Is it possible to talk about a bunch of the elephants in the room?! All at once?

You know the ones, the taboo topics, the whispered words that might get one in trouble, those ideas that make us a little uncomfortable in our chairs.

For instance:

Does a watches country of origin and political baggage bear any affect on ones opinions? Do I really want to buy from country XYZ because their political leader is a twat, and taxing poor Joe XYZ watchmaker, therefore I’m funding mr. uber twats war? :: For example, Russia, they make watches, but Russia isn’t just Putin and vice versa. Putin doesn’t represent the Russian watchmaker. Trouble is if we’re supposed to vote with our wallets, why buy now if I know part of it goes to fund war, regardless of what anyone in the transaction wants? I’ll wear a vintage Vostok, but buying new currently seems less than ideal.

Which is worse: the Rolex [or insert whichever sordid watch brand you want here] business model or, the oblivious acolytes cuckolding themselves for just a whiff of some swag who don’t know the difference between quartz and mechanical? :: Honestly, I don’t think Rolex should just get a pass for all the grey market back alley dealings they essentially condoned, but I also don’t hold it to them for life, I just dunno when to forgive them. The Bucherer acquisition and the 1908 make my head tilt in curiosity, but I’m not their target demographic, so my opinion ain’t shit. To answer the question though, which is worse? The business practices, or the uber bros? I can’t stand the clueless.

Are fake and counterfeit supporters just condoning criminal and terrorist organizations? Are they just lying to themselves and trying to pass on that lie to others by telling everyone that fakes don’t hurt anyone? :: I can see that it’s a funny joke sometimes, get a fake, get a laugh, but then what? And at what expense? Aren’t there enough homage companies out there that getting a replica isn’t really necessary?

Does wearing a flieger made by Laco, Stowa, IWC, Lange & Söhne, make one a nazi sympathizer? :: Yes. If you knowingly are aware of the history, seek out vintage pieces of the WWII era, and own them, then yes, you’re kind of a nazi simp. I own a flieger from Islander, and I bought it before I even knew where fliegers came from, can’t say i fancy any nazi’s. Would I own any of these companies modern fliegers? Ayup. Their past misgivings have been allocated to the history books, and they are not owned and run by the same people. Besides, we can’t quite be sure if these companies were sympathizers at the time of the war anyway, whether they were “asked” at gunpoint or not.

Is Hublot really as bad as that puffed up YT salesman says they are? Or does every luxury brand find a way to stretch the truth to us about something (Panerei? Tag Heuer?)? Or does every YouTuber have an angle? :: There is no question a majority of watch companies are out for every buck they can make—and some of them really don’t care how it happens. There might be some out there who actually give a damn about the watch and the customer, I doubt Hublot is one of them. Regardless of what that teletubby tells me, I know he’s a salesman to the end and will say whatever he wants to get the clicks, so I can’t really take his word that Hublot is bad at all. So no Hublot isn’t all bad, and yeah I’ll bet most YouTube “reviewers” like Nico who have AD status, have an angle.

Is Richard Mille really that ugly, or are you just jealous you can’t wear it and rock it, or even afford it, so therefore just bash it? :: When I first saw Richard Mille, I thought they were skeletonized G-Shocks, just shockingly different in presentation to get the looks. After a little research, turns out they kinda got some watchmaking chops. Sure, they might be overpriced, and divisive in design, but I don’t have an issue admitting I kinda like the look.

Let’s ask some hard questions here (possibly politely? I dunno, I’ll do my best), and let’s hope i don’t get banned.

Let this picture of a plus $310K Ulysse Nardin Voyeuristic Minute Repeater start off your “journey” into the the dark places of the watch-underworld.

Image

Cheers, and as always, Crunch on.

Reply
·

Concur all around. Some of the discourse around a watch's place of manufacture/origin is borderline infantile. To be fair, the syndrome doesn't restrict itself to timepieces, but you get what I mean. Japan bombed Pearl Harbor, yet how many Americans are wearing an Orient today with a wrist shot at the wheel of a Toyota? You have spoken no heresy.

·

A post after my own heart, but nowhere to be seen… algorithm strikes again.

Watch origins are a sore point. Destroys series #7 looked at popular origins of military types (B-Uhr, Radiomir, etc…) and if people can separate the time from the crime. It’s tricky. I have a huge soft spot for Radiomirs, but some of my family would consider me an absolute bellend because if it. Wearing an oversized diver doesn’t necessarily make one a fascist, but goose-stepping over to the right will, and you can wear any watch doing that. A lot of wristwatch invention and popularisation stems from military activity - as uncomfortable a fact that is, it needs to be said. Rare, and some might say, “naughty” watches are potentially quite desirable, but the line to which decency is crossed is not necessarily drawn by the owner, and that needs to be considered. Swastikas and Iron Eagles are do-nots, alongside faces of dictators, or gifts from unsavoury types.

I sympathise with those who find it uncomfortable to wear a Russian or Chinese watch, but politicising something apolitical is just a slippery slope. Swiss neutrality had its own baggage after all. I don’t think one needs to ruthlessly dictate what is allowed though - that sort of thing needs nipping in the bud (and whatever reason - I’m looking at you Nico).

Certain brand hate is ignorance, and I have recommended people have a little read around and do better; apparently that makes me a c*nt. In a sea of arseholes, it’s probably nice to be a c*nt.

·
Porthole

A post after my own heart, but nowhere to be seen… algorithm strikes again.

Watch origins are a sore point. Destroys series #7 looked at popular origins of military types (B-Uhr, Radiomir, etc…) and if people can separate the time from the crime. It’s tricky. I have a huge soft spot for Radiomirs, but some of my family would consider me an absolute bellend because if it. Wearing an oversized diver doesn’t necessarily make one a fascist, but goose-stepping over to the right will, and you can wear any watch doing that. A lot of wristwatch invention and popularisation stems from military activity - as uncomfortable a fact that is, it needs to be said. Rare, and some might say, “naughty” watches are potentially quite desirable, but the line to which decency is crossed is not necessarily drawn by the owner, and that needs to be considered. Swastikas and Iron Eagles are do-nots, alongside faces of dictators, or gifts from unsavoury types.

I sympathise with those who find it uncomfortable to wear a Russian or Chinese watch, but politicising something apolitical is just a slippery slope. Swiss neutrality had its own baggage after all. I don’t think one needs to ruthlessly dictate what is allowed though - that sort of thing needs nipping in the bud (and whatever reason - I’m looking at you Nico).

Certain brand hate is ignorance, and I have recommended people have a little read around and do better; apparently that makes me a c*nt. In a sea of arseholes, it’s probably nice to be a c*nt.