Democracy And A Chance Of A Lifetime...

[Richard Tracy]

I was once told that the most important decisions, which effect our lives

for good or for bad...are slept through or voted with mindless fingers,..

I never believed it,...

Following are the final results for the once in a lifetime

chance offered by a dealer for us, to decide what watches

we wanted built.

Do You,.. understand the significance of the Opportunity ??

http://www.rwg.cc/members/index.php?showtopic=17954

Fully 80% of what was submitted was done so with scant thought

into the dealer's guidelines, and for other reasons, which would take a psychologist

to explain,.. though I would say that the majority of members never participated,

siting reasons such as;

1. 'I don't do polls.'

2. 'The watch I wanted was deleted, I don't care if it did not fit the guidelines'

so fu*k the rest,..

Only a few members took the time to take full advantage, which by the way

is for all of us,.. not just a few.

Though I do appreciate and feel that we have found a few winners,... I think in future,

I will take the advice of some who felt all along that the majority of people are like children,

forever searching for sparkling new toys to slobber over, ways to take as much as they can, for

as little money as possible,. or ring side seats for fights or broils,.. but when it comes to thinking,..

working or helping out,...they would rather not bother, but,..............

'hey.. call me when you have the watches,.. and for a cheap price ,.."

One High point is we have discovered a group of keen minds, and strong hands, which I hope will

continue with me to bring a dream to life,.. A Small but powerful Team.

I just regret that it could not be a community project,..

Sadly....when it comes to the majority of people.....Neil was right after all..

[crystalcranium]

Richard, thank you for your efforts. Community service and leadership is very difficult. I have served on trustees at my church and the personalities, childness among sober adults, pettiness and selfishness never ceased to amaze me. It takes a special person to lead in circumstances like this especially when the rallying cry has the potential to start a stampede for the Titanic's lifeboats without regard for everyone's good. I could hear some disappointment in your posts of late and I'm sorry this undertaking, that came from a wonderful place of wanting to share a great opportunity, soured and wore on you. Keep up the good work!

Chris

[Pugwash]

... and those of us that took part and tried to make it work appreciate the work and effort put in. What an opportunity, it would have been criminal not to have taken part. I wouldn't have felt my time was wasted, even if my suggestions had been lambasted and came last.

[dluddy]

More input for us RT......

Just look at the typical % voter turnout at a typical US Preseidential election

We live in an apathetic world, I'm afraid. Even when we have democracy, we don't take advantage of it as we should.

Thanks for the efforts of the few

[AMK000]

@ Richard T:

Dont let it get you down.

This community is not different than the rest (and real) world.

So ... cheer up and just think that you have started an excellent initiative.

Q: Are we making the numbers ????

[sssurfer]

RT,

thanks for your effort in this.

I did not vote simply because I was not interested in any of the proposed models. If I had put a random vote that would have been an undeserved vantage to a random model vs other models, and I preferred to stay impartial and to keep the polls unbiased.

I'm sorry if this sounded like taking no interest in the matter.

Sometimes forbearing from doing something is not due to sloth and idleness, but to a choice -- with no criticism to the starter(s) of the matter.

Sincerely,

[fotoman]

RT,

thanks for your effort in this.

I did not vote simply because I was not interested in any of the proposed models. If I had put a random vote that would have been an undeserved vantage to a random model vs other models, and I preferred to stay impartial and to keep the polls unbiased.

I'm sorry if this sounded like taking no interest in the matter.

Sometimes forbearing from doing something is not due to sloth and idleness, but to a choice -- with no criticism to the starter(s) of the matter.

Sincerely,

yeah same for me, if i wouldn't buy any of them, why would i vote for one? i particpated up until the point that no watch tthat i wanted to purchase was still in the running.

I don't want this to sound the wrong way, but i don't really care which one of those watches we produce. I think there are plenty of folks here who care about the project, maybe even participated, but, when it comes down to it, i'm not going to chose arbitrarily or to try to figure out what "average consumers" want, i have no idea what sells and what doesn't

Good job those who volunteered, i'm keeping my eyes out for a 10k model

[archibald]

Democracies get what kind of leader they deserve. Watch poll respondants will get the kind of watch they deserve, which in this case is yet another IWC...or a Tag, probably.

Like I do with all elections, I exercised my responsibility to vote, and like in all elections the plain vanilla candidate is going to win.

[KB]

and like in all elections the plain vanilla candidate is going to win.

And I truely believe this to be a shame as well as a waste of a golden opportunity, those that didn't vote for lack of interest in what was on offer needed only to present us with the watches that they wanted to see.

To have us believe that the one or two watches that some offered where the only watches that stirred their interest beggars belief when so many of us currently own over a dozen watches.

