Three tiers of watch brands.....and one you shouldn’t buy

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Dan Pierce

I don't buy brands. I buy references I like. Having owned everything from Patek to Seiko skx, and many in-between, as well as vintage to brand new, the tier was never as important as the joy a specific watch brought me when used as intended.
dP

You have a lot of quoted threads, but this may be the all time winner

Welcome to the forum OP

[GoingPlaces]

Originally Posted by Dan Pierce

I don't buy brands. I buy references I like. Having owned everything from Patek to Seiko skx, and many in-between, as well as vintage to brand new, the tier was never as important as the joy a specific watch brought me when used as intended.
dP

I'll too will quote you Dan. Couldn't have said it better.

OP seems to be trying to encapsulate knowledge through a "tier"system for watches. No such thing. Just wear what you enjoy.

[Dave455]

I think you’ve made a good start.

Perhaps think about what makes a watch a tier 1 rather than a tier 2? I think for most folks it would be whether there’s not only a “manufacture” movement (one made by that maker, and probably for that watch) but also whether that movement is hand finished, and whether the result is that much better than mass produced movements. That’s what puts firms such as Patek Phillipe, Vacheron Constantin etc in the top league.

I think you’ve probably got tier 2 about right, but I think I’d probably put Jaeger LeCoultre in here now. They’re no better than Rolex right now, and probably not as consistent. Relative rarity doesn’t move you up the league, only quality.

In tier 3 I’d probably put the makers that offer very nice watches, at very reasonable prices. You’ve allowed $5k, but that’s still a lot. I’m thinking of the likes of Sinn, Hanhart, Orfina, Glycine and many more. These are all manufacturers with heritage, who know what they’re doing, who generally use bought in (historically ETA but now various) movements but turn out very nice watches. Orfina, for example, offer a watch that’s probably 90% of the quality of an IWC, but at about 30% of the price, so that’s what I call “value”. They do it by not charging a premium for their name, and not spending a huge chunk on advertising!

What should you buy? Buy within your budget, and buy what you like. If you make a mistake value wise you will still enjoy the watch. Buy what you think you will keep long term. Even if you eventually end up with a tier 2 or tier 1 watch, you will probably still want a tier 3 for appropriate occasions. If you can, buy quality, so look at and handle as many watches as you can, you’ll soon notice the differences.

If in doubt, buy classics. If a watch is a classic there’s probably a reason why! Above all, don’t worry about “tiers” too much. Using your system you would overlook a watch that’s not in the top 5 of tier two, despite it being a better watch than a tier 3. In reality, there are no tiers and the differences between the makers are gradual and seamless. There’s even a good deal of overlap with different models.

One you shouldn’t buy? Well here’s a whole heap - names you’ve never heard of (and neither has anybody else) getting third parties to assemble watches that are little more than poor copies of classic designs that have been “crowd funded” because even the guy behind the idea knows they’re crap!

[wrx04]

Originally Posted by Dave455

I think you’ve made a good start.

Perhaps think about what makes a watch a tier 1 rather than a tier 2? I think for most folks it would be whether there’s not only a “manufacture” movement (one made by that maker, and probably for that watch) but also whether that movement is hand finished, and whether the result is that much better than mass produced movements. That’s what puts firms such as Patek Phillipe, Vacheron Constantin etc in the top league.

I think you’ve probably got tier 2 about right, but I think I’d probably put Jaeger LeCoultre in here now. They’re no better than Rolex right now, and probably not as consistent. Relative rarity doesn’t move you up the league, only quality.

In tier 3 I’d probably put the makers that offer very nice watches, at very reasonable prices. You’ve allowed $5k, but that’s still a lot. I’m thinking of the likes of Sinn, Hanhart, Orfina, Glycine and many more. These are all manufacturers with heritage, who know what they’re doing, who generally use bought in (historically ETA but now various) movements but turn out very nice watches. Orfina, for example, offer a watch that’s probably 90% of the quality of an IWC, but at about 30% of the price, so that’s what I call “value”. They do it by not charging a premium for their name, and not spending a huge chunk on advertising!

What should you buy? Buy within your budget, and buy what you like. If you make a mistake value wise you will still enjoy the watch. Buy what you think you will keep long term. Even if you eventually end up with a tier 2 or tier 1 watch, you will probably still want a tier 3 for appropriate occasions. If you can, buy quality, so look at and handle as many watches as you can, you’ll soon notice the differences.

If in doubt, buy classics. If a watch is a classic there’s probably a reason why! Above all, don’t worry about “tiers” too much. Using your system you would overlook a watch that’s not in the top 5 of tier two, despite it being a better watch than a tier 3. In reality, there are no tiers and the differences between the makers are gradual and seamless. There’s even a good deal of overlap with different models.

