Are you a brand buyer or a watch buyer

Honestly, I'm a little of both. I bought most of the watches I have because I like the looks, or the story behind the watch, like my Bulova Lunar Pilot, and can afford them. There is one watch that is on the way, however, that I bought because I like the looks and the brand. With that said, there are some brands, like Rolex, that really don't interest me. I could never afford one, and except for the Daytona, they don't do much for me. By the way, I went to a microbrand show earlier in the year and bought a beautiful watch that I absolutely LOVE. Tsao Constellation. It also has a great story behind it. 

I personally cant get into microbrands.  I just prefer to buy watches from established brands with a history. 

It’s a bit of both - maybe that’s sad but - let’s say a cartier Tank style watch. Can get the real deal or something almost identical for 1/10th the price. But every time i looked at the logo I’d feel a bit sad I didnt have the real thing.

but if a new brand does something amazing I can appreciate it in a different way. So (I know it’s a bigger brand now but) I’m a recent christopher ward convert. because of their quality and originality in the bel canto.

I assure you I have no affinity to Casio other than that they make great watches. I have a Vaer on today. This is one of the few newer brands that I don't see as Spaghetti Scametti or people solving questions that nobody asked or have already been answered.

The fact that people buy Rolex annoys me too, but I'd still take a Day-Date. It really holds up after all those decades. 

Brand is one of those things that matters much more before the purchase, when one is thinking about hopes and fears and not more practical tangible matters.

Sadly CW watch company is no longer owned by CW and is now another corporate owned toy box. The bel canto isa fantastic example of whats possible when you have a seemingly bottomless budget to create with. The designs are no longer a single mans creations but the now typical design by comittee product. Its a tough place to be and unfortunately the microbrands are their own worst enemy as most come up with some generic design then get a slack handful made in china then put their name on it and declare themselves a watch brand. Hopefully this trend will be short lived and the talented bunch out there beaverin away in their darkened caves will prevail…..

regards rob

I don’t think of it as buying a brand. These brands and their watches have built up reputations over the years of being fantastic mechanisms which stand the test of time. I’d rather buy from an established brand than an unknown/unproven one when I’m spending thousands of ££ 

Brand matters to most watch buyers, because most watches are mostly about looks/status. Most people spending thousands of dollars on a watch want a quality product, that also is recognized by others as having some form of status. It might be the "insider" recognition of a Sinn, or JLC, but it can also be the obvious recognition of Rolex or Omega.  

Lastly, what some consider a dull/stale design, others consider a timeless classic. 

I am one of those who does a bit of both. There are brands I gravitate to, and watches I own where brand was not really a consideration, even if the watch is a big brand. I have also had watches I got because of the watch impress me so much that I bought other watches from that brand because of the brand more than the watch.

Design means more to me, but so does whether I can afford it. Just yesterday a YouTube video showed me a ‘new’ Britihs Brand that is working in the same range as the Ali/Amazon Chinese watches, and it was good to see — because other brands working in that spec level (particularly movements) are many times that price range.

If I could nip round the corner, and get a reasonable watch for a reasonable price, I am more likely to ‘buy British’ as it were. But I have yet to see any that are to my liking, particularly in a design sense, let alone price range.

While the brand does come into play in my decision making process, it's certainly not at the top of my list. For me personally, I have to be drawn to the watch from an aesthetic point of view, and if the appearance doesn't stir something within me, the name on the dial doesn't come into play at all. If the aesthetics appeal to me, then other factors come into play, such as level and quality of finishing & materials, movement, etc.  

If a watch features a standard Swiss Eta or Sellita movement it is still easy enough to get it serviced. local watch makers do exist, just hard to find. Maybe a bit of a wait depending on how busy they are.

I got a good laugh about looking for your watch maker. Reminded me of the time I handed over a Seamaster to a watchmaker on a canal bridge In the middle of nowhere. They can be a strange breed. Happy to report watch came back better than ever.

Martins jewellers in Glasgow have a good reputation for repairs and service, might be worth a trip.

I'm both.

To me, the MoonSwatch symbolises the importance 'brand' in this game. It's not a great watch. And you could get better for your money. 

But let's look at the other end of the scale. There's a really simple reason Rolex out sells the rest of the category put together. Or trounces the likes of Grand Seiko - who make arguable better watches if you compare pieces from a similar price bracket. The strength of its brand. 

