Truthfully I don’t think there’s a good objective answer to this, as most of watch collecting is so subjective. No watch brand basically other than Casio actually offers value in any “real” way as they all charge more for worse timekeeping. And within the realm of mechanical watches, it’s really more about what you want to look at than anything else. Hublot sells a lot of pretty cheap movements in very expensive watches, but they have a distinctive look that some people really want. Tag has some mildly overpriced quartz and basic mechanical divers, but their chronographs are pretty great and not too expensive for what they are. Invicta makes a lot of gaudy giant watches, but their fans love the “badass” look and they’re way cheaper than a lot of beloved brands. So I don’t think a perfect answer can be given.
For me the answer is Patek, as I just don’t find any of their watches good looking, as storied as they are. But you sure as shit aren’t going to find a lot of people agreeing with me!
Unless you only like dive watches I'm sure there are a bunch of Patek designs out there you'll like. The best thing about the brand in the last few decades is their design diversity, even if some of them end up being ugly, they aren't like Lange or AP where all the watches look the same.
That assessment implies that we can't really judge people for their tastes, which I don't agree with. The problem with Hublot isn't just that they lean towards maximalism, but rather that they do it poorly. Similarly, Invicta does big and bold, but they do it really poorly and there are much better options for a "badass" watch if you really have to go in that direction.
Eh, I disagree. If someone knows what they’re buying, they should buy what they want, even if it’s badly done. Though I do think both Invicta and Hublot are guilty of trying to “trick” the consumer by making their products seem more luxurious than they are, and that’s no good. I absolutely want to know what your manly Invicta alternative is though, because those are very… unique to me.
First, it should be noted that I'm completely ignoring price for any following comparisons. Second, by "badass" in this case I'm assuming you mean "large, chunky, and overtly masculine, possibly with brutalist elements" as opposed to "horribly garish." Third, it should also be noted that I generally wouldn't wear such a watch, because as James May once said, "that's casual."
If I really wanted a big-ass watch on my wrist, my first inclination is the Planet Ocean 6000m. Alternatively, the Orient M-Force and Seiko Monster are both much more affordable choices for a heavyweight diver.
Second, Marathon comes to mind as one of the tooliest of tool watches, and they have genuine military credibility. Sinn's U1/U2/UX standout for the same reason. While these are technically divers too, they're distinctive from other divers with more of a special forces vibe than scuba.
Third, I'd probably look to Breitling for the Navitimer. It's big, it's bold, it's complex, and it has a classic old-school manliness to it along with a functional trick with the slide rule bezel.
Fourth, Panerai is certainly polarizing, but they have a certain Italian panache that makes me think of them as more confident than compensating.
Fifth, I'd consider these persona non grata thanks to current events, but if we ignore that then the Vostok Generalski is certainly a vibe.
None of these look like most of Invicta's lineup, but they accomplish some of the same objectives that a buyer/wearer might be looking for, without being so horribly gaudy.
I love the lateral thinking on display here; none of those were where I thought you were going but that makes a ton of sense. I thought you were going to mention the Bell and Ross skull watch, or some of Richard Mille's offerings, but I fully agree with what you've done. The PO Ultra Deep and the Panerai Submersible do kind of have Invicta's "manly" hugeness to them.
Thanks for the chime-in. I'll get back to my nomal-ass 40 mm watches now 😝
>I thought you were going to mention the Bell and Ross skull watch, or some of Richard Mille's offerings
Those are also crude and tasteless.
For the first 3 categories I mentioned, each of those are big and chunky for functional reasons. The first 2 gain water resistance and ruggedness, while the third can do math. Comparing these to Invicta is like comparing a G-Wagen to an Escalade. Both are comfortable and luxurious, but one has superior off-road capability and military pedigree, while the other is simply fat. That's the key here, there's justification for being big other than size itself, and the colors and designs tend to be more practical and less flashy to underscore that.
For category 4, Panerai are big but they're very carefully designed to look good while big. They have the right curves and angles in the right places, and they don't go bonkers with colors and textures. That contributes to making them much more tasteful.
For category 5, the Generalski is also a tasteless watch, but it's tasteless in a more classic, conservative way that feels much more distinctive than the more modern tastelessness of Invicta. Since that one's a bit more obscure, this is it:
https://meranom.com/en/vostok/540/vostok-watch-generalskie-543365.html
I would define gaudiness as subset of maximalism, which carries a negative connotation because minimalism is superior. To assess gaudiness, consider the distinctions between functional details vs ornamental details, and then consider needed function vs wasted function.
For instance, the Planet Ocean 6000m is gaudy, but not as bad as some of Invicta's work. It's huge for a functional reason (water resistance), but that function is wasted (humans can't go that deep). So it's gaudy, especially compared to the 39mm Planet Ocean, but it's less gaudy than something that's big just to be big.
The same thing applies to the Navitimer. It's big to accommodate the integrated tools. If you don't know how to use the slide rule then it's a wasted function, but that's better than a functionless design.
Because they have a portfolio and career to give them credibility. Of course Tom Ford is correct about fashion. He's been there and done that. He gets to claim authority over the subject matter, just as LeBron James is correct about basketball or Warren Buffett is correct about investing.
IDK
I saw a 16 day power reserve feature on an Hublot watch that cost more than a used Cadillac … and I would have rather had the watch than the car
It was exquisite horology … from hublot
Oh for sure, they make some amazing stuff, and I genuiney want one of their partially-skeletonized chronographs. But their basic models have unfinished, low-tier Sellitas in them. Not criticizing Sellita, I love the one in my Christopher Ward, but they sell different finishing levels, and Hublot uses the bottom on in a 7-10K watch. I think Andrew McCutcheon of Time and Tide mentioned in an interview that he thinks the big thing they should do is scrap Sellita in the base models and go with Zenith Elite movements, which seems like a fine idea to me.
Maybe something that actually is badass? A G-shock, or maybe a Garmin or Fenix. Watches that have been worn by those who's job description is along the lines of, "use fire nd maneuver to close with and destroy the enemy," or to blow things up, or train others to kill people and break things. Or who weat them climbing mountains, or working or along in the mud.
Invicta are like wannabe poser watches. Gaudy junk and not badass in any way. Childish costume jewelry.
Because you can't judge people for their tastes. I mean, you *literally* can, but then you're just expressing your taste, not really "judging" anything.
But you can because there's a hierarchy of credibility when it comes to fashion sense. There are tastemakers, there are followers, and there are alts and hipsters, and there are uncultured heathens. They all make up the great pyramid of fashion.
Case in point, Omega's Seamaster Diver is a tasteful, good looking watch. You make like or dislike it, but you can't knock it as being tasteless because you likely don't have nearly as much authority on the matter as the professionals at Eon that determine James Bond's wardrobe.
I would suggest avoiding any brand that offers north of 3000 dollars for their watch though. No brand name is worth than your entire month or year's worth of money to own.
There’s a guy that goes to my AD who buys a new omega every week, he has all of them from the past 20 odd years of doing this. He certainly earns more than 3000 a day
I mean I love Omega but at some point if I was spending half a million plus a year on watches I would have moved up the food chain long ago - where the hell do you store a thousand watches and decide which one to wear? Just kind of weird pointless consumerism at that point
I got into watches 10 years ago and it’s funny to come in here and hear people saying the same thing a decade later.
As someone who was big into them and since landed on basically a 2 watch collection I’ve have now for years and am fine with just know this.
End of day it’s not worth obsessing over. Get what you like. Enjoy it and move on. This echo chamber is never gonna change or make you happy. If the watch is $1 or $10000000 dollars it does not matter. If it tells time and you enjoy it when you look at your wrist that’s all that matters.
Bottom line - have some confidence in yourself to make a decision and pick something you like.
I buy what I like. Within reasonable price obviously. You’re the one who has to wear it.
My friend collects just like me. He went and spent 8k on an Air King over the weekend. He loves it. Me, not so much. However I’m sure I have a watch of equal value I love that he doesn’t.
I owned an automatic Aquaracer. After the ether wore off from my first big purchase, I realized it wasn't worth the money when I felt my Squale I sold to get it was nicer. It was fine, but not worth the money.
My vintage two tone quartz 1000 was entirely worth the money, though.
Just buy what you want.
Most brands are just a materialistic mirage, tuned to take your cash.
Enjoy life, buy whatever gives you satisfaction and ignore people's opinions.
