The watch says yes but the brand says no

[Guybrush]

Are that watches that you like but you don't get them because something about the brand at large bothers you?

There are a few individual watches that appeal to me (from Bell & Ross, Tag Heuer and a few other brands) but I've held back on them because I feel like the brand as a whole doesn't cohere for me: like they're trying to be too many different things---diver-oriented and pilot-oriented, and dressy, and tactical, and art deco, and vintage-inspired, and racing-oriented, and big on limited editions, and, and, and... This feels like a very stupid reason to not buy a watch, though, right? I love Omega (and own one), but I wonder if they're guilty of the same offense, though maybe to a lesser extent.

One of the reasons I respect Rolex is that they seem to be one of the few mass-produced brands that doesn't do a lot of this kind of stuff: they have their core lines and those don't seem to change too much---or only incrementally.

Still, I should probably get over this and subscribe to the "if you like it, get it" mentality.

Just wondering, purely out of interest, whether others have similar thoughts.

[OG1982]

Yes, if you like it - GET IT!!!

I have bought watches from various other brands - like Bell & Ross, Omega and Seiko etc. and can honestly say I've enjoyed them as much as the 2 Rolex's I own and currently enjoy. Yes, they may try hard (Omega we are looking at you) but if that's what you are into you should buy it and enjoy it.

[ArtNouveau]

I have owned watches from over 20+ brands, all because that individual piece was attractive to me. I do not crave or want all Rolex models and that goes for all the others too.
In my box currently I have two Rolex, two Omega, an Oris, four Seikos, and a gaggle of microbrands.
To me being held to only one brand would be very boring.

[Jack T]

Some interesting points, good ones. For me, Rolex is still a most desirable brand, but I have been looking at other brands for several years. Fortunately, I have the Rolex models that most interest me (although I wouldn't turn down a Platona or platinum DD) but I'm concerned Rolex is compromising in some areas. Consolidating several lines around the 41mm case is one example of homogenizing. Similar to when GM did this with chassis and badge engineering many years ago with Oldsmobile, Pontiac, Chevy and Buick.

Likewise the 32xx series movement, it is off to a shaky start, and has some design features that seem to me like shortcuts.

Rolex isn't unlike other manufactures, they provide watches that fill a variety of niches, divers, chronographs, dress watches, everyday watches. Omega does that too, it's to be expected from these large diversified outfits. I like Omega, they make good watches, provide good value, and those on their blogs seem to be free from the angst we see here among the Rolex followers over availability, the grey market, declining AD's, bundling, wait lists, etc.

My AD handles Grand Seiko, IWC and other brands with some really great pieces. I bought a GP Laureato last year because I like the integrated bracelet design, couldn't endure all the BS around AP and PP, it's a great watch. B&Ross makes an excellent comparable model. So does Wempe (Wempe!!!, of all watch makers) and Chopard, abeit a bit pricey. And for an every day, truly tool like watch, Sinn makes several solid models.

So yes, the world is full of great watch brands, and we can have a lot of fun with all of them.

[csaltphoto]

Yep. I really like Ball because of the tritium lume. But other things about the design just don't quite work for me.

[Spoonage]

I Buy what I like. I have a couple watches that WIS or watch snobs would scoff at, examples being a Corum (Ti-Bridge) and a Kobold (Spirit of America) among others.

Sent from my Pixel 4 XL using Tapatalk

[seabreeze60]

As time moves on with my collection, I find that having brand flexibility is a positive. I was over weighted on Rolex and Omega and sold most of them. Having a flexible collection of watches purchased at reasonable prices is my goal.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Masteryacht]

Always wondered why Tag makes so many drastic changes. From a ten year period to the next, you wouldn’t know it’s a Tag without their logo on it. I miss their formula 1 models from the 90’s.

[Akkis]

Originally Posted by Masteryacht

Always wondered why Tag makes so many drastic changes. From a ten year period to the next, you wouldn’t know it’s a Tag without their logo on it. I miss their formula 1 models from the 90’s.

I will say tags Monaco line is incredible. Would love to get a vintage one one day


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jamesbondOO7]

I have to confess I have absolutely zero interest for any other brand.

[drfrankenstein]

I think Grand Seiko has the ugliest logo I've ever seen. This definitely prevents me from owning one without question.

[RoRoRo]

Rolex do limited editions to a degree. But don’t call them as such. The availability of them is choked in order to make it appear literally limited.

[Guybrush]

Originally Posted by RoRoRo

Rolex do limited editions to a degree. But don’t call them as such. The availability of them is choked in order to make it appear literally limited.

Very true.