If a Roger Smith could be picked up for a similar price (and you could actually buy one), they would never sell as many watches. Even though they're of infinitey better quality. 

Brands, marketing and cognitive bias matter are what the industry revoles around. And it will always be a (sad) reality. 

I just went to your site, you have some really cool models!

For me, it's about position on a pricing continuum.

$0-$x - Gimme that weird independent.  If it's a dud and I can't easily service it, no worries

$x-$y - Established brand, please.  I'm going to wear it a lot, and I'm worried about durability, serviceability, resale value, etc.

>$y - Back with the weird.  Anything here would likely be fragile and expensive to service, anyway.

Right now I'm interested in cheap and weird, so my last 3 watches have all been <$750 and from small, new-ish brands.

Most small makers like myself use proprietary movements that any high street jewller can service or repair. Thats if they still have a repairman…this is another subject which i will cover ata later date… we use ETA movements which are still used by many of the well known brands including big names such as breitling and tag heur…. The cost of developing in house movements is cost prohibitive, even big names such as ressence use the ubiquitous 2824 movement in their 50k watch…many watchmakers make minor changes to well known movements to create interesting complications…dont be put offminor makers just make sure you are diligent in your research before parting with yourhard earned…

I buy watches I like, that i can afford and I'm not to proud have a homage or 2. 

Other notable or less obvious changes, crown guard evolution, movements 4 major changes, bracelet, clasp, lume chemistry, dial layout and material changes.  It took a lifetime for this tool to evolve.  It is appreciated and brand recognized for its distilled design.  I give you the claw hammer tool evolution for reference.

Don't forget the Sky Dweller, introduced about 10 years ago and very innovative in terms of movement.

I own everything from Rolex/Omega on the high end, to Citizen, Seiko, Vaer and Martenero on the low end.  Each watch has something that makes me happy.  Not sure if that makes me a brand loyalist or not.

An interesting thread to read through!

I few random thoughts of my own.

Firstly, the vast, VAST majority of watches are bought by non-watch people who probably don't even know microbrands exist. If they have £3k+ to spend they are going to head to the high street where they can try pieces on from brands they've heard of.

As some others have mentioned, buying from microbrands very often means buying blind online, without the benefit of a try on. Many may be willing to take a punt if the watch is in the £300-£1000 range, but above that it's a lot of money to be laying down for an unknown unless there is a lot of social proof for the brand (Baltic and the like). 

Small boutique microbrands, such as yourself, will never win if you try to sell just the watch. You have too many hard hitters in your price range such as Cartier, Longines etc. 

What microbrands can offer is a personal customer experience that bigger brands could only dream of.

You need to sell yourself more on your website. I've seen much more passion and insight into your watches in this thread than is on your site, and when your website is your only way of communicating with the watch community it has to be on point. It just feels like it's full of a lot of buzz words like 'innovative' and 'forward thinking'. I think you need a bit more of a human touch.

With many of your models I don't really grasp 'why' you've made them. Maybe I need to be an aviation person to understand it better, but a bit more of a discussion telling me why you have chosen that design, why Mach 2? Etc. 

Also say more about yourself and your team. Tell me more about Rob, Steve and Katherine. Why are they passionate about watches? Show me all the time, effort, design, thought, care and attention you are putting into these lovely watches that is making them worth the £3.5k.

It just feels a bit sterile, which is such a shame, because you are obviously a passionate guy who has put blood, sweat, and tears into these watches and your business. It needs to show more on your site. 

Another massive appeal of microbrands is the connection between watchmaker and customer. Being able to interact and talk to the person who has made your watch is magical, but your website doesn't give the feeling that you are interested in talking to potential customers. You need to be saying:

"We would love to hear from you if you have any questions or just want to talk watches. We are passionate about what we do and love speaking to fellow enthusiast's, so please drop us an email..." 

Anyway, that's my random brain dump that you did not ask for 🤣

Now I shall answer your question: 

I love many watches. I enjoying buying from big brands because I love their history. I enjoying buying from microbrands because I love the people behind them.

I've heard a few podcasts featuring Mike France, the current CEO of Christopher Ward, and it seems he was one of the original three owners and continues to be an owner of the company.  Feel free to correct me if I am wrong, but I don't think CW has become a nameless, faceless corporation.  Their size and reach in the market appears to be a feature of good products at reasonable prices along with consistency over time.

