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

The Watch Appreciation Thread - Page 1623

post #24331 of 35730
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuckie Egg View Post

Anyway thanks for your thoughts. It's a lot of money for a watch so I'll cogitate over it & look at other similar offerings from other brands as well.

 

I totally get your concern.  $29,000 MSRP for the Patek 5296 is not a small amount of money.  However, given this particular watchmaker and its offerings, you usually shouldn't expect a deployant clasp to come with any piece under $35K to $40K (although you can very well purchase a deployant clasp: $3,600 for YG/WG/RG or $5,100 for Plat) and even the "sportier" models don't really come with high water resistance.  In exchange you get arguably the best finishing/decoration and attention to detail in the world, great value retention and possibly even appreciation and all that comes with that supposedly magical phenomenon of "owning a Patek Philippe for the next generation."

 

I am not being too cheeky with the comments above, I hope.  I own several Pateks myself so I'm very much a "victim" of its "magic."  It's just a very different beast when it comes to the pricing/functionality offering ratio.  After all, if you want an extremely high price/functionality offering ratio, there is always Citizen's BZ0016-50E:

 

I mean, for $1,395 check out what you get: 

 

Essential functions include a minute repeater, 1/4 second chronograph  measuring up to 12 hours, perpetual calendar, month-day-date, luminous hands, 44mm case, 100M WR, and a dual-coated anti-reflective sapphire crystal.  The titanium with rose gold tone accents and rich black dial identify this as a timepiece for serious watch collectors.

 

http://www.citizenwatch.com/en-us/watches/watch-detail/?model=BZ0016-50E

 

Patek is just such a different beast, for a variety of different reasons.  Most of the world's population would probably feel justified in wondering how it could get away with charging such high prices... but such are the forces of market demand and supply...

post #24332 of 35730
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

frilly - great pic. i am amazed at your new found restraint!!!

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

 

But loving "Frillshot - The Sequel" from your little girl. :)

 

Thanks, TWAT brothers!  Running the 30 year watch budget into the ground in four months helps fuel restraint!

post #24333 of 35730

And, in other news from NY Mag, AP is suing Hilfiger and Movado for basically aping its ROO design:

 

http://nymag.com/thecut/2013/08/luxury-watchmaker-sues-tommy-hilfiger.html

 

Of course, this is NY Mag so the pictures they used for comparison sucked.  It ain't the classic RO that is most closely comparable, but the ROO.  Hodinkee does a better photo comp:

 

http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/audemars-piguet-sues-tommy-hilfiger-and-movado-for

post #24334 of 35730
Thanks for your input earlier Frills, and I too am impressed with this new-found restraint smile.gif.

I just saw that on Hodinkee as well. I have to say, I do not think that they will be winning that one. I really doubt any court will find that there has been any trademark infringement on the ROO.
post #24335 of 35730
Thank you nofrills for sharing your thoughts about the PP. I do like the classic understated look of that 5296g and the fact that PP keeps to a more traditional 37-38mm size which is considered small now. I've also had a look at the JLC Master Control which seems ideal were it not for the 3/6/9 Arabic numerals.
post #24336 of 35730
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcomer View Post

Thanks for your input earlier Frills, and I too am impressed with this new-found restraint smile.gif.

I just saw that on Hodinkee as well. I have to say, I do not think that they will be winning that one. I really doubt any court will find that there has been any trademark infringement on the ROO.

 

Hoped you might weigh in on that one given your legal expertise.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuckie Egg View Post

Thank you nofrills for sharing your thoughts about the PP. I do like the classic understated look of that 5296g and the fact that PP keeps to a more traditional 37-38mm size which is considered small now. I've also had a look at the JLC Master Control which seems ideal were it not for the 3/6/9 Arabic numerals.

 

With the exception of the Nautilus/5711 all of my PPs are 36mm.  Have no problems wearing that size - but then my wrist is all of 6.25".  JLC certainly makes a lot of very lovely classic dress pieces, at much more affordable (reasonable?) price points.  Finishing/decoration is, IMHO, on a totally different level with PP though (as it should be).

post #24337 of 35730
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChicagoRon View Post

I'd like to say this Hodinkee article on the RL Khaki vindicates me, but it doesn't really... I'm still not ashamed I liked the watch, but I didn't buy one, so I guess I didn't like it that much. The comments section reads a lot like the TWAT reaction to my saying I liked it when I saw it in person.

http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/hands-on-with-the-ralph-lauren-rl67-safari-chronometer-live-pics-details-pricing

In other news... tried on a Gray Pano-Lunar today.... almost certainly my next purchase, and probably within a year. I'm a little smitten.