To be clear, my original query was about brands that just rub the wrong way--like they're trying too hard to be too many things. Rolex--through its marketing endeavors, of course--doesn't seem to convolute its identity in that way. They're pretty clear about the handful of things they do: mid-level (or upper-entry-level) luxury watches and rugged but refined tool-watches with strong historical significance. Not that aren't a few outliers, but they're not presenting the sheer quantity of variants that other brands do, nor are they schizo about gimmicky themes (like tactical or vintage). And I'm no Rolex shill--if I were a one-watch person, I'd probably go for Omega. But (the point of this thread) I'll admit that there's something about Omega that annoys me.

But, again, I should probably just get over it and buy watches and not brands.

[TheVTCGuy]

Interesting take, I can understand. I am kind of Rolex-dedicated, but my second watch is a Seiko Dawn Turtle. I saw it, and while I have a lot of respect for Seiko am not truly a fan, but this watch just sang to me. It is now my watch to wear when I don’t wear the Rolex.

[Fleetlord]

This is exactly why the market mostly ignores most watch brands.

Too many overall references. Too much production. Too available. Too many different categories being covered (pilots, divers, tactical, fashion, sports, dress).

The market doesn’t connect with brands who follow that path and simply disregards them.

[Mystro]

If you know your watches you will buy the watch regardless of brand if it calls to you. Life is way too short and a diverse collection is interesting with less watches conflicting with each other.

[BoilerRxZ06]

Originally Posted by Guybrush

Are that watches that you like but you don't get them because something about the brand at large bothers you?

There are a few individual watches that appeal to me (from Bell & Ross, Tag Heuer and a few other brands) but I've held back on them because I feel like the brand as a whole doesn't cohere for me: like they're trying to be too many different things---diver-oriented and pilot-oriented, and dressy, and tactical, and art deco, and vintage-inspired, and racing-oriented, and big on limited editions, and, and, and... This feels like a very stupid reason to not buy a watch, though, right? I love Omega (and own one), but I wonder if they're guilty of the same offense, though maybe to a lesser extent.

One of the reasons I respect Rolex is that they seem to be one of the few mass-produced brands that doesn't do a lot of this kind of stuff: they have their core lines and those don't seem to change too much---or only incrementally.

Still, I should probably get over this and subscribe to the "if you like it, get it" mentality.

Just wondering, purely out of interest, whether others have similar thoughts.

Very interesting take. At first I thought it was going to come across as "elitist" but I get what you're saying. I remember walking into my AD back in 2007 as a 27 year old "kid." I knew nothing about watches, but knew I liked the idea of owning a higher end piece that looked cool. I never made it past the Panerai display. People love them, people hate them, but for me it was just perfection.

That being said, I never even considered a Rolex at the time because I considered it a "douchey" move. "First time watch buyer buys a Rolex to show it off and flex some disposable income," is what went through my head. I labelled most Rolex owners as the types who literally wanted to flash around their wealth. I was wrong, of course, but just wanted to share my initial thoughts on why I initially stayed away from Rolex.

Shortly thereafter, I found this forum and quickly changed my attitude. Barely a year later, I purchased my 116710 ln and was thrilled with it. All in all though, I definitely purchase a watch first and foremost on the eye appeal and personal preference. I don't really care about the name on it, so long as it's quality.

[Krash]

I have to confess that I always think twice about Cartier.

[AK797]

I would and have bought watches from the more obscure brands, such as UN and Chopard, but I would make sure I bought them at good prices to mitigate the usual fall in price.

[Token74]

I couldn’t buy a Hublot no matter how much I might like a watch they make, I simply don’t like the brand.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[enjoythemusic]

You make good points OP. Yes Rolex is solid and consistent. Other brands, like Panerai for example, could be a crapshoot of movement (including doing mystery movements inside their timepieces). Other brands, say Bvlgari, has done an amazing job at creating some impressive timepieces / movements recently.

OMEGA does some great stuff, some WIS stuff, and of course constant production of 'knowns' too.

Ming is Ming, you know and you either love it or not.

Some brands have been doing not much true innovation for a long time... like PP for their mass-produced pieces. Maybe you like that, maybe not, yet at very high pricing there should be something of true value there imho.

FP Journe is.... if you know, then you know :)

ALS is excellent, imho easily outdoing Patek... and then some :)

B&R, with Panerai seemingly moving that way too, are really just fashion watches. Good basic movement, yet nothing really special. So it's the design / style you like and why people buy them (certainly not for the movent inside).

