From a 2014 interview, this covers it:
Why did you choose to start an online-only business?
I had just sold the Early Learning Centre (ELC) in 2004 and after about a month I was bored. Chris Ward, who I had known for 20 years, was also looking to sell his business. With my business partner, Peter Ellis, we got on a boat on the Thames in 2004 to brainstorm what we might do.
Having been in retail for more years than I would care to mention, Peter and I had already established a very successful business in ELC. We didn’t want to get too tied into bricks-and-mortar at that stage so decided on an online business. We wanted it to be relatively high-value and relatively low volume, something that could be sold across the world.
So when was your lightbulb moment?
One of the great lightbulb moments for me was when we discovered the prices the luxury watch brands were charging the customer. Frankly we thought it was crazy and we discovered that they were asking multiples that were incredible large. We then discovered that we were using lots of the same components that they were using.
As someone who works in an agency much like Hello (I like to think we are a lot better, but any designer will say the same about their agency). You could well be correct about the appeal. Most in my agency don't wear a watch, Mondaine are hated but those nasty MVMT and INSTRMNT watches seem to be rated as "good watches" for some unknown reason. I can tell you that few if any in our agency would consider spending a few hundred on a watch. The above are about £60 - £150 and the general consensus seems to be that they are, as I said a "good watch".Originally Posted by markrlondon
My most recent victory was convincing one of my designers to spend his £100 odd on a Seiko diver. i have created a new WIS.
Interesting, thanks.
I presume the cheap fashion watches are seen as "good watches" is that they are cheap, funky, fashionable items.
I think the appeal is purely based on the design style that these watches use. If I'm honest, I do quite like the styling but they are over priced, hipster tinsel. I think more than half the cost goes into a box that convinces people they've bought a relatively "luxury" item. I watched our copy writer unbox one and you would have thought he had just discovered the holy grail. It drew a crowd of designers like the proverbial flies to excrement.
This is the mob
http://www.instrmnt.co.uk
Also meant to say that there's not 1 smart watch in our agency despite a high proportion of apple fan boys and also a rather large tech team. We could well be unique on this front.
A lot of opinions on CW by people who have never owned one or will ever own one or handled one in person:-)
Could easily be CW's new website.
And that's the problem with the new CW branding/website/logo to my mind: Fine for fashion watches; less fine for supposedly more luxury watches in a somewhat higher price range.
Wow! ;-)
Well, quite. I don't own them because I don't like them. What should I do, buy one so I can then say authoritatively that I don't like it?
Is there something magic that happens when you get one in your hands? Are you saying that although they don't look especially attractive, they feel so good to the touch that it doesn't matter? (I've tried that line on women, and it doesn't work.)
I was indifferent to them till I bought one.
Am not sure if and when I will buy one again but the quality and feel was a revelation. Much, much better than I expected.
There are small/boutique/micro brands and then there are some like CW.
I can understand someone saying they don't like the looks or branding but I am amused by people suggesting that they look like a $100 watch or cost twice as much as they should.
I hate it when people talk up micro bramds saying that some are as good as those costing ten times more.
I will only say that Inhave owned many watches from micro brands but CW's quality is above most.
The problem is a lot of them look kind of bland and the branding is an issue for quite a few. I cannot argue with that.
But, quality is definitely there.
Last edited by RAJEN; 9th May 2016 at 00:00.
I don't think this comment is aimed at me but, for the avoidance of doubt, I have never said anything like that. I've always felt that the watches themselves were fine and am on record saying so.
It's just the branding changes that I think are nuts.
No, Mark. Not you.
I don't have a particular issue with branding but a lot of people (including the fans )have objected.
So, I can accept that it is an issue.
I think the point is if you don't like them and have no intention of owning one what is the point of going on about it especially when it's just regurgitating the same comment over and over again as some do. It's no different to the usual bore merchants on Rolex and Seiko threads we get it you don't like them move on there is so much more to life.
The most bizarre thing I have found in all of these discussions both here and on the CW forum is a poll where most who voted said they would keep buying there watches but only the old logo (ChrWard). The same logo people went into meltdown over when it was introduced over the original one.
If someone has considered one and chosen not to buy, I am interested in the reason. It is as valid as someone buying and saying why.
