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

The Watch Appreciation Thread - Page 1653

post #24781 of 31277

Wraith - that's a very handsome watch - congrats!

post #24782 of 31277
Very nice Wraith! It looks great on your wrist!

Also, just for a fun hump-day question: which would you choose, the black / black Rolex GMT, or the black / blue Rolex GMT?

This thread on TRF had me thinking (easy morning reading): https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=306969&page=2

Although I initially was leaning more towards the black / blue, I can't help but feel like the black / black is the 'better' option. The black / blue is definitely sexier, but I wonder if I would ever get sick of it! The black / black is tried, tested, and true (especially when you consider it is a logical extension of the submariner).
post #24783 of 31277
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcomer View Post


Also, just for a fun hump-day question: which would you choose, the black / black Rolex GMT, or the black / blue Rolex GMT?

 

 

The black/black, while I have been drawn to it, often can be mistaken for a sub at first glance and that bothers me. It's the reason a GMT has never been on my list for the long haul (black confused with the Sub; Pepsi, coke, root beer too loud for me; and blue/black is too much for what the watch is in my opinion). It's also the reason why the 16570 will likely be my next purchase (but white dial); kind of ties in to the whole Roger POV of watches, it's a Rolex that isn't immediately recognizable as a Rolex to the general public.

 

Edit: Realize I didn't actually answer your question; Blue/Black because it separates itself from the sub at a glance.

post #24784 of 31277

Nuke - The Black/Black GMT did not speak to me so my initial interest was in the black-date-Sub until I saw the Black/Blue GMT from Basel.  The green hand of the Black/Black is not enough contrast to read easily but I do like the new blue hand.  Now if the new GMT was Black/Black with a blue hand I would have considered it.

 

I cannot read TRF from where I am currently but hopefully someone pointed this out.  Also if memory serves correctly, I think I may have looked at an EX2 for the added hour hand and contrast to the dial.  

post #24785 of 31277
I'd take the Black/Blue GMT hnds down just on pure aesthetics - the bi-colour ceramic bezel is just too cool. But I'm probably not a buyer for this watch as I don't find the GMT complication particularly useful.
post #24786 of 31277
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWraith View Post

I'm home now, so here's a better shot of the Tudor, which I picked up today from the dealer in Sydney:

 

 

Congratulations on the pickup!  Looks great!

post #24787 of 31277
Quote:
Originally Posted by Journeyman View Post


Both of the above paragraphs are very pertinent, and go back to a discussion that we briefly had in this thread a few months ago.

At that time, I put up a post which pondered why a lot of people on SF (as an example) were very happy to use small, exclusive ateliers for clothing that cost a large amount of money and that was largely unknown outside a small circle of people (so the very antithesis of name-brand, logo clothing) but that, when it comes to watches, those same people very clearly prefer to purchase watches that are very much "name brands", with clearly visible logos and which come from manufacturers that spend large amounts on advertising - Rolex, Panerai, AP, PP and so on.

It seemed like an interesting example of a sort of cognitive dissonance to me - on the one hand, in terms of clothing, some people were clearly searching for something that was unbranded and exclusive, known only to a relatively small number of people, whilst on the other hand, those same people were purchasing watches that were clearly branded and very well-known.

Of course, this isn't an eternal rule - there are plenty of WISs out there who have some watches from the big brands, whilst also having watches from smaller houses or solo manufacturers.

A few knowledgeable members (including Dino, from memory) chimed in with thoughtful responses, and made some very valid points such as the big watch brands being a known quantity in terms of quality, easy availability of parts and servicing, good resale value (as quite a few WISs like to sell watches after a while to acquire more/different watches) and so on.

So, as Dino and others have noted, for various reasons, even though lesser-known brands may make great quality watches, a lot of people prefer to keep on purchasing watches from big brands for the reasons note above and as a result, brands like GS may well have trouble gaining traction outside their home countries.

I agree with the above, I would just include that as stitch and others have mentioned, the difference in this case is also that GS isn't merely a small company hand making watches (which seems to be what people like to think of when it comes to small independent companies), rather this is a division of a huge company and a very well known company.  Furthermore, Seiko is a brand that isn't immediately thought of a producer of luxury goods, its generally thought of as a producer of relatively inexpensive watches.  That brand association is tough to get past.  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

The difference being that in the case of the clothing makers, these small and relatively unknown makers have a mystique about them and have nothing else associated with them other then their handiwork.

However, in the case of GS they have a very strong association with their product, namely watches that one can get for 100 bucks.

A small boutique watch brand that's aims to sell high quality watches for a lot of money and have nothing else associated with themselves other than their product will always have a better shot than someone like Seiko selling a GS.

+1 agreed.  While funding might be an issue for a small upstart, in a way its probably easier to create brand image and attract interest if a company is a small upstart and they can create the image they want.  It takes time to get the word out, but a company like that can be upscale from the start.  

