Do Franklin Mint know Panerai are trying to muscle in to their market niche?
The most significant thing I get from this thread is the general notion of hunting is bad. There is a difference between hunting a lion and hunting a rabbit. Both are hunting though. Are you all vegetarians? Call this kind of hunting what it is, trophy hunting. That I don't agree with,but I'm pretty sure none of us would be here if humans didn't hunt for food.
So yes, I've no love for this marketing ploy, but I still respect hunting if for its valuable purpose.
Do Franklin Mint know Panerai are trying to muscle in to their market niche?
Yeah you're probably right...Guess when Scott Dunn take honeymooners to bag the big five they're going to come back with a load of trophies too. (Joking)
Richemont owns both companies and its big charities are Laureus and an African conservation charity. Wouldn't surprise me if some of the proceeds from the watch went to the conservarion charity (like with Laureus and certain IWCs).
Let me know if you can't stand any of your Richemont collection...happy to take them off your hands!
Thinking pigeon on Saturday for dinner, does that make me a bad hunter bloke type??
Nope. But using powdered white rhino horn to cure asthma would. Isn't that back to the point of this thread. The engravings are in bad taste, conservation arguments or no. And as for those arguments there's literally zero conservation culling of rhinos because there simply aren't enough of them still standing. You pose with a trophy rhino you want shooting your self IMO.
But hey ho each to their own.
Pheasant for tea round these parts, yum.
Not keen on those PAMs personally, although I appreciate the craftsmanship.
Am I the only one who doesn't like the watch for its lack of functionality? During a boring meeting or just waiting for something, casual glimpsing at the time... When I imagine I would need to open the case every single time... complete turnoff.
If those "illustratrations" were on the back of the watch I would consider them to be unique and interesting in a way , no matter whether I like them or not (I don't).
OP - if you consider those animals could mean to an owner something else than the original idea, it's not that bad. Many people I know are quite fond of lions for example and like to buy some brands or stuff with lion motif just because they like the animal.
Well, I didn't realise purdey's were owned by richemont?!
was after one of their guns made for deepak Singh at auction but went too rich for my wallet, beuitiful gun mind.
mike
Nice watch but 20k?
You're having a giraffe ..
Good luck everybody. Have a good one.
Basically Richemont give the impression they are run by a bunch of complete morons with absolutely no idea about marketing and product design.
Who can forget the Damien Hirst spin painting made with Panerai dials- utter crap......along with other works by Hirst that included a Panerai watch- crap.
This big game Purdy Panerai is of no consequence imho because anyone with any taste would have abandoned the brand years ago.
I don't care for Panerai styling and engraving them does not make them any more pleasant looking to my eye.
Studies disagree with that statement. Without the money from big game hunting there would be no reason for the local, generally poor populations in Africa to try to conserve game and their habitat.
http://conservationmagazine.org/2014...-conservation/
In America at the turn of the 20th century many species of big game - elk, whitetail deer, wild turkey and others - had alarmingly low populations. Thanks to laws enacting hunting seasons and tax dollars from hunters game is at record levels in the USA today. The conservation efforts that benefit game animals have also proven to benefit non-game species, mostly through habitat preservation.
I understand why some people oppose hunting but I am guessing one or two courses in range and wildlife management would change most minds. It may not make them want to hunt but it should inform of the benefits and would likely make them more tolerant of hunting in general.
Ok , what you say and demonstrate is a distinct lack of understanding to the core issues . The people buying licenses for hundreds of thousands of Dollars are not real ' Hunters ' just wealthy Americans primarily who have nothing else to occupy their time and offer a lame excuse for their poor judgment and activity , killing wild animals in Africa .
Let's not loose sight of the fact that Africa is one of the most corrupt nations in the world , it runs in their DNA , donations into conservation come from charities and philanthropic avenues , most licence money gets divided amongst the non deserved . But the spin makes it out to be a self funding and ecological satisfying business which it is far from being . The country makes millions from this industry and it is quite shameful .
T regardless of what one pseudo article says from a university in Washington , big game numbers are decreasing , more regular types of roaming animals are increasing and the balance of nature is being upset not controlled .
It's a money business , If these idiots were so worried about animal welfare , the eco system and conservation they would just donate their hard earned cash and go back to supplying fake breasts , lips and whatever else they do for the mentally unstable in their day to day occupations .
Thought Africa was a continent not a nation? Bit of a sweeping statement of an entire continent though, was not aware that game hunting was even practiced in every single country in Africa and corruption runs in their DNA.
Do they also like Panerai watches in the country of Africa?
It's all very convenient for people shooting animals to claim that they are doing us a favour in protecting animals. Perhaps we should allow the shooting of Pandas and why not kick off whaling again.
I think Trumps views on disbanding the EPA give an indication as to the message coming from the States and so it will be a boon to all those tough gun totting hunters out there.
More guns less environmental protection we are really moving forward aren't we.
Without commenting on the morality of hunting debate I think you have to appreciate that we are a very small island and have a certain taste in watches that is usually reserved and traditional, the remainder of the world have some very exotic and wild tastes which to us seem very strange or revolting but equally they find our bland reserved choices equally offensive.
I deal internationally and some of the stuff is way out there and whilst I don't appreciate the style it lights a spark of desire in others.
RIAC
Don't care about the politics, the economics, or whatever other argument is out there. I think it is a disgrace to hunt wild animals for fun. I understand about culls of over populated species and I personally think there has to be a better way of dealing with it. I work on a family farm when they need help and now then when an animal is hurt, likely to die and is suffering then to me it is a more humane thing to put it out of its misery so guns and shooting animals is not what this is about, it's about hunting animals because you can, either through wealth, position or whatever else. That I disapprove of.
As for the watches, talented engraving, notable mark, appreciate the military significance of it, don't like the watches with the engraving, wouldn't buy it, can't afford it anyway, rather distasteful
Last edited by Brucy; 16th November 2016 at 08:38.
"One can hardly begin to imagine the type of bravery needed to sit astride a torpedo on a dark moonless night, encased in a rubber suit and primitive breathing apparatus, whilst attempting to penetrate the enemy defenses, which usually included a steel anti-torpedo net enclosing the harbor mouth."
http://www.watcheswithnolimits.com/i...mid=87&lang=en
Fas est ab hoste doceri
Well exactly if Purdey, Holland and Holland, Boss et all only produced hunting guns for the UK market they would have gone out of business by now. I had a little search and noted the New York Gun Rooms are a massive part of the business.
Some old Duke blasting a pheasant on his land is not for me but I understand that occasionally killing a rabbit or putting an animal out of its misery is not going to create a wildlife crisis.
These watches though are aimed at international big game hunters from across the world who frankly don't care a damn. They'd shoot every last one of they had the chance and crow about killing the last remaining one.
I've written to Richemont it will be interesting to see if they bother replying.
I'll wait for the chrono model with the panda dial.
Corruption runs in the DNA of all Africans? Get out of here.
People who whine about shooting sports being for the monied classes are right - they are. And it's great. I live within spitting distance of one of the premier shooting estates in the country, and within an admittedly enthusiastic spit of some wonderful grouse moors. The money from the rich shooters pays not only for the upkeep and conservation of the moors, but funds the estate and allows them to throw their doors open to locals and support many small businesses and individuals in the area. We all get to enjoy the moors, woodland and estates that would otherwise be out of bounds, overgrown or sold off, for the sake of a handful of shooting days per year.
If some Mockney new money wants to get their Rangey dirty while pretending to be landed Gentry, I'll happily say "yes sir" and take 40 quid a Pheasant off him.
The best bit is the shot birds end up in the local game dealer where they're prepped and flogged at two for a fiver. Good, high quality fresh meat - incredibly low in fat and delicious. Yum.
Last edited by kungfugerbil; 16th November 2016 at 10:00.
The triumph of wealth over taste exemplified.
Delicately put. Although I can't see anyone being as offended by classic design as we are of this lapse in taste.
They might think we are boring or unadventurous or even a moribund group of grey-faced whatsits who consider a pocket square to be the mark of a cad.
It's worth remembering though, before we chuck ourselves on the fire of self-hatred, that there are places in the world where the Leopard Daytona is considered to be an attractive proposition.
Some 'old' guns were pretty effective too....too effective it seems (and not a great deal of skill involved)!
http://rarehistoricalphotos.com/punt-gun-1910-1920/
Actually, they're aimed at rich watch collectors who will buy a limited edition piece, put in a safe & take out for a fondle, perhaps once or twice a year, whilst wearing lint-free gloves, a white coat & a face-mask. A small percentage will ever be worn outside a building & an even smaller percentage 'in the wild'.
Incidentally, I know little about 'big game hunting' & shotguns. Are shotguns the weapons of choice for the purpose?
______
Jim.
Needs a genuine Rhino horn dial and elephant skin strap or I'm out.
Oh wait, I was out when it was a Panerai.
Yes but you don't HAVE to eat meat do you? You eat it because you like and enjoy eating meat so what is the difference?
Regardless of how its morally justified I doubt being stunned, throat slit, bolt through the brain, bashed over the head or any other manner is really a great experience for the animal.
Back on topic (a bit) while it's entirely possible to admire the craft and skill of engraving at this level, regardless of the level of 'good taste' exhibited by the Panerai in opting for this limited edition theme, it's actually not a nice thing to my eye and is clearly a safe-queen in the way that many high-end heavily decorated guns are.
Having done some work with high-end gun manufacturers in the past including Purdey, a lot of this co-branding does go on but the marketing is handled on a 1:1 basis to a select audience who like this type of adornment and buy into the lifestyle. The issue is more one of publicity and strength of endorsement than the watches actually being made I'd say. I've seen enormously questionable items in the past that have never been publicly promoted and these would probably have best been left in that category in my opinion.