Daniel
"A man with a watch knows what time it is. A man with two watches is never sure." - Segal’s Law
Orlando, FL
Member since
Last active: 1 month ago
Seiko
Seiko
But who is what Seiko was? 🧐
Christopher Ward?
I’d say Tudor is still what Tudor was.
I’d say Tudor is still what Tudor was.
Agreed. Tudor was always meant to be the more affordable version that could experiment. That remains consistent. I’d argue they have taken a lot of thunder (and definitely sales) away from other brands like Omega, Breitling, and Zenith.
But who is what Seiko was? 🧐
Laurel…I think
If Tudor was intended to be a "nice" everyman's watch, I think CW, Longines, Tissot, Hamilton, etc., have stepped into that gap.
Seiko has some watches that fit into the space left by Tudor and other brands moving up-market, but much of Seiko's lineup is below that level.
Montres Tudor SA are a Swiss watchmaker based in Geneva, Switzerland. Registered in 1926 by Hans Wilsdorf, founder of Rolex, the brand remains a sister company to Rolex; both companies are owned by the Hans Wilsdorf Foundation.
Tudor and Rolex still follow their original modus operandi, so Rolex is Rolex, and Tudor is Tudor.
The answer is probably Seiko or Christopher Ward, that’s always the answer on here, regardless of whether it was the actual question.
I will say Bremont, so I can see if that gets the visceral reaction that usually follows.
I will also say Tag, and just wait patiently for the remainder of the baying mob…
Oris 🤩
Agreed. Tudor was always meant to be the more affordable version that could experiment. That remains consistent. I’d argue they have taken a lot of thunder (and definitely sales) away from other brands like Omega, Breitling, and Zenith.
From the Rolex perspective, it’s genius. Tudor steals sales from other brands, but somehow not Rolex.
Montres Tudor SA are a Swiss watchmaker based in Geneva, Switzerland. Registered in 1926 by Hans Wilsdorf, founder of Rolex, the brand remains a sister company to Rolex; both companies are owned by the Hans Wilsdorf Foundation.
Tudor and Rolex still follow their original modus operandi, so Rolex is Rolex, and Tudor is Tudor.
The answer is probably Seiko or Christopher Ward, that’s always the answer on here, regardless of whether it was the actual question.
I will say Bremont, so I can see if that gets the visceral reaction that usually follows.
I will also say Tag, and just wait patiently for the remainder of the baying mob…
I’m saving my visceral reaction for the Seiko people. They’re out of control and need to be stopped.
SEIKO IS STEALING YOUR MONEY AND CAN’T EVEN LINE UP THEIR INDICES. THEY WILL SELL YOU A WATCH FOR $1500, TELL YOU IT CANT HAVE SAPPHIRE, THEN SELL ME AN ALMOST IDENTICAL WATCH FOR $500.
But who is what Seiko was? 🧐
Orient?
I’m saving my visceral reaction for the Seiko people. They’re out of control and need to be stopped.
SEIKO IS STEALING YOUR MONEY AND CAN’T EVEN LINE UP THEIR INDICES. THEY WILL SELL YOU A WATCH FOR $1500, TELL YOU IT CANT HAVE SAPPHIRE, THEN SELL ME AN ALMOST IDENTICAL WATCH FOR $500.
Your Honour, I’d like to scrub my client’s testimony from the record.
I’m staying out of any Seiko chat, it’s too much of a risk for me.
Lots of fun stuff to read in this thread. I think Tudor can be looked at a few ways for what they were. Ignoring Rolex and military stuff for a second, they were really well made watches with serviceable 3rd party movements and significant infrastructure. As was discussed, the whole push into manufacture movements for Tudor allows them to compete with Omega (and so effectively establishing them as competitors in the minds of buyers, therefore allowing Rolex to remain seated above Omega as far as brand perception goes. Full disclosure I love My Tudor deeply but I would take an Omega over a Rolex most days of the week). We talk about how the watch industry remains in the dark ages but the way Rolex has maintained their position over Omega via Tudor is impressive. Thanks for bringing that up!
Anyway, the brand who is what Tudor was has to make a great product with 3rd party movements and a good infrastructure for repair, parts, service, etc. Now there are so many companies that fit here compared to 10 years ago. Seiko doesn‘t fit this for a few reasons but they do capture a good amount of this market. Chris Ward and Oris seem big enough now to fit this description. From there you have a bunch of companies that touch this idea but may be limited in size or variety of offerings. The Sinns and Montas of the world come to mind in that area. So, I guess CW and Oris are my answer
If Tudor was intended to be a "nice" everyman's watch, I think CW, Longines, Tissot, Hamilton, etc., have stepped into that gap.