That's not so strange I think: Everything is relative. A lot of fans hated the Chr.Ward logo compared to the old one. Now they hate the new one even more. So, in comparison, the Chr.Ward one is less bad than the new one. But it's still bad.
Those who said that the Chr.Ward logo would fail do seem to have been proved right. If it was working well then there could not possibly have been any need to change the logo (especially not in such a radical way) so soon. It is always dangerous to predict the future (who knows, perhaps the new Christopher Ward will become the hipster luxury watch of choice with its new non-luxury style hipster branding) but personally I am predicting a similar change of tack again not so far into the future, if the company is still around as an independent entity for much longer.
I have no idea how CW is doing (I always thought they were doing really well) but I cannot help but observe that businesses doing very well don't tend to need to change logos and branding twice in such a short timeframe, especially not the in the luxury goods market.
As ever, time will tell. I hope they know what they are doing and are doing well and that this new branding will pick up new customers from groups not previously known for buying luxury watches.
Last edited by markrlondon; 9th May 2016 at 17:46. Reason: Fixed typo
I have never liked a CW watch enough to want to buy one, but I do like the this vintage model a lot. The logo is a step change, not sure it works completely but overall it's a big improvement for me over the old logo. I am seriously considering buying this one.
In that case there's not much point in discussing anything you don't like or are not going to buy - a Picasso, a Rolls Royce, rap music, foie gras, etc. Forums are about discussion and giving views; the only comments which are regurgitative are the 'I like it' or 'Not for me' kind.
It seems to me this discussion about the importance of branding and positioning has been one of the most constructive in recent weeks, especially as a couple of people who really know what they are talking about (by training and experience) have made interesting, for me at least, contributions.
Maybe the next step will be two CW brands?!
One for traditional watches, and one for the hipsters?
I think some figures for sales volume etc were gleaned from the online chats Chris Ward does on the CW forum from time to time, and I seem to remember they were quite healthy.
They merged with SH last year and acquired the in house SH21 movement and they certainly seem to have enough money to keep rebranding.
I suspect they're just trying to find the magic high volume formula, and then who knows what next.
Simon it wasn't that element of discussion or criticism I was referring to, it was rather the repetitive comments that surface whenever certain brands are discussed the same as I mentioned for Rolex and Seiko.
Someone just repeating the same thing found in every single thread discussion of a particular brand is hardly a contribution. I may not like x brand of music but what would be the point of every time x brand of music is mentioned I just repeated the same thing, I would rather just discuss something I liked, had an interest in, had some knowledge of, gave reasons for liking/not liking. Life's too short.
Mark, what I found interesting was the seeming acceptance of the ChrWard logo, prior to this new one there were people saying they would never buy a CW again due to the logo (personally I didn't think much of it but it didn't stop me buying their watches) now the logo has changed again and suddenly the old logo is the preferred choice, something that made me think is it more of a comfort zone "Well I don't like this logo but I am used to it now so just don't change it again".
If that is the case then CW may not be onto such a bad thing, likewise I don't know how good or bad their sales are or if the logo had anything to do with it but it's worth noting the first watches to have the new logo are their biggest sellers the dive watches. Like the first logo it will be years before the 2nd one completely sells out and no doubt by that time the dust will settle on the new logo.
Fine, but let's be fair about it; let's disallow positive comments too. They're just as boring when trotted out repeatedly (”The quality! Won't someone think of the quality?")
From now on the only threads allowed will be strictly neutral: "Christopher Ward: I Could Take Them Or Leave Them To Be Honest". Or "Christopher Ward: They Just Don't Really Impinge On My Life In a Big Way."
"Christopher Ward: Fine For Those That Like Them."
(That's enough neutral thread titles —Ed.)
I've owned a few of their watches (first logo and second logo versions) and have nothing against them as a brand. I've only every paid sale prices and in terms of their quality i've never been blown away, nor have I been disappointed. They seem worth it at c£300 but i struggle to convince myself of most of them over £500.
The old logo never bothered me. It seemed that most of the criticism with it was based around the abbreviation of "Christopher" and therefor an easy fix. The more I look at this rebrand and the more I think about it, the more i conclude that they've made a bit of a mistake here. I'd like to see a justification of this route in plain English, possibly a brand positioning statement that actually means something other than the fluff in the Loupe magazine. Be good to see the binned ideas as there was no doubt an option that simply evolved the current brand and marque fixing the C word/Coward issue that most seemed to feel was the issue with the old logo. A simple solution of correcting the mistakes, finessing a more unique serif font with ligatures and possibly advancing the CW monogram as a support marque.
Still. All those old logo watches are in a warehouse somewhere so i look forward to picking a few up in the next sale then flipping them on eBay for the same price a few months later. Not a total loss then.
I don't think the quality of the watches is being brought into question, but when a watch looks like a cheap Kickstarter watch, it's not doing itself any favours is it?
And it does look like a Kickstarter watch:
I'm pretty sure if you asked an ordinary member of the public to differentiate between them on the grounds of quality, perceived value, luxury-ness (?), they'd struggle.
From what I have read somewhere the impression I got is that there are no immediate plans to stick the new logo/typeface on the Trident C60 range. Maybe they will see how the sales of the new C65 (which was keenly awaited for many on the CW forum) stack up against the existing C60.
My issue with this is that their constant sales on their own website presents the image not of a premium brand but of a discounter who like to have the appearance of a premium brand. I actually think in this rebranding they have been more influenced by the success of companies like Daniel Wellington than further upmarket.
Last edited by Alansmithee; 9th May 2016 at 11:56.
Agreed - I know they want market traction, but as previously said this looks like a Kickstarter or a Daniel Wellington special. The only USP at the price point seems to be the in-house designed movement, but I doubt how many people are deliberately purchasing on that alone?
Good point, and probably supports what I said about the design team in my agency being 100% non WIS and thinking watches like MVMNT, INSTRMNT and Daniel Wellington are in fact pretty upmarket. I dare say the Hello research looked more at those fashion brands than the slightly cheaper brands that appeal to WIS and that's why the rebrand seems to align with these Kickstarteresque manufacturers.
Seems CW's is paying a high price for being British.
It wouldn't attract as much derision or criticism and uninformed nitpicking if it were made in Timbuktoo. Same goes for Bremont too.
Hate the world, spite their own- what a unique formula for success:-)
I think you've hit the nail on the head there, son. They're the poor man's Bremont.
I'm Scottish, they are all foreign watch makers to me.
That's the irony, they're ditching the Britishness and especially 'London' from their watches. Look at the Waitrose watch, 'London' has gone. In future, they wish to be known as an 'anglo-swiss' brand, which of course, is what they are. Now we all know there's no real links to London, but many of the forum members from abroad, whether it be from the states (many) or elsewhere - even Edinburgh - have all commented negatively about this change and stated that was a factor in their deciding to buy into the brand. It's all a bit surreal and goes beyond the new logo, the whole positioning of the company is an issue.
Edit re: the Bremont comments - actually a few CW forum members, myself included, own a Bremont as well as a CW.
Last edited by Caller; 9th May 2016 at 18:04.
I have a very specific issue - and it's an issue only for me - as a child growing up in rural shropshire, I'd hear adverts constantly for Alan Ward's furtinture warehouse (still exists I believe) - so now when I heard the name "Christopher Ward" - it brings to mind cheap carpets.
It's funny how these things stick with you.
IMHO:
-If appealing to hipsters, as the agency + CW seem to be doing, then "London" has to be there...
-Typographically it fails regardless of the font, the dead space after ward looks terrible...
-I would prefer just "Christopher" and drop the "Ward"
-There is something there at the core "LONDON STYLE WITH SWISS PRECISION"
I would not trust the agency blurb, I rejected some agency work, re-did it myself - yet the agency still claim what a success it was in store, even though their's was never manufactured!
Last edited by 2kilo; 9th May 2016 at 20:49.
^^^ LOL
Would be nice to see SO little on a Rolex dial
M.
Not surprising; clearly it doesn't work and the home market is relishing the opportunity to slam the company harder than it ever has since its inception.
The detestation of the concept of "buying British" is remarkable when viewed from the outside. And you wonder why the Bear Pit is full of people bitching about the (continuing) death of manufacturing in the UK.
...but what do I know; I don't even like watches!
I think it did work, although perhaps not in the UK. Several people (outside of England!) cited it as a key reason for their purchase of a CW watch. Whilst they are hardly a statistically valid sample, they were nevertheless notable.
