WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 20 of 48 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
For an example Tudor and Audemars. With Tudor and their return to the states they have been getting a lot of attention. Tudor was a brand that I didn't know/hear much about up until recently. I even seen QB Robert Griffin wearing one on an ad. And with Audemars they're almost there with Rolex when comes to people just buying them as status symbols. Plus lately it seems like they're endorsing more athletes and celebrities. So my question is it a bad or good thing for a brand to be too mainstream.

BTW didn't mean to single out Tudor and AP
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,538 Posts
Good for the brand,bad for the enthusiasts

I'll take Panerai as an example,been wearing it since late 2005,back then it was somewhat obscure,when I see somebody else wearing it,most likely he/she is a 'Risti

Now,I was out and about in HK for around 10-12 hrs total,browsing around in Central,Tsimtsatsui and Causeway Bay and I saw 10+ Pams..and no,I didn't count the ones in the shop...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,938 Posts
Depends, I guess. At this writing I'd sum up my favorite mainstream brand as Tag Heuer, yet their quality seems to improve with the passing of each new model year. That's the rub for me - when the art of watchmaking gives way to sheer commerce and the quality suffers (name any TV watch brand, for instance), it's time to change brands.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,540 Posts
I don't see how it can be "bad".

Tudor has been around for decades by the way. And this is not their first foray into the States.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,883 Posts
Every Micro wants to grow up and be Rolex or I guess some want to be PP but it might be hard to call PP mainstream. It is obviously good for the company AND I think it is good for the enthusiast in multiple potential ways. If you are a long time Paneristi for example you have far more variety and in house movements to enjoy if you prefer to stay in that camp, if you prefer to move on to a more obscure brand and "ride the wave" again then you will get far more for your collection than you would had they stayed obscure. I expect all those vintage and newer Euro only models will receive more interest in the coming years and see monetary appreciation that they wouldn't have without the return of Tudor to our shores. In the end I wouldn't be bothered since I am not a fanboy of any brand and actually have a "rule" of two per brand max, if the direction a company went branded me by extension in a way I didn't want to be seen I would dump them and move on. The only time it has happened to me was with AP, the rise of the (IMHO) gosh awful ROO caused me to stray from the brand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vandelsand

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,590 Posts
For an example Tudor and Audemars. With Tudor and their return to the states they have been getting a lot of attention. Tudor was a brand that I didn't know/hear much about up until recently. I even seen QB Robert Griffin wearing one on an ad. And with Audemars they're almost there with Rolex when comes to people just buying them as status symbols. Plus lately it seems like they're endorsing more athletes and celebrities. So my question is it a bad or good thing for a brand to be too mainstream.

BTW didn't mean to single out Tudor and AP

Audemars Piguet can hardly be considered a mainstream brand by any stretch of the imagination IMO. They make about 26k watches per year, while JLC and Patek make about double as many each, and they aren't exactly mainstream either. They may have been boosting their brand recognition lately, but you wouldn't call a Bugatti Veyron a mainstream car even though everyone knows what it is (yes, another comparison between watches and cars!).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
370 Posts
Discussion Starter #11
Audemars Piguet can hardly be considered a mainstream brand by any stretch of the imagination IMO. They make about 26k watches per year, while JLC and Patek make about double as many each, and they aren't exactly mainstream either. They may have been boosting their brand recognition lately, but you wouldn't call a Bugatti Veyron a mainstream car even though everyone knows what it is (yes, another comparison between watches and cars!).
So what brands would you consider mainstream other than Rolex?

Sent from my M886 using Tapatalk 2
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
20,990 Posts
Yeah, Audemars has been in some rap songs and an episode of Entourage.

I'm just trying to wrap my mind around the idea that popularity--earned or unearned--is by default a bad thing. As a breed, WIS love Seiko. There are hundreds of thousands of people walking around with Seikos of their wrists who don't even know that there are watches that don't take batteries.

Don't get so caught up in these things. It's not worth it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,590 Posts
So what brands would you consider mainstream other than Rolex?

Sent from my M886 using Tapatalk 2
The most mainstream brands I can think of would be Seiko, Citizen, Casio, Rolex, Omega, Tissot, and the like. There are certainly other brands that are becoming more mainstream, but the high end brands are just a couple steps away from the tiny brands that you often can't buy easily even if you have the money.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
21,829 Posts
The only watch related advertisement I've been seeing regularly on television (both in the US and in Europe) has been for the Omega Co-Axial movement. It's admittedly a very nicely done advertisement, but I've lost track of how many times I've seen it in the last few months.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,861 Posts
Nothing bad about it at all. Especially with brands that go with in-house movements. Now, you don't have to pay through the nose to get your obscure timepiece properly serviced.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
909 Posts
i'm kinda turned off by the brands, which are for sale literally, at every shopping mall in the area.
Certina, Tissot, those double name swiss watches (FC, ML, AN, etc..), seikos, orients, citizens
They might be good, but their mass presense is not a good selling point for me.

That must be due to the fact that for the same amount of money i can buy me a decent boutique brand (which sometimes comes with a history as a bonus) which are usually best value for the money you pay.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,376 Posts
Why do you consider Seiko, Citizen or Orient as something bad even if they can be obtained everywhere? They are better alone just because they aren't part of the Swiss bunch. And what you see everywhere are cheaper quartz watches and Seiko 5's. You won't find SARB, GrandSeiko and other higher end models everywhere. Citizen Signature Automatics are all around 1000 bucks. Not exactly something you pick up along with daily milk and bread... And similar goes with Orients. M-Force and OrientStar aren't all that cheap and they can go for around 700+ bucks. Affordable but not quite cheap.

And that's the thing with these brands. They have everything from cheap 15 bucks quartz watch for your kids up to a 50k bucks super complex mechanical watch (Credor). Swiss brands on the other hand mostly only cover expensive segment and that makes them virtually more exclusive. But still, if you can buy Seiko 5 it doesn't mean you can also get a GrandSeiko... and that somewhat skews the feel of the brands exclusiveness.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
909 Posts
true, you can not buy higher end Seikos or Orients (same goes to every brand imaginable) next to the diary corner, even invicta's has got some actually pricey models (no, i'm not comparing those two).
But what i meant is the brand in a whole, not the separate models.

For that particular reason, probably i won't be buying any of these watches (but i can easily find myself buying hamilton, which in my case are much more rare than a tissot or certina, or any of them japanese)
 
1 - 20 of 48 Posts
Top