One you shouldn’t buy? Well here’s a whole heap - names you’ve never heard of (and neither has anybody else) getting third parties to assemble watches that are little more than poor copies of classic designs that have been “crowd funded” because even the guy behind the idea knows they’re crap!

Thanks for the well thought out post, Dave. Thats exactly the type of info I was looking for. I'll look into Orfina....havent heard of that one.

In retrospect, I should've worded my my original post differently: Perhaps I should've asked everyone for their top three or four favorite references for a given price point, and elaborate why you like those choices....everyones opinion will vary, but it will be interesting to see if certain watches are mentioned more frequently than others. The same goes for why you personally would avoid certain watches/companies based on your ownership/experience/etc...

Im sure everyone who enjoys watches can give examples of references they love (and specific reasons why they love them) from the $200 price point all the way to the $20k+

[wrx04]

Edit:

If you could use all the knowledge you have now, and go back to when you were first starting out collecting watches, what advice would you give yourself?

[CalSRQ1]

Originally Posted by Dan Pierce

I don't buy brands. I buy references I like. Having owned everything from Patek to Seiko skx, and many in-between, as well as vintage to brand new, the tier was never as important as the joy a specific watch brought me when used as intended.
dP

Excellent

[Pongster]

Originally Posted by Nav01L

That was more of a tongue in cheek one of course.

7 in my view would start with the perpetual calendars from the big three and go all the way to things like 5270s, but it would also comprise things like an FPJ resonance or DeBethunes Tourbillon watches, a striking Zeitwerk or the chiming watches from AP, Patek or Vacheron or even JLC, not to mention the tourbs. To be fair, many RMs would also be in this category, especially the ultralight tourbillons.

8 is where I‘s see many of the watches Greubel make, Patek‘s supercomplication, VC‘s les cabinotiers watches, or some Urwerks, to name some of the more mainstream ones, but also eclectic stuff like some MB&F pieces or the Antiqua.

Where would a Jacob & Co Astronomia lie? Level 7 or 8?

The Paul Newman’s Paul Newman would have been Level 3?

[Nav01L]

Originally Posted by Pongster

Where would a Jacob & Co Astronomia lie? Level 7 or 8?

The Paul Newman’s Paul Newman would have been Level 3?

I‘m not very familiar with Jacob‘s supercomplex watches, but they certainly seem to venture towards 8 from what I see.

As for the PNPN, indeed, quality tiers don’t have anything to do with provenance

[DoraTheExplorerII]

Also a person shouldn't write off entire brands contrary to popular internet mob opinion, such as Hublot, Panerai, etc. (maybe even Invicta) without doing your own due diligence and investigation.

[joli160]

Have a look at Gronefeld for tier 1

[sgwatchguy]

There’s 4 tiers for me:

[#1]
I wish I could buy and I’ll need a lottery.

[#2]
I would love to buy and I’ll need to be patient

[#3]
I could buy today

[#4]
I would not buy

I operate between 2 and 3, happy and satisfied.

[Ziggurat]

Originally Posted by Nav01L

I don’t think ranking brands is that easy because some of them, like JLC will have low level stuff that’s just about on par with lower end offerings of brands like IWC and other stuff that flies up in the spheres of complicated Pateks or Vacherons.

What probably makes most sense is to organize individual watches in these broad categories:

Level 1: Mechanical, industrial, purely cost focussed watches with mostly generic designs and parts, basic rough machine finish if any, approx. CHF 500-3500

Level 2: Mechanical, industrial, simple, quality focussed watches with mostly generic movements but often dedicated designs and marketing stories, basic machine finish, approx. CHF 3500 - 6500

Level 3: Mechanical, industrial more function specific quality watches with more dedicated and complex movements and strongly developed designs and marketing identities, machine finish, approx. CHF 6500 - 12000 (more of in precious metals)

Level 4: Mechanical, partially hand finished simple watches with often very classical designs, entry level to the world of haute horlogerie, approx. CHF 17000 - 28000

Level 5: Mechanical, partially hand finished watches with simple complications (chronographs, calendars, ACs, etc.), approx. CHF 30000 - 60000

Level 6: Mechanical hand finished watches from independents, with often outstanding artisanship on relatively simple movements, CHF 50000 - 80000

Level 7: Mechanical partially or truly hand finished watches with great complications (split second chronographs, perpetual calendars, tourbillions (not actually a complication but who cares), etc., approx CHF 75000 - ******

Level 7bis: Richard Mille, fantastic marketing, watchmaking that may or may not be superior to others (it’s not really), ridiculous hype, approx. 90000 - ******

Level 8: Exceptional mechanical watches, often hand made by independents, approx. CHF 300000 - *******


Brands like Rolex clearly dominate level 3. AP arguably has a very strong footing in level 4 from a brand recognition perspective. Other brands like Patek or VC will give you the best quality in the segment. Level 5 has a lot of competition in it, lots of great Langes, cool underrated Patek chronos at the upper end, VC is really strong in there too and some upper end JLCs can be found there as well... etc, etc...

This is a great way of looking at how to position different manufactures and brands. It allows for all makers to participate across all levels, depending on their level of investment into the product. For example, one can find some great, historically significant watches from Cartier that would not fit easily into other methods of categorization, because many will think of them as primarily a jewelry Maison.

[athens7]

Originally Posted by Skyrider01

Let's not forget the independents, many of which I would classify ahead of those you put in Tier 1.

FP Journe
Kari Voutilainen
Romain Gauthier
Laurent Ferrier
Philippe Dufour

These fit your criteria for Tier 1 much better than the mass produced brands you listed.

Agree. Could also consider Roger Smith, Akriva, Jean Daniel Nicolas for this group.

[MCMartiny]

I personally found this lecture very informative in terms of different tiers of brands and watches - as well as the recent history of the industry. In addition it gives good inside view into how the large watch groups thinks and position their products in different price segments. Massena is a very engaging speaker and well worth an hour of your time (at least if you are a WIS):

https://youtu.be/SQFYdtqtSyY?t=118

[AK797]

Originally Posted by MichaelFlash

Agreed. This "tier" thing and ones you shouldn't buy are IMHO exactly the element of watch collecting that turns me off the most. Sounds more like someone looking to invest in stocks as opposed to enjoying the watches themselves. Rid yourself of this type of thinking and a whole world of possibilities opens up and you avoid boredom by collecting the exact same watches and brands as everyone else.

I agree, but for beginners it helps to rank things so you get a general idea without having any experience, and then it falls to you to try out the watches or whatever the new hobby is and find what works for you best.

[wrx04]

Originally Posted by MCMartiny

I personally found this lecture very informative in terms of different tiers of brands and watches - as well as the recent history of the industry. In addition it gives good inside view into how the large watch groups thinks and position their products in different price segments. Massena is a very engaging speaker and well worth an hour of your time (at least if you are a WIS):

https://youtu.be/SQFYdtqtSyY?t=118

I watched the entire lecture.......very interesting.

Seems like the vast majority of the watch industry is brands that exist in different segments of the market (owned by the same parent company) to capture different price points.

The independent ones, less so. Rolex, for example, seems to be the same build quality across the board.....price increases only with use of precious metals which retain inherent value.

So people buy the marketing story more than build quality? The price points basically are a “tier” system, and a certain amount of wealth required to play in that tier is what makes them exclusive/sought after?

The video makes it seem that luxury watches are more a status symbol than a tool. Or maybe a place for the wealthy to store or trade wealth. Do you feel this is an accurate assessment?

[MCMartiny]

Originally Posted by wrx04

I watched the entire lecture.......very interesting.

Seems like the vast majority of the watch industry is brands that exist in different segments of the market (owned by the same parent company) to capture different price points.

The independent ones, less so. Rolex, for example, seems to be the same build quality across the board.....price increases only with use of precious metals which retain inherent value.

So people buy the marketing story more than build quality? The price points basically are a “tier” system, and a certain amount of wealth required to play in that tier is what makes them exclusive/sought after?

The video makes it seem that luxury watches are more a status symbol than a tool. Or maybe a place for the wealthy to store or trade wealth. Do you feel this is an accurate assessment?

Yes, I think that is a fair summary.

Especially the large groups play a price segmentation game with brand and marketing being the primary driving force behind product decisions and tiers. Even Patek and Rolex are what they are today because they are both exceptional at playing this marketing / branding game (and have a history that plays well into it). For the most part, the only guys that truly care more about the end product than segmentation, marketing and brand are the independents (and possibly Lange IMHO).

[wrx04]

Cool. Thanks for the input, I appreciate it. Thanks

[Justindo]

Putting watch brands into categories is tricky but, simultaneously, useful, as certain watch brands straddle two or even three tiers, depending on the watch and yet the brand has, more or less, a tier identity. Complications, hand finishing, materials, brand history and hype, new and used prices, and what one values complicate the matter further.

For example, I would put all Rolexes, most Omegas, most Breitlings, most Tudors, and the better TAG Heuers in the same tier and yet there is still, somewhat, of a hierarchy here. Value plays a role here too. While I think the steel Submariner is a better watch overall than a steel Super Ocean Heritage II, they're honestly fairly similar in terms of overall quality and there is no way one is objectively worth three times the grey market price of the other new if you take resale out of the equation.