What's in a name?

[anton]

Other than this great forum, I like to frequent other watcher forums out there. Perhaps many of you know PMWF/SCWF, ThePuristS, TURF, WUS, TZ (and TZ-UK), and who could forget TBWF? I've read so many arguments and debates about what is better value, prestige, "bang for the buck", etc.

So, during my travels, I see so many watches that look like clear knockoffs of others (or hommages); Invicta is a known culprit in this. But there are some people who swear by their brand as the brand of choice, and most others are just paying a premium for a "name" or to be some part of "elitist" club.

My question for you is: How can such an argument be justified? What's in a name? What can you get from purchasing from one brand that you can't get with another?

Please don't include reps vs. gens or HBB vs. ROO is this argument.

The reason why I chose to ask my question here vs. other forums is that many of you have given unbiased responses to questions and I'm sure an overwhelming number of you are gen owners, from the simplest Luminox to the most extravagant Breguet.

[Victoria]

So, during my travels, I see so many watches that look like clear knockoffs of others (or hommages); Invicta is a known culprit in this. But there are some people who swear by their brand as the brand of choice, and most others are just paying a premium for a "name" or to be some part of "elitist" club.

My question for you is: How can such an argument be justified? What's in a name? What can you get from purchasing from one brand that you can't get with another?

I don't know. It's like asking why one would want a Volkswagen instead of a Rolls-Royce if given a chance to buy either/or. Both get you from point A to point B, so functionality is not in question.

I'm sure Invicta is a fine marque. But if their designs are so obviously knock-offs of better known timepieces, one is left wondering -- why?

To me, the answer is obvious. Because one can't afford the Rolex on which it is based.

Remember, most of us who frequent these rep watch forums are looking for replica watches of elite marques.

There are many reasons for that, but one reason MUST surely be we want to look like we have the real thing -- else we'd stick to Invicta or Geneva watches, right?

The why is complicated. Snobbery. Quality (snigger). Being associated with the best. The elegant lines of a finely crafted watch. Many reasons.

P.S.: Don't own any Invictas. But I do own a Caravelle (by Bulova, IIRC) Tank knock-off of a Cartier Tank. It's a GREAT watch. Flawless mechanism. Looks awesome. But I never wore it again after I finally bought my Cartier Tank.

[Raijor]

Certain brands have attached themselves to having a meaning beyond telling time and have become an extravagance. That extravagance has value that some people are willing to pay dearly for ... in order that the buyer may associate him/herself to the meaning. .... "I deserve the best because I am the best." This is the result of clever marketing on the part of the producer. .... by associating a product to emotions that make a person feel good about themselves, a producer is able to sell the product for more than the utility of the product is actually worth. It is all about clever marketing. Associate special feelings toward a brand and people will pay extra to associate with the brand. This does not justify the argument - perhaps it explains a part of it. - Cheers

[TeeJay]

Other than this great forum, I like to frequent other watcher forums out there. Perhaps many of you know PMWF/SCWF, ThePuristS, TURF, WUS, TZ (and TZ-UK), and who could forget TBWF? I've read so many arguments and debates about what is better value, prestige, "bang for the buck", etc.

So, during my travels, I see so many watches that look like clear knockoffs of others (or hommages); Invicta is a known culprit in this. But there are some people who swear by their brand as the brand of choice, and most others are just paying a premium for a "name" or to be some part of "elitist" club.

My question for you is: How can such an argument be justified? What's in a name? What can you get from purchasing from one brand that you can't get with another?

Please don't include reps vs. gens or HBB vs. ROO is this argument.

The reason why I chose to ask my question here vs. other forums is that many of you have given unbiased responses to questions and I'm sure an overwhelming number of you are gen owners, from the simplest Luminox to the most extravagant Breguet.

At the end of the day, I would have to say the only difference between the brands is aesthetic appearance, and maybe an update in the materials/technology involved, say, a modern divers watch having double ARd saphire crystal, compared to the perspex crystals of yester-year. It's the 'little things' rather than the glaringly obvious, as, at the end of the day, they're all just watches. All just devices for telling the time.

With regards Clone Watches like Invicta, I view them solely as a company which, although wanting to make a name for themselves, doesn't have the talent or drive to design anything of their own, so just copies and bastardizes another company's designs before slapping their own brand on it. Sure, the replicas might be copies of real watches, but at least they (the factories) are (at least in theory ) replicating those specific details and branding, rather than simply cloning the watch and applying their own label. In that sense, reps are at least 'remaining true' to the original, as although they may be imitations, they only appear to be imitations, rather than a different brand all together, which the Clone Watches appear to be.

[Pugwash]

Good brands are responsible for good design and good design is worth paying for.

If I were exceedingly well-heeled, I'd buy gens over reps every time but, as I'm not as well off as I'd like, I buy reps.

[Corgi]

If I were exceedingly well-heeled, I'd buy gens over reps every time but, as I'm not as well off as I'd like, I buy reps.