One of my absolute faves, though I prefer blue
this was a present from myself to myself last year
on a separate note, taking wrist pics while driving is much harder than it seems
post #24338 of 35730
Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post

And, in other news from NY Mag, AP is suing Hilfiger and Movado for basically aping its ROO design:
http://nymag.com/thecut/2013/08/luxury-watchmaker-sues-tommy-hilfiger.html
Of course, this is NY Mag so the pictures they used for comparison sucked.  It ain't the classic RO that is most closely comparable, but the ROO.  Hodinkee does a better photo comp:
http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/audemars-piguet-sues-tommy-hilfiger-and-movado-for


lol at TH for the lame and shameless copy. lol at AP for suing. though i doubt even they think they can win, its probably more to make a point.
post #24339 of 35730

^ This and stitchy's comment: fistbump.gif

post #24340 of 35730

The only thing missing from that Citizen is a thermometer.  I chuckled at the Grand Complication on the dial.

post #24341 of 35730
Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post

Hoped you might weigh in on that one given your legal expertise.  

I would not quite call it legal expertise, I have a fairly rudimentary understanding of IP law, but I will give it a shot! First, the Hodinkee comments do not seem very correct. They are making a trademark infringement claim rather than copyright. Vis-a-vis infringement of a "design" trademark, the trademark cannot be "functional." The functionality doctrine prevents trademark law, which seeks to promote competition by protecting a firm's reputation, form instead inhibiting legitimate competition by allowing a producer to control a useful product feature. Trademark cannot protect what should be protected by patent. In other words, if the screws give the watch a benefit over competition because of some advantage it bestows upon the watch, then it is not "trademarkable." A product feature is functional if it is essential to the use or purpose of the article or if it affects the cost or quality of the article, that is, if exclusive use of the feature would put competitors at a significant non-reputation-related disadvantage.

Functionality is a very low bar. I think the screws can easily be found to be functional. This is the same way a Submariner design is not trademarkable. It was designed to be a tool watch, which is by its very nature functional. I hope this is fairly clear.

*DISCLAIMER*: Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
This could be 100% wrong
post #24342 of 35730
Quote:
Originally Posted by jbarwick View Post

The only thing missing from that Citizen is a thermometer.  I chuckled at the Grand Complication on the dial.

There are many G-Shocks with all the complications boasted by Citizen AND a thermometer AND compass AND it's f*ng mud-proof!
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

lol at TH for the lame and shameless copy. lol at AP for suing. though i doubt even they think they can win, its probably more to make a point.

And on that note: no lawsuits pending as far as I know, but check out this Burberry watch:

http://us.burberry.com/store/watches/mens-watches/the-britain/prod-38393671-the-britain-bby1203-43mm-automatic/

Homage to the humble Patek Philippe Aquanaut 5167/1A?
post #24343 of 35730
I am going to have to respectfully disagree with Newcomer - I don't think AP is destined to lose this case and more likely will force TH to settle. Trademark and trade dress law can protect the look and feel of a product if it causes the "likelihood of confusion amongst consumers." The hurdle here is proving that consumers would be confused by TH's blatant copy when it costs 1/100th of a ROO. Functionality has been sidestepped by many circuits although I don't know what circuit AP sued in.

Interestingly enough for the NYers on the thread, Pearl Oyster Bar, a seafood shack styled restaurant in the Village, successfully sued Ed's Lobster Bar in the East Village for copying its style to the tee - marble bar, black and white tiling, lobster cages, etc. All these decorating cues seemed pretty generic to the legal community at the time (4-5 yrs ago) but a NY court concluded that diners would be confused and assumed that Pearl and Ed were affiliated and that Ed was unfairly piggybacking Pearl's goodwill. Ed had to re-decorate and lawyers were pretty surprised.

This is a really soft area of the law but I definitely think innovators even from an aesthetics point of view deserve any available protection. Will be interesting to see how it plays out.
post #24344 of 35730
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post


lol at TH for the lame and shameless copy. lol at AP for suing. though i doubt even they think they can win, its probably more to make a point.

