The "what were they thinking" thread

[Watchbug]

I agree 100% with Drucnk Uncle, as well as the two that iceman66 posted. The ROO is hideous, as are 99.9% of Hublots.

[zaskar36]

The Montegrappa designed by Sylvestor Stallone

Hahahahaha. That thing looks like the golden goose had to relieve itself over a watch head.

[Glenroiland]

A kid with crayons I can understand. They're still working on fine motor skills and don't have a clear understanding of design or colors. However, this watch was designed by two adults and that's the frightening thing about it. What can I say that hasn't been said already said on this or the other forum. The 6 that looks like the date but isn't. The actual date window that gets lost on the busy dial. The "made you look" sub-dials that aren't sub-dials. I can understand putting a design there but why put a printed subdial at the 9? Even if it's racing inspired, it comes off as super cheap.

It's admirable the brand owner has a "I make what I like" attitude. However, for someone who has completed multiple watches, I'm surprised he so grossly misjudged the demand this watch. Despite this, I hear some people like it. At least 48 KS backers. And good for them. Seeing as how it's only a third funded on KS with 10 days to go means that at the very least, the 48 backers will be saved from a buying mistake if the project dies.

I have a great idea, lets bash two members.

[Glenroiland]

I have to say I quite like that watch. I don't think I will buy one now but I might pick one up down the line

I like it as well.

[Drunk Uncle]

I have a great idea, lets bash two members.

I fail to see how pointing out perfectly legitimate criticisms of a design and by extension questioning the brand owner's business decision as "bashing"? Yes, the guy who designed it is a member here and on WUS. Yes, Docvail is well known around both these parts. That doesn't mean anything he does should be immune from any and all criticism, especially if the criticism is cogent, salient, and germane to the watches he is trying to sell.

I clearly don't like the design. I backed up my critique by pointing to specific elements that make the watch, in my opinion, poorly executed. Now, by extension when presented with a mess of watch, it's also perfectly legitimate to call into question the designer's ability to compose a good looking watch. For comparison, if a personal stylist dresses their clients in unflattering clothes with horrible fit, and tacky makeup, it would be natural to call into question that stylist's ability to do their job properly. Or if a surgeon botches a procedure, it's only natural to question his surgical ability. I think I'm perfectly within the realm of logic to question the designers ability to design, and in turn, question Docvail's decision to go forward with the project. Doc is a man with several watches already produced, many of them very well received. He's shown the ability to conduct market research and gauge the success of a project before he releases it via a forum or KS. The fact that the Legends KS campaign wasn't funded (and evidenced by a relatively paltry sum raised) is a misstep that falls into the thread title of "What were they thinking".

To me, "bash" is unproductive criticism, i.e. "it sucks, you suck". Here, everything I stated was backed up with a salient point. Doc is "beloved forum favorite" but he's not perfect.

[Glenroiland]

I fail to see how pointing out perfectly legitimate criticisms of a design and by extension questioning the brand owner's business decision as "bashing"? Yes, the guy who designed it is a member here and on WUS. Yes, Docvail is well known around both these parts. That doesn't mean anything he does should be immune from any and all criticism, especially if the criticism is cogent, salient, and germane to the watches he is trying to sell.

I clearly don't like the design. I backed up my critique by pointing to specific elements that make the watch, in my opinion, poorly executed. Now, by extension when presented with a mess of watch, it's also perfectly legitimate to call into question the designer's ability to compose a good looking watch. For comparison, if a personal stylist dresses their clients in unflattering clothes with horrible fit, and tacky makeup, it would be natural to call into question that stylist's ability to do their job properly. Or if a surgeon botches a procedure, it's only natural to question his surgical ability. I think I'm perfectly within the realm of logic to question the designers ability to design, and in turn, question Docvail's decision to go forward with the project. Doc is a man with several watches already produced, many of them very well received. He's shown the ability to conduct market research and gauge the success of a project before he releases it via a forum or KS. The fact that the Legends KS campaign wasn't funded (and evidenced by a relatively paltry sum raised) is a misstep that falls into the thread title of "What were they thinking".

To me, "bash" is unproductive criticism, i.e. "it sucks, you suck". Here, everything I stated was backed up with a salient point. Doc is "beloved forum favorite" but he's not perfect.

We clearly won't see eye to eye here.

Comparing the design to being worse than a kid with a crayon who is still working on their fine motor skills is bashing. That verbiage is definitively inflammatory and unnecessary. It might as well be, "it sucks, you suck".

Anyway, goodnight.

[Glenroiland]

........back to regular programming........



edit: inflammatory and unnecessary.

[Chase]

We clearly won't see eye to eye. Comparing the design to being worse than a kid with a crayon who is still working on their fine motor skills is bashing. anyway, goodnight.

Some of his past designs aren't too bad, but this Monaco Heritage Chrono I just don't know about. He's running contests to give one away for free and I wasn't interested in entering.

[Drunk Uncle]

We clearly won't see eye to eye here.

Comparing the design to being worse than a kid with a crayon who is still working on their fine motor skills is bashing. That verbiage is definitively inflammatory and unnecessary. It might as well be, "it sucks, you suck".

Anyway, goodnight.

What does it matter if the verbiage is inflammatory? Statements much more inflammatory are made about larger brands everyday on WUS and here. From Hublot to Invicta, I've read put downs with much more vitriol that what I wrote. However, just because a statement is inflammatory doesn't make it false. I've read movie and book reviews where a work is called rotten, garbage, life stealing, etc. Those kind of words are really inflammatory but they communicate a message and related to the subject matter at hand. I covered why I believe the design was poor. With the way color was used, it not a stretch to compare the overall aesthetic to be childlike. It wasn't "it sucks, you suck", I'd characterize it as "it sucks, here's why". And I still stand by my original statements 100%.

This goes to something I've noticed first on f71 and now here, namely, every time someone has anything provocative to say about a micro brand everyone jumps on their back. My word choice can be seen as inflammatory but it's not uncalled for. Is criticism suppose to be held back just because the brand owner hangs out on the forums? Do I have to worry about hurting their feelings or making them feel sad? At the end of the day, they (and by they, I mean any watch brand, micro or otherwise) are TRYING TO SELL something. If someone is trying to make money and put themselves out into the marketplace, they need to develop a thick skin. They're big boys trying to turn a profit, they can handle the comments.

[underwatermechanic]

I find it interesting that two of the most vocal critics have come to IWL to post only in this thread. Perhaps they are saving all of their other posts for the new year