Reply With QuoteOris Aquis or most offerings from San Martin.
Tbf I wear them with the branding too!
Imagine all watches are unbranded, no logos or brand names, but otherwise identical in all other ways and at the same price.
What are you wearing?
I think I’d be going with a Smiths PRS-25 or 48 or a Sinn 556
Last edited by Montello; 12th February 2023 at 18:19.
Oris Aquis or most offerings from San Martin.
Tbf I wear them with the branding too!
hilarious, if that were the case you could buy a rolex for a grand !!!
Currently, I'm wearing a Precista PRS20 full-lume. There's no branding or logo on the dial.
Yesterday, I wore a Precista PRS20 LE. No branding or logo on the dial of that one either.
I used to have a completely sterile Ray Wong Rolex Sub clone. I'd quite like a sterile Rolex Sub, based on a 14060.
______
Jim.
Sorry to be boring, but I’m still going to go with this :
I’m certain I’m not influenced by the brand.
The premise of the discussion is prices are unchanged, just the branding is removed.Originally Posted by bigbaddes
I would simply run a Rolex Explorer, branded or unbranded. On reflection I would prefer it to be unbranded as I would be less at risk of having the stuffing kicked out of me by a mugger.
Still the Hanhart Pioneer MK I for me.
We have yet to see any evidence you own a watch?
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
Wasn't his wife set upon at the golf club for his watch? Although quite right, no evidence of that.
Would a sterile PRS-25 not offer considerably better value for money?
Is the Rolex really over 10x superior if both have no branding?
An IWC vintage aquatimer, just pure simple legible class.
A blacked out lemania 5100 orfina Porsche design
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Not sure I really understand the question, if all watches had the same price, build quality, fit and finish and were unbranded why would anyone care if its a Rolex or an Invicta? The brand name may play a part but in many cases people buy into the brand with the assumption of better quality. Would I buy a Precista Italian over a Panerai if they both had the exact same build quality fit and finish blank dial etc? Sure what difference would it make? But then what difference would it make buying the Panerai?
Panerai 219 or 026
In my opinion the Explorer is a watch that just cannot be bettered.
Read it again.
Imagine if all watches were the same as they are today, same build quality and same price. Just sterile dials.
Are you buying a sterile Explorer at £6000 ( or what ever they are now ) or a sterile PRS-25 at £400?
Same watches as they are today but with no branding on the watch.
Fortunately I don’t have to imagine ;)
Looking at my collection, I think that all but one of them would actually look better with the branding removed. The exception is my Speedmaster which really needs the text to balance the dial.
So, I would dump the Speedy but carry on wearing the rest. If I can add one to replace the Speedy I’d buy an AP16202 in a heartbeat but I expect that I still wouldn’t be permitted to buy one from AP even in the unbranded world.
What is that?Fortunately I don’t have to imagine ;)
Ah ok understand now. In that case you have to consider the name is not the be all and end all to many people, it’s the fit and finish the overall quality that also matters. Is that difference several thousand pounds? Highly unlikely but given the choice I would go for the better made watch the name doesn’t have a great importance to me.
A Moser.
I think without branding the ability to see the workmanship would become a lot more important, as there would be no presumption of quality based on branding.
So display backs would be a lot more popular for higher spend watches I would guess.
I guess that’s the point the proposition teases out. Without the branding many of us would likely be wearing different watches.
At first glance I thought it might be a Satory Billard. Now they make amazing dials which are mostly sterile, the price is probably half or less of a Moser but then you dont get an in house movement with a high quality finish.
But it wouldn't be a Rolex, would it...
I'd probably still favour my Sinn Arktis, Breitling Cosmonaute and Breil Manta (hell, who is impressed by Breil?)
M
Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk
Breitling Cosmonaute 809 - What's not to like?
Like someone else stated I dont think I would change any of my collection, there may be a few that had I tried or know of alternatives I may have gone for but that would be a bit of a pointless argument as they are already in the collection now.
I know some will always look to a certain brand as being bought for its name only but I have to say the speedie is probably one of the most overrated watches out there. In comparison to say the Siduna chronograph which is currently about £1700 I would say they are about the same (Ok factor in a bit more for the bracelet) I accept that they have made some upgrades to the movement but I really see little that justifies its price.
I do think if we are really going to try and compare watches they we need to look at something of at least a similar build quality, to compare a £2-300 watch with one that costs several thousand doesnt seem to make sense.
In reality you’d probably end up paying near the same once you factor in the cost for a 18k case iirc
However, No branding & indeterminate case material makes it fairly discreet bar the colour.
No branding wouldn't change anything in my collection.
It’s an interesting question but slightly loaded. Fundamentally it comes down to a distinction between brand and branding.
I own an omega, which I bought because I liked the movement, design, quality and yes, the history and story of the brand. I have a Carrera chronograph, which again, I like the look of and appreciate its heritage and divers from Doxa and Seiko. To me, the brand is an important part of the appeal of the watch, given each brands history and associations. If there was no brandING on the dial, it would still be a watch of that brand and I still would enjoy wearing an omega, (TAG)heuer, doxa or Seiko, partly because of the properties of each watch but partly because of the heritage of the brand.
As such, I would still buy the same watches (I think) even if the brandING was omitted and there was no way of telling at a glance whether it was a genuine watch or an homage / clone.
Regarding value, that’s a separate conversation.. A smiths is definitely better value for money, but is an explorer worth less without Rolex written on the dial? I’d probably say no, the explorer is just a great watch which merits a high price.
If I think about the watches I wear for their utility or beauty then it would likely be a Casio, Aerospace or my 3919 just for the looks.
Interesting question, as what I'm currently wearing has minimal branding.
Currently this:
But I'd actually choose this over all my others.
The subtext is that we just want the logo. But nothing is that simple. The brand became famous in the first place because it made distinctive and attractive designs which stood the test of time and were high quality. So do we just want the brand, or the qualities that built that brand? Of course, when brands become famous they can charge more, and exclusivity becomes a factor. But even then, do people want the watches simply because they are exclusive and valuable, or because they are superior products and retain that value? Man maths says that some expensive brands are virtually free, if you buy sensibly. So of course the brand is a factor, but perhaps not only in the way the OP is implying.
In answer to the question, I’d choose a Royal Oak because I like the way it looks. I’d choose a 60s Seiko Skyliner for the same reason. I’d choose a Grand Seiko 9F because it’s comfortable, accurate and well crafted, and would look great with an unbranded vantablack dial. So I’d want the same watches in the end. Perhaps some people are just buying the logo, but on a forum of watch collectors it’s likely to be a more complex calculation, which involves liking the actual watch.
Grand Seiko SBGW263
stunning simplicity and I couldn't care less which brand it is. Unfortunately I do care about an £87k price tag.
Very much depends on the individual. Some will purchase simply due to their exclusivity, others due to their perceived superiority as a product (even though they don't have the knowledge to confirm that superiority) and others will purchase in the belief that it will retain more of its value than others. That only takes into account those who purchase because of a brand name and not those who don't.
PAM779 which I bought specifically because there was no dial branding although I appreciate there are visually obvious clues with regards the manufacturer.
Perhaps I should grasp the nettle and say there are a few Rolex I’d still have wanted (mostly vintage / neo-vintage, though not all), because I liked the designs, though it’s certainly a factor that the notoriety of the brand made them very good value, or at least it used to. In an unbranded world I’d still prefer the real thing as it’s likely to be better quality than a similar looking knock-off, and to have better service support. But does it retain its value? I’m fond of free watches. So unfortunately the question doesn’t quite work without factoring in depreciation in this hypothetical unbranded world - are you still paid to wear certain watches?
Last edited by Itsguy; 13th February 2023 at 09:38.
I'm not sure it does, as it simplifies the brand to tiny printed dial logo. It's much more than that. In the 90's I really wanted a Tag Heuer, not because of the 3mm Green and Red Logo on the dial, but because I thought the Link bracelet was really cool and like nothing I'd seen before. It was iconic and modern, and if the exact same watch had been designed and made by another brand –*I'd have liked it too.
The design of the item is all part of the brand. The oyster or jubilee bracelet, fluted bezel and mercedes hands are all iconic parts of the Rolex brand, and reasons why buyers choose those watches. You'll certainly spot a bracelet or bezel before you'll see a dial logo. I think many of us would be wearing the same watch without branding. Same with cars, take the badge of a Lambo or BMW and it's still identifiable by its manufacturer because of its entire design language, not just the badge it wears.
To take it further, if historically by law all watch brands had to be unbranded, manufacturers would try harder to protect their case, dial, crown, and bracelet designs, so homage and look-a-like watches couldn't exist in the first place.
Some really thoughtful and considered posts here.
I think as a group on a watch forum clearly most are mindful of the whole design of the watch; and of course all those elements contribute to the brand more than just the overt representation of the brand which is the name/logo.
That said I think the heritage, branding, physical design, quality of manufacture and purchase experience are all part of the total package which leads us to make a choice.
I guess the point I was trying to tease out was that brand is clearly part of the equation; maybe less so for people here than the Instgrammers who only care for the logo ... but it is still part of the equation to a greater or lesser extent.
I agree brand does play a part in the choices we all make. Brands would not spend the money they do on positioning their product, if it were not important. (Tudor is still the poor man’s Rolex, Skoda are the poor man’s VW etc.)
It is a double edged sword though, branding / the brand / associations with that brand can be a total turn off. We may miss a quality product but we can’t see past the branding.
I would buy and wear the same watches as I currently do.
I don't like the new or old Seiko 5 logo, the Orient 'Rothmans' insignia, the Rolex coronet, the Blancpain engraving, the old-style Parmigiani Fleurier plaque or the FP Journe 'Inventit & Fecit' bumf.
They're all fine products, in their own ways, but would not be for me.
Last edited by jwg663; 13th February 2023 at 12:36.
______
Jim.
Pshaw forget VW, the Skoda Karoq is the smart mans Audi Q3.
Absolutely; I recall seeing some negative comments about Tudors choice of brand ambassadors ...
Branding absolutely does matter, particularly for Rolex owners (and I speak as a former one who intends to become one again once funds allow). Rolex is an unusual outlier because it is a status symbol that has been adopted by the wider culture and is one of the most recognised brands in the world. I don't think you can even buy a Rolex without having been influenced or enticed by the branding to some degree, potentially even subliminally.
I am currently wearing a Linde Werdelin. No non WIS knows what it is and I doubt people would consider it to be a luxury watch. To a lesser extent I'd say the same is true of most other luxury watch brands, everything from IWC to Tudor. Even Patek and AP aern't terribly well known amongst non WIS. Perhaps Omega has more brand recognition amongst the general public but I bet the average consumer has no idea what they now retail for.
I appreciate this doesn't entirely answer the original post but it is at least in the wheelhouse so please forgive me. I do find it very interesting and I do have a marketing background albeit many moons ago in the car industry.
Does VW really have any cachet as a brand?
Maybe it's me, but I have a VW and it's not a brand that holds any perceived value for me.
M
Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk
Breitling Cosmonaute 809 - What's not to like?
Of course it does, a VW Transporter is way more in demand than a Citroen or Vauxhall equivalent. A Golf is way more desirable than it's Dacia counterpart.
Agree. VW is Tesco. Solid, boring, everyman and a cut above Kwik Save.
When compared to a Skoda or a Seat in the same size class, then I would say it does (not saying any make bad cars - they all use the same parts) there is a reason VW group have car marques in the same size / class brackets and they market them accordingly.
Each to their own, but you've all demonstrated it does.
M
Sent from my Pixel 6a using Tapatalk
Breitling Cosmonaute 809 - What's not to like?
Posting Permissions
