Does a Watch Brand's Heritage Impact Your Purchase Decision?

This may be the toughest poll to answer on here, but I went with history and heritage due to my opinion the brands with the most history usually also have the best quality and reliability.

I want both!

Ideally both, but if I don’t like the watch itself, then the brand history and heritage aren’t really factors. So I voted B.

Depends on the mood.

I think that a cool and interesting heritage is a bonus; not a factor in making a purchase decision 👍🏻

I would say first order second order. With features and quality being first order probably together with pricing and dimensions considerations. History and heritage will be among the many second order considerations and certainly may elevate a watch above others in my thinking.

History is a bonus and makes it more appealing, but the present reality of the actual watch is what will determine if it's a watch I want to buy or just a watch with some cool history.

At first i was unsure how to vote.

Then i remembered that e.g. Longines has a extensive History, yet i disregard them as a Standard-ETA-Swatchgroup Brand. At the same Level as Certina, Tissot, Mido, Rado etc....

So no, History is not that important to me. Except for the Speedmaster .... :)

Omega

History is very intriguing to me, but I have been proven otherwise by newcomer microbrands.

Would you share some of your favorite microbrands?

Currently I only have a Selten aventurine, but I'm expecting a Spinnaker Fifty Phantoms by the end of the month. Other microbrands that caught my eye are Derenzo, Velini, Venezianico, Farer, Vario, De Guzman & Co. and Lorier.

I would agree with you, and the way I created the poll is a bit ungrateful to answer tbh, as there are many factors influencing a watch purchase. One of them is certainly price, where some brands with the heritage would be certainly unavailable to many people. Might create a poll regarding this as well. 😂

This is not a yes or no answer, a mix of A and B.

The watch first. Brand heritage is for me the topping. Its important but not the main focus

Neither. For me it's all about how the watch looks, especially the dial.

History often is what gets me into a brand. So it is important to me. But equally all historic brands were new at some point, so new brands still deserve attention as long as they are trying to create something long lasting, not just a cash grab

Sometimes.

Hey Nebojsa,

As some people mentioned here I think it’s not so much an either-or, but I think I get where you’re getting at. It might not be a dichotomy so to speak but we can rank order the two areas even if we engage in both.

For me personally, most important is a watch’s story. Maybe it’s a rerelease of a 1950-1960s military watch (e.g. Bulova Hack or perhaps it was featured on X movie (e.g. Hamilton Murph) or maybe it’s the watch that defined what that category is today (e.g. G-Shock Square). You’ll notice that viewed this way, it’s history but not the brand’s history, it’s the watch’s/the design’s particular history.

Quality and features are obviously important but they tend to follow anyway.

History and heritage is just marketing bs. I only care about what they do now.

I would say reputation over heritage. I don't care how long they've been around if their watches are crap. I'd rather have a new brand that's known for making quality watches.