Heritage; What Does It Mean? How Much Does It Matter in a Watch or a Brand?

Funny but it seems to me that "Heritage" means watch brands cannot anymore come up with a new design for their new releases that they just copy what their ancestors did 50-200 years before. 😂

I select my watches based on factors other than heritage, but if I'm considering 2 watches that are very similar in other aspects, I may consider the brands "heritage" as part of my decision making process, but only if it is authentic. An unrelated entity reviving a storied brand name simply because someone with sufficient available cash bought the rights to a name means sweet f**k all as far as I'm concerned. In terms of "heritage" for established brands, the length of time that a brand has existed is meaningless in and of itself - it must also be accompanied by a proven track record.

[Cue predictable responses based on SES.]

As a history buff, a heritage brand has been a factor for me in watches. Mechanical watches (and even quartz watches) are an out-dated technology, so we really aren't shopping for the latest and greatest gizmo here. (As awesome as it is, not much reason for all the functions of a great chrono like the Speedmaster that can't be done with a basic smartphone.) So I look for the story that comes with a watch. I like the idea that a company has been making one thing so well that they have been doing it for our grandparents and even before. Owning a bit of history, in a way, even if it's a new watch. Really wish that Elgin was still around and Hamilton was still in Pennsylvania. But I still hold dear my Dad's Elgin tank, even though it doesn't work, really love my Hamilton Khaki Field, even though I know it's not technically the same company from Lancaster, and something is special about my Bulova Precisionist, even though it's now really a Citizen. So, even though some brands may have passed down just a name, as long as there is a good quality with it, there is value in that story. For me, the big Swiss brands are out of my collection parameters, but I think there is some added value for heritage. Some companies definitely charge quite the premium, I agree and that is why I'm in the sub-$1000 tier, but if they've been doing what they do for nearly 150+ years, that's part of the value. We really are wearing out-dated pieces of mechanical jewelry. Part of it is the story they carry.

Heritage means very little to me, it's mostly a good marketing/branding device. Look at brands like Tissot, Longines, Oris, etc... They proudly announce their founding year on the landing page of their websites, just so you know how much "heritage" they have. Tissot even puts it on the dial sometimes. Sure they make good watches, but they aren't better than brands like CW, Damasko, Sinn, etc., that have far less "heritage".

If people like a brand with heritage, enjoy the brand. I personally don't really care about it, and will buy from any brand that makes a watch I find interesting.

The only thing I want in terms of heritage is a sense of stability, that the company is likely to exist in 10-20 years. I’d like to have a good feeling that the company will be around for service and spare parts. It’s nice that they can draw from a back catalog like Longines or Omega but that certainly isn’t a primary consideration for me.

For new brands, I think it’s better that they stick popular movements like ETA, Sellita or Seiko, etc. At least it’s the comfort of knowing that the watch is serviceable even if the brand disappears.

I'm at a bit of a loss re: a definition of SES (prob because that is the same acronym my client uses to describe what they do and I can't think past it.)

There is that, but realistically, there's only so much design that can go into a watch and most of that happened 50-200 years ago. LOL

Let me try with a definition.

Heritage: A euphemism in the watch industry. It is mostly used to describe the ungodly high premium which is charged by certain brands for watches that were made in the past by a company they are loosely related to.

I don't know if there is a time frame given to heritage. But handing down knowledge to another within that brand is by definition of heritage. So how long does it take or what does it take to be considered a brand with heritage. A generation? Having proprietary movements, design? Maybe time will tell lol.

Love to have deeper discussions, but in person. Fingers get sore after poking at the screen.

Cheers!

Somewhat agree to that observation. But honestly, I believe there is some degree of "laziness" on the design aspect of producing a new watch nowadays. Or watch brands just do not want to jump into the unknown and risk producing a flop! I admire the courage of some brands who ventured in this direction however. Tudor with the North Flag, AP with the Code 11.59 and just recently Rolex with the new Cellini 2023. Then again, I understand they have to run a business and stick to a proven design/formula. 😉

Being cynical my first reaction is to paint heritage and legacy as the words that a marketing department use when they run out of ideas to convince us that they giving them our money is a really smart idea. Sometime it obviously isn't since the legacy of some companies isn't something they might wish to bring to our attention.

