What is a fashion watch, then?
This relates to a recent post. What defines a fashion watch? Are Bering fashion watches and are the cheapest Casios? The cheapest Casio watch can be had for about £9 but it doesn't look as though it would be called one. Are the cheapest g-shocks fashion watches? What about some of the Hublot range?
It doesn't, necessarily seem to be about cost. I doubt that it is automatically about looks and style. You can pay good money for some horrible looking items. Is it about the movement? I wouldn't think so as many watches up to at least £300 often have very similar movements (and probably watches much more expensive than that).
If I went to a watch convention (which, I admit, is unlikely) and said that I was a fashion watch collector, would I be escorted from the premises? That is to say, is it more about snobbery than anything else?
I collect affordable watches and if possible, ones with some history behind them. I like Vostok and have three of their's. I have a one-handed, Luch watch from Belarus and a beautiful, English, Elliot...
The definition of "fashion" watch is a moving target. It is the watch community's equivalent of the No True Scotsman fallacy. It is there to merely exclude that which we don't like.
You can't like or even collect a fashion watch, as a fashion watch is defined by your dislike for it. 🙄
Of course the explicit subtext is that a fashion watch is for people that care about brand names or looks and not silly nerd minutiae like technical details, history, finishing of the innards and other things that bore the typical consumer, who is a lowly ignorant Philistine amused and tricked by baubles. We are so much different and better that it defies explanation.
I agree it can change from person to person, but it definitely starts with almost any watch from a fashion designer. I.e. Michael Kors, Kenneth Cole, Gucci. They usually have no watch provenance or pedigree. They do it to just capitalize on the name.
Would people like down on you? Probably some. I would think most would think you may not know much about watches, for you to make that claim.
Personally, I would take the cheapest Casio or Timex over any fashion watch.
It's really fuzzy for me sometimes. I see Aurelian's take and there is something to that.
As an owner of 6 Star Wars themed watches & past owner of numerous mall kiosk novelties, I say this with respect: IMO, a fashion watch's main definition is a watch that is made by another company than the one whose brand is on the exterior of the watch or watch packaging.
its easy, watch that manufactured by fashion company (usually came along with bad conotation within watch enthusiast). then cartier and bvlgari came and cancelled my previous statement😂. so i dont think there is an exact meaning of this word
It is a somewhat amorphous concept, but I tend to think of fashion watches in two distinct ways, one of which does have negative connotations. They can be seen as watches released by companies that also release clothing or jewelry, and are not necessarily bad and include Cartier, Polo, LaCoste, Tommy Hilfiger, Chanel, etc. They range in value and quality. The other view I have of them, the negative one, should probably be called something else, perhaps drop-ship watches. These are the Vincero, MVMT, Filippo Loretti, Spaghetti Scameti, etc. brands that simply add cost to watches from AliExpress.
Part of the problem in discussing fashion watches is this conflation of very different approaches from companies into a single entity called "fashion watches."
Fashion watches tend to be used as jewelry and usually no numbers on the face. They coordinate with the outfit and plastic is out. It's more about looks and less about time
A fashion watch has little to do with cost and has more to do with what that cost goes into. If the cheap watch has a reliable movement and functional purpose or aesthetic, probably not a fashion watch. If a $300 watch has an identical equivalent on aliexpress for $10 just with a different logo slapped on, then the money goes 100% into marketing and creating an illusion of quality. That's where I would draw the fashion watch line.
Fashion watches tend to be used as jewelry and usually no numbers on the face. They coordinate with the outfit and plastic is out. It's more about looks and less about time
Well, to be completely honest, if I could have my pick of a new mechanical watch (within reason), it would be the Omega CK 859. I do not make that choice based on its time keeping ability.
For me, it's brands who make primarily other things (like clothes) but branch out into watches and charge a premium for a cheap watch because it has their logo on it. So wouldn't call the likes of Skagen a fashion watch. Whereas Gucci or Vivienne Westwood I would say yes.
My calculation goes like that: (no horological significance + sub-par specs and build quality) x overpriced for what it is = archetypal fashion watch
I suppose there are fashion watches and fashion watches.
