Chronotriggered destroys watches… #1

Neither!  It is sheer idiocy, lunacy, and highway robbery to sell "in-house" movements as somehow superior to "workhorse movements."  

I could rehash the whole "complex components require massive fixed R&D expenditure, which then creates natural monopolies" blah, blah, blah, and how if you go "in-house" you get Nissan CVT transmission quality, etc., etc.  

What I've written and have always written about "in-house" movements:

• I would take an ETA or Sellita or Seiko or Miyota movement over an "in-house" 8 days a week
• "Workhorse movements" have shown their reliability and quality in real-world, empirical, day-to-day use and abuse, for decades on end now
• Parts are plentiful, any competent watch-maker is equipped to work on them, it's all relatively cheap to maintain, etc., etc.
• The only reason that manufacturers are touting "in-house" movements is because the Swatch Group bought up all the movement manufacturers coming out of the quartz crisis, and then wanted to put all their competitors out of business by no longer supplying them with ETA movements, etc.  Unfortunately, the Swiss government stepped in to prevent free commerce.  As a result, all these manufacturers had to move in-house, and their marketing tells you that in-house is better
• But, if in-house is better, why do in-house movements cost so much more?  As a business guy, my hypothesis is this:  "I gotta charge you a ton upfront, to cover all the downstream warranty costs I gotta eat, when the movement fails you!"

Given all that, I would put both of those in a museum as "best in class" and destroy all the "in-house" movement watches out there!

Bremont for me. I can't put my finger on it but something seems disingenuous and pandery. 

I suppose as a younger brand they wanted to make a big song and dance about how this was not a “jobber” with an off the shelf ebauche, but watch people can sniff these things out, just like they did a few years before with Tag and the cal.1887.

I'm in the "neither" camp.  Look, these are either decent watches or they aren't, but deceitful marketing doesn't change that.  Had I bought either under the impression they were sporting new in-house movements, yeah, I'd be annoyed.  Beyond that, I'd wear either of these.

That said, I like where you're at with this post.  I'm not sure what you could come up with that would piss me off enough to want to smash it, but I'm open to suggestions.  Even things I hate, I'd be willing to bet will look different to me in t 10-20 years.  But you should definitely have another go at making me mad with watches.

Also, it's amazing that people still think they can get away with stuff in the internet age.  How do they not realize there are thousands of lonely dudes out there with nothing better to do than wreck somebody else's day?

Yes, you and I share similar views on in-house vs off-the-shelf. At the same time, brands can do what they want and both brands technically did nothing that is not common practice, and maybe just got a little carried away with the marketing. 
These two always seem to rule up so much hostility, and it is both tiresome and amusing in equal measures.

Pick one though… for me?

I do see a lot of polls that are pick one of these to keep, or if you get rid of a watch out of this random selection what would it be, which is fun and all, but (no offense) can come across as a little contrived, and a little “content for content sake”. I was watching the program, and I liked the concept, albeit it is difficult to even say the choice between destroying a Rolf Harris against the Eric Gill is not a fair choice and a little contrived. Harris was a beloved entertainer who encouraged many children to take up art and whose fall from grace was documented; Gill, conversely, is a highly revered artist within the establishment whose “crimes” were only revealed after his death when his diaries were discovered. If alive he would have faced significant jail time. Harris and Gill aren’t even in the same league, it was purely provocative (it gets the people going), but it does potentially open other avenues in discussion around whether you can separate the art from the artist. I mean, I like The Smiths despite Morrissey, and I like Morrissey despite Morrissey, but it makes it hard to listen to retrospectively. Anyway, I digress… this too can be seen to be quite contrived as a concept (a straight shoot-out always is) but I think a parallel discussion over which of these two watches I have seen people have visceral reactions to was one I wanted to try and replicate. Perhaps this is an indulgence too far? It would be more shocking if I actually acquired both models, grabbed an audience, and smashed the losing watch, but maybe that is something we could convince the platform to invest in if this gains traction 😀

I do see a lot of polls that are pick one of these to keep, or if you get rid of a watch out of this random selection what would it be, which is fun and all, but (no offense) can come across as a little contrived, and a little “content for content sake”. I was watching the program, and I liked the concept, albeit it is difficult to even say the choice between destroying a Rolf Harris against the Eric Gill is not a fair choice and a little contrived. Harris was a beloved entertainer who encouraged many children to take up art and whose fall from grace was documented; Gill, conversely, is a highly revered artist within the establishment whose “crimes” were only revealed after his death when his diaries were discovered. If alive he would have faced significant jail time. Harris and Gill aren’t even in the same league, it was purely provocative (it gets the people going), but it does potentially open other avenues in discussion around whether you can separate the art from the artist. I mean, I like The Smiths despite Morrissey, and I like Morrissey despite Morrissey, but it makes it hard to listen to retrospectively. Anyway, I digress… this too can be seen to be quite contrived as a concept (a straight shoot-out always is) but I think a parallel discussion over which of these two watches I have seen people have visceral reactions to was one I wanted to try and replicate. Perhaps this is an indulgence too far? It would be more shocking if I actually acquired both models, grabbed an audience, and smashed the losing watch, but maybe that is something we could convince the platform to invest in if this gains traction 😀

Destroy a watch? 

