You'll like this.....not a lot

[RAJEN]

We are seeing the reverse of the typical Breitling thread-
I don't normally like Breitling but I like this one:-)

[sean]

Whether you like the rebrand, reading the rationale behind it is enlightening.

http://www.01134.co.uk/christopher-ward/

Christopher Ward didn’t come to us with a brief — they came with an appetite for change. We are pretty straight talking — as are they — and they liked that. We had to get to the core of what these guys were all about — they were disruptive, real, no-nonsense people, and their new brand needed to reflect this.

Note that the following image is "bucking the predictable convention of watch advertising."



And that the logo is

crafted for reproduction at minute sizes.

The key to this rebrand was that it started within the business, it wasn’t imposed — to impose a brand, no matter how clever, wouldn’t be sustainable. The overriding response has been extremely positive within the business, and the now branding better reflects the feeling that most people have that they are part of more than ‘just another watch company’.

[Seamaster73]

I Would wear it with joy.

Smack? Tar? Crystal meth?

You'll have to tell us if we're going to help you.

[MarkO]

I don't hate it but it is underwhelming - not sure what they were going for here

[jools]

I don't particularly like the logo but the watch itself looks nice. At least there's less text than on the average Rolex.

[UKMike]

I looked at the previous logo and thought "It will never be worse than this" - now I admit I was very wrong.

The new one is appalling and they've even put it in the wrong place. S**t design.
Could they please make it available without the logo? Even if it costs more!
I foresee plenty of these at half price in the next Christmas sale.

[PJ S]

Smack? Tar? Crystal meth?

You'll have to tell us if we're going to help you.

He’s not ready for help yet.
When he wants it, he knows we’re here for him.

[UKMike]

If Christopher is prepared to change his Christian name I think "Awk Ward" would fit better on the dial.

[beechcustom]

CW rebranding = 'Happy Shopper' Nomos.

[Fianoglach]

nice looking watch terrible company logo . looks like something from kickstarter

[PaulSim]

The CW forum hate the rebrand which is a disaster for a boutique watch maker. If the loyal following ain't that loyal then there are plenty of other makers that will appeal no doubt. Gotta agree, it makes it look swatch or ice like or as our learned friend said "it's like moving dog shit to another part of the garden"

[hoopsontoast]

I have to say, I REALLY like the look of the 'new?' C5 Malvern Slimline Square, pity its not an auto.

[robert75]

I have to say, I REALLY like the look of the 'new?' C5 Malvern Slimline Square, pity its not an auto.

While the logo doesn't bother me the text "Slimline" Does I really wish they would just drop that otherwise yes, its a really nice looking watch I personally prefer it handwind to automatic.

Regarding the new trident watch I actually quite like it (even in school uniform colours) it reminds me of the Halios tropic watch. Take out the automatic from the dial and its a pretty decent watch.

[SimonK]

I rather like it, in fact it is probably the first CW watch I've ever seen that I liked. Not keen on comedy second-hand tails, but the case size, date position and hand and index design are spot on for me. As for the logo position, several brands put the logo at 9 o'clock in the seventies - Mido, Zodiac and Orient, to name but three - and so the idea of CW doing so on a watch they call 'vintage' seems perfectly reasonable.

[2kilo]

Emperor's new coat, agency sales pitch probably backed up with "focus group" research from the school run...
"Disruptive" seems to be the on-trend brand buzzword taking over from decades of "funky"...

aaaaaaahhhhh I hate design agencies and I am one :)

Whether you like the rebrand, reading the rationale behind it is enlightening.

http://www.01134.co.uk/christopher-ward/



Note that the following image is "bucking the predictable convention of watch advertising."



And that the logo is

[mowflow]

Upon arriving home last night the latest copy of the CW magazine they send out was waiting for me. There is an article on the rebrand, so as a creative director and professional designer of some 20 odd years I read this with interest.

CW have perfectly understood what branding means, it's value and the relationship they need to have with an agency. They have went about the process in the correct way (although a lack of brief is silly). How the agency arrived at this new solution is quite apparent although much of the rationale is the stock BS we designers wheel out as a sales pitch for our ideas. What seems apparent to me is that there has been a lack of consideration of the current products and the customers perception of the brand. The new branding may well reflect the character and desire within CW to appear to be doing things differently but their products don't say the same and subsequently buyers do not perceive them this way.

