Good lord..
"Kurono is pleased to introduce the new Kurono 青磁:SEIJI - a limited 388-piece release in a celadon-like blue-green lacquer dial finish in Kurono’s iconic 37mm case. Kurono 青磁:SEIJI is not a women's watch, but men won't be able to buy it. Please allow us to explain.
While it can be worn by both men and women alike, Kurono 青磁:SEIJI is a conscious effort to increase the diversity of Kurono collectors and is an extension of Hajime Asaoka's desire to make his designs a lot more accessible. We have no doubt that due to its uniqueness, male collectors will want to acquire it and pair it with a black or darker strap for their own use. But we are making this process a whole lot harder. Sales will wholly be via a closed allocation process via an auditable fair-ballot automated system.
70% of all allocations will be reserved for #kuronocontributors and existing customers. All existing customers will be entitled to submit one nomination for a female to acquire the watch, with nominations by Kurono Contributors and existing female owners given higher allocation priority. Each nomination must be accompanied by the nominee's SNS (social network service) account such as Instagram, Twitter, or Line, for verification purpose. SNS accounts setup specifically for the purchase of Seiji shall be automatically disqualified.
Expression of Interest forms will be automatically emailed* to all Contributors and existing customers on 26th August 2021. Should there be more nominations than allocations, an automated ballot will be conducted.
30% of all allocations will be available to the public. Public registration of interest will be available on www.kuronotokyo.com from 3rd Sep [2230hrs JST] to 4th Sep [2230hrs JST]
Kurono 青磁:SEIJI is limited to 388 pieces, with fulfillment in October, but - MEN WON'T GET IT
Sales will wholly be via a closed allocation process.
Kurono 青磁:SEIJI is priced at JPY 197,000 / USD 1,793 (excluding applicable taxes /VAT), and will be fulfilled in October 2021."
Weird. While the intention of diversifying the hobby is laudable , making it less limited, rather than arbitrarily limited to women seems like a better way to go. Wouldn’t take much to get the watch ordered for ones partner and then keeping it.
Also the comment regarding men wanting to put the watch on a black or brown strap seems to rather undermine the sentiment they were going for.
Slow progress I guess
Good on them.
I like that they're trying to get women into their watches that not automatically offering ones that are minuscule and/or dripping in zirconia/diamonds as an afterthought to their standard range.
I except that it'll cause some "well if theyre offering watches that I cant buy then i'm not buying anything of theirs and they can see how they like THAT!" puffing from the regularly hard done by but i'm sure they'll cope.
It’s a nice concept it’s the fact it’s wrapped in vomit inducing guff that I have a problem with.Originally Posted by verv
If it was a genuine effort at diversity then good on them, just sounds like how to get a few more mugs on our hamster wheel to me though
The Kurono customers will be able to nominate a female to purchase one comment was interesting
Last edited by robert75; 24th August 2021 at 12:54.
Find me a watch launch that isn't full of guff.
It’s the level of vomit inducing guff I guess I have a problem with. There are tolerable levels and then there is this
388 women. There's got to be less-contrived ways, surely?
I like the sentiment but find it a little condescending. Surely if a woman wants to buy a watch, she will go through the process and buy it.
Most of the woman I know just aren’t that interested in watches, even those who appreciate them for what they are.
70% going to existing owners. Another way of saying spend history is important.
It will help women who want to buy the watch to get it if you remove a large percentage of competition from the scramble that new releases tend to create.
How does it work for those men who identify as women? Or for the women who identify as men?
No matter what, I feel offended.
Just seems weird to me and potentially a cynical ploy to jump aboard the equality bandwagon. Doesn't the whole diversity and inclusion thing aim to address inequality? If so, what disadvantage are they trying to address that a woman faces when buying a watch over the internet when compared to a man? I'd assume there are less women in this interest purely because of choice, not any accessibility issue?
I still put that down to an interest thing though. The scramble isn't physical...it's sitting there hovering over a computer at a specific time on your own.
I’m offended because you feel offended.
Imagine if you will telling a feminist she couldn't buy a watch because it was for Men, light tampon fuse and stand well back.
With apologies to Gilbert O'Sullivan's two dads:
'In matters horological,
Kurono favours biological,
ToFor the Japanese vendor,
It'll be based on gender.'
Please feel free to add lines or verses if you're touched (not like that!) by the Muse.
Last edited by jwg663; 24th August 2021 at 16:57. Reason: Scansion...