 

A company associated with inexpensive products will probably have a tough time shaking that image.  

post #24788 of 31277
such a great discussion, this watch thread sure have a great professional image mingled with half naked kate! satisfied.gif
post #24789 of 31277
Quote:
Originally Posted by wurger View Post

such a great discussion, this watch thread sure have a great professional image mingled with half naked kate! satisfied.gif

icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif

---

newC - blue/black no question.
post #24790 of 31277
Really starting to like the black face Explorer II (not sure about red or orange hand). Am I on to something or have I just been staring at too many Tumblr pics? I am not even that much of a Rolex fan; would really love some views here; please don't hold back.



?src=is%7BRolex%2F7721013106122709796kEr%3F%26layer%3D1%26src%3Dblack--eii--g--g--42131061225299833Bn%26layer%3D2%26src%3D21657013106173127406a7v%7D&$description$&rotate=86.6&extend=-1275,-710,-111,-552

post #24791 of 31277

You are on to something, but I'm not a fan of the new one on the wrist (nor do I like the hand or McQueen reference, just not for me, YMMV). I happen to prefer the white dial because I have enough black faced sport watches (but I really like both a lot). And, as I said above, part of the appeal for me is it's a bit less recognizable as far as rolex goes, so that may play well with you.

post #24792 of 31277
Quote:
Originally Posted by Journeyman View Post

At that time, I put up a post which pondered why a lot of people on SF (as an example) were very happy to use small, exclusive ateliers for clothing that cost a large amount of money and that was largely unknown outside a small circle of people (so the very antithesis of name-brand, logo clothing) but that, when it comes to watches, those same people very clearly prefer to purchase watches that are very much "name brands", with clearly visible logos and which come from manufacturers that spend large amounts on advertising - Rolex, Panerai, AP, PP and so on.

It seemed like an interesting example of a sort of cognitive dissonance to me - on the one hand, in terms of clothing, some people were clearly searching for something that was unbranded and exclusive, known only to a relatively small number of people, whilst on the other hand, those same people were purchasing watches that were clearly branded and very well-known.

In addition to the reasons listed above (branch of large company making cheap watches, etc) by others, I will add 2 more.

Making a watch is obviously a much more complicated process than making a jacket. Two (skilled) people with a needle and an iron could order a roll of cloth off the interwebz and make a jacket. A watch, not so easy - which is why production is dominated by large corporations.

The small watch ateliers who are able to bring everything in-house or close enough, their price ranges are out of reach for 99.9999% - there are far fewer people who can drop $160,000 for a Horological Machine than there are people who can stretch $7000 for a jacket made by Rubi.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

I don't think it's any accident either that a GS looks so much like a Rolex.  They imitate, however deliberately or otherwise, the market leaders, and in some ways that makes sense.  But more for a car than a watch.  Spring drives and quality standards aside, a watch is never really about its function in the way a car is.  It's about it's style.  I would surmise that Nuke didn't just buy a JLC because he thought it was more prestigious than a GS.  I suspect that the JLC looked more distinctively like a JLC, more original, more personality.  I like the look of a lot of Seikos, but the ones to which I'm most drawn are the most unusual.  Too many, to me, in design concept are just too similar to a Sub or a PO. And that, far more than the name, is what looks like a cheap watch.

And that is my problem with GS - their designs. There are maybe one or two out of the many - and there are many GSs I have looked at in person and online - that I have thought to myself, "hmm, this is something unique and interesting". I mean, go browse the current GS lineup at the GS website here - you have lots of Datejust-esque models in all lineups, a few Spring Drives that remind me of TAGs, two truly terrible 4-hand monstrosities that resemble the Submariner, and oddly enough a couple that resemble Hamiltons Khakis. The chronographs look like something a 18 year old gets as his first "serious" watch, and every single Quartz model is either bland or a gussied up Datejust.

Only one model appeals to me - SBGW047. Even despite the 4 lines of text on the dial having 4 different fonts. Which bright spark in the design department thought it really necessary to state "Seiko", "GS" and "Grand Seiko" on the same dial? Who is going to look at the watch, say "oh that's a Seiko", then "but wait, it's a GS? what does that mean???", and then "oh, Grand Seiko!"?????!!!



Add to that the value-suck with mall Seikos, the paucity of secondhand market demand and the consequent resale price hit, and GS is pretty much a no go for me.
post #24793 of 31277
Quote:
Originally Posted by DLJr View Post
 

 

The black/black, while I have been drawn to it, often can be mistaken for a sub at first glance and that bothers me. 

 

Edit: Realize I didn't actually answer your question; Blue/Black because it separates itself from the sub at a glance.

+1 

 

For exactly that reason.  My first Rolex was a GMT with black bezel.  Great watch, but it became annoying when people would say (even in jewelry stores), nice Sub.  For me, with a black bezel, the GMT lacks its own identity and lives in the shadow of its sibling, the Sub.  

 

So my vote would be for a blue/black GMT.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWraith View Post

I couldn't wait any longer (forgive the crummy cellphone photo):

Congrats!  Looks great, enjoy it!

