Likes Likes:  11

View Poll Results: For Better or For Worse

Voters
18. You may not vote on this poll
  • Enjoyment triumphs pedigree once I (reluctantly) quash admriation

    16 88.89%
  • Pedigree can't be ignored if I squint just a little

    2 11.11%
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 24

Thread: Theoretical this or that?

  1. #1
    Member ljb187's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    588

    Theoretical this or that?

    Say you've got a chance to own & wear two of four watches. One pair you like a little more while the other pair you like a little less (say the difference is about 15%). Hate to say it but for the purposes of this poll I'm locking you down...you happen to like an Oris Classic Date and a Tissot Visiodate more than a JLC Master Control and IWC Portofino. Maybe it's that the Oris and Tissot are a little snappier & sportier. Maybe it's the IWC's Roman numeral or leaf hands...it could be the thickish bezel / smallish numbers of the JLC...whatever it is the better watches have one or two design issues that you could live with but also couldn't help but notice. The elephant in the room is that the Oris and Tissot watches are from Oris and Tissot instead of JLC and IWC.

    Oris Classic Date




    Tissot Visodate



    JLC Master Control




    IWC Portofino Hand Wound 8 Days



    You know the the JLC and IWC are better watches in every way - history, price, movement, materials, fit & finish (ugh) - but, even after considering that it's the Oris & Tissot's designs you'd rather see on your wrists every day. Would you sacrifice the chance to own these much high quality watches for a pair of somewhat pedestrian offerings that are undeniably if not completely overwhelmingly more satisfying?
    Last edited by ljb187; Feb 19, 2015 at 06:10 PM.

  2. #2
    Theoretically - not related to any specific pair - I would always go with the more "satisfying" (to use your word) option. When it comes to watches, pleasure of ownership of something you actually like to wear is crucial.

  3. Likes ljb187, Nokie, popoki nui liked this post
  4. #3
    The Dude Abides Nokie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Northern CA
    Posts
    3,516
    The one I like best.


    At this time it is the JLC, but tomorrow it could be the Visodate,
    "Either He's Dead, Or My Watch Has Stopped....."
    Groucho Marx

  5. #4
    From an aesthetics perspective, I like the IWC best, but I am not a fan of the second markers.

    The Visodate is a close contender, but I abhor the font in which Tissot is written. It makes the whole watch look like a gimmick.

    I find the aesthetics of the JLC and the Oris absolutely unappealing, so those aren't even contenders.

    I would call them butt ugly, but then I wouldn't want to offend Invicta owners.

  6. #5

  7. Likes M. Montaigne, popoki nui, Domo liked this post
  8. #6
    Member ljb187's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    588
    The choice is really more about going with something you like rather than something you respect...regardless of brand. To make it more straightforward, would you choose a SARB over a Grand Seiko because your clear-cut preference for the presentation of the simpler watch overrides your admiration for the technical achievements of the other?

    The former could perhaps be classified as pleasure while the latter might be termed esteem.
    Last edited by ljb187; Feb 19, 2015 at 08:08 PM.

  9. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by ljb187 View Post
    The choice is really more about going with something you like rather than something you respect...regardless of brand. To make it more straightforward, would you choose a SARB over a somewhat similar Grand Seiko because (in this case) you have a pronounced preference for the details in SARB's design that overrides your admiration for the Grand Seiko?
    Unlike most other consumer goods, with watches, brand cachet strongly correlates to quality.

    Pateks do not have a great brand image (just) because they are expensive; rather, it is a function of quality and finish, and that shows up in pricing as well.

    Therefore, if I had to choose, it would be a combination of aesthetics and quality (and this includes movement, finish, and other factors). Brand prestige is almost never a factor (in fact, my favorite watches are almost all Seikos).

  10. Likes popoki nui liked this post
  11. #8
    Dinger of Hum Chronopolitano's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    Chronopolis
    Posts
    1,561
    Sounds to me like two entirely different sets of criteria for enjoyment. Sex or food? Travel or a new car?

    That said, by all means, choose the right enjoyment for yourself.

  12. Likes ljb187, M. Montaigne liked this post
  13. #9
    Member ljb187's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2014
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    588
    Quote Originally Posted by M. Montaigne View Post
    Unlike most other consumer goods, with watches, brand cachet strongly correlates to quality.

    Pateks do not have a great brand image (just) because they are expensive; rather, it is a function of quality and finish, and that shows up in pricing as well.

    Therefore, if I had to choose, it would be a combination of aesthetics and quality (and this includes movement, finish, and other factors). Brand prestige is almost never a factor (in fact, my favorite watches are almost all Seikos).
    Correct, but given an acceptable level of quality (Oris, Tissot, SARBs, Hamilton), couldn't aesthetics tip the scales in favor of a much lesser watch simply because you find more to like...not a whole lot...but enough. To keep with the Seiko example because nobody does a better job a the low & high ends of the spectrum:

    I put $6000 on a table. Your choice is between a SARB013 and a SBGR083. You're blown away by the chance to own a great watch but in the back of your mind you know rather wear the SABR despite the GS's obvious quality. Think of it this way...I can only semi-fathom how great the houses in Beverly / Holmby Hills are, but you can claim one for your own if you want:



    But has always been your dream house:



    The Beverly Hills home is spectacular...worth tons more ($12,000,000) plus it's less than 10 miles from the ocean. However, the beach house is no slouch...maybe $1,000,000....is just a few blocks from the sea and you get to live in a classic Southern California bungalow while riding your bicycle nearly everywhere you go.

    Still, everything is going to be a little simpler...you'll have to water your own plants and pluck your own weeds, there's probably only one 1.5 bathrooms and the backyard is about as big as the living room. Plus there will be hippy neighbors instead of servants and 9 year old Jeep in your driveway instead of a Maybach in the garage (or the DB9 for that matter). Think of that stuff as the movement. Understand the location and exterior as the aesthetic...at what point is "less is more" no longer good enough? Is there ever a point when the craftsmanship (and luxury) simply can't be ignored?
    Last edited by ljb187; Feb 19, 2015 at 11:12 PM.

  14. #10
    Is this a trick question? I'm not a huge fan of these outside of liking the IWC a little so if you are talking I had to buy them, obviously I would go with the cheaper two or none. If I were given them, then IWC and JLC because of the brand prestige and finishing quality vs the others.

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