______
Jim.
If you've got a Dick
You'll not hear it tick
We have a woke agenda
These are only for Brenda...
Last edited by Vanguard; 24th August 2021 at 15:27.
I don't particularly associate it with that.
Whats equality about saying we've made this watch for women to wear and we're selling it only to women? Nothing.
Its not equal, its not diverse, and its not inclusive. Its quite the opposite.
Women make up a lower percentage of purchasers because theyre not particularly well catered to with the choice being mens watches, or scaled down / bejewelled / quartz / afterthought type models that exist to "compliment" the male-centred manufacturer lines.
The number of women buying luxury/mechanical watches is increasing, their prevalence on male dominated forums is not, which makes them appear virtually non existent through a lack of representation. They arent.
And yes, you can say "uh well, all they have to do is sit at a computer at a certain time"
I have no issue doing that because my work is online based.
MrsV though? No chance.
If she was up against 98% male buyers all sitting at their computers at a certain time because the watch has been forum hyped?
Upgrade that to really no effing chance.
Remove the male buyers, back to a chance, albeit still not a big one as there are only 388 of them.
I am a feminist, and I DO buy watches for men.
If there was a watch that came out which was marketed and sold to only men, I wouldnt care.
Do you not remember "equality has to stop somewhere", "official supplier to men", "our titanium models are tough on women cos theyre only available to men"?
A brand makes one specific watch for women and here already the complaining about cynicism, equality, inequality, diversity, bandwagons, and feminists lighting tampons.
And Kurono say that men won't get it. Theyre not wrong, in fact the double meaning word play is sublime.
So gender discrimination is OK now, I'm so confused and there was Me thinking it was not OK anymore to tell someone what they could or couldn't purchase based on what was between their legs.
Whats that you say? Not discrimination as long as it benefits Women, got it now, of course silly Me and my maverick sense of fairness and inclusivity for all.
Verv,
My cynicism is regarding the brand in general not that they are selling to women only, even the marketing of "Find a female and pass on her social media so we can confirm she is real" Sounds even more like a watch ad from the 70s. Why not sell to women who want the watch full stop not their "Kurono customers who happen to have a wife/gf/partner who wants a watch"
Paulin watches are actually made by two women with hand made dials, Anordain make some fantastic enamel dial watches (Sadly it looks like their smaller case watches will no longer be made) Both I prefer to the Kurono/Ming feeding frenzy arent you so lucky for us to allow you to buy from us (and now arent you lucky to know a bloke who bought from us)
Sex discrimination. Not gender.
I'm starting to feel the deep sense of outrage at you not being able to buy one of 388 watches that you don't want so if you'd like to wire me the funds, I can apply to buy one on your behalf and ship it over and we can beat them at their own game in the name of inclusivity.
Plenty references on HV.
I'm too old to know the difference between sex and gender, I always thought they were the same thing. If gender is a construct though why do they insist on taking all the hormones?
Anyway as you correctly pointed out I have no desire to buy the watch but I will defend the right of anyone Man, Woman or Potato who does.
Its the double standards that I find abhorrent.
Theyre asking people to nominate female buyers (and authenticate that rather than David Smith paying as D Smith and pretending his name is Delilah), and offering the watch to their existing 5% of female customers.
I'm sure that those men who are outraged enough or determined enough to fox the system will do so in order to gain some sort of satisfaction at doing so, but I think the idea in its purest form is rather nice and extends a hand towards female buyers.
I certainly read their email and thought that the acknowledgement of womens roles in society was well intended as is the gesture of exclusivity towards women who may otherwise be snaffled out of the supply chain by the other 95% of customers.
Its a strategy designed to appeal to women and tbh, I think it will.
The majority of men will be largely either unmoved or get involved by nominating or targeting their female partners, and there will no doubt be a few likely to vow never to touch the brand again for the audacity of offering a watch to women and excluding them. Maybe theyre calculated as being an acceptable loss.
I'm all for this. Fair play to Kurono.
Men have unfettered access to literally ALL watches. Watches are almost exclusively designed for men, marketed to men, consumed by men, and discussed by men.
A man can have any watch he wants. Access is unlimited.
Women don't have that. I have it because I largely DGAF what men think to me or my watches. Its a freedom that not all enjoy.
When there are threads on here where women are wearing mens watches, there is always a queue of men ready to complain that it looks too big, or not feminine enough, or 101 reasons why "she" shouldnt be wearing that watch when there are smaller datejusts available that are much more "suitable".
