WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner
Cancel
Create thread New Forums

Eterna = Fraud?

Jump to Latest
21 - 40 of 52 Posts
#21 ·
Tsujigiri said:
No, this isn't any more of an exaggeration than any of those other examples. There hasn't been any evidence presented that Eternas weren't used, just that a Longines may have been used and that one of the crew members supposedly doesn't remember Eternas. It would be odd for Thor to have worked with Eterna later like he did for no reason. And as has already been established, these guys probably aren't paying too much attention to their watches, so the one crew member not remembering doesn't mean a whole lot.

And yes, obviously I know racing extends beyond Steve McQueen, but the Steve McQueen connection was the only thing I was referring to. Probably poorly worded on my part.
Click to expand...
Except that's exactly the difference. There IS evidence that Omegas went to the moon. That an Explorer went to the top of Everest on the first expedition. That Cousteau wore a Doxa Sub. There's no real evidence, outside of conjecture and assumption, that Eterna's were actually used on the Kon-Tiki expedition. I'd love to believe it was true, but if the most you have going for you is the fact that one of the crew members later worked with Eterna, and Eterna's own marketing... no photos, no memories, no documentation... you don't have much.

Also - the Steve McQueen connection still doesn't work for you - he specifically chose the Heuer because it was more authentic for the movie. Heuer's were intimately close to auto-racing in that era, so literally nothing about their LeMans marketing - including Steve McQueen's connection - is false. Or even misleading.
 
  • Like
Reactions: composer and RobMc
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#22 ·
Some bold statements are made in this thread. Do any of you have proof that no Eternas actually were on board?

"I have no recollection" is the typical political way of saying that something actually was the case but that for some reason you wish it weren't. Perhaps they had a falling out over some advertising issue or something?
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#24 ·
RobMc said:
Exactly. Who exactly pays an "adventurer"? Thor never confirmed or denied. But he got paid after the fact to pose for ads. If there were any truth to it, why would Eterna wait ten years to capitalize on it, when the expedition made Thor instantly famous?
Click to expand...
You raise some interesting points, but you base your claims on an absence of evidence, rather than a preponderance of evidence--it is as easily conceivable that your internet search didn't in fact unearth the entire story, and while you may have, I think I'll wait on the side of 'innocent until proven guilty'--beyond a reasonable doubt.
 
Discussion starter · #25 ·
Buramu said:
Some bold statements are made in this thread. Do any of you have proof that no Eternas actually were on board?
Click to expand...
It's not on us to prove they weren't. They made the claim, the burden is on them to back it. And in the 70+ years since the expedition, and the 60+ years since they made that claim, they've shown not a single stitch of evidence to back it.
It's both amazing, and hysterical that they did it. But really, they just made a wild claim 10 years after the fact, and left it at that.
 
#26 ·
TheWalrus said:
That's cool. But at the same time a lot of people may very well want that particular watch specifically because there is some interesting heritage behind it. The fact the claim that it's not only contested - but contested by someone who was there - is a pretty significant issue. At least it would be for me, had I bought one. It would be like Buzz Aldrin saying "Omega-who? Never seen that watch."
Click to expand...
Hardly. WIS buy Omega precisely because they hope some of that moon thing will rub off on their earthbound lives. WIS aren't buying Eterna; they don't care.
 
#27 ·
RobMc said:
It's not on us to prove they weren't. They made the claim, the burden is on them to back it. And in the 70+ years since the expedition, and the 60+ years since they made that claim, they've shown not a single stitch of evidence to back it.
It's both amazing, and hysterical that they did it. But really, they just made a wild claim 10 years after the fact, and left it at that.
Click to expand...
It's not like you went out and bought Eternas anyway, is it. People aren't going to GTGs with their Eterna Speedmaster Professional! Eterna keeps going bust because it's not an in-brand with a big money following. You'll be hard-pressed finding someone to complain to because they're probably bust again, and literally no-one else cares. It's not as if Eterna has spend decades ripping people off because of its faked association; no-one's buying their watches.
 
#28 ·
RobMc said:
It's not on us to prove they weren't.
Click to expand...
Uhm, yes it is if you're using accusations like "fraud" and "lies". Otherwise it's slander.
 
#29 ·
I don't quite understand the outrage. Supplying something for an expedition is something completely different than actually using it. If Eterna says they supplied the watches, all they need to do is sending them to the expedition team. Even if they don't even make their way onto the raft, Eterna still supplied them. As long as Eterna doesn't claim that their watches were used for timekeeping during the journey, I don't see any problem at all.

Advertising always tries to suggest connection that aren't really there. It's up to us to read carefully. How many people believe that Omega was the first watch in space? Or that Edmund Hillary wore a Rolex Explorer on the peak of Everest? The first is definitely not true, the second most likely not, and Rolex never actually claimed that either, if you read carefully.

So I don't see what's wrong with Eterna's claim.

I mean, Breguet also supplied the Race for Water Odyssey with their limited edition Marine 5517 model (-> Breguet Partners with the Race for Water Foundation and Unveils A Special Edition Marine Watch - Monochrome Watches). But you'll hardly find any pictures of the crew wearing them, because they are kept in a safe on the boat and taken out only for very special, official events. This is just how it works..
 
#30 ·
TheWalrus said:
Except that's exactly the difference. (...) That an Explorer went to the top of Everest on the first expedition.
Click to expand...
And that's exactly what it didn't.. ;)

Quote from an article on that topic:

"While Edmund Hillary did, in fact, take his Rolex Oyster Perpetual during the 1953 expedition, it has been verified with various sources, including an account from the man himself, that he left his Rolex back at the base camp before making his ascent up the final stretch. So, no, Rolex made it close to the summit, but not on it. And yes, to reiterate, that honour belongs to Smiths."
-> The truth behind the Rolex Explorer - First watch on the summit of Mount Everest?