Agreed, I think its mainly to make a point.  Same as Rolex and Cartier, spending millions each year going after counterfeiters.  Even if you don't win, or can't stop everyone, it does send a message, and may deter smaller companies.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcomer View Post


I would not quite call it legal expertise, I have a fairly rudimentary understanding of IP law, but I will give it a shot! First, the Hodinkee comments do not seem very correct. They are making a trademark infringement claim rather than copyright. Vis-a-vis infringement of a "design" trademark, the trademark cannot be "functional." The functionality doctrine prevents trademark law, which seeks to promote competition by protecting a firm's reputation, form instead inhibiting legitimate competition by allowing a producer to control a useful product feature. Trademark cannot protect what should be protected by patent. In other words, if the screws give the watch a benefit over competition because of some advantage it bestows upon the watch, then it is not "trademarkable." A product feature is functional if it is essential to the use or purpose of the article or if it affects the cost or quality of the article, that is, if exclusive use of the feature would put competitors at a significant non-reputation-related disadvantage.

Functionality is a very low bar. I think the screws can easily be found to be functional. This is the same way a Submariner design is not trademarkable. It was designed to be a tool watch, which is by its very nature functional. I hope this is fairly clear.

*DISCLAIMER*: Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
This could be 100% wrong

I'm not sure Hodinkee is a reputable place for legal matters.  I've seen people write things about cases and totally miss the mark.

 

I like the disclaimer.  I don't practice in the field of IP.  I think your information is correct, but may matter theoretically more than in practice on this matter.  If you have well healed clients, they will frequently file suit, just to make a point.  They don't even care if they win, its merely to make the other guy spend money, harass him, and make him decide whether its worth it to try to defend a case, settle or, in this case stop the offending act.  I don't think anyone in this case is going to mistaken that TH junk for an AP RO.  If they do shame on them.  Its like the idiots on other forums buying a Parrot Philippe on Ebay for $300 and then going on TZ to find out if its real.  

 

There was a case where a company was using Corvettes with fiberglass body kits to build replicas of Ferraris that have been out of production for 10 year or more.  Anyone with half a brain knew it wasn't real.  There were so many blatant differences.  IIRC, Ferrari sued them under the theory that it was a poor representation to the public of what a Ferrari is, and they put the company out of business.  AP isn't going to put TH out of business, but they may become a headache for TH with a similar theory.     

 

Certain laws may have changed since that case, but I think the real issue is simply to make a point.  If you make replicas, homages, etc...we will spend the money and go after you.  I would think fighting about some junky, costume type jewelry watch wouldn't be worth TH's time and they would work out a settlement and simply scrap that design.  

 

I'll borrow your disclaimer if you don't mind :  This could be 100% wrong.   

Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post


There are many G-Shocks with all the complications boasted by Citizen AND a thermometer AND compass AND it's f*ng mud-proof!
And on that note: no lawsuits pending as far as I know, but check out this Burberry watch:

http://us.burberry.com/store/watches/mens-watches/the-britain/prod-38393671-the-britain-bby1203-43mm-automatic/

Homage to the humble Patek Philippe Aquanaut 5167/1A?

Kind of looks like a bad mix between an Aquanaut homage and a Clerc.  Also, thought it was very amusing that your daughter has the "Bruce Wayne" pose going with your 5711. 

post #24345 of 35730
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chuckie Egg View Post

Anyway thanks for your thoughts. It's a lot of money for a watch so I'll cogitate over it & look at other similar offerings from other brands as well.

As for the WR rating, I think you will find that similar offerings from other high end brands Lange, AP, VC, Piaget will also only be WR to 30m.  These are dress watches, and require a bit more care than say a sport watch from Rolex, IWC, Breitling, Omega etc.  Not to mention, even if they had greater water resistance, most are on alligator or crocodile straps that would get ruined if you wore them in the shower or dropped them in the tub (I believe replacing a factory alligator or croc strap is around $400 from most of these brands).  

 

With respect to deployant clasps, many brands, be it Lange, VC etc...offer deployants as an extra cost option.  I like deployants, but I've met people that didn't.  Some find them bulky or uncomfortable, and don't want the price of a deployant built into a watch they are purchasing.  

 

If you can see yourself wearing a dress watch accidentally into the shower or dropping it in a tub, maybe you need something more robust and less of a pure dress watch...maybe a Rolex DJ or Omega AT.  

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread