoever, literally ten years after its purchase.. i prefer an automatic movement and switch between a Rolex dresswatch and a Seiko take on a diving watch.. for under $150, it is one of the best purchases i've made..
post #9 of 11
Quote:
Quote:
(TCN @ July 07 2005,07:29) Tiffany's history with watches is unusual.  At various times in their history, up until the present, they've slapped their name on Pateks, VC's, and others, and retailed them out of their bigger stores.  A few years ago they had a lot of success with a stylish and inexpensive line of women's quartz watches, which they promptly discontinued to try to move further upmarket with their current offerings.  I have no idea how the current stuff is selling, but I have my suspiscions.
my girlfriend wears a Tiffany quartz watch..  it was passed to her from her mother several years ago..  they have repaired it multiple times, the clasp isn't exceptional, but they've repaired and replaced parts multiple times without any charge whatsoever, literally ten years after its purchase.. i prefer an automatic movement and switch between a Rolex dresswatch and a Seiko take on a diving watch..  for under $150, it is one of the best purchases i've made..
Those Seiko dive watches are cult classics, and deservedly so. A simple utilitarian design, backed up by a very robust movement (probably the Seiko 7002) . . . great watch. I believe the new models are around $400. Still an absolute steal. If your girlfriend's watch is one of the tank style Tiffany quartzes, then she owns another cult classic that commands a second hand premium among preppy girls who might consider the original Cartier version a little too "Paris Hiltonish". I'm a purist when it comes to men's watches, but I don't find a quartz movement to be a complete sin in the realm of women's watches. It allows for a thinner case, and avoids having to explain kinetic winding. Some of the jewelry-like attention lavished on the cases and dials of women's watches can justify the higher price tag. The above referenced Cartier Tank is such an example, IMHO.
post #10 of 11
Quote:
I agree with what's been posted here regarding that being a high price for a quartz movement. Are there quartz movements that are better than others? Yes, but who cares. I would like to chime in that an in-house movement is not necessarily better than one procured from ETA or another watchmaker. Swatch Group owns Omega, Blancpain, and Breuget, and uses modified ETA movements in all of their Omegas, and even some of their higher end watches. I would certainly stack any of these against the movements that Rolex manufactures "in-house". Additionally, JLC supplies some of their top-notch movements to other companies as well. Tiffany's history with watches is unusual. At various times in their history, up until the present, they've slapped their name on Pateks, VC's, and others, and retailed them out of their bigger stores. A few years ago they had a lot of success with a stylish and inexpensive line of women's quartz watches, which they promptly discontinued to try to move further upmarket with their current offerings. I have no idea how the current stuff is selling, but I have my suspiscions.
Not quite, BP and Breguet use Piguet and Lemania movements, respectively. Both of which are high-end watch houses and movement manufactures, which are all owned by Swatch. Whilst Omega's do use a lot of ETA movements, they have been slowly developing Omega-only movements, such as the Broad Arrow chronograph movement. JLC only really supplies movements to AP on a constant basis, and that is because AP owns part of JLC (or used to? I can't recall if they sold their stake or not). Putting the retailers name on the dial of a watch manufactured by another company and then sold through that particular shop is not unusual at all. Yes previously, it was a more common practice and was more often seen (take Cartier for example), than today, but it is hardly a discomforting factor. Take for instance Rolex watches, which were sold through Tiffany & Co. and have the T & Co. brand name stamped on the dial; they are worth more than non-T & Co. stamped Rolexes of the same year / model / metal. Jon.
post #11 of 11
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Quote:
(TCN @ July 07 2005,10:29) I agree with what's been posted here regarding that being a high price for a quartz movement.  Are there quartz movements that are better than others? Yes, but who cares.   I would like to chime in that an in-house movement is not necessarily better than one procured from ETA or another watchmaker.  Swatch Group owns Omega, Blancpain, and Breuget, and uses modified ETA movements in all of their Omegas, and even some of their higher end watches.  I would certainly stack any of these against the movements that Rolex manufactures "in-house".  Additionally, JLC supplies some of their top-notch movements to other companies as well. Tiffany's history with watches is unusual.  At various times in their history, up until the present, they've slapped their name on Pateks, VC's, and others, and retailed them out of their bigger stores.  A few years ago they had a lot of success with a stylish and inexpensive line of women's quartz watches, which they promptly discontinued to try to move further upmarket with their current offerings.  I have no idea how the current stuff is selling, but I have my suspiscions.
Not quite, BP and Breguet use Piguet and Lemania movements, respectively. Both of which are high-end watch houses and movement manufactures, which are all owned by Swatch. Whilst Omega's do use a lot of ETA movements, they have been slowly developing Omega-only movements, such as the Broad Arrow chronograph movement. JLC only really supplies movements to AP on a constant basis, and that is because AP owns part of JLC (or used to? I can't recall if they sold their stake or not). Putting the retailers name on the dial of a watch manufactured by another company and then sold through that particular shop is not unusual at all. Yes previously, it was a more common practice and was more often seen (take Cartier for example), than today, but it is hardly a discomforting factor. Take for instance Rolex watches, which were sold through Tiffany & Co. and have the T & Co. brand name stamped on the dial; they are worth more than non-T & Co. stamped Rolexes of the same year / model / metal. Jon.
Wait, what did Cartier do with regards to stamping?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Tiffany Watch