"I would never pay $$$$ for THAT brand!": Pricing Pigeonholing/Stereotypes

It is unrealistic to expect watch prices to remain frozen in time.

Unfortunately, inflation is real. And, because the costs increase, prices must increase over time.

While this might be unpopular, this is a fact of life and business.

Completely agree. It is unfair to pigeonhole one brand into a price range and dismiss everything they do outside of that category without giving the watch a fair chance by comparing its objective qualities instead of fabricating a false opinion based only on the brand's name.

This was very apparent with the release of the last Christopher Ward Twelve X a couple days ago. Everyone immediately decided it was inappropriately priced and assuredly a worse watch than a skeletonized Zenith or Oris based on a stupid name without ever seeing the watch in the metal. What if it is actually a better watch? Snobs are so brainwashed by a name on a dial that they won't consider the actual product. Are you buying a watch or a brand name on a tag? 🙄

I mean I would not buy a Tag Heuer or Breitling at retail, as I think in hand for my perceptions and preferences they are over priced compared to Tudor, Longines, Omega, and Rolex. Now someone else may feel that way about Tudor or Omega. In either case the personal opinion and perception on the value proposition is valid.

Well I would say it depends on the watch itself for example an entry level hublot is way to overpriced, even some of the steel rolexes but since they retain value I would consider it okay. On the other hand I like Longines or Oris for what you get as I think sub 10K you do not really get much better watches but instead you are paying for the brand.

Unfortunately in my humble opinion it boils down to...Simple economics 101 supply and demand.

Take a look a G-Shock, they make $50 watches and $5000 watches.

My point on this is very subjective. If I were the owner/CEO of a brand, I’d love to have the possibility of going up market whenever it makes sense… That being said, as a consumer, if Baltic comes up with a $10K horological masterpiece, would I buy it? Probably not. I’d be happy they make it, but I wouldn’t buy it. I’d rather spend that money on another brand. That’s not to say I expect Baltic to keep selling watches under $3K forever. Why would they?

Oh, for sure . . . and of course someone might have very particular relationships with certain brands or only with particular eras/collections that inform that perspective.

I paid $3000 for a secondhand Seiko and do not agree with paying $10k for a Rolex Submariner. I guess, therefore, I don't agree with pigeonholing and assessing higher or lower value of a brand base on the name. Prices for watches will go up like everything else.

In the case for Oris, the 400 caliber watches represent their investment in their future by fronting the costs for the new movement. It is a better movement. Their only flaw that made me not buying them for now is their laid back attitude in coming out with new cases and dials that distinguish them from the old. Maybe, attitudes will change when the new models come out.

I understand the point of the post and acknowledge there is merit in the argument... but, there is, in my opinion, an exception to this. As far as I know, the brand "Tudor" has always been lower tiered than "Rolex" so I think the majority of people would actually be surprised if one day Tudor releases series of watches that are more expensive than counterpart-comparable Rolex models...

To your very last sentence, I actually - speaking for myself - buy the watch and the brand name... 😅

Oh, yeah . . . I don't think anybody would argue with that when you have two (related) brands that are very much on different tracks. I see folks balking with certain Seiko prices creeping up and including tech like spring drive.

I did a long form post on the topic a while back. There are a couple distinctions:

• Did the brand significantly raise prices without actual innovations? Costs go up, so some price increase are expected.

• Or is it a classic “it is too much” because of built in excessive distribution touch points which leads to horrible secondary prices (Omega for example).

To my referenced post, I want to see brands like Jack Mason, Nodus, Baltic, and others go upmarket, but often times folks are not ready for it and yes, critiquing it is short sided.

The reactions you describe are reasonable and relatable. If a brand wants to go upscale, it has to make a case. We owe these brands nothing and they are sort of victims of their own success. I wouldn’t call this unfair to the brand and certainly not shortsighted. Once enough YTs and civilians get hands on with the Oris models you’re referencing, consumers will take the leap or look elsewhere. Makes me think about the similar experience of Hyundai / Kia in the US.

Seiko is a much better example imo of being pigeonholed. Some WC posters can’t get over the Seiko in Grand Seiko while conceding it’s a great brand.

The first two comments nail it.

All I’ll add is this is further prejudiced by the price we buy in at.

The Twelve X is more than 10x what I paid for my Christopher Ward, which whilst secondhand, was the most amount of money I could EVER imagine spending on a watch.

If you asked me in 2019 if £350 was worth it for a Christopher Ward, it was a maybe!

The simple truth in pricing anything is that every product is worth exactly the amount someone is willing to pay. This fact also varies from person to person. For example- I wouldn’t buy a Rolex, Hublot, or Richard Mille if they were under $1k simply because I don’t care for their design. Contrast that with happily paying retail for a VC Overseas or JLC Reverso. It’s all subjective.

Gonna put "happily" in quotations . . . I do what needs to be done for what I desire haha. Damn you JLC.

It's all subjective. Some people have mentioned inflation and that's a big part. But people will always have their biases towards brands or price points to determine the "quality of a watch". What matters is that you like the watch, and you are happy with it. I don't buy watches hoping to get noticed or gain attraction. I'm just as happy wearing my pagani design with a casual outfit as I am wearing my vacheron for a night out.