Ken

[Guest TTK]

Hate to be an 'I told you so"......but it proves what I've always said......these boards are FPFI.......the majority of respondents wouldn't know an opportunity if it sauntered up.....slavered over their leg and said..."I'm an opportunity"!

I bowed out of the whole situation when we started on the "let's get the best Sub" debate......I mean....any idiot with a reasonable credit rating can buy one...they're only $4000......less if you shop around judiciously......but if that's the pinnacle of most people's aims...an insignificant but significantly hyped up sports watch......then I'm thankful I march to the beat of a different drum.....!

As for the comprehension level exhibited.....all I can do is re-iterate what I've always said.....God must love stupid people....he made a lot of them...and sent them here.....it was depressing to watch idiots...and yes I mean idiots....pushing for Grand Complications.....with multiple functions that even most of the best manufactures would consided a daunting task.....moonphase indicators.....perpetual calendars.....with chronograph movements and even sidereal time indication......duuuuuuhhhhhh....!

[HauteHippie]

Democracies get what kind of leader they deserve. Watch poll respondants will get the kind of watch they deserve, which in this case is yet another IWC...or a Tag, probably.

Like I do with all elections, I exercised my responsibility to vote, and like in all elections the plain vanilla candidate is going to win.

Couldn't have said it better myself. *sigh* Another IWC, indeed.

[swdivad]

Boy... you guys are tough...

I initially voted for the Seahawk... that got shot down because the rules changed. Then I voted for the Ebel... that seems to have disappeared as well.

Now we're left with an IWC, a Paul Picot (nice watch, but where did that come from??!!), and a TAG (??!!)

There are a bunch of IWCs around, and probably in the making, a TAG (??!!), I'll go get one of them at a 5&Dime mall jewellery shop with my credit card almost maxed out, thank you!

The Paul Picot is nice, and different, and good enough to vote for... maybe even good enough to buy, but it surely came out of the blue for me and couldn't see where to vote for it.

All in all, I voted yay or nay for a bunch of watches, but they have all seemed to go missing in action.

[Shabber]

In the spirit of positive thinking, I like the watches that won and yes, while maybe they aren't going to please everyone, they certainly will do what they intended = make the mfg money. Let's think about this people...it's pretty cool to see some new watches and talk about some new ones. For just that, be grateful.

Me, sign me up for one of each!

[tonibari]

I know I'm a noob, but I voted for all the watches either up or down. Yes, I was not happy when some of the watches were removed (especially the Seahawk) but my though all along was: "If this goes well, we will do this again and them maybe it will be a watch that really tickles my fancy." So, I'm still planning on buying which ever watch will get made, just in the hopes that down the line we will repeat the effort. And I get a 1:1 copy of another great watch.

Sorry for all the crying people do, but all your work is much appreciated Richard T.

Toni

[Miss Understood]

Ah my dear bhoys

Did you not see these results before the voting commenced? Tsk!

Marketing is a science and it has learnt how to penetrate even the densest skull, leaving a memory. Or perhaps more tacitly said, leaving a Pavlovian response to a specific stimulus.

With massive repetition of imagery showing stainless steel sports watches, usually with a round and dark face, and correlating those watches with imagery of macho or money or boobs, can you not see that many people are programmed to reach the desired conclusion? Of course the voting would go toward where the advertising dollars have been spent.

A small eclectic group will recognize the superiority of a watch other than stainless, round and sporty. Perhaps these persons are immune to advertising? More likely they have superb filters with which to eliminate the dross from their lives. Some would call it discriminating taste.

This small group will be less likely to spend a lot of time here, and will not vote for a pedantic watch.

And so you have the easily manipulated majoriity voting, as always, for the eye-candy soundbite candidate.

Tsk. And I would so have loved something obscure, done well.

[r11co]

Democracies get what kind of leader they deserve. Watch poll respondants will get the kind of watch they deserve, which in this case is yet another IWC...or a Tag, probably.

The simple majority has spoken, and as often happens with simple majority voting over a number of candidates a minority opinion prevails....

I'm just dying to see what is going to happen when the first generation of the watch appears with flaws and all its supporters are torn between buying it out of loyalty and waiting for the 'second generation'. The only person who will see the result of that particular vote will be Jay - measured by the numbers of custom built watches still sitting in a cardboard box gathering dust......

[Pugwash]

The reason the more interesting and unusual candidates didn't win was, like TTK said, because they didn't fit. The IWCs appear to have won and that is almost entirely down to the fact that they are exactly what Jay/RT specified. The movements are clean and unmodded, they were answers to the question that was asked.