Calls rent-a-mob to storm @chronotriggered castle for such a heinous notion 

Destroy a watch? 

Calls rent-a-mob to storm @chronotriggered castle for such a heinous notion 

You don't have a phone number for Rent-A-Mob do you?  Asking for a guy I hardly even know should anything go wrong.

@chronotriggered For your sake, I picked the Bremont, simply because it does not fit me, the brand seems rudderless, and that Tag has resulted in a lot of cool-looking chronos later on.

I'm actually in the neither camp, but as that wasn't a voting option and I'm addicted to the polls I picked the Tag as I was the least interesting.

My biggest complaint are the animals hurt for leather. Often mislabeled cats and dogs from China which is the world's biggest producer of leather.

And many others too. There are documentaries about it like Dominion on YouTube. 

Not sure if that's controversial exactly, but it's sad to me.

Cutting to the chase… everything Bremont does has a whiff - No… a STENCH of try-hard-fakery-look-at-us-pompous-w*nkers 

Case in point 👇🏼

“Let’s take a random actor no one really gives a monkeys about, pay him a bunch of money, call him a “friend of the brand” (WTAF does that even mean?!), do some glossy photography and vom-inducing copywriting to launch yet another overpriced and boring steel sports watch, feeding a completely invented, hyper-polished and wierdly plastic sense of faux masculinity. 

Honestly, they can just get in the bin! 

So this poll was an easy one for me.

Bleugh 🤢 🤬

#triggered

I care very little about movements, so in-house or not matters not at all to me, so I approach this more from the angle of 'Whose lies were worst?'. As @Aurelian  said, if Bremont were stupid enough to get themselves caught out, having not learned lessons from Tag, well then that stupidity should not be rewarded. So Bremont for me.

What's most interesting about this question for me is how people approach the subject in different ways, which was obviously @chronotriggereds intention.

It appears that as watch lovers it would take a lot for us to be complicit in the actual destruction of a watch, regardless of history. I may be the only one who would say that if the Nazi Reverso was going to a collector who was going to use it to show his reverence to its former owner, I'd say destroy it. If it was going into a museum to be used to help us remember and learn about that horrific period in history, so it not be repeated, then that is a great reason to keep it around.

So what it boils down to for me when considering destroying a watch, piece of art or book is the question "Can something good still come from this existing?" I think in the vast majority of cases for watches the answer is going to be yes. 

You see, this is interesting, you are ok with the Tag because it’s effectively a Seiko in some way shape or form - a Seiko remix perhaps? Embracing the controversy head on?

Yes, one would theoretically be destroyed on the show, and that is kind of the point. If the Tag doesn’t resonate purely aesthetically, and that is why, perfectly valid if the controversy is not affecting you. This is why the watch version of this is so good, you could care, you could not, it’s so very nuanced it’s good to see this pan out.

Well yes, watches are going to command less existential impact than, say, a Picasso or a watercolour by Hitler, but at the same time, as many watch fans are incredibly passionate it was always going to be interesting (to me at least) to see how this format could work and what sort of responses would appear. 

The choice of watches was also deliberate, I wanted to choose something of horological relevance that saw and generated controversy within the watch community, rather than one of Hiltler’s watches or the Panerai’s, that would be a pretty forgone conclusion (no offence). I wanted something a little more leftfield, I think it’s revealing a lot about what people really think about some issues that certain watch fans get very passionate about... it seems a lot of people don’t care, and it’s therefore aesthetic or other less technical reasons that allows for the choice. Whether they support the theoretical destruction that comes from said choice in this scenario is also coming through: many would rather not choose at all whether through apathy or concern. Then of course, there are the zealots 😂. 
I am surprised at the current margin in the polls, it’s not very clear cut, it’s a difficult one. I never said this was supposed to be easy.

Tell us what you really think. 😂

I mean, this sort of post kind of really brings to the fore the Bremont shade that is still prevalent. Watchfinder’s video for the Wright Flyer is titled “The Most Controversial Watch Ever” - that is clickbait if ever I’ve seen... it is infamous. I’m very pleased to see this sort of reaction, I think the two watches chosen are perfect for this pilot.

I think the two watches chosen are perfect for this pilot.
 

100% agree. You smashed it mate 💥 Look at the diversity of perspectives on show you’ve brought to the fore 👏🏼 Nice work. Look fwd to instalment #2 

If there is enough demand then I can investigate the possibility of a second instalment. 

None, i actually like both.

Doesn’t work that way, not the format, pick one.