Many women are constrained by watch size, some are constrained because their watch taste isnt acceptable according to their partners, and some are constrained because they dont want quartz, or they dont want 28mm, or they dont want diamonds, or they dont want two tone, and they dont want something thats a condensed version of a current production "mens" watch. The range of watches for women is absolutely minuscule compared to the variety that men get to enjoy because theyre catered to fully when women buyers have always been a bit of an afterthought.
Women have been offered 388 single watches that are NOT for you, and you find that "abhorrent double standards".
And you have absolutely no interest in the watch.
Its kinda sad that you dont want women to have a drop in the ocean to themselves.
What a load of bullocks…
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
What a load of crap. If you want women to buy your watch, design a watch that only a woman would wear. Not rocket science.
Or if you’re in the business of selling watches, sell watches to whoever you can instead of picking and choosing your customers. Daft concept, and terrible looking watch anyway (imo)
Hmm. Human beings all have wrists regardless of their sexuality, gender whatever. It’s what attaches our hands to our arms. Some are thin, some less so. My own are nearly 9 inches around, and as a result a lot of watches simply won’t fit. Is this sizeism? Is it wrong to be a large framed man (I suspect it probably is) - do I complain I can’t wear the diddy little watches made for the more slender wristed? Nope. And how can a company ‘allow’ only a certain gender to buy their product based upon what, their genitals??!? - if they make a willy watch, maybe just sell it to the boys. But it wouldn’t be much good as my trousers and pants would get in the way…Mind you a small watch on a tiny Nato…..I may be onto something!!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by RobDad; 24th August 2021 at 21:11.
I suspect if they'd just call it a womens watch they would've avoided the radical insecurity that making a watch for women that chaps can't buy appears to generate.
Patek choose their customers.
Rolex choose their customers.
RM choose their customers.
AP choose their customers.
Mmm mmm.. great catch mate.. wear it in good health.. mmm mmmm... lovely mate.
A small Japanese watch brand choosing their customers and specifying women? Outrageous. Crap. My genitals, my persecuted genitals.
Oh I see what you mean - they choose rich knobs…..is this really something you’re getting upset about or you even think is a real issue? I just genuinely find it a bit peculiar. Nobody is being persecuted, nobody feels insecure - it all just seems a bit silly to me tbh?!?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
As a (former) Kurono customer
I suspect women that are into watches will be intelligent enough to decide which watches interest them, rather than going for an exclusive opportunity.
As an opportunity, it isn’t even that exclusive as 70% is allocated to existing contributors or customers. I’m not sure if Hajime Asaoka is truly attempting to widen ownership, or is doing some contemporary virtue signalling, but I’m not sure it truly matters.
It looks like I will be sent an expression of interest form on Saturday, and if I(as a man) wanted to be in with a chance, I would just apply through Mrs H. She couldn’t care about watches, but would be happy to facilitate if I wanted one. So I don’t think it’s hard for (men) to get one as an existing customer.
Is it all worth it? I sold mine within a week, so make of that what you will.
Dave
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Do you honestly think that the “previous” customers will not propose a close friend or relative and then flog it on for profit?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The fact we are all talking about this means I suspect that Asaoka-San has achieved exactly what he set out to achieve.
Absolutely!
We have to ask Eddie to make a watch for the over 50s.
I think this is the key point, alot of FOMO outrage posts about re Kurono’s allocation of these watches, the gender aspect just gives them another excuse to throw their toys out the pram, because they are denied something they feel entitled too.
Funny how times have changed since i first posted about their original release which was met as a very expensive art deco Miyota, without the hype (profiteering) i wonder how much people would actually care how they were marketed.
One thing that might resonate better if like the original series of watches where a portion of the proceeds went to charity, a portion of this run went to support women’s charities.
Massive miss for me. This is the sort of nonsense that would put me off the brand...
(1) Blatant discrimination
(2) Incredibly condescending to Women (asking the guys with spend history to 'nominate a female' who then has to share her Instagram account? wtf?)
(3) Positioning their selling of expensive watches to people as some sort of a gift...
Ugh, hard miss.
What a load of bollocks.
Couldn't agree more.
Given the membership here is almost entirely male I think it's fair to say our views on the female-only aspect will be bias to a degree whether we like it or not.