I must agree! But, I would still experiment with getting reps for very extravagant models. Obviously you have to draw the line somewhere...

[Guest Carl]

Our topic starter has placed a very good question.

What can be made of knock off watches?

I would say that they are all reps from the style viewpoint and must be judged as such.

Those which just rip off the gen to the greatest degree are what we are after here. Let's just admit it now.

Carl

[lanikai]

Established ..... Rolex... IWC ... established .. Prestiege.. History ... but most of all Marketing and ignorance by the general Public.....

I believe "Class Societies" .. have defined what we drive to what we wear and where we are "seen" .. why do people pay thousands of dollars to become members of elite country clubs ... maybe it has to do with you can only feel really comfortable with your own kind of people ?? Or it defines your "Class" ... or is it so you can golf at some of the "Best " courses... a little of everything ???

so if a Seiko keeps better time than any other time piece .. why would you choose a Rolex ... when you have to pay 1000 usd for a servicing and overhaul? so you can say... A servicing for a Rolex cost XXXXX amount of dollars ?? Is it about POWER ??

For lack of a more sophisticated word..

I can afford the same golf clubs that the pros use ... if I could afford their cars would I .. in a New York Minute ...

although I have known very wealthy individuals that wear a timex.. they are called essentric...LOL ...

Japan is a great example of you are what you wear, drive, and not where you travel but in what style ... every fiber of their culture is this way....

I have a friend that wore only rolex.. now he wears Invicta's ... he say's it keeps better time.. wow, Imagine That... Invicta has been around just as long as rolex i think.. imagine if Invicta had the breaks and marketing .. maybe the roles would be reversed..

societies create "Norms" .. Rules by which you are socially acceptable ... so would a Wall St. Broker be seen wearing an Invicta when all other "sucsessful associates" are wearing Rolex ??

I believe history from the time of Rome and before will hold this opinion to have some merit..

[anton]

One thing I never have seen is the relation of watch buying to other things that one may have in the home. When one purchases a TV or a Refrigerator (even a cell phone), they mull over the features of the product, their longevity, after-sales service options, advantages (or disadvantages) and then make a buying decision.

A watch is just as operative as a product like above, but it's sad to see that rarely anyone makes their watch purchases based solely on those factors.

Lanikai put it best when in Japan, appearances are everything. Well here in the States, it's much the same way too. I remember reading a story of one man who worked in a very large office building and passed by one of his colleagues, who wore a Cartier. The man writing the topic wore a Zenith Defy Extreme (bear in mind that his model went for $22K). They both engaged in a light conversation when he commented on her watch. She replied and raved about the watch and then commented on his. She then quickly debunked her comment by saying, "maybe when you earn as much as me, you can buy a Cartier."

A perfect example of how a name is unjust cause for ego.

[TeeJay]

One thing I never have seen is the relation of watch buying to other things that one may have in the home. When one purchases a TV or a Refrigerator (even a cell phone), they mull over the features of the product, their longevity, after-sales service options, advantages (or disadvantages) and then make a buying decision.

A watch is just as operative as a product like above, but it's sad to see that rarely anyone makes their watch purchases based solely on those factors.

Lanikai put it best when in Japan, appearances are everything. Well here in the States, it's much the same way too. I remember reading a story of one man who worked in a very large office building and passed by one of his colleagues, who wore a Cartier. The man writing the topic wore a Zenith Defy Extreme (bear in mind that his model went for $22K). They both engaged in a light conversation when he commented on her watch. She replied and raved about the watch and then commented on his. She then quickly debunked her comment by saying, "maybe when you earn as much as me, you can buy a Cartier."

A perfect example of how a name is unjust cause for ego.

Slightly off-topic, but with regard form and function, while I haven't so much mulled over the issue of function rather than form when buying a watch, it has been a huge consideration for what I wear on vacation in November, as it is international travel. At first, I was considering wearing a GMT watch, because I didn't want to have to re-set the watch on the plane, and then get all anal about it being bang on seconds accurate when it was re-set (for that reason, the other option was to set the watch ahead prior to travel, but that would then be awkard having to 'compensate' while in my native time zone) so the solution I've wound up with, is as the second sweep on a Panerai doesn't hack, that will be easy to jump forwards an hour without losing out the 'seconds accuracy'. Probably not a watch I would have chosen to wear on vacation, but, function has won out over form

[Pugwash]

Function over form is what's driving that question in the back of most replica collectors' heads: what would my first expensive genuine watch be now I'm so well educated in brands and quality?

I have that internal monologue often. Would I buy an IWC for the design or would I go for an Omega, Rolex, etc., and would I get a GMT or a chrono? Is it possible to buy a genuine watch for personal pleasure instead of an intended statement, and if so, which one?

That's when the voice at the back of my brain tells me to get something like a Ulysses Nardin Freak. Yeah, I don't listen to it much, either.