I think the branding works well in advertising but my personal opinion is that it feels rather unoriginal and forgettable. Developing a brand pattern and a simple typographic marque is a very straight forward and typical solution. I will be interested to see if CW start rationalising their product range to reflect the personality of the new branding although that seems a huge undertaking that would require a cull/refresh of some long term strong sellers such as the c60 which just don't fit with the new brand statement.

It will be interesting to see how this pans out. I suspect the marque in particular will need to develop to be more versatile. I don't agree with the statement about reproduction at tiny proportions, I feel the left alignment and imbalance between the 2 lines will cause issue and consistent placement at 9 o clock, something they state as a staple of the brand is going to be difficult. I'll be interested to see how this pattern they mention gets applied and how it looks. The only suggestion of it I see looks like a stylised union jack. Which seems a bit ukip to me.

Rebrands are rarely welcomed when first revealed but over time they grow into themselves and into the hearts of many. I have to say that I can't really see where this one is going without a complete change of direction on the products.

[Der Amf]

^^^^in light of what you wrote I scrolled up to look at the square slimline, and tried to imagine the new logo, squeezed in at nine o'clock. It wasn't a happy moment.

[iamvice]

Christopher ward... so weird man. I a not sure the appeal of their watches is. Sorry Warders.

[AM94]

How the agency arrived at this new solution is quite apparent although much of the rationale is the stock BS we designers wheel out as a sales pitch for our ideas. What seems apparent to me is that there has been a lack of consideration of the current products and the customers perception of the brand.

Having just gone through the painful process of a rebrand, which began with listening to pitches from four design agencies, this made me chuckle. Mowflow, hats off for calling out the 'stock BS': all professions have their stereotypical image but after having to endure four batches of BS, I'm not sure I could stand another lesson on the meaning of colours, shapes, etc, and emotive designer-talk.

You don't have to be a creative to see how misjudged this re-imaging of Chris Ward is. Whilst I find some of the imagery they are using excellent, too much of it is incongruous with where the product is currently placed in the market. If they are attempting to increase the price point, this looks like a fail to me and if they wanted to alienate the current one, it looks quite successful (especially when you consider how poorly the CW forum have responded to it).

[murkeywaters]

Mr Ward please just drop your name for the sake of your product which is very decent watches..

Yes I can understand the proud feeling you must have owning your own watch company but there comes a time when someone needs to tell you that Christopher Ward is just a normal humdrum every day name that looks so wrong on a watch to the point it's boring and owners are probably embarrassed to say they own a "Christopher Ward"

[Mcb2007]

It's a bit bit like moving dog shit to a different part of your lawn.

Not a bad looking watch, but this says it all regarding the logo .lol

[StuartGR]

I own a first-generation (i.e. first-logo) Trident GMT because I wanted a GMT beater for various trips and travels, and I have to say it has been a sterling performer; an entirely derivative design but a well-built solid lump of a thing that gets regular wrist time. I've toyed with the idea of other CW watches since then but I have found the revised branding off-putting and this further change leaves me pretty cold indeed. I also read the CW magazine that dropped through the letterbox yesterday and agree that much of the spiel designed to sell the change to existing customers is re-purposed bovine excrement. My first thought was actually "how much stock must they have lying around that now needs to be re-worked or flogged off for a burton in the next sale?"

Poor show all round.

SGR

[jimmer42]

New logo in rebrand:



38mm Trident Vintage

It's a shame because instead of that branding if that said omega or Tudor in the appropriate position on the dial many people would be wetting themselves and statements like 'next on my list' would be all over the thread........they'd need to get rid of the stupid trident though

[SteveR]

It just looks cheap. Like a toy watch almost.

There's something about it that says, to me, not to take it too seriously. I quite liked the look of some of their watches, but the pricing was just a bit high IMO. If the prices remain like they are, and they now have this logo.... I'll not even give them a second glance

[Seamaster73]

As a brand, they're doomed to live in the space between the watches dodgy foreigners try to sell you in motorway service carparks, and the ones punted in the back pages of the Sunday supplements. As Archie would say, "dogshit".

[andrew]

It's a shame because instead of that branding if that said omega or Tudor in the appropriate position on the dial many people would be wetting themselves and statements like 'next on my list' would be all over the thread........they'd need to get rid of the stupid trident though

Yep. It's amazing, how much it's not just about the brand, it's only about the brand.