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcomer View Post

Reading the Grand Seiko discussion lately has been very interesting. And I guess I will come out of the wood works... I am exactly the person Dino described, to a T. I love Grand Seiko, I think they are a great "value," I like their designs (well, some of them), I like what they stand for, and I think they are really very beautiful watches. But something has always held me back. First I got an Omega. Second, when I had a larger budget, I decided to go for a JLC. Third, when I had a larger budget, I once against opted for a JLC. At each of these steps, I really did consider the Snowflake. I asked about pricing, I looked into reviews, I oogled it. But at the end of the day, I chose Omega, and I chose JLC.

I may get a Grand Seiko one day, but I guess brand means more to me than I think it does! I have drooled over several models, but at the end of the day, I think I will be hard pressed to actually take the plunge. There will always be that voice in the back of my head that says "save for the Patek," or "you always wanted a Submariner, spring for that!" I think it will likely be a while until I am "at the place" where I am ready for a GS. In isolation, they are gorgeous watches, probably the best in their class. But in the grand scheme of things, it is much more difficult.

Great post Nuke.  I give you a lot of credit for coming clean and admitting that although you like the GS, something holds you back from buying it and you instead have chosen and Omega or JLCs.  While some may fret about people being too brand conscious, or concerned about what others think, so what.  In the end you are the one that has to wear the watch.  I personally buy what I like.  I don't care if its a brand that is recognized easily like Rolex, or something that is more obscure to the general public like a VC.  While I think GS makes a high quality product, I've never had any interest in owning one.  Not because of their quality, its simply in that price range, there are watches from other brands that I would rather own...like a JLC.  

 

This next part is in general an not specifically toward Nuke. 

I think something that should be recognized, is that wanting a well known brand name is not a bad thing, as long as the watch (or item) is good quality, you are happy with it, and you bought it for you (rather than to impress others).  I like the terms brand whore, we all know people that are slaves to brands...but I think there are different types of brand whores.   A brand whore can be someone that likes and buys big name brands,  or someone that buys big names for recognition from others.  If you bought it because you have always wanted a watch from brand A, or because you like the design, and you did it for your own enjoyment then who cares.  If a person does it because they want others to be impressed then maybe they have issues as they seem to require the the approval of others.   In the grand scheme of things only watch savvy people would notice watches like JLC, AP, VC, Patek etc.  The "Average Joe" might know a Tag, an Omega, or Rolex, but that's about it.  So when people choose a JLC over a GS, or a Patek over a gold Rolex can we really say they are a brand whore, just because they bought a big name brand in the watch world.  To us they might be buying something well known, but that's not so with non-watch people.  I've owned my VCs for years and never had a single comment about them, and my AP for over a year and it has only gotten a comment or two and that happened in a watch store.  So you can still buy names that are big in the watch world, but which in general fly under the radar.

 

I think avoiding certain brands and denying oneself ownership of a great watch because its a bigger brand name and not wanting to be labeled a brand whore, isn't very different than buying a watch specifically for brand recognition ...each is motivated by concern about others and what they will think.  

  

Quote:
Originally Posted by rnguy001 View Post

I hear what you're saying Stitches and admittedly don't know enough about GS to comment on just how well they sell or what their market strategy is.

As an analogy though Lexus was able to grab a good market share out of the shadow of Toyota and then compete with Mercedes BMW Audi etc.

Yes and no.  When Lexus first came to market, they offered a good quality product, but at a lesser price than MB and BMW.  Their ES250 was nothing more than a dressed up Camry, but they offered a solid product and great customer service.  In addition, their original LS400 was about the price of the entry level MB 300SE.  It was far less expensive than MB's 420SEL, or the 560SEL flagship sedan of 1989/90.  They also came in at a time when American cars were at an all time low for quality, and many people had turned to Japanese cars for reliable well made average transportation.  There were very few options for people buying at a mid range price level to somewhat luxury oriented cars without spending serious money for an MB or BMW.  Also, remember Caddy wasn't the hot seller they are today.  So Honda came in with their Acura and did quite well, and opened a new market for Japanese cars.  Also, note, they completely changed the names of the brand to sell in the USA.  In Japan, Acuras even the sporty NSX, was branded Honda in the home market.  Here brand perception was an issue and they created a new image.  They got a foothold in a mid market range rather than uber luxury...only later did they move further upmarket with more expensive models.  Also cars are a necessity for most people, and people that spend a lot of time in cars may splurge on a slightly more up market vehicle.  Most people need watches, but I think fewer see a need to splurge on them...its a different arena compared to cars.  

 

But keep in mind breaking into luxury car markets, as someone already pointed out did not work for VW with the Phaeton.  In addition, MB decided they wanted to move upscale and get a piece of Bentley and Roll Royce's action...that didn't work out well for MB.  Their Maybach was a failure.  MB is an established car maker, known for luxury products, but it just doesn't have cache necessary to compete at the next level.  For that kind of money people wanted a Bentley or Rolls.  They didn't want a more upscale MB.     

post #24794 of 31277
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

I think avoiding certain brands and denying oneself ownership of a great watch because its a bigger brand name and not wanting to be labeled a brand whore, isn't very different than buying a watch specifically for brand recognition ...each is motivated by concern about others and what they will think.  

Ding ding ding - good counterpoint. 10 points to Gryffindor. icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif
post #24795 of 31277
did anyone notice RGIII wearing a tudor on the cover of SI?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread