Reply With Quote
The two things are not necessarily mutually exclusive. The difference can be one that consists only of perception and subjectivity. ;-)Originally Posted by Siac
Hi,
http://uk.askmen.com/authors/watch_snob
Is this guy (assumed by his writings to be a guy), a knowledgable and well versed expert, someone whose opinion we should take heed of... or is he a pontificating buffoon?!
Personally, I like his responses, they are well written and funny at times (if you like ascerbic wit!), and he makes some good points about heritage of brands etc.
Your views appreciated.
Last edited by Siac; 5th April 2016 at 19:23.
The two things are not necessarily mutually exclusive. The difference can be one that consists only of perception and subjectivity. ;-)
I would take it as watch based entertainment rather than serious critique - he's writing in Askmen.com that should be all you need to know.
Now is Ariel Adams a pontificating buffoon - that's a more interesting question.
And quite an easily answered one.
Also owner of humanity's most disgusting armhair.
I wouldn't be surprised if "he" wasn't, in fact, several writers.
I enjoy much of what is written and much of it hits the mark, though as much again is tongue in cheek.
Your thread title isn't appropriate to this part of the forum though...
I have rolled around the idea, and of those choices, I am mulling over the word "twat". Not because of the opinions he holds, but because I don't need to go to askmen.com to find it, as it's no different to any other opinion available on a watch forum, and he sometimes gets his facts wrong whilst pontificating.
...but what do I know; I don't even like watches!
Having just sampled his webpage, basically I couldn't care less!
Is that because if we discuss his elevation to status of Titan we would be breaking the no Religion rules.
The Titans
The mighty Titans were a powerful race that ruled the world before Olympians, in a time of the Golden Age of men. They were immortal giants of incredible strength and knowledge of old religion rituals and magic. They are also known as the Elder Gods and their dwelling place was at Mount Othrys. In Greek culture they were interpreted as personifications of the earth (Gaea) and the sky or heavens (Uranus).
The first generation of Titans were descendants of Gaea and Uranus who originally gave birth to Twelve Titans, six males and six females. Males were Coeus, Cronus, Crius, Hyperion, Iapetus and Oceanus while females were Mnemosyne, Phoebe, Rhea, Theia, Themis, Tethys. Some brothers and sisters consorted with each other while others consorted with sons and daughters of their relatives and gave birth to the second generation of Titans. Hyperion and Theia gave birth to Eos, Helios and Selene, while Coeus and Phoebe gave birth to Leto and Asteria. Oceanus and Tethys gave birth to Oceanids and Potamoi who are in general not referred as Titans. However, am Oceanid Clymene, a daughter of Oceanus and Tethys, helped Iapetus to continue the next generation and bore him Atlas, Prometheus, Epimetheus and Menoetius. Crius and his half-sister Eurybia, a daughter of Gaea and Pontus, gave birth to Astraeus, Pallas and Perses. And finally, in later ages Cronus and Rhea gave birth to younger gods, Zeus, Hades, Poseidon, Hera, Hestia and Demeter who rebelled against Cronus and his followers. They called themselves the Olympian Gods, after Mount Olympus which was their main dwelling place.
There you go you've made me go off on a religious Google - for the record, and before anyone asks I'm not a Titan either .......
Admin: apologies if the title is not appropriate. I can't change it to Titan or Tool. You're welcome to.
Go to your original post, and click "Edit". Then click "Advanced".
Sooner rather than later, I suggest.
Thanks. Hoped now more acceptable.
He or they (if it is a group)seem unable to ever write anything encouraging about any brand outside of Patek. I read an article where he just slated off Glycine without any reason why apart from they were not really well known. Omega he might just mention a Speedmaster (yawn).
A real waste of an opportunity to review lesser advertises brands, compare real value in models and of course cover the main players. I would actually rely on Archie more than that waste of writing.
- - - Updated - - -
He or they (if it is a group)seem unable to ever write anything encouraging about any brand outside of Patek. I read an article where he just slated off Glycine without any reason why apart from they were not really well known. Omega he might just mention a Speedmaster (yawn).
A real waste of an opportunity to review lesser advertised brands, compare real value in models and of course cover the main players. I would actually rely on Archie more than that waste of writing.
I've always enjoyed the column, it's pretty tongue in cheek.
Before I was assimilated, I used to take the opinions more seriously though.
That's one of his balls-ups. He claimed that Glycine was no longer interesting now it made Airmen with ordinary ETA movements. Well, in the 1950s the Airman came with Felsa movements and then A.Schild, which are no more in-house to Glycine than ETA is today. Hey, if you're going to get all specific, people are going to get all specific as well!
...but what do I know; I don't even like watches!
It's entertaining but like all of these things, it passes off opinion as fact.
That's precisely why people read it, and it's provocative (and we all love conversations about watches).
It's entertainment! Opinions from an inaccessible make-believe world sprinkled with some interesting knowledge. People take it seriously?
He (they?) makes some interesting points at times, other times he contradicts himself. Yes, it's good for a chuckle, some will believe it and take it seriously, of course... same way people would read and digest the Daily Star versus The Times etc.
I do like it when he unmasks the marketing efforts that would claim false heritage, Perrelet was recently lambasted, as is Panerai often.
Regarding Glycine, granted, the modern Glycine watches, as with 95% of the present day Swiss output, are cookie cutter watches with ETA movements and Chinese made cases and bracelets.
However, if one goes back to the sixties and seventies, even the late fifties, there were the original Glycine Airman and SST watches. Yes, they used the pedestrian Felsa and A. Schild movements, but along with the 24 hour dial, they had the unique hack mechanism that no other manufacturer has duplicated. The hack device was not part of the movement, it was contained in the movement ring that secured the movement to the case. There was the lever that fit into a notch in the stem on one end and on the other end a tiny (.06 mm) wire that came up through a hole in the dial when activated by pulling the stem into the winding position, which stopped the second hand exactly at zero.
The fact that these watches are now selling at anywhere from ten to thirty times, and even more, their original cost, is proof that the world recognizes them as special watches. Does anyone imagine that a modern Glycine will ever sell for ten times its current cost? Well perhaps if we suffer runaway inflation, but the point is, they have nothing that makes them stand out from the crowd.
James Sadilek - ccwatchmaker
Posting Permissions