[mowflow]

Having just gone through the painful process of a rebrand, which began with listening to pitches from four design agencies, this made me chuckle. Mowflow, hats off for calling out the 'stock BS': all professions have their stereotypical image but after having to endure four batches of BS, I'm not sure I could stand another lesson on the meaning of colours, shapes, etc, and emotive designer-talk.

You don't have to be a creative to see how misjudged this re-imaging of Chris Ward is. Whilst I find some of the imagery they are using excellent, too much of it is incongruous with where the product is currently placed in the market. If they are attempting to increase the price point, this looks like a fail to me and if they wanted to alienate the current one, it looks quite successful (especially when you consider how poorly the CW forum have responded to it).

Increasing price point is an interesting one. Their prices have slowly increased over the years with a notable and justifiable jump when they acquired and started producing an in house movement.

The big issue they have with price is that a modest price is what CW is built on. The whole "cut out the middle man" thing. They don't outrightly say it in the article but reading into the "industry disruptor" statement they clearly still see this as their USP.

I suspect the rebrand is either an attempt to address the criticism they have taken from many angles or it is part of a whole product line revolution. The former seems most likely although it's odd they almost dismiss their own "me too" products in the article.

[ktmog6uk]

i've never got why he doesn't just go with "Ward" at 12, maybe with the model name underneath. Out of the three designs used so far the first was by far the best in my opinion.

[Der Amf]

^^^^this. And with only four letters the designer has enough space to introduce a nice signature touch, eg the ornament of the first letter like in the original Stowa design (a "W" offers plenty of options)

[mark.wilo13]

It is an improvement but I hate the 9 o'clock positioning.


Mark Williams on IPhone Taptalk

[markrlondon]

I assume that's meant in the Yes, Minister! sense of the word "brave"?

Correct. :-)

the logo's typeface is so out of character with the rest of the watch that it's horrible.

Yes, this is the problem I see. The new logo simply seems incompatible with 'classic' style watches.

As has already been said, it is very Kickstater-ish.

I generally quite like CW watches and it pleases me that a British watch company is (hopefully, although I begin to wonder now) doing well. But their branding/logo changes have been awful in my opinion.

The only other comparison I could think of was the logo changes with Kemmner watches but as he is very much a micro brand selling to a WIS audience I don't think it matters very much for him.

I agree: Kemmner and CW sell to entirely different audiences.

All being said I question how often you look at a logo on a watch.

As much as any other part of the watch, surely. It is part and parcel of the design of the watch,, as much as the case, hands, rest of the dial, movement, and so on. Indeed, if it is important enough to change then it is important enough to be looked at as part of the design of the watch.

Emperor's new coat, agency sales pitch probably backed up with "focus group" research from the school run...
"Disruptive" seems to be the on-trend brand buzzword taking over from decades of "funky"...

Yes, I agree that the design agency's spiel in the 'Loupe' magazine was vapid bullstuff.

[markrlondon]

The CW forum hate the rebrand which is a disaster for a boutique watch maker. If the loyal following ain't that loyal then there are plenty of other makers that will appeal no doubt.

I don't think this is actually all that big a deal. CW is not a boutique watch dealer at all -- they are competing in the mainstream. Christopher Ward has pointed out (quoted on CW forum) that the preferences of the WIS fans on the forum do not represent the watches that sell best in general. In other words, WIS preferences are distinctly different to mass market preferences.

Nevertheless, I still think this new logo is not suitable for the mainstream, unless CW is seriously intending to target an entirely new market (one that, as far as I can tell, doesn't generally spend CW-money on watches).

[markrlondon]

What seems apparent to me is that there has been a lack of consideration of the current products and the customers perception of the brand. The new branding may well reflect the character and desire within CW to appear to be doing things differently but their products don't say the same and subsequently buyers do not perceive them this way.

[...] I will be interested to see if CW start rationalising their product range to reflect the personality of the new branding although that seems a huge undertaking that would require a cull/refresh of some long term strong sellers such as the c60 which just don't fit with the new brand statement.

They took on a new chief designer last year and it does seem (based upon what has been said and reading between the lines) that the aim is to create a new range of watches. If so, then it seems to be very brave indeed (in the 'Yes Minister' sense again). Throwing away what made you as successful as you are is an interesting strategy.

One might wonder if things have not been going as well as they seemed at CW.

