Let's Talk About Replica Watches...

Originally Posted by DerekS

Click to expand...

the difference between a 6K watch and a fake one, is well...craftmanship. If you think a 200 dollar ripoff will last you as long and be as well built as the genuine then you have rocks in your head. If you are buying one to show off....then get a knock off.

Do you have any empirical evidence to back that up?

Only read the original post, so I don't know what direction this thread has gone in, but I will say this:

You said that no Jeweller could tell that it was fake? Not true. I'm a jeweller, and I could tell. Then, I would refuse to do any work to said watch, including a battery change. I know most places won't care, but it's a matter of principle.

Buying a fake doesn't just rip of Rolex. Despite what some people say, counterfeiting DOES fund organised crime, and although it doesn't feel like it, chances are you're money is lining the pockets of some very unpleasant people. With links to drugs, prostitution and people-smuggling, and according to Interpol, terrorism.

Also, your friends will find out and think you're cheap.

Originally Posted by Captain Winky

Click to expand...

Not entirely true. They'll still sell movements, but now they'll only sell completed movements, with the ETA stamp on them. Previously, they'd sell parts of movements which watch manufacturers could augment with parts of their own (the ETA in an IWC is unrecognizable as such, for example). It's that practice which they'll be stopping. However anyone who wants to fit a watch with a generic ETA will still be able to do so.
Yeah, you are right. But that is the general gist. they will stop selling ebauches

To the OP: Take this discussion to www.watchuseek.com or even www.rolexforums.com. Not saying that people here don't make valid points, just that you might learn a little more from a forum full of watch enthusiasts. Anyone encouraging him should be ashamed; buying counterfeit goods is just disgusting.

A fake is a fake is a fake.

Many people buy a watch for more than just appearance;
they want the mechanical expertise of the manufacturer.

Personally I'd buy the IWC.
That's the real IWC,
not the replica.

Originally Posted by Ellis

Click to expand...

Despite what some people say, counterfeiting DOES fund organised crime, and although it doesn't feel like it, chances are you're money is lining the pockets of some very unpleasant people. With links to drugs, prostitution and people-smuggling, and according to Interpol, terrorism.

please provide some proof of this.

Originally Posted by citizenshame

Click to expand...

please provide some proof of this.

This report is quite informative. One problem though is that it's dated (2003).

http://www.gacg.org/Content/Upload/D...rapport_uk.pdf

Originally Posted by Artisan Fran

Click to expand...

Do you have any empirical evidence to back that up?

It is evident from a cursory examination of the parts themselves, without even accounting for the skill of the watchmaker assembling them. They don't fit together as well, are made of inferior materials often lack features of the genuine articles (like water resistancy to stated depth).

Originally Posted by Firstladyofsong

Click to expand...

This report is quite informative. One problem though is that it's dated (2003).

http://www.gacg.org/Content/Upload/D...rapport_uk.pdf

not trying to discredit the report, and really i have no dog in this fight, but that link is from a clearly biased source. if we were debating whether marajuana caused cancer, would you link to a report from unitedmarajuanasmokers.org?

Originally Posted by citizenshame

Click to expand...

not trying to discredit the report, and really i have no dog in this fight, but that link is from a clearly biased source. if we were debating whether marajuana caused cancer, would you link to a report from unitedmarajuanasmokers.org?
I would if they referenced valid evidence. I hear what you are saying, but the fact that the source has a vested interest in an argument does not in and of itself invalidate an argument. It should be considered when evaluating an argument, but it's not enough. (Edited to include the referenced quote.)

Originally Posted by marco_rol

Click to expand...

I would if they referenced valid evidence. I hear what you are saying, but the fact that the source has a vested interest in an argument does not in and of itself invalidate an argument. It should be considered when evaluating an argument, but it's not enough.

(Edited to include the referenced quote.)

If the evidence is valid. My issue is the uncertainty in making that very determination. I'm not going to sift through a 50 page document and cross reference and cite check to figure it out, so for all practical purposes, that study is irrelevant to me.

Buying a replica certainly does fund illegal activity.
The production of a replica watch breaks the law.
Whether or not that funds "organized" crime is another matter.

Originally Posted by gorgekko

Click to expand...

What is it with the recent crop of idiots from Canada? Have we bred a fresh batch of them up here or something?
I hvae also been following SF General discussion topics

Originally Posted by Artisan Fran

Click to expand...

Do you have any empirical evidence to back that up?
H0: No difference in time to breakdown between authentic and fake. Calculated t value exceeds critical value. I have enough evidence to reject the Null.

Originally Posted by Ellis

Click to expand...

Only read the original post, so I don't know what direction this thread has gone in, but I will say this: You said that no Jeweller could tell that it was fake? Not true. I'm a jeweller, and I could tell. Then, I would refuse to do any work to said watch, including a battery change. I know most places won't care, but it's a matter of principle. Buying a fake doesn't just rip of Rolex. Despite what some people say, counterfeiting DOES fund organised crime, and although it doesn't feel like it, chances are you're money is lining the pockets of some very unpleasant people. With links to drugs, prostitution and people-smuggling, and according to Interpol, terrorism. Also, your friends will find out and think you're cheap.
QFT from a true jewelery. You also earn more revenue by increased demand for authentic watches, alongside standing on principle. I would venture out to say, most SFers either 1) would buy the authentic watch, because they have sufficent money to do so, or willingness to spend discretionary income to buy 2) buy a fake replica, but not be concerned it is a fake as they know very well the differences 3) buy a watch that looks like the unaffordable desired watch e.g. seiko for the AL&S mentioned earlier in this thread.

The thing is, in the case of Rolex, is that most people are buying Rolex for status. For that reason, Rolex charges an exorbitant markup and represents the worst value-for-money of all manufactures, in my opinion.

As an example, I bought a Zenith El Primero chronograph about 12 years ago and paid about $2000 for it (brand new). At the same time, Rolex was charging around $9000 for a Daytona -- a watch that was an El Primero movement inside a Rolex case. What are you getting for that additional $7000? Status. Nobody knows Zenith (certainly back then), while everybody knows that Rolex is The Best Watch.

A goddamn Jaeger-LeCoultre perpetual calendar and a Rolex Daytona are in the same price range. Because the Daytona is on par horologically with the JLC? **** no. It's because one is a status symbol and the other isn't.

I own a non-fake Rolex too -- a Submariner, which is the Rolex everybody ought to buy. It's a durable, handsome, not-too-expensive watch.

But I find it difficult to believe that there are people out there that collect Rolexes because of their exquisite workmanship. The joke is that when you open the case back of a Rolex, metal filings fall out. ETA makes movements considered comparable to Rolex. You chose Rolex because it's a status symbol. There's nothing wrong with that at all, but don't be disingenuous about it.

Originally Posted by Ellis

Click to expand...

Buying a fake doesn't just rip of Rolex. Despite what some people say, counterfeiting DOES fund organised crime, and although it doesn't feel like it, chances are you're money is lining the pockets of some very unpleasant people. With links to drugs, prostitution and people-smuggling, and according to Interpol, terrorism.

Frankly, this sounds preposterous. Drug cartels and forced prostitution or whatever, sure, those are bad, bad people. But fake Louis Vuitton handbags are made in the same Chinese factories that make purses for Liz Claiborne, and fake Rolexes are made in the same Chinese factories that make cheap-ass watches for Nautica or whatever. I seriously doubt these places are any more diabolically sinister than any other Chinese sweatshop.