Seiko has some watches that fit into the space left by Tudor and other brands moving up-market, but much of Seiko's lineup is below that level.
Hamilton makes some pretty nice pieces!
But, but, but…if Seiko is making spring drive and fancy dial Seikos, and GS is now selling $10k+ watches, is Seiko the new GS? And if so who is the new Seiko? Orient? We can play this game all day. :-)
We can, but I’m hoping we don’t have to.
Agreed. Tudor was always meant to be the more affordable version that could experiment. That remains consistent. I’d argue they have taken a lot of thunder (and definitely sales) away from other brands like Omega, Breitling, and Zenith.
Really? I would take any of those three over a Tudor.
Love Omega and Zenith and am gaining some love for the new Breitling releases like the Chronomat . Tudor are nice if boring, though Ironically my favourite is the Ranger🤷😂. But any interest in the brand ends there.
Lots of fun stuff to read in this thread. I think Tudor can be looked at a few ways for what they were. Ignoring Rolex and military stuff for a second, they were really well made watches with serviceable 3rd party movements and significant infrastructure. As was discussed, the whole push into manufacture movements for Tudor allows them to compete with Omega (and so effectively establishing them as competitors in the minds of buyers, therefore allowing Rolex to remain seated above Omega as far as brand perception goes. Full disclosure I love My Tudor deeply but I would take an Omega over a Rolex most days of the week). We talk about how the watch industry remains in the dark ages but the way Rolex has maintained their position over Omega via Tudor is impressive. Thanks for bringing that up!
Anyway, the brand who is what Tudor was has to make a great product with 3rd party movements and a good infrastructure for repair, parts, service, etc. Now there are so many companies that fit here compared to 10 years ago. Seiko doesn‘t fit this for a few reasons but they do capture a good amount of this market. Chris Ward and Oris seem big enough now to fit this description. From there you have a bunch of companies that touch this idea but may be limited in size or variety of offerings. The Sinns and Montas of the world come to mind in that area. So, I guess CW and Oris are my answer
I agree CW first sprung to mind. But Oris is also a good shout.
Not Monta though they are quality and Sinn are better than Tudor to my mind and not really trying to be anything but Sinn.
Really? I would take any of those three over a Tudor.
Love Omega and Zenith and am gaining some love for the new Breitling releases like the Chronomat . Tudor are nice if boring, though Ironically my favourite is the Ranger🤷😂. But any interest in the brand ends there.
Again, 100% not saying Tudor is better than the three from a watch perspective, but there is little doubt most folks cross shop Tudor with those brands. Just because watch enthusiasts would choose one of those three, many won’t and the sales reflect it. It is not a coincidence as Tudor has gained market share Omega has lost.
I know, personally, I cross shop them with Breitling and Omega. Zenith not so much, but then again they don’t have a watch (at the moment) that scratches that itch for me.
Again, 100% not saying Tudor is better than the three from a watch perspective, but there is little doubt most folks cross shop Tudor with those brands. Just because watch enthusiasts would choose one of those three, many won’t and the sales reflect it. It is not a coincidence as Tudor has gained market share Omega has lost.
I know, personally, I cross shop them with Breitling and Omega. Zenith not so much, but then again they don’t have a watch (at the moment) that scratches that itch for me.
Well if you say so but I just can't see it myself. Not saying anything bad about Tudor at all but I don't see them in the same field as any of those other 3 much more diverse brands you mention. As for cross shopping something against something else don't we all do this with most things? I know , I do.
CW London
Orient......seems to be the one word answer in this thread from more than a few?
I don't think they are the new Tudor really although some of the Orient Star watches are very nice indeed?
Smiths
CWC is Tudor before it was reintroduced to the U.S.
But who is what Seiko was? 🧐
Orient
Montres Tudor SA are a Swiss watchmaker based in Geneva, Switzerland. Registered in 1926 by Hans Wilsdorf, founder of Rolex, the brand remains a sister company to Rolex; both companies are owned by the Hans Wilsdorf Foundation.
Tudor and Rolex still follow their original modus operandi, so Rolex is Rolex, and Tudor is Tudor.
The answer is probably Seiko or Christopher Ward, that’s always the answer on here, regardless of whether it was the actual question.
I will say Bremont, so I can see if that gets the visceral reaction that usually follows.
I will also say Tag, and just wait patiently for the remainder of the baying mob…
Tag uses ETA movements, right?
Oris comes to mind as mostly making tool watches with mostly third party movements. Swiss, independent and all that.
Maybe a shout out for Ball watches as well, but their collection can be pretty hit or miss.
Longines maybe.