On the other hand, we all want to connect with our past, or at least our perceived collective past, and it is often done through possessing "stuff" (aka collecting). The more the better If this past is glorious or has greater than life people. The idea of having heritage or legacy is a mean to convince us that its a conduit that somehow allow us to reach back to the past and connect with something meaningful that will make us greater. This is all BS of course, but it's a BS that sells if done correctly because we all appreciate a good story when it's told by a talented storyteller.

So heritage and legacy means being able to show historical records showing that you were there and did something important or meaningful. This past also has to be carefully curated before publication, because some of the things that were done are better left forgotten. The idea also has to be embodied into an item that has preferably some advantageous features, or is at least functional. It will also help if it doesn't look offending or fugly because you can polish a turd for 100 years and it will still remain a turd.

So there it is, to have a claim to heritage and/or legacy there is the need to be convincing about the existence of a continuous link to something that is believed to have happened in the past, show that it was a positive happening, that the current product looks like the one that participated in this event and that it is still nice enough to look at so it won't offend anyone's sensibilities or taste.

And that's how things like a Moonwatch or an Explorer are born and a legend is created and why Vostoks are failing (not pretty enough) or other brands are careful about their heritage (timing bomb raids and strafing civilians, really?) and why once a thing is recognized as having legacy and heritage, its creators are very careful not to change its appearances too much (Think Porsche 911 for example)

There’s a concept (I’m not sure where I read this anymore) that basically says we decide what we want/want to do, then we make up reasons to justify it. We only think the arguments for or against come first. This sounds counterintuitive, but I think there’s a lot of evidence that it’s largely true.

With watches, this shows up when people want a Rolex because it’s a Rolex, but they tell themselves it’s about specs or heritage. It’s really about their emotions when they think about Rolex. But that’s uncomfortable to say. It’s easier to quote the past accomplishments of a company than to admit you just like the watch for some reason.

“Heritage” is about associations that make us feel good. I feel better about a watch that went to the moon than a similar watch that didn’t. I feel better about a watch that was the first or the best at something. Look at those stupid dive watches that have a fifty bajillion meter WR. They’re big, ugly, and stupid, but they have a halo effect on other divers from that company. Zenith makes fine watches, but if you already like them you probably like to think about how they provided early movements for the mighty Daytona. Does it really matter? No, but it feels good to think about as you wear your Zenith.

I bought a 1950s Zenith just last week based solely on the premise that it's a Zenith and it's the brand that saved the Daytona. Should a simplistic manual wind watch (the thing I got) from almost two decades before the automatic chronograph be treated with the same reverence as Zenith's pièce de résistance, El Primero? Nope, not at all. These two things are not only separated by innovation, function, complexity, and time, the only thing they have in common ultimately is that both are made by Zenith.

But as you stated, quite astutely, it feels good to think about the mighty Daytona as I wear my Zenith. For me, the story or the legacy or the heritage behind the brand is the rational element to an emotional action (people buy with emotions and justify their purchase with reason after the fact--which is a real marketing concept). I like the look of the watch but it's too old and I have too many watches that I need more than just "oh lovely" to justify a purchase I already decided at the emotional level I am making. So heritage helps here. I didn't just buy a watch, I bought a piece of history. That's easier to swallow than I just gave hundreds of dollars away for a piece of metal I already have tens of.

Yeah, I’d value a vintage watch more if it were an Omega than a Tissot. It would somehow bring me more enjoyment.

We see ourselves in our possessions, so what they “mean” is important. When others ooo and aaaah over our Rolex, we feel validated.

Now the specs and all that aren’t nothing, I only mention all this because we talk specs to death and usually ignore the shallow emotions that helped us justify a purchase.

Very interesting viewpoint and one I can see holds a lot of truth. Always appreciate your contributions to my musings.

For me heritage in the watch world means artisanship. Utilising Skills that have been practiced and improved upon by craftspeople for generations. These watches are not, and cannot be churned out in their hundreds, let alone thousand, tens of thousands etc. Each watch takes between 3 and 9 months to create, with every single part being made by hand, often without modern machinery. It has nothing to do with the age of a company simply because the vast majority of these watches are made by individuals or small teams in tiny workshops and not factories. Watch makers such as Felipe Pikkulik and Masahiro Kikuno are true heritage watch makers, as well as slightly larger maisons like A lange & Sohne.

Heritage and Legacy are like NFTs — you’re told you’re buying something which you cannot by definition own. 😉

Interesting perspective and one I cannot immediately refute.

Brand: Could this not also be a synonym for heritage or legacy?

The companies can have them of course, but the trick is to get your marketing to persuade the customer that they are getting in on it too.

Maybe a few have actually managed making that real — Omega and it’s serial numbers and archives for specific watches — but those don’t tend to market it as something you are buying.

Any watch can have heritage and legacy of a personal nature though.

For me heritage is one of many parts of a brand rather than being the same or similar to it.

Oh, I'm late here!

In my case - I care about heritage and it sometimes weights a decision about getting I watch that interests me.

I define it as a company that has a history and can take design cues from its prior decades. Not cribbing or homaging. I will avoid homage / clommage for lack of heritage and lack of originality.

That said, I'll still buy a no heritage watch if I like it enough. A lack of direct contact with its past due to the quartz meteor impact extinction is tenuous heritage. But will get those as well if the design is unique. Zodiac fits that bill. they’re still Swiss and make some great re interpretations of 50s Zodiac diver designs. And fun original designs that are unique to that company.

..And of course : Seikoha heritage! WOOOOOO🤘🏆💪! 😀😉

I will respectfully agree to disagree. I think that there’s a massive difference between, say, JLC, which has operated continuously since the 1800s, even though it’s now operating under the umbrella of Richemont, and Gevril, which is a modern company (ca. 1990s) using the name of a company which previously had a long history but went under during the quartz crisis/revolution, and which has no relationship to the former company other than the use of the name.

I think that we agree more than disagree. JLC, Cartier, and perhaps Omega are the best examples of brands that have been less affected by consolidation. Part of that may be the structure of Richemont as compared to Swatch. Some of that may be due to the brands themselves (unlike Omega, Cartier never had to back off of a line of digital watches). Perhaps I underestimate the independence of certain brands within the corporate structure, but even JLC can't be as independent as it once was. There is always the problem of asset allocation. In trying to make Montblanc into a major brand (like they are in other areas), is Richemont diverting resources that JLC could use? I wish that we still had an industry insider to tell us.

Longevity without innovation doesn't interest me other than props for surviving which is obviously no small feat in itself. If the watch actually accomished something beyond merely existing (think polar caps, diving the Mariana Trench, circumnavigation of the globe, space travel, crossing the Atlantic, mountaineering summits, storming Guadalcanal, etc) then I'm more likely to be feeling the claim to heritage. I'm fine with buying a well spec'd watch that doesn't have a heritage angle (ex San Martin chrono diver) and also fine buying a watch where heritage is it's strong suit (ex Nivada Antarctic). Many revived brands are in my view gimmicky cash grabs with nostalgia as the marketing hook though a select few have done justice to the original. I suspect that many enthusiasts are unaware that they are even sporting a revived brand due to the skillful editing of the narrative by the newest owners of the licensing rights. Great topic with no "right" answers just what feels right for the individual. As always your wrist, your rules.

Revived brands for sure are lacking in the actual heritage department. One of the reasons I won't buy a new Smiths, even though I like the designs.

Nothing wrong with being true to yourself and surrounding yourself with others who support your inclination to do so.

As I have involved in this hobby I think it matters more and more there are so many cool micro brands that offer the detailing, specs, cool looks, even in house movements; however, if you want to spend that little extra or I should say lot extra you can buy into the heritage. To me it’s not just about the watch but the history of the watch, the history of the watch movement, important movements of history that had to do with that watch, or maybe movies I love which featured the watch. It’s like buying a historical house or a famous painting. Watches are works of art. Some new up and coming street artists make some really cool stuff but it’s going to be differnt than buying a devinci

Great post! Heritage is a word I’ve always associated with a brand which has developed a watch to tackle a certain problem.. ball engineer, muhle glasshutte with its SAR, Rolex gmt and sub lines. If these watches are still being produced years and years after their introduction I believe this is where the heritage tag for a brand comes into place. All be it the world is a very different place today, many of the watches will never be used for the very purpose they’re were designed.. but who cares! We love and buy them anyway.. I’d love a Rolex gmt! But as a lorry driver I’ll never cross multiple time zones, but to know this watch was developed with the intended use of Pan Am pilots and others alike👌that’s heritage for me👍