[craniotes]

Regards,
Adam

[Tooks]

If I look at the history of the people behind the CW brand, I suspect that the plan all along is to build a huge business and then flog it off, pocketing the profit. Maybe this is part of that strategy?

They are in the mass market, and doing it very successfully. They are building the business, sales, awareness and revenue. It's difficult to argue they haven't been successful, even if what they're about turns you off.

I'll admit my knowledge and view of advertising agencies isn't extensive and isn't all that complimentary, but I can imagine a fly on the wall documentary about the rebranding would end up looking like an episode of W1A...

I was a fan of CW watches, over the years I've owned/tried about a dozen from the £150 to £1k price points, and I liked some of them very much indeed. They lost me a bit with the first rebrand, and this one leaves me even colder.

I don't own any CW watches now, there is no room for one even in my modestly numbered collection. Quality control is lacking, I recall poor dial printing/case flaws/misaligned bezels and chapter rings/timekeeping issues and strap problems. The fantastic customer service resolved the issues or refunded me very quickly, so no issues there, but after a while you stop being so understanding. I've read that returns due to faults are less than 1%, but that wasn't my experience, I must have been very unlucky.

In the end, that's what it's about for me, when a watch company is all about the brand rather than the watch itself, I lose interest. I own Breitling and Omega watches amongst others, and they do a fair bit of marketing most would agree, but at their core they are still watchmakers who by and large put together some very well made watches, and they don't rebrand every five minutes. That makes me feel comfortable sinking a fair bit of cash into one, and it could be that I'm not a target CW customer, which I'm also comfortable with.

I wonder at times whether CW is just a huge vanity exercise?

There will no doubt be a blowout 'old logo' sale sometime soon, to make way for the new stuff. It must be very confusing for visitors to the new website to start browsing and come across old logo watches alongside the new stuff.

[alfat33]

... that Christopher Ward is just a normal humdrum every day name that looks so wrong on a watch to the point it's boring and owners are probably embarrassed to say they own a "Christopher Ward"

It's a good job that Enzo Ferrari ignored advice like that - I guess he realised that plenty of people would be happy to drive round in a 'Smith' if it was good enough. Actually that's not a bad name for a watch...

For all the analysis and psuedo-science, isn't this logo just different from what they have done before? It's OK to try something different. Most people won't like it at first. If it's any good, it will last and seem inspired, if in a couple of years not enough people like it then it will change again. A lot of people here seem not to like it today but I wonder in a couple of years of that will be the same.

Steve Jobs was asked how he could be so sure his new designs were right. He didn't say 'we rely on years of design principles and we test designs with loads of people'. He said 'Taste.' And he meant his.

[markrlondon]

If I look at the history of the people behind the CW brand, I suspect that the plan all along is to build a huge business and then flog it off, pocketing the profit. Maybe this is part of that strategy?

Undoubtedly on all points. The question is not so much whether or not this is part of the strategy; it is surely about whether or not the execution of the strategy in terms of logos and branding is very good and likely to be successful.

In as much as the new branding seems to be designed to appeal to the kind of people employed by the Hello design agency, who are not nowadays typically expensive/luxury watch buyers (if they buy a watch at all it is surely likely to be a smartwatch), it does not seem to me to be likely to succeed. It's all wrong for the luxury watch niche, surely.

Let's face it, CW is no longer in the value watch niche.

They are in the mass market, and doing it very successfully. They are building the business, sales, awareness and revenue. It's difficult to argue they haven't been successful, even if what they're about turns you off.

I previously thought that but two rebrands/new logos in only a few years might suggest otherwise.

[markrlondon]

For all the analysis and psuedo-science, isn't this logo just different from what they have done before? It's OK to try something different.

Yes, it is just different. But "just different" is rarely neutral; it's usually either better or worse than what went before. Presumably the management of CW think it is better. I think they are very likely to be mistaken in their market. If they were selling smartwatches then maybe the new branding would work; when selling luxury mechanical (and quartz) watches... no, it's all wrong.

It's ok to try something different but it is unwise in business to break what has made you successful so far.

Most people won't like it at first. If it's any good, it will last and seem inspired, if in a couple of years not enough people like it then it will change again. A lot of people here seem not to like it today but I wonder in a couple of years of that will be the same.