Who knows what the average non-WIS thinks. I would have thought most British non-WISs would hardly be aware that there is such a thing as a British (or Anglo-Swiss) watch company.
My only criticism of CW is that mucking around with the logos and brand images is unlikely to be a recipe for success. I still like the watches in general and don't share the opinion commonly expressed around here they are no good because they are particularly derivative. I don't think they are any more derivative then any other similar-sized watch company with its own designs. (Ironically, though, the new chief designer they took on last year has actually said something along the lines of them being derivative, although he didn't use those words).
It is remarkable and desperately sad. But I think there are also reasons for it: There is a national memory that British manufacturing used to be excellent at one time. It was probably true, once upon a time. But a world war which bankrupted the country, post-war austerity, followed by nationalisations, management-union warfare, excessive cost-cutting, short-termism in strategy, and so on, led to a clear decline in standards in British-manufactured mass market goods. Public perception and perhaps manufacturing quality (or quality versus price, at least) have not recovered. Furthermore, those who advocate "buy British" are sometimes now even accused of being xenophobic -- it has become positive politically correct to favour other countries over one's own country.
We are still global contenders in music, fashion, and design, - and the label of British, UK, and London add significant weight to any product, especially on a global stage IMHO...
CW's actions / ethos seems confused:
-Hire a fashion / hipster agency
-Redesign brand with a more "fashion" look
-Remove London, the strongest "fashion" endorsement
-All placed on faux vintage look watch
Seems to me the agency don't really know the category that well, and probably spin that as a positive. Which is wrong IMHO - you need experts / craftsmen that can break the mould [in a similar manner to the impressionist movement]...
Just because a watch brand sell ugly watches, with methods akin to Sunday Supplement, doesn’t mean we all hate our country.
Even they can’t satisfy themselves, as the re-brand after re-brand shows.
Not such a bad idea. At least not compared to two new logos in a short period of time.
I am sure that is the case but I still think that two rebrands/logos in such a short period of time is hardly a sign of success.
As I say, I think it's all a matter of comparison. The old was disliked but the new one is hated, so old wins out in comparison.
I got it right about the Chr.Ward logo, so my prediction is that the new logo will not last long wither. ;-)
Not a fan of the new logo..
Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk
Interesting. Back when the Chr.Ward logo was introduced, Christopher Ward claimed that one of the reasons for introducing it was to help avoid "brand drift". If they really intend to keep the old logo in production alongside the new then brand drift would no longer seem to concern them.
Certainly seems like it, doesn't it, looking from the outside in.
Dropping "London" is just crass.
It's so important in some brand images they use it to enforce credibility and desire - London, Paris, New York.
And then think of Morgan and Triumph. Half the appeal is because they wave the flag.
I think what is meant is the old logo will be slowly phased out like the original logo was.
...Peckham.
.... This time next year Rodeny, we'll be millionaires......
Brilliant
Just need a few Albanian car stereos now.
I would agree with that. In some instances it can be beneficial for someone with little experience or knowledge to come in and totally revolutionise an industry or sector. Other times an almost encyclopaedic knowledge of the industry and a the behaviour of the specific consumer is essential. The later was needed here.
I wonder if the CW forum was used in the agencies research and development. I'd feel like i'd won the lottery if any of my clients had a resource of customer opinion and insight like that.
Reading the (almost) universal derision on the CW forum, it seems pretty obvious Hello, the design agency, neglected to tap into the opinions and thoughts of the CW faithful. This, together with the fact the owners of CW opted to work with an agency who proudly declare themselves to be 'trouble makers' who rebuild and reposition brands to encourage fast growth, would suggest that watch enthusiasts and collectors aren't where the brand sees its core market and that they're planning to move into a more mainstream, fashion-watch position.
I doubt it very much!
I'm not sure how much use the forum really is when it comes to designing watches with mass market appeal. I recall seeing Christopher Ward being quoted on the forum saying that although he values the forum and the loyal buyers, the preferences of forum members are not a good guide to the preferences of the mass market.
In other words, if you only intend to sell to WISs then forums are great but if you intend to sell to the mass market then forums don't tell you much about how to design a watch (or brand or logo).
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