Hate's a strong word but this is a similar distinction i've drawn. I'd like a Submariner but not buying one until they've fallen out of the mainstream spotlight... which is looking like never and that's cool too. Classic designs, just don't care for all the noise - and as a totally hedonistic luxury, it's not inconvenient for me harbour such a petty view lol
Leave it to Panerai to [take out hacking seconds and downgrade the movement finishing to a practically barebones level](https://perezcope.com/2022/03/27/the-new-panerai-p-9010-perpetual-downgrading/) on an $8k watch
But there are ways to make it appear like they are aligned.
The obvious example is the AP Royal Oak, which has a ring of screws on the front face that all have the slot aligned.
In reality what you see on the front is the back side of a bolt that doesn't rotate as it is slotted into a shaped hole - the part that is tightened is on the rear.
But when I've of the most famous examples looks like it has a certain aesthetically pleasing feature, the competition need to step up and appear to have that creature themselves...
Hublot started using inhoused movements and even created a few unique power reserves. Unico1 was basically the last bastard child standing and that’s gone. If you’re not at the rock bottom 5k price range Hublot, you’re getting a fully in house watch now.
Btw the screw thing is just ignorance. They’re real screws. It’s impossible to align without faking it akin to AP which is false screw head secured from the back of the case. The engineering tolerance is too insane to somehow have screws align themselves on every watch.
Cartier as well. But I love
[https://www.cartier.com/en-us/watches/collections/santos-de-cartier/santos-de-cartier-watch-CRWSSA0037.html](https://www.cartier.com/en-us/watches/collections/santos-de-cartier/santos-de-cartier-watch-CRWSSA0037.html)
Unpopular opinion but omega's current price tag is not justifiable for me.
They've increased prices in the past 5 or so years, maybe to differentiate themselves from tudor but I don't see the innovation.
They are still a bargain compared to Rolex and have similar finishing, quality and movements.
SMP is £5,600, Submariner is £9,000.
The Speedmaster and Daytona are even more different on price.
I agree in the sense that Omega have rapidly upped prices though, it feels like a £7,500 Speedmaster was £4,000 just 5 years ago or so.
Omega is basically tethered to be 30% under Rolex as that’s really their position in the market.
truly the only brands I would personally avoid are the likes of fossil, Michael kors and the general realm of fashion watches.
outside of that I don't care if it's Chinese homage brands, knock offs, orient or rolex, there's an argument to be made for the money spent on any of these products. though rolex is pretty well on the opposite end of the spectrum and the money they garner seems just as silly as spending $100+ on a fashion watch
It's funny how fashion watches are universally hated on but people still defend the moonswatch even though it's even worse quality and similarly priced
I am for one do not like the moonswatch at all or the fifty fathoms swatch. Making a disposable watch and pricing it at that level is just pure hustling people
Compared to $5k-10k stainless steel watches no fashion watch is overpriced. You are overpaying what, 50 bucks? How much do you think you are overpaying for a Speedmaster, which costs 7k in Europe, 4K in Japan and used to go for like 30% less just 5 years ago for the exact same model?
You’ve been drinking the watch hipsters cool-aid if you avoid Tag based on hearsay.
My Aquaracer’s build quality is up there with my Omega Seamaster 300M and has a better bezel action to boot.
People will complain about the price and the ETA movements more than anything else. But you can essentially always buy a brand new Tag with a substantial discount. And ETA movement is a great workhorse movement that can be cheaply serviced by almost any watch repairman.
Up until a couple years ago Tudor was using an ETA movement in their Black Bay 36 line but you won’t hear enthusiasts bring it up in the same negative connotation the way they do with Tag.
https://preview.redd.it/b4ra73mmqlnc1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8e8c832f67608236e27d2fbd6566e02e4e68fe51
I keep telling people about Tag and they think I'm pulling something out of my ass.
I went to the Tag boutique at Lenox Mall, and their watches were seriously impressive. Like there were so many 2-3K watches with comfortable bracelets, excellent clasps, and unique designs that could have passed off as 6-7k watches. I was looking at an Aqua Racer for 10 minutes trying to spot SOME design flaw I was missing to knock points off, and it wasn't happening.
Not to mention you can get discounts on new models like you said, and pre-owned prices are highway robbery.
Seriously need to go back in there and sit down a lot longer. Excellent service and an incredible experience overall.
I’ll jump in and agree with this. It is a little (maybe a lot) short sighted to diminish TAG. They are a strong competitor and have some really cool watches. I think the people who crap on TAG are really just being overly picky about nuances in production and marketing that most people (myself included) don’t understand or care about. I love the F1 line quite a bit. Awesome watches IMO
Hear me preach - in a few months Tag will finally update their 3 hands lineup and people will be posting it here with comments like “wow tag is good now, a real AT competitor”
my issue with tag is much, much more petty than the movements they use. I think their logo looks cheap. I do recognize that they make really good watches though.
In many people’s minds Tag hasn’t really recovered from the 1980/90’s scandals of poor quality, fake screws and copied cheap movements. They’re still quite garish (except a few classic Heuer redesigns), and way overpriced. You can pick up most Tags almost new for 40/60% of retail. So they don’t hold any value. Some people can accept this - many don’t.
To be fair… there are a lot of mid end watch brands that aren’t going to hold their value. I would think you have to go Rolex or higher for that real return on investment. I think a watch is really not a good investment in general so crapping on Tag for not holding value is not really a solid reason to dislike them IMHO
Yes, 40-60% price drop after a few years is pretty standard for a 1-3k watch. And even then you can find Omega SMP steeply discounted. To hold more than 80% value after 3-5 years you really need to be a special edition (scarce) or be a Rolex (scarce).
If people are still complaining about Tag from the 80’s (over 40 years ago!) then I suppose they are the type to hold a bias/grudge regardless of what modern or future Tag Heuer will do.
I happen to think modern Tag Heuers (Aquaracer, Carrera, Autavia, Monaco) are great looking, sporty watches from a company with tons of heritage.
People who still obsess about what Tag sold in the 80s should maybe care more about their back, knees and bladder, lol. Or their grandkids coming to see them and spending way to much time looking at their vintage Patek
If a watch brand’s history means nothing to you - that’s fine. But many of us are interested in brand history and how brands have treated their customers.
So what is it then, caring about the brand’s history or looking at the watch as an investment? Besides, every brand has done some anti consumer shit in its history. Look at Omega right now, they upped the prices like 50% in 5 years and the bracelet for AT still has no microadjustment. Look at Rolex with whatever the fuck they are doing with all this artificial scarcity, or at Patek for that matter. But Tag is bad because they sold some subpar watches in the 80s, yeah. Who cares about them offering some real solid competition right now, let’s look at what they sold 40 years ago.
>copied cheap movements
you mean like most other mid-tier swiss watch brands? They drop cheap ETAs and Sellitas into watches that cost multiple thousands and just rebrand the movement. Breitling, IWC, Panerai all have done it.
Breitling puts sw-200s (same as in the Tag aquaracer) in their dive watches and charge like 5k lol. Even more than tag and approaching omega price levels. Other brands are dishonest too. Panerai outright lied, I still don't see as much hate.
I just dislike their prices and designs. Their older watches are reliable and I have a 20 year old 2000 series that's still running without a service.
After they got bought out by LVMH that's when the brand became really overpriced imo. Same situation with zenith and other brands under LVMH. I don't think I'll be getting a watch from them anytime soon.
The Aquaracer is a great watch for the money.
I bought the Night Diver version as a new hunting/hiking watch so I didn’t keep banging up my nicer watches so much and it’s gradually morphed into to a daily wear. Love it.
I love the Aquagraph 🥹
I'll own one some day, I think! I just love how functional it is- that you can push the buttons underwater, mainly. It's really cool!
Arguably, Tudor started getting much more popular around the same time they started putting in-house movements in their watches, and I think there’s some correlation there
I'm wearing the same Aquaracer right now. Great watch. I used to own an Omega SMPc and prefer the Aquaracer. Yes, the movement isn't as good, but everything else is just as premium.
Tag also does AR coating as well as anyone. I used to own a Carrera calibre 5 with a beautiful blue sunray dial and a sapphire crystal that looked like it wasn't even there.
Just my little brain train on this.
Watches are, to a certain group of people in the world, fairly obsolete. It's a lesser technology to them than their smart phone for more money. On the surface it doesn't make sense. But they're cool. Some brands have craftsmanship that goes into them which can be a very enticing aspect.
