Originally Posted by
Itsguy
Part of that difficult position is that they do have to intentionally make them look cheaper than Rolex, and that the whole brand proposition includes the thought 'made by Rolex, but cheaper'. This may not be the message people want to convey when they choose a luxury watch. Apple had the same issue with the iPhone 6c, which was basically the same phone, but with a plastic back, and cheaper. Give or take the fingerprint sensor it had identical functionality and actually looked really good, but people overwhelmingly chose the more expensive version because they considered the iPhone to be a premium product and they didn't like the image of having the cheaper version, even if it was just as good. Omega also found out to their cost in the 70s-90s that competing on price is the wrong strategy in the luxury game and only serves to devalue the brand in the eyes of the customer.
Tudor should benefit from the increasing prices of their vintage models, which is in part a halo effect from the price of vintage Rolex, but also includes some love for the original design elements. These are reprised in the BB and have some people seeing the BB as a thinking man's choice. But only the kind of people who frequent this forum would really get that or have ever swooned over a vintage snowflake. They will need many more than that to succeed in the mass market. Perhaps they can take more design risks that Rolex, who are terminally glued to the past, and succeeded that way. But Tudor can't completely escape their past either it seems. As you say, a difficult position.