The aspect that was of more surprise to me really was the vetting process they've outlined. 'Expression of Interest' sounds depressingly familiar, but proof of gender specifically via evidence of a social media account (as opposed to a copy of ID, for example)? I'm a fan of the brand, but the cynical side of me suspects a milking (no pun) of those ladies who do end up becoming owners, given the brand's adept use of social channels for its marketing.
That's problem with women, so emotional. Would a round of babychams turn those frowns upsidedown?
Absolutely not and ive never indicated that I might.
I think it will be bought by women or their male partners, some may be kept, and others will be flipped in exactly the same way that their other watches are.
This does of course lead to the fact that any of you could get one at some point should you so desire just like any other wanted watch, and the only change to the normal life cycle of watches in this instance is that the first pair of hands to own it on paper will be a woman.
Again, its a nice gesture, its not going to be enforceable in the long run, and some are still getting the hump because theres on particular watch out there out of all of them that have been reserved to show appreciation to female wearers and invite them into the community.
I will give them the benifit of the doubt. They probably mean well and some of the BS they came up with is because of the inherent difficulties in verifying the authenticity of the person nominated, the current climate of flipping for profit etc
The end result is the process looks botched up and gives the impression they are a little too full of themselves. Doesn’t take away from the fact that the intention is good.
It’s the old ‘it’s discrimination unless it’s against men who have been discriminating for centuries’ argument. Nope. It’s just discrimination. Actually it’s cheesy, naff marketing and I’m not remotely offended by it. But stepping back for a moment, it’s discrimination pure and simple. If society is ever going to progress, discrimination needs to be called out in whichever form it takes, and saying ‘well you don’t like it aimed at you, do you’ is frankly childish.
I’ve just realised all this hasn’t even achieved it’s aim. I genuinely can’t even recall the brand name now I’m writing this
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Women are long overdue an invite to the obscure Japanese watch market.
No, whats childish is quite literally making an argument up in your head, applying it to others, and responding to it as if its something that exists.It’s the old ‘it’s discrimination unless it’s against men who have been discriminating for centuries’ argument. Nope. It’s just discrimination. Actually it’s cheesy, naff marketing and I’m not remotely offended by it. But stepping back for a moment, it’s discrimination pure and simple. If society is ever going to progress, discrimination needs to be called out in whichever form it takes, and saying ‘well you don’t like it aimed at you, do you’ is frankly childish.
I’ve just realised all this hasn’t even achieved it’s aim. I genuinely can’t even recall the brand name now I’m writing this
Takes some imagination.
I know right? Massive threat. Well worth declaring bollocks because it affects you soooooo much.
I genuinely think it’s a shame you’re too blinkered to see the obvious. And that’s why discrimination is still with us.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thats a bit of a weasel is it not?
You've said "Its discrimination unless its against men who have been discriminating for centuries argument"
That argument hasn't been made in this thread, so perhaps you'd like to share where you've seen it in this context?
I'm quite happy to take my blinkers off and be shown the obvious, but I dont rate my ability to see something that hasn't happened particularly highly.
You know what it’s just a watch forum, I’m not getting into arguments - I’m leaving it here, no offence meant. Not got the time or temperament for online aggro. Peace out!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It has an alarm function but no snooze button because you is either woke or you ain't.
Quite...
I commonly throw the word 'bollocks' at obvious gender grifts. It's intended to be mildly amusing.
The only thing threatened here is my intelligence. I feel dumber having skimmed the blurb.
What you appear to be doing is attributing some sort of gammon related rage to those who question the company's intentions, together with those who feel that inventing gender discrimination can have the opposite effect of the purported intention. You can only shout 'fire' so many times before people switch off.
On a separate note, I read your comments on discrimination in the wider watch market and am nonplussed. Women can and do wear men's watches, there's even an oversized watch craze, whereas men cannot wear a ladies specific watch. So if anything, (some) women get the best of both worlds.
Of course some women feel they can't wear a man's watch, but that's no different to me feeling I can't pull of a straw boater, Hermes handbag, skinny jeans. That's just life.
And believe me, if an industry feels it can exploit an untapped demographic, it will! Why on earth wouldn't it?? Take for example the Man Bag. Was that an attempt to end gender discrimination, or was it a way to sell more bags?
Anyway, I can only echo the words of others: I wasn't familiar with the brand before opening this thread, I still don't recall the brand name and I doubt I'll ever buy a watch from them. Nor will I open this thread again.
In summary: I win. Goodbye.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote