Likes Likes:  20
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 35

Thread: Brand Perception

  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by FuzzyB View Post
    I have a Rolex and I have a Tudor. Two watches from the same company, yet my impression of each is quite different.

    To some, there is a stigma associated with Tudor that it's a second rate watch that wants to be like its big brother Rolex but falls short. In other words, the only reason to bought a Tudor was because you couldn't afford the Rolex.
    I think that in the past that sentiment held more weight. There were some near identical looking models, to the layman, with the Tudor using third party movements. In fact, if I'm not mistaken, that was the reason the brand was born...

    The newer Tudor models are more individual, and have a style of their own. Perhaps a trendier younger brother? It also allows the group to compete with some of the lower priced Swatch Group ranges whilst still keeping the Rolex entry price relatively high. Tudor is hardly a budget brand, and it would be foolish to make assumptions that someone wanted Rolex but settled for a Tudor as it was cheaper. That's a very odd, judgmental view anyway, based on nothing. Also, given the difference in the ranges it's very unlikely to the true. People buy the watch they like within their budget in my experience, they don't alsways spend up to budget for the sake of it. For example, my recent serious "possibles" list ranged from £2k to £6.5k retail price. The watch I settled on was £3.6k, but it was only as I completed the purchase that I realised I didn't know the price (just that it was within budget).

    It's also worth remembering that what is on your wrist doesn't represent your collection. I love this watch, and am wearing it now, because of what it represents. It was a gift on my daughter's birth:



    To judge my purchasing power on this would be inaccurate.

    I'm rambling now as I've drunk much wine whilst typing this... Basically, IMO, Tudor is a luxury brand which stands on its own two feet now more than ever.
    Last edited by OrangeSport; Aug 10, 2015 at 08:10 PM.
    G-Shock: GW3000B-1A
    Rolex: Submariner 14060M
    Accurist: 1961 Shockmaster (Gold) & 1965 Shockmaster (Steel)
    Omega: Speedmaster Professional 3570.50.00
    Meistersinger: Perigraph AM1002
    Ben Sherman: S489.OOBS
    Rotary: 1990 Quartz (Gold)
    Steinhart: Ocean GMT 39mm
    Certina: DS Super PH500M & DS PH200M
    Timex: MKI Mechanical

  2. Likes Chase liked this post
  3. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Raza View Post
    It's that old Boxster/911 argument that continues to make no sense.
    I would probably by a Boxster/Caymen if I wanted a sports car in that price range. They are hard to beat. Would I buy a 911 if I was looking +/- £100K? Probably not..
    Last edited by OrangeSport; Aug 10, 2015 at 08:11 PM.
    G-Shock: GW3000B-1A
    Rolex: Submariner 14060M
    Accurist: 1961 Shockmaster (Gold) & 1965 Shockmaster (Steel)
    Omega: Speedmaster Professional 3570.50.00
    Meistersinger: Perigraph AM1002
    Ben Sherman: S489.OOBS
    Rotary: 1990 Quartz (Gold)
    Steinhart: Ocean GMT 39mm
    Certina: DS Super PH500M & DS PH200M
    Timex: MKI Mechanical

  4. Likes uchinanchu liked this post
  5. #23
    I just had another thought. Tudor has been around for so long and up until a few years ago seemed to be little more than an afterthought to Rolex.

    Is the recent push for Tudor a way to increase overall sales for the brand or to further prop up the prices for Rolex? Now that Omega seems to be pricing themselves closer to Rolex territory, being able to point to Tudor prices may be a reason to justify even higher prices for Rolex. Or perhaps I'm just feeling a bit cynical today.

  6. #24
    Big Member Chase's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Calgary
    Posts
    2,424
    Quote Originally Posted by FuzzyB View Post
    I just had another thought. Tudor has been around for so long and up until a few years ago seemed to be little more than an afterthought to Rolex.

    Is the recent push for Tudor a way to increase overall sales for the brand or to further prop up the prices for Rolex? Now that Omega seems to be pricing themselves closer to Rolex territory, being able to point to Tudor prices may be a reason to justify even higher prices for Rolex. Or perhaps I'm just feeling a bit cynical today.
    I'm more cynical than you apparently. To me Tudor is the one competing with Omega, not Rolex.

    Largely it's like Porsche and Audi. Owners are the same, they share some resources, but ultimately stand on their own two feet.
    IWL ROLEX/TUDOR FORUM HELMUT UHREN ATELIER

    Fine bespoke leather straps & accessories

    Black Friday sale now on... discount code BlackFriday2016 saves you 49% no limit!

  7. #25
    Moderator - Central tribe125's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Kent - UK
    Posts
    18,906
    I agree, it's Tudor v Omega.

    Until fairly recent times, Rolex's sport models could be seen as up-market tool watches. In the context of the market as a whole, they weren't even that expensive. Those days are gone. What to do? Re-invigorate Tudor. Wider appeal, more sales.

  8. Likes Chase liked this post
  9. #26
    It would be easier to move Tudor up market and then introduce a new third tier than to try to introduce a tier between them. Once Tudor is totally in house movements and Rolex has been moved yet higher, plenty of space for a new brand with the qualities we associate with Ye Tudors Of Olde

  10. Likes FuzzyB liked this post
  11. #27
    Moderator - Central tribe125's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Kent - UK
    Posts
    18,906
    Quote Originally Posted by Der Amf View Post
    a new brand with the qualities we associate with Ye Tudors Of Olde

    I'm pretty open-minded about watch materials but half-timbered would be a step too far.

  12. Likes shameless, scottjc liked this post
  13. #28
    Super Member Raza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Philadelphia
    Posts
    23,327
    Blog Entries
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Der Amf View Post
    It would be easier to move Tudor up market and then introduce a new third tier than to try to introduce a tier between them. Once Tudor is totally in house movements and Rolex has been moved yet higher, plenty of space for a new brand with the qualities we associate with Ye Tudors Of Olde
    Brace yourself for $10,000 Air Kings and $17,000 Submariners.

  14. #29
    Sadly in the next 10-15 years that has a strong chance of happening.

  15. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by -JP View Post
    Sadly in the next 10-15 years that has a strong chance of happening.
    Not so sadly if you own them already... This, along with minimal model changes year on year, is why Rolex watches hold their price well over time...
    G-Shock: GW3000B-1A
    Rolex: Submariner 14060M
    Accurist: 1961 Shockmaster (Gold) & 1965 Shockmaster (Steel)
    Omega: Speedmaster Professional 3570.50.00
    Meistersinger: Perigraph AM1002
    Ben Sherman: S489.OOBS
    Rotary: 1990 Quartz (Gold)
    Steinhart: Ocean GMT 39mm
    Certina: DS Super PH500M & DS PH200M
    Timex: MKI Mechanical

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About Us
We are an independent and wide-ranging forum for watch enthusiasts. From mainspring to microchip, from Europe to Asia, from micro-brand to boutique - we cover it all. Novice or expert, we want you to feel at home. Whether it's asking a simple question or contributing to the fund of horological knowledge, it's all the same hobby. Or, if you like, you can just show us a picture of your new watch. We'll provide the welcoming and courteous environment, the rest is up to you!
Join us