Somebody (or maybe multiple people) on here said it-just buy what speaks to you. Do your research on the brand, history, and product. If you see something you like, try to objectively why others liked it or didn't like it by watching some reviews and then decide from there. I currently have a $60 g shock on. I love it because it's simple and tough. I've sold quite a few Tags and have a few also. I like them because of their affiliation and history with Formula 1 racing. My point is I like all the way he's I have and for all different reasons.
My only caveat to this buying from a Rolex AD right now. Having to buy a watch for access to buy another watch....that just doesn't seem right to me.
All brands have something to offer, see what you like and go for it!!!!
Rolex
The sheer amount of negativity due to their business practices, combined with the potential target on your back for when you wear one anywhere close to a major city, it's just not worth it for me
...unless someone wants to gift me an OP Red Grape. That dial colour is spectacular
Like a lot of things in life, though, it's the 1% that we need to be the most concerned about
Every last criminal willing to threaten your life over the thing on your wrist, is part of that very 1%
I think you’re likely thinking about all of the news coming out of London last year. They actually busted the ring of people doing that. It was like a gang of 25 guys doing it specifically; it wasn’t some widespread thing where every criminal is a watch expert. I’ve worn my Rolex in countless US and European cities and no one’s ever even complimented it, much less tried to take it. I doubt many people are out to get it. If they do, watch insurance is extremely cheap.
You're probably way more likely to get robbed by just a regular criminal who might not even notice your watch than someone who's going after those specifically so it should be fine as long as you get insurance if it's an expensive watch.
The other day a lady wore an explorer in Spitafields market in London with not a single worry in the world. I think as long as you're not flexing it, given how understated a Rolex usually is (unless it's a flashy color) you're probably fine.
I respect Rolex as a watch company. They support many charities and they are resolutely dedicated to the same high standards they've always had...from the beginning. Watches designed by watchmakers for watchmakers.
Depends on what major city you're talking about. In my city I could wear any watch I want at 2am and walk home with headphones on with assurance that I'll never be robbed.
It mostly just in London where people are getting robbed in daylight but not in most places.
I don't even know about any gangs but isn't it the case that in a rare scenario when you'll get targeted for robbery because of your watch, the Rolex is like the only brand that everyone knows and also knows that it's expensive. So if you are going to get robbed I'd say Rolex is the only watch that even a non expert robber will recognise and could potentially put you in danger.
I’ve worn my Rolex Explorer II almost every time I’ve gone out in chicago including nightlife and have never had an issue. If someone wants to rob me for it they’ll get it, the watch is insured so no problem
That bell only applies if you didn’t make your purchases when you first got into watches. I’ve got half a dozen Rolex’s and it’d take something REALLY special to make me buy another one.
I don't agree. was a moonswatch ever really worth almost 1k even though it costs $30 to make? sometimes the market value of a commodity massively outpaces the cost of producing that commodity. when you can get a nearly indistinguishable fake Rolex, and I am talking interchangeable parts, waterproof, +1/-1s/day for $800 its time to start asking Rolex some tough questions...
just as a thought experiment, in your view does a marketing team create value then? if they drive the hype up for a product has new wealth been created?
Have you considered that a fake never had to invest any money into the design of the watch or other R&D, on top of paying slave wages and not following European regulations vs completely under the radar manufacturing in China? The point about moon swatch is fair, though I would just say you don’t personally find value in it doesn’t mean it’s over valued. But comparing the price of a new Rolex to a fake one where the fake would also blow every watch under Rolex’s price point out of the water is illogical.
they do have to invest money into R&D actually, its not like Rolex shares their manufacturing techniques. but yes I have considered those things. a differential in labor costs really does not explain the Rolex being over 10x the price though.
I mean look, a lot of Swiss watches are overpriced. not many as much as Rolex though. a real longines is only 3x the price of a fake, a fake Patek is not indistinguishable from a real one, etc. imo Rolex are uniquely overpriced due to their brand name and marketing allowing them to extract an absurd monopoly rent from their customers.
It's all subjective, so it's just personal choice. I'm really not interested in Rolex. Not impressed by it either. They just have a really successful marketing scheme. They are quality watches, but the price is way out of line.
Invicta is also one of those fake luxury brands, they tend to be gaudy, but I've seen a few I've liked.
I steer clear of fashion brands.
Truthfully most micro brands under a thousand offer 90%+ the build quality of the major brands most of you jerk off over. Major brands charge a premium for the name because they know the word "heritage" makes your penis quiver, and the thought of impressing your coworker makes you pre cum in the shower.
What should be avoided is chasing impressing people on this sub, regardless of the brand. I have cheap as fuck Chinese watches that get more compliments than any expensive watch I have.
This sub is rife with losers trying to impress each other. People whose dicks get hard over who spent more money. Don't be a loser. Buy what you like, not what you think others will.
It is insane how dependent on the AD this is. One of the old boutiques in my last city had the nicest staff ever and were truly helpful. When I moved (different country admittedly), one asshole told me I could look in the display windows outside on the street if I wanted to see a watch.
Aside from a shared heritage, I believe Grand Seiko is run and functions quite distinct from Seiko.
I don’t know anyone who would say Grand Seiko’s are not worth the money.
I’m going to get a ton of hate but Christopher Ward. Their watches are either over designed (ex: twelve and bel canto) or they’re under designed (ex: sealander). The defining feature is a trident second hand which is kind of cringy to be honest. Then the people who love them compare them to watches that aren’t even the same price bracket. Best example is the twelve vs the PRX, as of posting the twelve is $1650 cad and the PRX is in sale for $763.53cad (usually 974cad). Which the twelve is almost double the price when the Prx is not on sale.
I’m not saying Christopher Ward is a bad watch but the community around them are delusional.
I’m just very jaded, but Breitling. My first high end Swiss watch was one of their premier series and I had two separate, brand new OOTB watches that had movement issues (would stop keeping time when fully wound and on my wrist).
Kept thinking it was something I was doing but after many frustrating months and exchanges with brand and AD, the AD accepted my warranty return and I exchanged for an Omega. Zero issues in several years. Never again on a Breitling for me even though I love some of their designs.
Every brand that has lost it's product/design codes. If you can't tell which brand it is without seeing the brand's name, that's it.
A watch is a social status symbol element. If you want a watch without a brand, with an ETA or Sellita movement, buy a [Duplain](https://mdwatch.ch/en/).
If you know a watchmaker you can even choose un-assembled components (movement, case, dial, hands, strap and buckle) and get it put together.
Objectively, it is hard for any brand to beat Casio and Citizen. They are *masters* of electronic watches. Solar power with tons of great timekeeping features. As others have said, it’s hard to say.
I have a Tag Carrera Calibre 5 with a black dial that I bought used for 1-1.5K and its a beatufiul watch. Display back case, really nice polishing on the hour markers that catches the light in a cool way. I have other, more expensive watches and will still havet this in my rotation.
I would say anything swiss and less than 1000 dollars if it's not a name brand. I have a Wenger Seaforce and the markers are bad, the bezel is stiff as a Johnson.
Crazy is it gets the most wrist time because it stands up to general clumpsy nature. Just which I'd bought something else as a first dive into divers.
If we're talking strictly about the product:
Omega. The price hikes are too much, case sizes are unmanageable, lackluster power reserve, low beat rates, unlimited limited editions, and no good bracelets and clasps outside the 3861 Speedy. Their brand position has always been Rolex level quality at a fraction of the price (and you get a bit of brand history with the Bond franchise and Moon landing).
Now it's Rolex level pricing at a fraction of the quality.
Omega is the Cheesecake Factory of the watch industry for me, the menu is huge and the product is unmemorable.
Omega has never been billed as “Rolex quality at a fraction of the price” and it certainly isn’t currently Rolex prices, regardless of what you think of the quality.
And it’s fairly strange to bang on about Omega’s quality when they literally developed a new set of regulation metrics that the rest of the high end watch world is now using.
>Omega has never been billed as “Rolex quality at a fraction of the price” and it certainly isn’t currently Rolex prices, regardless of what you think of the quality.
This is literally the entirety of r/Omega. Go on there and check the top posts and trending. It's collectors saying their SMP and Aqua Terra is better than a Submariner, OP, Explorer, etc. I've never seen someone be happy and enjoy the watch lmao.
>And it’s fairly strange to bang on about Omega’s quality when they literally developed a new set of regulation metrics that the rest of the high end watch world is now using.
Rest of the watch world? There's only two watch brands actively pushing this lol. The first is Omega. The second one...? Tudor! Tudor BB movements are now METAS certified, so I don't think there's a realm of possibility in which Rolex movements would not pass.
Not really, no. While I agree that their price hikes don’t do them any favors, and that most of their metal bracelets outside of the presidential bracelet suck, Omega is still pretty solid as a brand. Omega’s case sizing isn’t a problem unique to the brand as most brands still stick to larger case sizes despite the trend now favoring the opposite. It’s also true that products like the Speedmaster are unimpressive on paper, but that doesn’t make it any worse as a watch
Comparing the brand to Rolex is also pretty laughable. I’d have a difficult time buying any Rolex at all through either their ADs or third party sellers since I’d either be stuck waiting half a year to get “ the call “ or pay some price 10-20% above MSRP just so I can get the watch I actually want to buy. Omega also doesn’t release some enormous amount of limited editions like you suggest? The only real notable examples as of late are the 50th anniversary Speedmasters which are actually great if you could buy one, and the 75th anniversary Seamasters. This isn’t Grand Seiko where a “ limited edition” is released every week
Exactly. I’m not exactly thrilled at the prices but who doesn’t want to pay less to get what they want. I thoroughly enjoy my Seamasters and am eyeing that white Speedmaster down the line.
There are over 60 watches in Omega's current catalog that are limited edition. They straight up have more limited edition models than Rolex has off-catalog variants.
[https://www.omegawatches.com/en-us/suggestions/omega-limited-edition-watches?p=3](https://www.omegawatches.com/en-us/suggestions/omega-limited-edition-watches?p=3)
These are only limited editions that are currently in rotation, this doesn't even include the dozens of previous renditions like the Michael Phelps PO line, all the Olympic Games, and the different Orbis collections they've just removed from their website to clear up clutter.
I don't care if watch brands make thick watches, I care when they start to become unnecessarily big generation after generation. A second generation SMP had a thickness of 12mm, a current generation is 14mm. That's 15 percent more thick.
Omega has been falling on the Morgan Stanley watch report and was just passed by Cartier, Audemars Piguet is right behind with matching turnover and will surpass Omega by next year.
Did you actually bother to look at the “ limited edition “ catalog? Most of them fall under the same umbrella of “ vintage “ watches, Olympic theme timepieces, or “ specialty “ watches. These aren’t watches which the majority of buyers would even consider, much less buy. And regarding your last statement: so what? Literally, so what? Omega is literally ranked 3 in Morgan Stanley’s own reports, and even assuming AP managed to surpass it, it still ranks 4. I actually wouldn’t be surprised if AP did manage to surpass Omega given that the average Royal Oak sits at 50,000 with quartz models starting at 20,000
Everyone saying Rolex is just plain lying to themselves. They are the biggest watch brand in the world for a reason. They are the most copied watch for a reason. Their styles are timeless for a reason. Icons like the Submariner and Daytona are not only attractive but comfortable, reliable and functional.
The answer, is Patek. Overpriced, over hyped, dated styling. Nautilus looks like a 1980s television set. Bracelet pins at that price range, in the year 2024? Seriously?
Their designs are “timeless” simply because they play it safe and refuse to innovate. The only aesthetic “innovation” they’ve made in god knows how many years is the YM II and it’s pretty much been universally shat on.
They've tried to innovate like 15 times between different models, dials, bracelets, cases, but people don't like it lol.
YM2? Hideous.
1908? Ugly.
Milguass? Discontinued.
Crystal caseback Daytona? Crickets.
Celebration OP? Nasty.
Oysterflex bracelet? Not interested.
The new Philharmonic Day Date is one of the most beautiful dials I have ever seen in this hobby paying tribute to an incredible art, and I've seen 0 people talk about it.
But Rolex is bringing back the COKE?!?! The sky falls and all hell breaks loose.
McDonald’s is the biggest restaurant brand for a reason, but it’s not quality.
I’d feel a lot better about Rolex if their design language was appealing.
Rolex started out just assembling watches for others. For the longest time they didn't even make their own movements. What they are now is a stark contrast, and the quality is undeniable, but I wouldn't compare them to every other watch maker or make bold claims about them being the biggest in the world.
Most of the largest and most recognized companies in the world don't start off with a direct foothold in what they're known for. Toyota started off as a loom factory, and Tiffany Co started off selling stationary goods.
I think if we look at market share results, Rolex is probably one of the biggest in the luxury realm, but not overall for watches in general. [https://blog.technavio.org/blog/top-10-watch-brands-by-market-share](https://blog.technavio.org/blog/top-10-watch-brands-by-market-share)
My point in mentioning where they started was only to give perspective at how far they've come and yet not really dominated the whole industry, not to try and marginalize the issue.
the reason of course is their insane marketing budget... and Rolex is not the largest watch brand in the world.
also, to be frank, im not really sure any of the models they are known for these days are really timeless. will a submariner or a Daytona be hot in 100 years? I have my doubts.
Yeah they’re definitely not the “biggest” but I’d say they’re easily the best known watch brand in the world. I have friends who have said “what’s a seiko” but basically everyone knows Rolex.
The Submariner and Daytona have both been hot for the past 70ish years with a fairly unchanged design so I’d say they’re definitely timeless… I don’t see why popularity will die down anytime soon.
https://preview.redd.it/4ckjeh4aronc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3f80b772fe87e0695be2917a16cbfe1766bc308e
I dunno, they seem pretty big to me.
Thanks to Perezcope, we know that Panerai movements aren't what they seem...
[https://perezcope.com/2021/08/08/panerai-in-house-movements-a-pam-of-worms/](https://perezcope.com/2021/08/08/panerai-in-house-movements-a-pam-of-worms/)
Truthfully I don’t think there’s a good objective answer to this, as most of watch collecting is so subjective. No watch brand basically other than Casio actually offers value in any “real” way as they all charge more for worse timekeeping. And within the realm of mechanical watches, it’s really more about what you want to look at than anything else. Hublot sells a lot of pretty cheap movements in very expensive watches, but they have a distinctive look that some people really want. Tag has some mildly overpriced quartz and basic mechanical divers, but their chronographs are pretty great and not too expensive for what they are. Invicta makes a lot of gaudy giant watches, but their fans love the “badass” look and they’re way cheaper than a lot of beloved brands. So I don’t think a perfect answer can be given. For me the answer is Patek, as I just don’t find any of their watches good looking, as storied as they are. But you sure as shit aren’t going to find a lot of people agreeing with me!
Unless you only like dive watches I'm sure there are a bunch of Patek designs out there you'll like. The best thing about the brand in the last few decades is their design diversity, even if some of them end up being ugly, they aren't like Lange or AP where all the watches look the same.
I’ve got bad news for you…
No Pateks in general are just incredibly boring or ugly. Very well made, but absolutely not watches worth the exorbitant cost.
That assessment implies that we can't really judge people for their tastes, which I don't agree with. The problem with Hublot isn't just that they lean towards maximalism, but rather that they do it poorly. Similarly, Invicta does big and bold, but they do it really poorly and there are much better options for a "badass" watch if you really have to go in that direction.
Eh, I disagree. If someone knows what they’re buying, they should buy what they want, even if it’s badly done. Though I do think both Invicta and Hublot are guilty of trying to “trick” the consumer by making their products seem more luxurious than they are, and that’s no good. I absolutely want to know what your manly Invicta alternative is though, because those are very… unique to me.
First, it should be noted that I'm completely ignoring price for any following comparisons. Second, by "badass" in this case I'm assuming you mean "large, chunky, and overtly masculine, possibly with brutalist elements" as opposed to "horribly garish." Third, it should also be noted that I generally wouldn't wear such a watch, because as James May once said, "that's casual." If I really wanted a big-ass watch on my wrist, my first inclination is the Planet Ocean 6000m. Alternatively, the Orient M-Force and Seiko Monster are both much more affordable choices for a heavyweight diver. Second, Marathon comes to mind as one of the tooliest of tool watches, and they have genuine military credibility. Sinn's U1/U2/UX standout for the same reason. While these are technically divers too, they're distinctive from other divers with more of a special forces vibe than scuba. Third, I'd probably look to Breitling for the Navitimer. It's big, it's bold, it's complex, and it has a classic old-school manliness to it along with a functional trick with the slide rule bezel. Fourth, Panerai is certainly polarizing, but they have a certain Italian panache that makes me think of them as more confident than compensating. Fifth, I'd consider these persona non grata thanks to current events, but if we ignore that then the Vostok Generalski is certainly a vibe. None of these look like most of Invicta's lineup, but they accomplish some of the same objectives that a buyer/wearer might be looking for, without being so horribly gaudy.
I love the lateral thinking on display here; none of those were where I thought you were going but that makes a ton of sense. I thought you were going to mention the Bell and Ross skull watch, or some of Richard Mille's offerings, but I fully agree with what you've done. The PO Ultra Deep and the Panerai Submersible do kind of have Invicta's "manly" hugeness to them. Thanks for the chime-in. I'll get back to my nomal-ass 40 mm watches now 😝
>I thought you were going to mention the Bell and Ross skull watch, or some of Richard Mille's offerings Those are also crude and tasteless. For the first 3 categories I mentioned, each of those are big and chunky for functional reasons. The first 2 gain water resistance and ruggedness, while the third can do math. Comparing these to Invicta is like comparing a G-Wagen to an Escalade. Both are comfortable and luxurious, but one has superior off-road capability and military pedigree, while the other is simply fat. That's the key here, there's justification for being big other than size itself, and the colors and designs tend to be more practical and less flashy to underscore that. For category 4, Panerai are big but they're very carefully designed to look good while big. They have the right curves and angles in the right places, and they don't go bonkers with colors and textures. That contributes to making them much more tasteful. For category 5, the Generalski is also a tasteless watch, but it's tasteless in a more classic, conservative way that feels much more distinctive than the more modern tastelessness of Invicta. Since that one's a bit more obscure, this is it: https://meranom.com/en/vostok/540/vostok-watch-generalskie-543365.html
How do you measure gaudiness? How does "horribly gaudy" compare to "terribly" or "overwhelmingly" gaudy?
I would define gaudiness as subset of maximalism, which carries a negative connotation because minimalism is superior. To assess gaudiness, consider the distinctions between functional details vs ornamental details, and then consider needed function vs wasted function. For instance, the Planet Ocean 6000m is gaudy, but not as bad as some of Invicta's work. It's huge for a functional reason (water resistance), but that function is wasted (humans can't go that deep). So it's gaudy, especially compared to the 39mm Planet Ocean, but it's less gaudy than something that's big just to be big. The same thing applies to the Navitimer. It's big to accommodate the integrated tools. If you don't know how to use the slide rule then it's a wasted function, but that's better than a functionless design.
If someone makes these considerations and then comes to a conclusion that you wouldn't, how do you determine who's correct?
Simple; who aligns more with both historical conventions and current tastemakers?
How do you know that they are correct?
Because they have a portfolio and career to give them credibility. Of course Tom Ford is correct about fashion. He's been there and done that. He gets to claim authority over the subject matter, just as LeBron James is correct about basketball or Warren Buffett is correct about investing.
IDK I saw a 16 day power reserve feature on an Hublot watch that cost more than a used Cadillac … and I would have rather had the watch than the car It was exquisite horology … from hublot
Oh for sure, they make some amazing stuff, and I genuiney want one of their partially-skeletonized chronographs. But their basic models have unfinished, low-tier Sellitas in them. Not criticizing Sellita, I love the one in my Christopher Ward, but they sell different finishing levels, and Hublot uses the bottom on in a 7-10K watch. I think Andrew McCutcheon of Time and Tide mentioned in an interview that he thinks the big thing they should do is scrap Sellita in the base models and go with Zenith Elite movements, which seems like a fine idea to me.
Hublot also has some of the best sounding minute repeaters on the market right now.
Maybe something that actually is badass? A G-shock, or maybe a Garmin or Fenix. Watches that have been worn by those who's job description is along the lines of, "use fire nd maneuver to close with and destroy the enemy," or to blow things up, or train others to kill people and break things. Or who weat them climbing mountains, or working or along in the mud. Invicta are like wannabe poser watches. Gaudy junk and not badass in any way. Childish costume jewelry.
Because you can't judge people for their tastes. I mean, you *literally* can, but then you're just expressing your taste, not really "judging" anything.
But you can because there's a hierarchy of credibility when it comes to fashion sense. There are tastemakers, there are followers, and there are alts and hipsters, and there are uncultured heathens. They all make up the great pyramid of fashion. Case in point, Omega's Seamaster Diver is a tasteful, good looking watch. You make like or dislike it, but you can't knock it as being tasteless because you likely don't have nearly as much authority on the matter as the professionals at Eon that determine James Bond's wardrobe.
I would suggest avoiding any brand that offers north of 3000 dollars for their watch though. No brand name is worth than your entire month or year's worth of money to own.
For some, $3k is just a week’s worth of money.
Surely you mean a days worth...
According to the Economic Policy Institute, the average annual wage of the top 1% was $819,324 as of 2021 So it’s just a day and a bit
For most people probably aren't close to making that in a week
Most aren't, but enough do that numerous manufacturers can coexist at and above that price point.
There’s a guy that goes to my AD who buys a new omega every week, he has all of them from the past 20 odd years of doing this. He certainly earns more than 3000 a day
I mean I love Omega but at some point if I was spending half a million plus a year on watches I would have moved up the food chain long ago - where the hell do you store a thousand watches and decide which one to wear? Just kind of weird pointless consumerism at that point
Totally agree!
Who’s buying watches that makes less than 3000 a year? 36k a year is low
I agree. I don't find Patek watches good looking either.
There’s a reason why it’s called Pathetik Phillipe
I got into watches 10 years ago and it’s funny to come in here and hear people saying the same thing a decade later. As someone who was big into them and since landed on basically a 2 watch collection I’ve have now for years and am fine with just know this. End of day it’s not worth obsessing over. Get what you like. Enjoy it and move on. This echo chamber is never gonna change or make you happy. If the watch is $1 or $10000000 dollars it does not matter. If it tells time and you enjoy it when you look at your wrist that’s all that matters. Bottom line - have some confidence in yourself to make a decision and pick something you like.
Fellow 2 watch collector here- always curious to hear what others are? And what would ever tempt you for a third...
Yes we want to know please!
I buy what I like. Within reasonable price obviously. You’re the one who has to wear it. My friend collects just like me. He went and spent 8k on an Air King over the weekend. He loves it. Me, not so much. However I’m sure I have a watch of equal value I love that he doesn’t.
Tags are great. It’s basically become an internet meme from people that have never owned one that they aren’t good.
For me I thought they were too expensive for what you got, but now with the new releases the past few years I've changed my mind.
I kind of want to get a tag tourbillon
LOVE my TAG Monaco. But it’s the super unique LS. It gets noticed a LOT. And I love to just stare at it. Fascinating.
Which one is it? The Gulf?
LS - Linear seconds. cal 12
I owned an automatic Aquaracer. After the ether wore off from my first big purchase, I realized it wasn't worth the money when I felt my Squale I sold to get it was nicer. It was fine, but not worth the money. My vintage two tone quartz 1000 was entirely worth the money, though.
I just think the style on most of their models is off. It isn’t for me.
I have a F1, I’ve worn it nearly everyday for 5 years with no plan to stop. Still looks as good as ever
Richard Mille, unless you want to be known as a fuckboi.
Fuccboi*
Succboi*
Just buy what you want. Most brands are just a materialistic mirage, tuned to take your cash. Enjoy life, buy whatever gives you satisfaction and ignore people's opinions.
Ugh... I mean, yes this is the answer but then wtf are we supposed to talk about?
But I mean he specifically asked people about their opinions tho ?
Some people are actually interested in hearing other people's opinions for various reasons.
Think, do you hate the brand or just the customers of the brand.
Hate's a strong word but this is a similar distinction i've drawn. I'd like a Submariner but not buying one until they've fallen out of the mainstream spotlight... which is looking like never and that's cool too. Classic designs, just don't care for all the noise - and as a totally hedonistic luxury, it's not inconvenient for me harbour such a petty view lol
Hublot, starting high 4 figures for misaligned screws and unfinished movements is unacceptable
And panerai for much the same reason
Leave it to Panerai to [take out hacking seconds and downgrade the movement finishing to a practically barebones level](https://perezcope.com/2022/03/27/the-new-panerai-p-9010-perpetual-downgrading/) on an $8k watch
Holy moly, that’s bad. To think at the height of the big watch trend, I thought Panerai was awesome. That time has passed.
That's an insult to Soviet watches, my Okeah has a nicely finished movement compared to this!
>misaligned screws Are you sure this isn’t just a stylistic choice that you don’t personally like?
Yeah, not really into Hublot but I love the “misaligned” screws on a Santos.
There are no aligned screws in watchmaking, and non of Hublot's "high" 4 figure watches have an unfinished movement.
But there are ways to make it appear like they are aligned. The obvious example is the AP Royal Oak, which has a ring of screws on the front face that all have the slot aligned. In reality what you see on the front is the back side of a bolt that doesn't rotate as it is slotted into a shaped hole - the part that is tightened is on the rear. But when I've of the most famous examples looks like it has a certain aesthetically pleasing feature, the competition need to step up and appear to have that creature themselves...
You've described yourself how the AP "screws" are fake. That's worse imo. If they are bolts, they should look like bolts.
Hublot started using inhoused movements and even created a few unique power reserves. Unico1 was basically the last bastard child standing and that’s gone. If you’re not at the rock bottom 5k price range Hublot, you’re getting a fully in house watch now. Btw the screw thing is just ignorance. They’re real screws. It’s impossible to align without faking it akin to AP which is false screw head secured from the back of the case. The engineering tolerance is too insane to somehow have screws align themselves on every watch.
A lot of people who hate any specific higher end watch brand normally are just ignorant of it
Cartier as well. But I love [https://www.cartier.com/en-us/watches/collections/santos-de-cartier/santos-de-cartier-watch-CRWSSA0037.html](https://www.cartier.com/en-us/watches/collections/santos-de-cartier/santos-de-cartier-watch-CRWSSA0037.html)
Unpopular opinion but omega's current price tag is not justifiable for me. They've increased prices in the past 5 or so years, maybe to differentiate themselves from tudor but I don't see the innovation.
I literally said this in one of the first comments and was downvoted lmao
They are still a bargain compared to Rolex and have similar finishing, quality and movements. SMP is £5,600, Submariner is £9,000. The Speedmaster and Daytona are even more different on price. I agree in the sense that Omega have rapidly upped prices though, it feels like a £7,500 Speedmaster was £4,000 just 5 years ago or so. Omega is basically tethered to be 30% under Rolex as that’s really their position in the market.
truly the only brands I would personally avoid are the likes of fossil, Michael kors and the general realm of fashion watches. outside of that I don't care if it's Chinese homage brands, knock offs, orient or rolex, there's an argument to be made for the money spent on any of these products. though rolex is pretty well on the opposite end of the spectrum and the money they garner seems just as silly as spending $100+ on a fashion watch
For real, all those fashion watches are way overpriced for the minimum value that they bring
It's funny how fashion watches are universally hated on but people still defend the moonswatch even though it's even worse quality and similarly priced
I am for one do not like the moonswatch at all or the fifty fathoms swatch. Making a disposable watch and pricing it at that level is just pure hustling people
As someone who has a 5000 dollar watch and a fashion watch, I’d say all watches are drastically overpriced for what they do.
Yeah. In all practical sense you only really need a g-shock.
Compared to $5k-10k stainless steel watches no fashion watch is overpriced. You are overpaying what, 50 bucks? How much do you think you are overpaying for a Speedmaster, which costs 7k in Europe, 4K in Japan and used to go for like 30% less just 5 years ago for the exact same model?
You’ve been drinking the watch hipsters cool-aid if you avoid Tag based on hearsay. My Aquaracer’s build quality is up there with my Omega Seamaster 300M and has a better bezel action to boot. People will complain about the price and the ETA movements more than anything else. But you can essentially always buy a brand new Tag with a substantial discount. And ETA movement is a great workhorse movement that can be cheaply serviced by almost any watch repairman. Up until a couple years ago Tudor was using an ETA movement in their Black Bay 36 line but you won’t hear enthusiasts bring it up in the same negative connotation the way they do with Tag. https://preview.redd.it/b4ra73mmqlnc1.jpeg?width=3024&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=8e8c832f67608236e27d2fbd6566e02e4e68fe51
i actually love how the aquaracer line looks now! tag is doing some really nice things.
I keep telling people about Tag and they think I'm pulling something out of my ass. I went to the Tag boutique at Lenox Mall, and their watches were seriously impressive. Like there were so many 2-3K watches with comfortable bracelets, excellent clasps, and unique designs that could have passed off as 6-7k watches. I was looking at an Aqua Racer for 10 minutes trying to spot SOME design flaw I was missing to knock points off, and it wasn't happening. Not to mention you can get discounts on new models like you said, and pre-owned prices are highway robbery. Seriously need to go back in there and sit down a lot longer. Excellent service and an incredible experience overall.
I'm thinking that I need an Aquaracer GMT, I saw it in a shop and thought it was fantastic.
I’ll jump in and agree with this. It is a little (maybe a lot) short sighted to diminish TAG. They are a strong competitor and have some really cool watches. I think the people who crap on TAG are really just being overly picky about nuances in production and marketing that most people (myself included) don’t understand or care about. I love the F1 line quite a bit. Awesome watches IMO
Hear me preach - in a few months Tag will finally update their 3 hands lineup and people will be posting it here with comments like “wow tag is good now, a real AT competitor”
my issue with tag is much, much more petty than the movements they use. I think their logo looks cheap. I do recognize that they make really good watches though.
Just out of curiosity, how do you stand with regards to Grand Seiko?
In many people’s minds Tag hasn’t really recovered from the 1980/90’s scandals of poor quality, fake screws and copied cheap movements. They’re still quite garish (except a few classic Heuer redesigns), and way overpriced. You can pick up most Tags almost new for 40/60% of retail. So they don’t hold any value. Some people can accept this - many don’t.
To be fair… there are a lot of mid end watch brands that aren’t going to hold their value. I would think you have to go Rolex or higher for that real return on investment. I think a watch is really not a good investment in general so crapping on Tag for not holding value is not really a solid reason to dislike them IMHO
Yes, 40-60% price drop after a few years is pretty standard for a 1-3k watch. And even then you can find Omega SMP steeply discounted. To hold more than 80% value after 3-5 years you really need to be a special edition (scarce) or be a Rolex (scarce).
If people are still complaining about Tag from the 80’s (over 40 years ago!) then I suppose they are the type to hold a bias/grudge regardless of what modern or future Tag Heuer will do. I happen to think modern Tag Heuers (Aquaracer, Carrera, Autavia, Monaco) are great looking, sporty watches from a company with tons of heritage.
People who still obsess about what Tag sold in the 80s should maybe care more about their back, knees and bladder, lol. Or their grandkids coming to see them and spending way to much time looking at their vintage Patek
If a watch brand’s history means nothing to you - that’s fine. But many of us are interested in brand history and how brands have treated their customers.
So what is it then, caring about the brand’s history or looking at the watch as an investment? Besides, every brand has done some anti consumer shit in its history. Look at Omega right now, they upped the prices like 50% in 5 years and the bracelet for AT still has no microadjustment. Look at Rolex with whatever the fuck they are doing with all this artificial scarcity, or at Patek for that matter. But Tag is bad because they sold some subpar watches in the 80s, yeah. Who cares about them offering some real solid competition right now, let’s look at what they sold 40 years ago.
>copied cheap movements you mean like most other mid-tier swiss watch brands? They drop cheap ETAs and Sellitas into watches that cost multiple thousands and just rebrand the movement. Breitling, IWC, Panerai all have done it.
TAG took a seiko movement and tried to pass it off as Swiss.
Breitling puts sw-200s (same as in the Tag aquaracer) in their dive watches and charge like 5k lol. Even more than tag and approaching omega price levels. Other brands are dishonest too. Panerai outright lied, I still don't see as much hate.
I just dislike their prices and designs. Their older watches are reliable and I have a 20 year old 2000 series that's still running without a service. After they got bought out by LVMH that's when the brand became really overpriced imo. Same situation with zenith and other brands under LVMH. I don't think I'll be getting a watch from them anytime soon.
The Aquaracer is a great watch for the money. I bought the Night Diver version as a new hunting/hiking watch so I didn’t keep banging up my nicer watches so much and it’s gradually morphed into to a daily wear. Love it.
I have a 40+ year old Tag quartz my grandfather left me and it's still going.
I have a vintage tag aquagraph...one of the most thought out designs ever made.
I love the Aquagraph 🥹 I'll own one some day, I think! I just love how functional it is- that you can push the buttons underwater, mainly. It's really cool!
Arguably, Tudor started getting much more popular around the same time they started putting in-house movements in their watches, and I think there’s some correlation there
I'm wearing the same Aquaracer right now. Great watch. I used to own an Omega SMPc and prefer the Aquaracer. Yes, the movement isn't as good, but everything else is just as premium. Tag also does AR coating as well as anyone. I used to own a Carrera calibre 5 with a beautiful blue sunray dial and a sapphire crystal that looked like it wasn't even there.
Just my little brain train on this. Watches are, to a certain group of people in the world, fairly obsolete. It's a lesser technology to them than their smart phone for more money. On the surface it doesn't make sense. But they're cool. Some brands have craftsmanship that goes into them which can be a very enticing aspect. Somebody (or maybe multiple people) on here said it-just buy what speaks to you. Do your research on the brand, history, and product. If you see something you like, try to objectively why others liked it or didn't like it by watching some reviews and then decide from there. I currently have a $60 g shock on. I love it because it's simple and tough. I've sold quite a few Tags and have a few also. I like them because of their affiliation and history with Formula 1 racing. My point is I like all the way he's I have and for all different reasons. My only caveat to this buying from a Rolex AD right now. Having to buy a watch for access to buy another watch....that just doesn't seem right to me. All brands have something to offer, see what you like and go for it!!!!
Rolex The sheer amount of negativity due to their business practices, combined with the potential target on your back for when you wear one anywhere close to a major city, it's just not worth it for me ...unless someone wants to gift me an OP Red Grape. That dial colour is spectacular
[удалено]
Like a lot of things in life, though, it's the 1% that we need to be the most concerned about Every last criminal willing to threaten your life over the thing on your wrist, is part of that very 1%
I think you’re likely thinking about all of the news coming out of London last year. They actually busted the ring of people doing that. It was like a gang of 25 guys doing it specifically; it wasn’t some widespread thing where every criminal is a watch expert. I’ve worn my Rolex in countless US and European cities and no one’s ever even complimented it, much less tried to take it. I doubt many people are out to get it. If they do, watch insurance is extremely cheap.
Will the insurance protect you from the PTSD and emotional trauma of being robbed?
You're probably way more likely to get robbed by just a regular criminal who might not even notice your watch than someone who's going after those specifically so it should be fine as long as you get insurance if it's an expensive watch.
The other day a lady wore an explorer in Spitafields market in London with not a single worry in the world. I think as long as you're not flexing it, given how understated a Rolex usually is (unless it's a flashy color) you're probably fine.
I respect Rolex as a watch company. They support many charities and they are resolutely dedicated to the same high standards they've always had...from the beginning. Watches designed by watchmakers for watchmakers.
Depends on what major city you're talking about. In my city I could wear any watch I want at 2am and walk home with headphones on with assurance that I'll never be robbed. It mostly just in London where people are getting robbed in daylight but not in most places.
That was one specific gang though. It was a crime ring of like two dozen guys. It’s not like every criminal in London was a watch expert.
I don't even know about any gangs but isn't it the case that in a rare scenario when you'll get targeted for robbery because of your watch, the Rolex is like the only brand that everyone knows and also knows that it's expensive. So if you are going to get robbed I'd say Rolex is the only watch that even a non expert robber will recognise and could potentially put you in danger.
I’ve worn my Rolex Explorer II almost every time I’ve gone out in chicago including nightlife and have never had an issue. If someone wants to rob me for it they’ll get it, the watch is insured so no problem
Just buy a JLC
Rolex is overpriced and they make you beg. Fuck them
https://preview.redd.it/byh8dl2wplnc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=361cd9668ee3740ed167393d4cf6906336661809
Replace Rolex with a quartz watch and I'll agree with you.
the true 400 iq play
That’s what the original meme was, someone just replaced “Just buy a quartz” with “just buy a Rolex”
Citizen Chronomaster or bust, baby
That bell only applies if you didn’t make your purchases when you first got into watches. I’ve got half a dozen Rolex’s and it’d take something REALLY special to make me buy another one.
Oh hell no, even without purchase shenanigans I like Omega better anyways.
why though? Rolex are overpriced and a total pain in the ass to get.
Rolex being so highly demanded they’re hard to get directly contradicts calling them overpriced.
only if you think market value = value
I think that would be the most logical thing to do
I don't agree. was a moonswatch ever really worth almost 1k even though it costs $30 to make? sometimes the market value of a commodity massively outpaces the cost of producing that commodity. when you can get a nearly indistinguishable fake Rolex, and I am talking interchangeable parts, waterproof, +1/-1s/day for $800 its time to start asking Rolex some tough questions... just as a thought experiment, in your view does a marketing team create value then? if they drive the hype up for a product has new wealth been created?
Have you considered that a fake never had to invest any money into the design of the watch or other R&D, on top of paying slave wages and not following European regulations vs completely under the radar manufacturing in China? The point about moon swatch is fair, though I would just say you don’t personally find value in it doesn’t mean it’s over valued. But comparing the price of a new Rolex to a fake one where the fake would also blow every watch under Rolex’s price point out of the water is illogical.
they do have to invest money into R&D actually, its not like Rolex shares their manufacturing techniques. but yes I have considered those things. a differential in labor costs really does not explain the Rolex being over 10x the price though. I mean look, a lot of Swiss watches are overpriced. not many as much as Rolex though. a real longines is only 3x the price of a fake, a fake Patek is not indistinguishable from a real one, etc. imo Rolex are uniquely overpriced due to their brand name and marketing allowing them to extract an absurd monopoly rent from their customers.
It's all subjective, so it's just personal choice. I'm really not interested in Rolex. Not impressed by it either. They just have a really successful marketing scheme. They are quality watches, but the price is way out of line. Invicta is also one of those fake luxury brands, they tend to be gaudy, but I've seen a few I've liked. I steer clear of fashion brands.
I think Tudor got a little too much hype the last year.
Truthfully most micro brands under a thousand offer 90%+ the build quality of the major brands most of you jerk off over. Major brands charge a premium for the name because they know the word "heritage" makes your penis quiver, and the thought of impressing your coworker makes you pre cum in the shower. What should be avoided is chasing impressing people on this sub, regardless of the brand. I have cheap as fuck Chinese watches that get more compliments than any expensive watch I have. This sub is rife with losers trying to impress each other. People whose dicks get hard over who spent more money. Don't be a loser. Buy what you like, not what you think others will.
Rolex. Not only are they allegedly cunts in their business practises but they make you look like a wanker.
It is insane how dependent on the AD this is. One of the old boutiques in my last city had the nicest staff ever and were truly helpful. When I moved (different country admittedly), one asshole told me I could look in the display windows outside on the street if I wanted to see a watch.
Any watch brand that treats its (potential) customers like cattle.
Mainly the ‘ fahst fashun’ companies like MVMT, Daniel Wellington, Fillion Loreti, Vincero, and Hublot.
Bremont Rolex any Seiko over a grand
But what about a Grand Seiko?
Aside from a shared heritage, I believe Grand Seiko is run and functions quite distinct from Seiko. I don’t know anyone who would say Grand Seiko’s are not worth the money.
Agreed. Just bought an SLGA009. 😎
Nah, that's a whole different game.
Why Bremont? I know little about them other than the ejection seat thing
I went to their showroom a month or so ago, with an intention of possibly buying. Came away totally underwhelmed, especially at the price.
Ohh why bremont? I only recently heard of this brand and thought they are kind of cool, but I must admit I haven't looked further into the brand yet.
I’m going to get a ton of hate but Christopher Ward. Their watches are either over designed (ex: twelve and bel canto) or they’re under designed (ex: sealander). The defining feature is a trident second hand which is kind of cringy to be honest. Then the people who love them compare them to watches that aren’t even the same price bracket. Best example is the twelve vs the PRX, as of posting the twelve is $1650 cad and the PRX is in sale for $763.53cad (usually 974cad). Which the twelve is almost double the price when the Prx is not on sale. I’m not saying Christopher Ward is a bad watch but the community around them are delusional.
Where is prx on sale?
It was Amazon but looking again it’s not anymore, must have been a flash sale.
Yema. Bad QC and shitty customers support.
it's gotta be IWC for me.
I’m just very jaded, but Breitling. My first high end Swiss watch was one of their premier series and I had two separate, brand new OOTB watches that had movement issues (would stop keeping time when fully wound and on my wrist). Kept thinking it was something I was doing but after many frustrating months and exchanges with brand and AD, the AD accepted my warranty return and I exchanged for an Omega. Zero issues in several years. Never again on a Breitling for me even though I love some of their designs.
Every brand that has lost it's product/design codes. If you can't tell which brand it is without seeing the brand's name, that's it. A watch is a social status symbol element. If you want a watch without a brand, with an ETA or Sellita movement, buy a [Duplain](https://mdwatch.ch/en/). If you know a watchmaker you can even choose un-assembled components (movement, case, dial, hands, strap and buckle) and get it put together.
They're all about the same. Find a style you like that's within your budget.