I got to be honest, it's a little bit of both, I do enjoy a 100 dollars Seiko as much as I enjoy a 9000 dollars Rolex. I'm pretty sure the decision making of buying these two watches relied heavily on the brand name too. I'm reluctant to invest a good amount of money on a microbrand even if I like the watch

The movement in a watch does not interest me one bit, Sellita, ETA or in house.
I have 2 vintage watches from the 60s (Tissot and Nivada), never serviced, and they are still ticking today....so.....all the more modern watches will outlive all of us here on the forum and probably still be ticking in 100 years or more....so why should the type of movement interest me when I buy a watch?

Microbrands don't interest me either....I like to have an established brand on my wrist, Omega, Rolex, IWC, Tudor......It just makes me feel good when I have this on my wrist......is it snobbism?  Well yes, most likely in a large part, but collecting luxury watches is a snobbish hobby anyway...and I don't feel ashamed of it 

Yes ur right, a very clever piece of jiggery pokery … a very clever complication indeed and i respect this with great reverence… a truely great movement…

To be fair they have billions and it is arguably the only major innovation from them in decades

Last new reference before that maybe the Yachtmaster? Which isn't that much different from the Submariner. Then there is the various deep sea dwellers, but they are more variations than new watches.

Anyway, glad you are not producing Rolex homages.

My father used to own a transmission shop on Reisterstown Road. I am more of a Montgomery County guy. This comment is just a way to work the term "Baltimoron" into the thread.

I got news for you, I bring the term Baltimoron to every thread I touch. Fun fact: after 15 years, my wife’s still can’t say “Reisterstown”. 

Great question in my case I would say when i started I looked at brand . I had Watch brands I wanted to own and I accomplished that .. Now i look for unique microbrand watches that I find interesting. 

Not ashamed to say it but I do look at brand first and foremost. I think part of what's interesting about watches for me is the heritage narrative of the more established brands. And as much as this line of thinking can be frowned upon by hardcore watch enthusiasts, there is a linkage between brand and identity and sense of community. Who you are, who you think you are, and whose tribe do you belong to can be reflected in what you wear. That's how fashion works. And watches are fashion items as much as they are everything else (pieces of art you wear on your wrist, sentimental milestone markers, just a tool, you name it). Sure, your self-worth shouldn't be dictated by any material whether it be watch, car, computer, or whatever, but these things when selected well can be used to express yourself to the world, whether consciously or unconsciously. You wear your brand, so to speak. 

So, with that premise, I'd like to think I'm an Omega person. Whatever that means. I just like to imagine that I'm the type of person who wears an Omega. Blame James Bond and the moon landing. I can see myself being a Tissot guy and a Longines guy. If I had the money, I would love a Patek, maybe an AP even. Those brands can reflect the myriad of identities and personalities of "me." 

I would never be a Rolex guy. Even if I had the money I would never buy a Rolex because of my admittedly warped perception of that brand. In this part of the world (the Philippines) Rolexes are worn by old people, ballers, and snooty old rich. I'm not any of those. That's an unfair generalization but that's my own perception of the brand. My father has a Rolex. He's not a baller or snooty rich, just old. He's been talking about giving me his Rolex since he wants to upgrade and since I've recently been getting into watches. I won't turn down a gift like that, obviously. But that's more because it's a powerful gesture by a father to his son and not because it's a freaking Rolex. If it were just me, I'm very interested in and excited about getting another Omega soonest. 

Many thanks for your constructive criticism !!! Like many people my skill is in the making and not the marketing. As a microbrand we suffer terribly from being neither one or the other .it is obvious from the response we get from the shows we do that we have a product that appeals but you are quite right our website is lack lustre and is due for a revamp !! Also i have plans to ptomote using video showing us making stuff..dials etc so people can see what goes into making our watches…

regards rob

I was really surprised by the watches in person, as they have an elegance and refinement that simply doesn't seem to come across in the photos I've seen. I truly didn't think they were the kind of watch for me (I do realise I'm not your target audience 😆) but after actually getting hands on with them I could definitely see me getting a Longitude or Flying Scotsman in the future.

I really enjoyed chatting to you guys at World Time and definitely think putting some videos together showing the production process would be brilliant. 🍻