"...but a lot of pricing is based on intangibles..." And one key intangible is brand. Brand names have value because they represent something and have earned (or bought) trust, and can charge a premium over no name brands. A brand name signals what you can expect, a certain sort of product, a certain level of quality, certain designs and features, etc., and yes, price point. There are "value brands" and "premium" brands. If a brand steps too far out of their lane, they face pushback because they confound expectations. People expect extreme conservatism from Rolex, a millimeter change here or there, so when they release a jigsaw puzzle dial people lose their minds. People expect quirkiness from Moser, so when they release a wacky watch made of cheese, it presumably adds to their brand value; see, look, I'm buying in this avant-garde brand! If Lange were to sell a watch for a mere $10,000, people would say they were cheapening the brand. Seiko was king of value brands, so people continue to lose their minds as they push into higher price points. Grand Seiko was "just a Seiko" until the expended a lot of time, effort, and money to convince people otherwise. So it's only natural that people balk when brands charger a higher than expected price, and it's their job to convince the world that its justified.

Nice train of thought about the social contract of sorts that brands have made with their audiences.

I really don't understand the CW X or BC. Why make these while the rest of their collection are solid pieces that many love? I am not interested in these models because they're butt ugly not necessary of their value proposition.

I think they may be testing their brand's position like Seiko SLA and SNR models.

I think part of price hikes are some brands testing what their customer base will actually pay and, on the other hand, it's a brand attempting to change their branding.

We've seen this with the massive uptick in Rolexes where they were a high quality tool watch at a higher price, but still attainable to the common man, to them shifting to charging luxury brand prices.

Using an outside example: Apple was run of the mill in pricing and they changed marketing strategy by closing down 90% of their stores and reopening new ones in high end malls, etc. With that they added several hundred percent markup to all products. Gave out free junk to certain A-list celebs and paid to put their stuff in movies. So, a phone that would be reasonable at $150-$200 is now listed at over $1000. It flew under the radar because Apple held so little of the market and they still kind of hold the same small corner of the market, but just have more of a following.

I think most pushback is at this rebranding. If Casio up and decided that all their watches were worth nothing less than $120 for a F91 and upwards of $15000 for a G-shock that had slight improvements (if any), there would be an uproar. Casio is known as a solid budget brand, who does offer some more expensive models. Their more expensive watches are released under certain lines (such as Ediface or G-Shock), so they thread the needle of their base and putting out more expensive products.

Seiko was was known for their affordable watches, but in recent years they've moved out of that market. There doesn't seem to be any innovation or change in build quality to point to a price increase that doesn't follow costs or inflation. And it's such things where people may feel kind of betrayed by something they once could depend on.

Nothing against Seiko for doing such. I would have liked to have seen them maintain their typical lineup and then maybe come out with a Seiko deluxe (or whatever branding) and release more expensive models under that.

But overall I think people are fine paying for innovation or better quality. It's just when theres a sudden increase for no reason, especially when it creates a vacuum where their products used to be. Eventually people will move on and take to whatever fills that gap. Whether the rebranding works and the watchmaker succeeds is their new area is up to value for money, innovation, quality etc.

Ppl who complain about Oris or Seiko charging more for their watches are fine with Rolex charging north of 8K USD for industrial made, good but ok boring watches and making you buy more stuff for the privilege of buying them.

Although, I think it's a good thing for us enthusiasts, that GS is kept as our secret. We don't want GS to go the way of Rolex. I can foresee a time when a GS dress watch will be at the level of PP Calatrava, at a fraction of the price.

I'm influenced by the video made by this watch that watch, and I start to distinct hand crafting watch making vs mass manufacturing. And I think below 10k, most watch maker would be producing watches in mass via manufacturing.

And there usually limited companies that are vertically integrated, which imples most watch company are sourcing parts.

Also on his video, he mentioned 3 hander watch price ranges from 500 to 3000 usually have more noticeable quality difference as price increases. But exceeding certain price point line 5000 to 10000, the quality might not grow as much. And the differentiation points become branding, story telling, "movement".

And is in house movement really better is another whole story.

I think in the end, I think company want to grow their profit, and whether or not the price is acceptable depends on the product. If the product is really mind blowing like the Bell Canto, even if it was price at 5k. People are willing to buy. However for the skeletonised CW, it is really not that that special, and we can get skeleton watch 3 hander for much cheaper price range. Also for most non hard core CW fan, they still personally not ready for 4k yet.

I do hope all company can be successful in their their top line products, as long they also keep innovating and kept entry watches interesting for us too.

I have a very simple view on this. Brands can price their watches however they like. They either provide value at that price point, be it with an innovative movement or extraordinary finishing or artistic/design value, or some combination of the three, or they don’t.

If someone says “I would never pay xyz$ for this brand” then either:

1. They are not the right customer for this brand, they won’t buy, other people (who see the value) will, and all is good.

2. The watch does not provide value (however you want to define it) commensurate with the price, too few people buy. This watch will be available used or on the gray market or even retail at a significant discount.

Agree with written as long as the jumps are not too much at once. Every brand needs to be aware where they are and where they want to go in steady steps. Much of pricing perception is tied with brand perception and no matter how much technology and innovation they make the jumps from one to next watch price should not be too high, even of the improvement justifies the costs

Right . . . or they were the right consumer for the brand at one point, but they are choosing not to move with the brand as they evolve or adjust their brand identity. All valid choices.

You are 100% correct on everything there. I think the big thing for many of us is many companies have raised their prices well beyond the average inflation rate over the last few years.

This is true HOWEVER prices have shot up in the last 3 or 4 years. For Omega's and JLC we are talking 40% or more. Now yes inflation was high... But not THAT high.

GREEDflation is real and unfortunately prevalent in the watch industry.

Watch prices have moved up too fast. Inflation is rampant but they have scaled up prices more than the inflation has hit them. The huge boom in the market caused brands to drink their own koolaid.

People have to accept that brand equity is a big part of watches. You are paying for the name on the dial. So when a watch doesn’t have the big brand cache you expect to get more from it in other areas relative to its price.

You bring up Oris. Go check the prices of that brand on the grey market.