It's not that the public voted for 'boring' watches, it was that no-one could come up with any 'interesting' ones that fit the rules.

Opportunity lost? Not for me as I'd have had to have bought a gen Aquatimer otherwise.

ps. The IWCs are not boring and I'm glad they had as much support as they did.

[r11co]

The reason the more interesting and unusual candidates didn't win was, like TTK said, because they didn't fit. The IWCs appear to have won and that is almost entirely down to the fact that they are exactly what Jay/RT specified. The movements are clean and unmodded, they were answers to the question that was asked.

So, why did the Tag Aquaracer survive the deletion process while the Oris Titan didn't? The objective standpoint is invalid here. Subjectivity on the part of certain people was always going to affect the outcome.

As it is, the IWC is probably an ideal choice from the risk and hassle POV of Jay as 'our' chosen model is little more than a variation on the Gst, and that is exactly what we will get (ie. a re-tooling of the Gst rep and a new dial.... woohoo)

[crystalcranium]

I love complications. The only replica I have that is a non chrono is a Submariner (OOPS EDIT I have an FA Jones too!), and I think many of the people here are gadget collectors too. Maybe we heard "We can have what we want" before we heard and absorbed the limitations. Some of the semi rants in the suggestions certainly sounded like kids in the candy store listing every kind of desired bell and whistle without much regard for practicality. I suggested the Lange because if fit the criteria AND was a beautiful, classic timeless design that was also large enough to satisfy those collectors for whom a 40mm watch "looks small". I was very surprised it recieved minimal support and that watches like the Ebel BTR were running away with the vote in the early going. This was a chance to obtain a high fidelity copy in an area where the replica market is lacking, good replicas of elegant, simple high horology pieces from Vacheron, Patek, A Lange et al. Too bad it didn't work out that way.

Just a public disclaimer. I did originally vote for the Seahawk before it was removed from the running (and before I suggested the Lange) and then my computer wouldn't allow me to log another vote. I didn't have the time or savy to figure out how to recast a vote so I guess technically, I didn't participate and for that I apologize.

[fotoman]

The reason the more interesting and unusual candidates didn't win was, like TTK said, because they didn't fit. The IWCs appear to have won and that is almost entirely down to the fact that they are exactly what Jay/RT specified. The movements are clean and unmodded, they were answers to the question that was asked.

It's not that the public voted for 'boring' watches, it was that no-one could come up with any 'interesting' ones that fit the rules.

Opportunity lost? Not for me as I'd have had to have bought a gen Aquatimer otherwise.

ps. The IWCs are not boring and I'm glad they had as much support as they did.

Ah cmon your bias cause you won. I posted at least 2 chopards that fit the rules and were interesting and different. They had modest interest but something out of the ordinary same ole by definition will not be a majority pleaser or it would be ordinary.

Again, its not that only 2 watches would peak my interest even though I own 12. Its that those 2 watches don't peak my interest.

I didn't vote no for polls cause a negative vote is stupid. If a watch got 200 positives and 400 negatives it would have made it cause no watch got 200 yes votes

And like I said why would I want to keep pugwash from his choice if I don't care which 3 are made. So I stayed out when I wouldn't buy any of them.

[Pugwash]

Ah cmon your bias cause you won. I posted at least 2 chopards that fit the rules and were interesting and different. They had modest interest but something out of the ordinary same ole by definition will not be a majority pleaser or it would be ordinary.

I thought you posted 2894-based reps ... I could be wrong, though.

[sam_tgg]

First of all, TC, thank you very much for your effort.

Second: remenber that it is a also a Porsche design in competition:

http://www.rwg.cc/members/index.php?showtopic=17032

You can vote or not. It is not a problem. But you must acept the rules: if not, what we have now: there are plenty of PAMs and Rolex. I can not understand why some people is against IWC. I will buy the cousteau version, but, this year were 4 good IWCs and all the people saying "another IWC" or another "TAG". How many good Tags are? One, the link. And the people love it. The IWC GST and the Engineur are also two loved ones. It is easy. I like the aquatimers a lot.

I personally voted the Paul Picot, because it is anew brand, it is beatuful watch, different dial, even when it "fights" against my Porsche. I will buy the Paul Picot (the only thing I do not like it is a 7750 reformed to be a 7753)

TTK is correct: a lot of people have no idea what their asking, as TTK show us many times, many people has no idea what they are buying, and them go to the dealers making trouble. But this kind of actions, as the one from DT, helps the people. For example, to know different brands and whatches. I really like a lot of them. And I voted positive to most of them.

[jonthebhoy]

First of all RT - many thanks for all the work you have put into this initiative. Low polling or not, I truly feel that the evolution of an idea such as this has a binding effect in our little community and that can only be good.