[Desuetude]

One thing I never have seen is the relation of watch buying to other things that one may have in the home. When one purchases a TV or a Refrigerator (even a cell phone), they mull over the features of the product, their longevity, after-sales service options, advantages (or disadvantages) and then make a buying decision.

Gotta disagree with you on that one. Why do I feel a need to have a Subzero fridge, a Viking range and grille, Miele dishwashers, etc, etc? Granted, such items help resale value. But I can tell you from personal experience that Subzeros, while their twin compressors are great, they break quite often, and they still have their functional quirks. The Viking range looks awesome, but heat modulation sucks, and the ovens are a joke. Not to mention the fact that the supposedly "stainless" grilles on the built in Viking grille are always rusting. I've replaced those damn things 3 times. I gave up after the third time, and just accept the fact that it's rusty, and use copious amounts of Pam when I grille. Don't even get me started on the Miele dishwashers. They also look great, and function well...while they work. Those break quite often.

Now, you may ask why I bring these things up. I could've easily gotten a Dacor range and fridge instead of the viking/subzero. I could've gotten any host of other dishwashers. I'm willing to bet that any of these alternative options would be functionally superior, longer lasting, cost less to maintain. Hell, I bet that bottom end GE stuff would've been better. In retrospect, I should have sucked it up, and just gone with what actually worked, especially given the fact that I actually use all of these appliances (most people with Viking ranges will never use them, lol)...but I didn't. I justified getting the appliances I have by the added appeal in resale value, and in some of their cases, the functional superiority. The reality is that I've spent more money in maintaining these appliances than whatever extra amount they might have added to resale. Not to mention the fact that I would probably be quite a bit happier having things that actually do their job when I am cooking.

However, whenever people step into my kitchen...people recognize and are impressed by the Viking range and the Subzero...and in the case of those who are really in tune, they'll comment on the dishwashers and the Franke hardware. Are they the most functionally superior items? No; I could've gotten commercial grade stuff that really kicks butt. Are they the most universally recognized high end appliances? Yes.

Ironically, I don't operate in this manner when it comes to watches, cars, clothing, etc. I buy what speaks to me, and couldn't care less what other people think. If someone else appreciates what I happen to wear or drive, good for them, they have great taste. . If not...well, they're not the one who has to drive/wear it.

[anton]

Gotta disagree with you on that one. Why do I feel a need to have a Subzero fridge, a Viking range and grille, Miele dishwashers, etc, etc? Granted, such items help resale value. But I can tell you from personal experience that Subzeros, while their twin compressors are great, they break quite often, and they still have their functional quirks. The Viking range looks awesome, but heat modulation sucks, and the ovens are a joke. Not to mention the fact that the supposedly "stainless" grilles on the built in Viking grille are always rusting. I've replaced those damn things 3 times. I gave up after the third time, and just accept the fact that it's rusty, and use copious amounts of Pam when I grille. Don't even get me started on the Miele dishwashers. They also look great, and function well...while they work. Those break quite often.

Now, you may ask why I bring these things up. I could've easily gotten a Dacor range and fridge instead of the viking/subzero. I could've gotten any host of other dishwashers. I'm willing to bet that any of these alternative options would be functionally superior, longer lasting, cost less to maintain. Hell, I bet that bottom end GE stuff would've been better. In retrospect, I should have sucked it up, and just gone with what actually worked, especially given the fact that I actually use all of these appliances (most people with Viking ranges will never use them, lol)...but I didn't. I justified getting the appliances I have by the added appeal in resale value, and in some of their cases, the functional superiority. The reality is that I've spent more money in maintaining these appliances than whatever extra amount they might have added to resale. Not to mention the fact that I would probably be quite a bit happier having things that actually do their job when I am cooking.

However, whenever people step into my kitchen...people recognize and are impressed by the Viking range and the Subzero...and in the case of those who are really in tune, they'll comment on the dishwashers and the Franke hardware. Are they the most functionally superior items? No; I could've gotten commercial grade stuff that really kicks butt. Are they the most universally recognized high end appliances? Yes.

Ironically, I don't operate in this manner when it comes to watches, cars, clothing, etc. I buy what speaks to me, and couldn't care less what other people think. If someone else appreciates what I happen to wear or drive, good for them, they have great taste. . If not...well, they're not the one who has to drive/wear it.

Defacto,

You are an exception to the rule. And (I think) you are from the Financial Capital of the World. When you speak of Miele dishwashers and Subzero fridges, then you are in a different league than let's say, someone in midwestern Pennsylvania.

But I agree to your point. Case in point is myself recently purchasing a Bang & Olufsen system for my living room. Other than it looking great, for its' price range I could have gotten a Sherwood amp and McIntosh speakers. But the B&O looks beautiful, always evokes comments from people that come over, and from its' release eleven years ago have still fetched about 60% of retail price.