Reply With QuoteWhat blocky looking thing is on his wrist!?
Correction: I think it’s just a Black Bay on nato. Calm down mate.
Just appeared on their Instagram page:
https://instagram.com/p/BggollyABCZ/
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What blocky looking thing is on his wrist!?
Correction: I think it’s just a Black Bay on nato. Calm down mate.
Wow, a box.
His endorsement would stop me buying anything .
"Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. The third time it's enemy action."
'Populism, the last refuge of a Tory scoundrel'.
More of a smug shot than a teaser
Must be his divorce papers in there.
He's looking at naked pics of Rebecca Loos and wishing he could have some again.
He's smugly thinking....."some more expensive free sh*t".
: )Originally Posted by watchmad
Agreed
Last edited by andy tims; 20th March 2018 at 14:08.
Andy
Wanted - Damasko DC57
Him and Lady Gaga killed modern Tudors for me....
Still love the vintage ones though..
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ha-ha.
Tudor have awful direction in ambassadors.
I think the subset of people that admire David Beckham as a style icon and have the best part of £5000 to spend on a tool focused wrist trinket is a very small group.
He brings brand awareness, pre Beckham videos on Tudor's instagram feed could expect 7-8k views, with him they're now reaching 60k views. He's a globally recognised personality, well liked and respected in most countries too. I expect Tudor see his value and are willing to extend his contract for another year at least.
The fact Beckham helps front Tudor really kills the brand for me
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Exactly. Marketing, geared to raise awareness of a brand that 'the man on the street' still largely hasn't heard of. Tudor won't give a toss what a minority of watch forum geeks think if Beckham, Gaga & the All Blacks succeed in raising mass global awareness. I personally don't care what watch a celebrity wears, and you'd have to be a bit simple to let it affect your individual purchasing decisions, but I can see that such tactics nevertheless raise brand awareness as a whole, even if they don't actually compel many to buy (or not buy) the particular model being advertised.
When you consider how wealthy they are as a couple, he’s probably thinking “some more cheap free sh*t!”
Funny that he is good enough for Tudor but not Rolex. Says it all.
While I think it is a rubbish teaser the presence or absence of a brand ambassador does not influence my decision to buy a watch.
I found the whole Piaget campaign with their group of ambassadors really grated with me but it would not have prevented me buying the watch if I had actually liked it when I tried it on .
Does not not say anything - watch brands choose ambassadors for various reasons, and I doubt ‘good enough?’ Is a criteria they use particularly.
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
Blessed we are to hold and share our own opinions. I happen to think he is the wrong side of classy for Rolex.
For that to be qualified, one would have to define class.
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
If its a Pelagos GMT I'm going to be all over it like [redacted].
But you own a Rolex....
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Debatable, but then he isn't advertising Rolex, is he?
Like him or not, I'd argue Beckham's image is a better fit for where Tudor (probably) see themselves as a brand - younger, brighter, more attainable (i.e. cheaper), more modern, less reserved than Rolex, so the likes of Gaga & Beckham fit with that I suppose.
By that I mean you largely don't see Rolex promoting fabric straps, bronze & ceramic cases, display backs, yellow power reserves, 'homeplate' style dials etc., and they mostly operate at a different, lower price range.
Rolex keep the same basic designs for decades, they're extremely classic & conservative in their approach - that's presumably why they see Roger Federer (the opposite of Beckham) as a good fit.
Horses for courses.
I like Tudor as a brand, and having thought about it I think that there are far worse brand ambassadors. The amount Beckham does for charity is truly remarkable, and Gaga's work for equality is also highly commendable. I'm sure that there are older types who will turn their noses us, but no more than I do to yauchtists, golfists, and other assorted "sports" people who are aimed at the rich.
F*****g show jumpers? Jesus H Christ, some people shouldn't point fingers when they criticise other brands choices.Funny that he is good enough for Tudor but not Rolex. Says it all.
This
Aren't you, by saying that you wouldn't buy anything endorsed by him being same as people that will buy it because it is endorsed by him? Shouldn't the decision itself be based on what you are buying rather than what association you are buying?
I owned a Tudor BB Chrono at the time he started doing the adverts for it and my initial reaction on seeing one of them was always "Oh, Beckham's wearing my watch!".......followed immediately by "Stop wearing my watch, idiots will buy it".
I guess my problem wasn't him, but the popularity that comes along with him.
I'm planning on buying a Tudor this year and the presence or absence of any particular ambassador is irrelevant - that ad could just as well be some generic male model opening a box as David Beckham for all the influence it has on my decision. I will buy the watch because of how it looks, how it feels on, and the research I do about its performance etc as well as the fact it suits my budget. I can't really believe that anyone with a modicum of intellect would let this kind of thing influence their product choice one way or the other.
That’s my opinion
Me too. His presence or absence is irrelevant to me.
I buy watches, not the celebrity doing the advertising.
I appreciate that many brands feel the need for ambassadors. That's their choice.
I am looking forward to seeing what the releases are. I hope they are good, I have been a little disappointed ever since the original Pelagos launch, and hope they can up their game.
Dave
Does that box contain Victorias meals for the week?
RIAC
I guess the problem is more with you. Some of the most despicable men in modern history have often been seen wearing Rolex yet their popularity continues to grow.
I think it is safe to say that anyone who resides on a watch forum has little to no interest on any brand ambassador and that they have zero affect on a purchase too.
But in the wider market it pays huge dividends and David Beckham is a brilliant choice by Tudor for their brand and I'm sure their sales/market share/brand awareness will be be vastly better with him in their campaigns.
Having met and spoken with Rolex marketeers they have a very different profile of support (above and below the line) for their brand ambassadors and it clearly works for them in the many fields they cover.
If the posters who suggest they would avoid buying in lieu of a brand ambassador association are serious then it’s a sad indightment of our hobby.
Practically nobody else would know or care.
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
Nobody wants to believe they've been pulled in by a brand promise, good packaging, marketing hype, endorsements, sponsorship deals, glossy adverts, AD patter, and the rest. But if that was true we'd all be wearing sterile dials, or Steinharts and the like.
Wouldn't influence my buying decision, but he makes sense for tudor. The average consumer doesn't seem to know much about tudor (if anything at all). Their 'ambassadors' will undoubtedly raise the profile, so job done.
The lady gaga tie in seems much stranger than Beckham.
Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk
True, though how many people are aware of that? And, for some balance, so does the Dalai Lama.
I bought a Tudor early January and spoke to the sales assistant about Beckham and Gaga, I was quite honest with her in saying that I thought it was a bit naff and that it may actually put people off the brand. She appeared to understand where I was coming from though she countered with, as some others on this thread have already mentioned, the fact that Tudor's profile had been raised considerably since the current advertising campaign started and words to the effect that it's better to be spoken about than not, even if it is divisive.
Obviously, the fact that Beckham is a face of Tudor didn't put me off buying the watch, in fact I'd like to think that it didn't make one iota of difference to my decision making process. However in the highly unlikely event someone was to comment on my watch and coo about it being the one that Beckham advertises (exaggerated response alert!) I'd be tempted to punch them square on the nose. I'm not a number, I'm a free man!
I think it's more about awareness - I'd be more likely to look at an advert for a watch with Beckham in it. This doesn't mean that I admire his style or want to wear the same thing as him, he just makes it more interesting in the first place. I'd make a judgement as to whether or not I like it regardless of golden balls putting his face to it.
Nah - A month
Andy
Wanted - Damasko DC57
2017 saw the BBSteel and BBchrono. Now they release this manure? Disappointed doesn't come close
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There is a lot wrong with that but white date window in the last pic?
It's awful. 1926 - first off I'd like a Rose. Then a strap not that bracelet. Even the silver writing on the dial stuck on as one plate - just lazy and badly done. Makes me want a Tissot or Hamilton jazzmaster. Based on this would you believenow imagine how Longines would have treated an old classic - cmon Tudor this is a mess. Get your act together
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by RustyBin5; 21st March 2018 at 10:16.
Hoping for something good from Tudor... I think oris has released some really interesting watches at 36 and 40mm!
Sent from my [device_name] using TZ-UK mobile app
I think tomorrow will see a blue and a black bezel version of the black bay chrono
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I’m intrigued to see the price point of those 1926 models. They better be cheap as chips, or else Tudor are taking the mickey.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That smug grin on Beckhams face was due to the huge pay packet he gets and certainly not the monstrosity that is the 1926.
Just hopeful? Or got a fancy feeling?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Posting Permissions