And yes have Omega, PP, Rolex, TAG Heuer, Panerai, Cartier... so have 'em here too. Just remember, don't overpay just for style (unless you're fully aware and don't mind overpaying), also look at the substance behind the brand imho.

[RotorSelfWinding]

As long as it's not Hublot, get the watch you want.

I'm kidding. If you like Hublot, buy it

[jackminny15]

I admit being a Rolex snob. But I'll also admit I am tired of the Rolex game. They can't seem to figure out ways to prevent the end consumer from having to sit on silly waiting lists for desired models, or maybe they don't want to. I have been waiting over a year for a Batman -- that is, waiting for the "privilege" of handing Rolex my $10,000. That has made me look elsewhere. If I eventually get the call, then great. But I am not going to sit around holding my breath, nor am I going to pay a 50%+ premium to a grey. I have begun to explore Panerai, Omega, Zenith, and Grand Seiko, and I've toyed with some Breitling and B&R models too.

[Bstewart]

Originally Posted by BoilerRxZ06

Very interesting take. At first I thought it was going to come across as "elitist" but I get what you're saying. I remember walking into my AD back in 2007 as a 27 year old "kid." I knew nothing about watches, but knew I liked the idea of owning a higher end piece that looked cool. I never made it past the Panerai display. People love them, people hate them, but for me it was just perfection.

That being said, I never even considered a Rolex at the time because I considered it a "douchey" move. "First time watch buyer buys a Rolex to show it off and flex some disposable income," is what went through my head. I labelled most Rolex owners as the types who literally wanted to flash around their wealth. I was wrong, of course, but just wanted to share my initial thoughts on why I initially stayed away from Rolex.

Shortly thereafter, I found this forum and quickly changed my attitude. Barely a year later, I purchased my 116710 ln and was thrilled with it. All in all though, I definitely purchase a watch first and foremost on the eye appeal and personal preference. I don't really care about the name on it, so long as it's quality.

Moyer or reis Nichols?

[Aquinas]

Wempe and Bucherer. I know they got more horological street cred than some established watch brands, but I still feel a (cheaper) Nomos or Tissot is more honest than a store brand (can’t really put into words why).

[Aquinas]

Ohhhh and Blancpain. I know the sub is to the fifty fathoms what a steinhart is to the sub, but still, I couldn’t wear a watch that’s called whitebread.
(I wouldn’t mind driving a car called smith though)

[RoRoRo]

I’ve said this on here before. Rolex is the litmus test for a lot of watch buyers. The current market status gives the brand the illusion of an investment, to a degree some watch models actually are (Daytona etc). Now think of every watch category they do and they pretty much outgun a lot of brands, think about after service where you know the watch will/can come back in brand new condition.

Your watch has asset status and has the potential to look new after 10 years.

Your hear about problems with other brand service centres, not being able to polish certain watches due to their tricky bezels and the Rolex train looks even more appealing to jump on.

The tangible and the intangible tug at the heart strings, Rolex isn’t hype, hype is fugazi and make believe. Rolex follow through, and this is why you want to park your £10,000 here and not elsewhere.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m still all for other brands. I recently got the latest Monaco simply because I’ve always just wanted one, Rolex can’t compete with this watch because they don’t produce a square case, maybe if they did I would’ve been tempted by that instead.

[Harry-57]

Originally Posted by Guybrush

Still, I should probably get over this and subscribe to the "if you like it, get it" mentality.

You just answered your own question. But only if you genuinely like a watch. We all buy for different reasons. My last Rolex purchase was a TT white Sky Dweller. in June 2020 My next will be a SS GMT BLRO, when my one finally turns up.

Since last July I've bought a Calibre 11 Monaco (brand new, unworn, grey dealer, 30% under MSRP) - the first automatic chrono function watch, launched in 1969 from the fruits of a collaboration between Heuer Breitling and Hamilton). Next up will be a Zenith El Primero Chronomaster, which has a history and pedigree that a Daytona can only dream of. After that it will be an Aqua Tetrra World Timer. I might go PM on this one. Like the Monaco, these will be bought either new grey with a discount or from an AD with a big chunk off MSRP. And like all my watches, they will be bought primarily because I love them.

The BLRO will land when it lands.

Each to our own.

[Nodzex]

Buy what you like, period! It’s your money after all.
I own Rolex-4, Omega-5, Tag Heuer-1, GS/Seiko-3, Breitling-1 and several daily beater watches. I love and wear them as I feel on that day. I don’t care if someone doesn’t like it!

[Boaters]

I have ro say I am mostly a Rolex kind of guy. Lately I have had interest in Sinn,Omega and Seiko not to mention a few Tudors. Oh what the hell I like them all