You can then read how Rolex' marketing insinuated that Rolex was first on Everest, without ever claiming it. Very clever and very successful. Just like Omega making a "First Omega in Space" edition of the Speedmaster, which is of course true, but all that sticks with people is "First in Space" connected with Omega. Which isn't quite the same.
 
#31 ·
Do we actually know that Eterna made this claim at the time of the Kon-Tiki range's launch in 1958 or was the claim made by third parties or later incarnations of the company and then adopted as fact?

This advert makes no mention of Eterna's products having been used on the actual voyage whilst you'd think it might have done if Eterna had set so much store by it.
15658898


There are also plenty who swear that the Longines Lindbergh Hour Angle watch celebrates the navigation technique Lindbergh used on his historic trans-Atlantic flight - it certainly celebrates the technique (though not in a functional form) but Lindbergh didn't use it, nor has Longines ever claimed he did.
 
#32 · (Edited)
G550driver said:
Do we actually know that Eterna made this claim at the time of the Kon-Tiki range's launch in 1958 or was the claim made by third parties or later incarnations of the company and then adopted as fact?

This advert makes no mention of Eterna's products having been used on the actual voyage whilst you'd think it might have done if Eterna had set so much store by it.
Click to expand...
The Wikipedia page on the KonTiki expedition quotes this article of FHS:

FH - Eterna celebrates 160 years

www.fhs.swiss www.fhs.swiss

It says:

"In 1947, young archaeologist and ethnologist Thor Heyerdahl is searching for appropriate watches for a particularly bold oceanic expedition. Dr. Schild-Comtesse decides to help the Norwegian who is inspired by the advanced technology and reliability of time-pieces from the factory in Granges. Since the 1930s, Eterna's research and development department had been working on the design of watertight watch housings which offer optimal protection against water penetration and the negative influence of temperature changes. Eterna undertakes the production of a small series of wrist watches which are particularly water-tight and resistant.
(...)
The adventure came to an end at the atoll of Raroia in the Tuamotu Archipelago in French Polynesia, after 101 days and nights on high seas and 8,000 kilometres travelled. For all manoeuvres and decisions which the survival of the crew and the success of the expedition depended on, the explorers relied on ETERNA watches."

Now, the fact that this line is written in an FHS article doesn't automatically mean that Eterna wrote that, but that claim goes much further than I originally thought.. Ah, the plot thickens.. ;)

Edit: thinking about it, the claim in the FHS article is pretty paradox, actually. If you are on an expedition that's successful if you can navigate a balsa raft from South America to Polynesia using >2000 years old technology only, how can the success of the expedition rely on a modern watch? Really defies the purpose, doesn't it?
 
#33 ·
It will devastate some of the people in this thread when they find out that most athletes/celebs do not actually wear Hublot or other brands like Jacob and Co unless they are paid to do so. Are they frauds or just playing the game?
 
#35 ·
TheWalrus said:
Except that's exactly the difference. There IS evidence that Omegas went to the moon. That an Explorer went to the top of Everest on the first expedition. That Cousteau wore a Doxa Sub. There's no real evidence, outside of conjecture and assumption, that Eterna's were actually used on the Kon-Tiki expedition. I'd love to believe it was true, but if the most you have going for you is the fact that one of the crew members later worked with Eterna, and Eterna's own marketing... no photos, no memories, no documentation... you don't have much.

Also - the Steve McQueen connection still doesn't work for you - he specifically chose the Heuer because it was more authentic for the movie. Heuer's were intimately close to auto-racing in that era, so literally nothing about their LeMans marketing - including Steve McQueen's connection - is false. Or even misleading.
Click to expand...
I don't think the Rolex that went to the top of Everest was an Explorer.
 
Save
Reply Quote Like Like
#38 · (Edited)
ffritz said:
Now, the fact that this line is written in an FHS article doesn't automatically mean that Eterna wrote that, but that claim goes much further than I originally thought.. Ah, the plot thickens.. ;)
Click to expand...
Quite. And until I see a statement truly attributable to Eterna I will not damn them.

I have made a bit of a study of the Longines Hour Angle and you'll find plenty of articles and statements, some learned and some less so, lauding this watch as collaboration between Longines and Lindbergh to assist pilots with navigation. The collaboration bit is clearly true but as a navigational tool it is completely bloody useless (not to mention obsolete even before it was conceived) to the point that I'm pretty confident that no pilot or navigator has ever bought one to do the job it was designed for (I can expand but this isn't the place). Longines markets it merely as a commemoration of Lindbergh's epic flight and does not claim it to be a navigational tool, let alone one used as one by Lindbergh.

There's a lot of hyperbole around our watches, plenty of it rooted in fiction and much of that possibly not originating with the manufacturer.
 
21 - 40 of 52 Posts
About this Discussion
51 Replies
23 Participants
Last post:
gmads
WatchUSeek Watch Forums
posts
24M
members
618K
Since
2005
A forum community dedicated to watch owners and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about watch collections, displays, watch winders, accessories, classifieds, and more! We welcome all manufacturers including Casio G-Shock, OMEGA, Rolex, Breitling, Rolex and Tudor, Seiko, Grand Seiko and others.
Full Forum Listing
Explore Our Forums
Public Forum Watches - Private Sellers and Sponsors Affordable watches Dive watches Casio G-Shock