The debates within each of the various polls have been interesting and informative and by and large conducted with respect. This is a credit to everyone who participated and contributed.

I wouldn't get too downhearted by the turn out - heck......even the mighty 'Perfect' Sub didn't poll the numbers one would expect!

I had my reasons for nominating the sub, and although I never expected it to win, I think my point was proved.

So where do we go from here?

I sincerely hope that something can be developed and that your enthusiasm has not waned. I look forward with interest.

JTB

[Richard Tracy]

I initially voted for the Seahawk... that got shot down because the rules changed. Then I voted for the Ebel... that seems to have disappeared as well.

All in all, I voted yay or nay for a bunch of watches, but they have all seemed to go missing in action.

Just for the record,.. watches were removed because they did not fit the requested criteria,..

Once posted, I did allow some to remain for a while, either to note interest for project 2, or

to give the submitter time to prove that it could be repped.

Regarding Tags,...Personally I find the brands though beautiful in some cases, out classed,

and priced for mall fare, however had to admit, that they have a devoted following, thus due

to a lack of posted alternatives, I allowed the Aquaracer to remain.

The Titan, however great looking, was priced much to low.

Lastly for those who at the remaining choices,.. the fault is your own, by your lack of participation,

or your refusal to understand that Jay is investing for profit, not to fill obscure personal wish lists.

There was demonstrated a sad, severe lack of foresight, failing to see, that once we fulfilled Jay's first

requests, that we would later have the power to select, and to fix all those wiggles that drive us crazy..

What remains in the Iwc's, though some may balk or yawn, do fit the bill, maybe not as blockbusters, but

enough for us to possibly climb to the next rung.

That is all we need now, to make a start, so I for one Thank Pugwash for his devotion to the project

and hope that Jay will see in his wisdom that these Iwc's are the way to go this time around.

[fotoman]

Lastly for those who at the remaining choices,.. the fault is your own, by your lack of participation,

or your refusal to understand that Jay is investing for profit, not to fill obscure personal wish lists.

There was demonstrated a sad, severe lack of foresight, failing to see, that once we fulfilled Jay's first

requests, that we would later have the power to select, and to fix all those wiggles that drive us crazy..

What remains in the Iwc's, though some may balk or yawn, do fit the bill, maybe not as blockbusters, but

enough for us to possibly climb to the next rung.

That is all we need now, to make a start, so I for one Thank Pugwash for his devotion to the project

and hope that Jay will see in his wisdom that these Iwc's are the way to go this time around.

I want to restate that i applaud what your doing and you did a great job. But i don't think that gets it at all. I particpated, no one liked my choices. So, apparently my tastes are not such that works for Jay.

Having come to that conclusion why would i vote for a watch i don't intend to buy. I'm not a bad loser. But i also don't think its appropriate for me to vote for a watch that i have no intention of buying. I'm not saying you have to commit to buy to vote, but, if i can't see any forseeable chance of me nuying any one of the choices, it doesn't make sense for me to vote. - I'm not "mad" at it. I posted watches that i believed jay could make a profit with. I don't want him to fullfill my obscure personal wish list. But like i said, if i voted for the porche and the porche won and Pugwash who really wants the IWC now can't get the IWC and i don't intend on buying the porche - then what purpose have i served.

I don't think you can reasonably expect any more then a number to vote for a particular piece then could be reasonably expected to buy it.

Remember way back i asked if we could find out from jay what his expectations were. HOw many pieces do you sell to the board? how many does he have to sell to make it worth it? 50? 300? 1000?

If only 40 of us bought the "ultimate PO" 45mm then, how can you expect reasonably that more than 40 of us would vote for a IWC model. Fact is, i just don't know what the numbers are so i don't know if we rose to the challenge or not.

I think "well i just don't vote in polls" is a lame answer. But i don't think you should be down on those of us who particpated, but didn't vote in the end because we didn't want to effect the outcome of those who were interested in the pieces presented.

by the way, is this one with the offset seconds ok or not. - i did have other chopards that were normal seconds at 6. - And were all the old polls deleted or just the ones that weren't rep-able, cause like i said i put up 2 chopards with your basic seconds at 6 layout. no chronos or anything and i can't seem to find them now.

i mean on this one the seconds is offset - but so is the crown, it looks like hte movement is just put in a little rotated

PS i'm already looking for 10k watches i think that Ulysse Nardin i put up, if the complication isn't that tuff, i just don't know these things would be huge. - Its based on a 2982a2 with a module.

with more time and having it in the back of my head, i'm sure we'll get some "more different" submissions next time