On one end, there are the high-end brands like Chanel, Hermes, Louis Vuitton... Of these, only Hermes had anything to do with watches - they were a retailer, with watches/clocks made as private label pieces for them by established manufacturers.
I still hate the way these three brands' watches look, but they happen to have built watchmaking departments specializing in stuff that goes into the haute horlogerie territory.
Then there's the stuff like Movado Group junk - Hugo Boss, Tommy Hilfiger... Especially the latter are rubbish. They look and feel like watches from a shop at a gas station. Oh, and MVMT, also a Movado Group brand. Junk. How do I know? Because I used to work at watch shops that retailed them, and I always tried to steer people towards anything of considerably better quality than that. The ugliness and cheap feel of these watches was inversely proportional to the customer's IQ. Don't even get me started on the trash made by the Turkish holding Arikan - Slazenger and Lee Cooper.
Was there any exception? Well, yes. Calvin Klein watches made by the Swatch Group. These were, in all fairness, quite decent. Their undoing were mineral crystals, but compared to the Movado Group's badly made trash, they were far from bad or wanting. Alas, the Swatch Group no longer makes watches for CK. I don't know who will CK turn to for making watches for them now.
I love luxury watches but I don't out right hate fashion brands. Some fashion brands bring cool designs to the table that luxury brands never thought of. What gives fashion brands a bad reputation is that they often price watches well above where they should be priced for the quality of the components they are made from.
My TVM cyclist fashion watch because Audemars Piguet does not make one like this.
Its all depends how much you know about watches and approach other. My best friend just getting into watches he has about 5 cheap American Exchange fashion watches valued 19.95 each and claim they are just as good Seiko and Citizen watches. The telling time I agree but the quality and movements he doesn't understand. Nothing wrong with Fashion watches if thats what you like. Just don't let Archie Luxury do a review because you are gonna get roasted and toasted out there.
In our circles we use the term "fashion watch" as a derogatory term, and it is truly more about brands than about watches. It seems to apply to two kind of brands:
The reason we use this term is to save ourselves time. When I go into an H.Samuel to look at their watches, I will simply not bother to look at their collection of watches labelled Hugo Boss, Tommi Hilfiger, Emporio Armani, Calvin Klein, Daniel Wellington. Notice that for either of the two forms of fashion watch the presence of the "overpriced" tag.
It is perfectly possible that this is unfair, that one of these companies took their watch department more seriously, and then one day someone pulls out their Hugo Boss watch model XYZ, makes an argument that this is a decent watch, and we struggle to refute that argument. At which point that brand would have made a small step out of the fashion watch ditch.
I suppose there are fashion watches and fashion watches.
On one end, there are the high-end brands like Chanel, Hermes, Louis Vuitton... Of these, only Hermes had anything to do with watches - they were a retailer, with watches/clocks made as private label pieces for them by established manufacturers.
I still hate the way these three brands' watches look, but they happen to have built watchmaking departments specializing in stuff that goes into the haute horlogerie territory.
Then there's the stuff like Movado Group junk - Hugo Boss, Tommy Hilfiger... Especially the latter are rubbish. They look and feel like watches from a shop at a gas station. Oh, and MVMT, also a Movado Group brand. Junk. How do I know? Because I used to work at watch shops that retailed them, and I always tried to steer people towards anything of considerably better quality than that. The ugliness and cheap feel of these watches was inversely proportional to the customer's IQ. Don't even get me started on the trash made by the Turkish holding Arikan - Slazenger and Lee Cooper.
Was there any exception? Well, yes. Calvin Klein watches made by the Swatch Group. These were, in all fairness, quite decent. Their undoing were mineral crystals, but compared to the Movado Group's badly made trash, they were far from bad or wanting. Alas, the Swatch Group no longer makes watches for CK. I don't know who will CK turn to for making watches for them now.
Well, that is the exact reason I started to make watches. Affordable quality and options.
You say that you do not like how their watches look. What is your honest opinion about mine?
https://www.liviakarsten.com/
And yes, it does cost much more to make than their watches. We designed it from the ground up to steer away from generic large scale produced junk.