I suspect it won't last any longer than the last logo. Many people pointed out that the old logo was rubbish. Seems they were right to say that it was rubbish, otherwise it wouldn't have been replaced so soon. The same people seem likely to be right again.

Steve Jobs was asked how he could be so sure his new designs were right. He didn't say 'we rely on years of design principles and we test designs with loads of people'. He said 'Taste.' And he meant his.

He did not, however, say "poor taste" or "inappropriate taste".

[bitfield]

Pinched from the CW forum:

[markrlondon]

^^^ Oh dear!

[patrick]

I'm sure the watches are well made and some of the designs are OK,but it just shouts vanity project.

[OldHooky]

I hope CW quickly realise that however good their watches might be, a crap logo will destroy their chances.

A logo is critical. Swap a Rolex coronet for a penis and just see what happens.

[alfat33]

...some sensible stuff...

All fair points Mark. I'm not saying anyone should like what CW have done, its all subjective and open to criticism or compliment. But by the same token, let's not dress it up as more than that.

Incidently, as we know, at one point Apple thought Steve Jobs' judgement was so poor that they fired him, thus proving that taste is indeed subjective but that the majority view isn't always the correct one in the long term.

[spluurfg]

The odd thing is they already have a perfectly good logo that they use on the crown...

[andrew]

I hope CW quickly realise that however good their watches might be, a crap logo will destroy their chances.

A logo is critical. Swap a Rolex coronet for a penis and just see what happens.

Well, Omega already tried that and it does no harm (ref. the threads about the cockenballs at the 12 of every Speedmaster). Must be because of who makes it, maybe ;).

[robert75]

As much as any other part of the watch, surely. It is part and parcel of the design of the watch,, as much as the case, hands, rest of the dial, movement, and so on. Indeed, if it is important enough to change then it is important enough to be looked at as part of the design of the watch.

I suppose that depends on the buyer, I personally thought the previous logo change was a pointless move likewise Stowa moving from their classic logo to their more "Modern" one (Its interesting, looking at the new CW website I see some comparisons lots of people in long white coats holding watch parts, very student/young person oriented) As much as I disliked both logo changes I cant remember the last time I actually looked at the logo on either of these watches the importance or relevance I feel is probably more to old customers than new ones (most of whom will be non WIS types and probably wont care either way)

The most interesting thing I found on the CW forum was the discussion about them dropping London from the dial. Several non UK members pointed out that having London on the dial was what brought them to the watch which made me think the whole idea of having ChrWard was specifically for the non UK market this logo change is nothing more than opening up another market to them. Its no surprise the first watches to come out with the new logo are their "diver/sports" watches their biggest selling and ones that probably sell to the younger buyer.

[AKM]

Bit of faux aged lume, case reminiscent of a Sinn and the 'disruptive' new logo which looks a lot like the one used on the Mondane Helvetica:



The easy criticism of Chr Ward is that most of the designs are derived rather than contributing anything new. I think that they need to work out what their brand values are, key design aspects to maintain and who their target market is; their output seems to be all over the place.

Sent from my XT1562 using Tapatalk

[bitfield]

The easy criticism of Chr Ward is that most of the designs are derived rather than contributing anything new.

That's not necessarily a bad thing in itself. Most of Eddie's watches are homages to classic military and dive watches, but they're subtly updated and upgraded, built with superior modern components, and finished to a high standard. He then sells them for a very fair price (albeit only for a few hours on Tuesday mornings).

In comparison, CW seems to be all over the place with bland homages and quirky design elements, like an over-enthusiastic art student who hasn't yet learned the value of restraint, and they're about twice as expensive as they should be. Not content with that, they keep flip-flopping on the brand and logo. I don't see them breaking away from their image as the Franklin Mint of watches.

[RobDad]

I genuinely don't get the CW brand at all. Even though I've been on this forum for years they seem to have crept into various threads but I don't think I've ever seen them for sale in a bricks and mortar retailer. and I've always thought they look like something you'd get in a Sunday supplement for a couple of hundred quid paid over instalments. Or yet another derivative fashion brand like guess or ice watches, but at the more 'john lewis' end of the market which may well be unfair. Where can you buy them, or am I just looking in the wrong jewellers windows?!?

[Der Amf]

The company was set up expressly as an internet only brand. There's an interview with one of the founders online somewhere from several years back. Quite enlightening as to the whys and wherefores of the company. I'll try to find it. Vanity project it is not, all about the business possibilities.