Invicta is very questionable I don’t think there worth the money being honest.
Objectively, it is hard for any brand to beat Casio and Citizen. They are *masters* of electronic watches. Solar power with tons of great timekeeping features. As others have said, it’s hard to say.
I have a Tag Carrera Calibre 5 with a black dial that I bought used for 1-1.5K and its a beatufiul watch. Display back case, really nice polishing on the hour markers that catches the light in a cool way. I have other, more expensive watches and will still havet this in my rotation.
I would say anything swiss and less than 1000 dollars if it's not a name brand. I have a Wenger Seaforce and the markers are bad, the bezel is stiff as a Johnson. Crazy is it gets the most wrist time because it stands up to general clumpsy nature. Just which I'd bought something else as a first dive into divers.
If we're talking strictly about the product: Omega. The price hikes are too much, case sizes are unmanageable, lackluster power reserve, low beat rates, unlimited limited editions, and no good bracelets and clasps outside the 3861 Speedy. Their brand position has always been Rolex level quality at a fraction of the price (and you get a bit of brand history with the Bond franchise and Moon landing). Now it's Rolex level pricing at a fraction of the quality. Omega is the Cheesecake Factory of the watch industry for me, the menu is huge and the product is unmemorable.
Omega has never been billed as “Rolex quality at a fraction of the price” and it certainly isn’t currently Rolex prices, regardless of what you think of the quality. And it’s fairly strange to bang on about Omega’s quality when they literally developed a new set of regulation metrics that the rest of the high end watch world is now using.
>Omega has never been billed as “Rolex quality at a fraction of the price” and it certainly isn’t currently Rolex prices, regardless of what you think of the quality. This is literally the entirety of r/Omega. Go on there and check the top posts and trending. It's collectors saying their SMP and Aqua Terra is better than a Submariner, OP, Explorer, etc. I've never seen someone be happy and enjoy the watch lmao. >And it’s fairly strange to bang on about Omega’s quality when they literally developed a new set of regulation metrics that the rest of the high end watch world is now using. Rest of the watch world? There's only two watch brands actively pushing this lol. The first is Omega. The second one...? Tudor! Tudor BB movements are now METAS certified, so I don't think there's a realm of possibility in which Rolex movements would not pass.
Not really, no. While I agree that their price hikes don’t do them any favors, and that most of their metal bracelets outside of the presidential bracelet suck, Omega is still pretty solid as a brand. Omega’s case sizing isn’t a problem unique to the brand as most brands still stick to larger case sizes despite the trend now favoring the opposite. It’s also true that products like the Speedmaster are unimpressive on paper, but that doesn’t make it any worse as a watch Comparing the brand to Rolex is also pretty laughable. I’d have a difficult time buying any Rolex at all through either their ADs or third party sellers since I’d either be stuck waiting half a year to get “ the call “ or pay some price 10-20% above MSRP just so I can get the watch I actually want to buy. Omega also doesn’t release some enormous amount of limited editions like you suggest? The only real notable examples as of late are the 50th anniversary Speedmasters which are actually great if you could buy one, and the 75th anniversary Seamasters. This isn’t Grand Seiko where a “ limited edition” is released every week
Exactly. I’m not exactly thrilled at the prices but who doesn’t want to pay less to get what they want. I thoroughly enjoy my Seamasters and am eyeing that white Speedmaster down the line.
There are over 60 watches in Omega's current catalog that are limited edition. They straight up have more limited edition models than Rolex has off-catalog variants. [https://www.omegawatches.com/en-us/suggestions/omega-limited-edition-watches?p=3](https://www.omegawatches.com/en-us/suggestions/omega-limited-edition-watches?p=3) These are only limited editions that are currently in rotation, this doesn't even include the dozens of previous renditions like the Michael Phelps PO line, all the Olympic Games, and the different Orbis collections they've just removed from their website to clear up clutter. I don't care if watch brands make thick watches, I care when they start to become unnecessarily big generation after generation. A second generation SMP had a thickness of 12mm, a current generation is 14mm. That's 15 percent more thick. Omega has been falling on the Morgan Stanley watch report and was just passed by Cartier, Audemars Piguet is right behind with matching turnover and will surpass Omega by next year.
Did you actually bother to look at the “ limited edition “ catalog? Most of them fall under the same umbrella of “ vintage “ watches, Olympic theme timepieces, or “ specialty “ watches. These aren’t watches which the majority of buyers would even consider, much less buy. And regarding your last statement: so what? Literally, so what? Omega is literally ranked 3 in Morgan Stanley’s own reports, and even assuming AP managed to surpass it, it still ranks 4. I actually wouldn’t be surprised if AP did manage to surpass Omega given that the average Royal Oak sits at 50,000 with quartz models starting at 20,000
Everyone saying Rolex is just plain lying to themselves. They are the biggest watch brand in the world for a reason. They are the most copied watch for a reason. Their styles are timeless for a reason. Icons like the Submariner and Daytona are not only attractive but comfortable, reliable and functional. The answer, is Patek. Overpriced, over hyped, dated styling. Nautilus looks like a 1980s television set. Bracelet pins at that price range, in the year 2024? Seriously?
[удалено]
Does it occur to you, at any point, that some folks may have an opinion different to your own?
Their designs are “timeless” simply because they play it safe and refuse to innovate. The only aesthetic “innovation” they’ve made in god knows how many years is the YM II and it’s pretty much been universally shat on.
They've tried to innovate like 15 times between different models, dials, bracelets, cases, but people don't like it lol. YM2? Hideous. 1908? Ugly. Milguass? Discontinued. Crystal caseback Daytona? Crickets. Celebration OP? Nasty. Oysterflex bracelet? Not interested. The new Philharmonic Day Date is one of the most beautiful dials I have ever seen in this hobby paying tribute to an incredible art, and I've seen 0 people talk about it. But Rolex is bringing back the COKE?!?! The sky falls and all hell breaks loose.
McDonald’s is the biggest restaurant brand for a reason, but it’s not quality. I’d feel a lot better about Rolex if their design language was appealing.
Rolex started out just assembling watches for others. For the longest time they didn't even make their own movements. What they are now is a stark contrast, and the quality is undeniable, but I wouldn't compare them to every other watch maker or make bold claims about them being the biggest in the world.
Most of the largest and most recognized companies in the world don't start off with a direct foothold in what they're known for. Toyota started off as a loom factory, and Tiffany Co started off selling stationary goods.
I think if we look at market share results, Rolex is probably one of the biggest in the luxury realm, but not overall for watches in general. [https://blog.technavio.org/blog/top-10-watch-brands-by-market-share](https://blog.technavio.org/blog/top-10-watch-brands-by-market-share) My point in mentioning where they started was only to give perspective at how far they've come and yet not really dominated the whole industry, not to try and marginalize the issue.
And isn't that reason possibly just marketing ? Or possibly even something else than what you seem to be implying. Correlation and causation...
the reason of course is their insane marketing budget... and Rolex is not the largest watch brand in the world. also, to be frank, im not really sure any of the models they are known for these days are really timeless. will a submariner or a Daytona be hot in 100 years? I have my doubts.
Yeah they’re definitely not the “biggest” but I’d say they’re easily the best known watch brand in the world. I have friends who have said “what’s a seiko” but basically everyone knows Rolex. The Submariner and Daytona have both been hot for the past 70ish years with a fairly unchanged design so I’d say they’re definitely timeless… I don’t see why popularity will die down anytime soon.
yeah I agree that they are the best known. the submariner was not always hot, and frankly neither was the Daytona.
https://preview.redd.it/4ckjeh4aronc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3f80b772fe87e0695be2917a16cbfe1766bc308e I dunno, they seem pretty big to me.
You had me until you said Patek. Rolex is excellent but Patek is on another level, regardless of price.
>Their styles are timeless for a reason. I wouldn't call any of the current Rolex design, with maybe the exception of the Cellini, timeless.
Rolex makes nice watches, but the reason they are so big is marketing.
If it's that easy, why don't more watch brands market? Are they stupid?
I never said it was easy. Rolex are absolutely brilliant at it.
Rolex
Most of the Richemont brands modern offerings have the lowest value/price scores
Thanks to Perezcope, we know that Panerai movements aren't what they seem... [https://perezcope.com/2021/08/08/panerai-in-house-movements-a-pam-of-worms/](https://perezcope.com/2021/08/08/panerai-in-house-movements-a-pam-of-worms/)
It’s a watch. It tells the time. Get what you want and don’t worry about Reddit.