Why do people think not buying homages means spending big money?
My posts never get looked at so to have a post get the sort of response this one on why I'll probably never embrace knock-offs did was kind of shocking.
The responses spun off in all sorts of different directions but there was one theme or flavour of response I wanted to address. That is that eschewing knock-offs necessarily means buying into the whole big money, high status, peacocking thing.
That simply isnt true. Yeah, I got some pricier watches but I dont have a single rolex, omega, tudor, cartier, AP, Patek or any of the hype watches knocked off.
A huge chunk of my collection is Seiko divers costing under 1k usd.
Almost half my collection are vintage Alpinas I probably paid less for than a Pagani Design sub knock-off.
Im a massive fan of the super original and hyper accessible stuff from Mr Jones
And the weird and wonderful you can pick up from 'mainstream' brands when you really pay attention.
Most of these watches I picked up for around the same kind of price a knock-off costs, only one of those in this post (guess which) cost sort of "serious" cash - lets say over 1k usd.
In my post I never once mentioned price and yet thats the first place pretty much all the more, lets say "heated", commenters went.
Why is that?
A collector, I think of watches as art where the story and aesthetics are everything and function isn't that important. Into Seiko, Breitling, JLC, German independents , got a Chopard and I think I ne...
More from pete.mcconvill.watches
I suppose it depends on how you define "homage", and what styles you find appealing. I won't go out of my way to find a brand that isn't considered a "homage" by some rando on the internet because the watches I find appealing are considered "homages".
I like my Momentum Sea Quartz 30, but to some out there it's a "homage" to some other brand, and therefore unworthy of love. (It's also a filthy quartz)
Are you fishing for a particular response?
I am not going to rehash my opinions again from recent threads, but will say that I think you have a fantastic collecting philosophy!
Obi-wan was wrong, there is a middle ground
I suppose it depends on how you define "homage", and what styles you find appealing. I won't go out of my way to find a brand that isn't considered a "homage" by some rando on the internet because the watches I find appealing are considered "homages".
I like my Momentum Sea Quartz 30, but to some out there it's a "homage" to some other brand, and therefore unworthy of love. (It's also a filthy quartz)
TBH I'd buy it regardless.
But cool point of fact is that the OG maker of the Sea Quartz, Chronosport, is in fact related directly to Momentum, aka St. Moritz Watch.
There's an interesting fireside chat between Malcolm Gladwell and Ezra Klein on the topic of "identities" and "polarization"— where one of Klein's ideas is that identities tend to root, reinforce, and activate under threat.
The particular example was that vegans often feel like they are under threat of social situations where they don't have any food options, and that constant perception of that identity under threat explains how "some vegans have become the splinter Hezbollah-like offshoot of vegetarians" (my favorite quote).
But I think that framework provides an interesting perspective whenever there is a group that seem to have a hair trigger on certain topics. Thinking about how/why the homage champions might feel like they are under threat—
...I wonder if the homage watch folks feel like they are being priced out of access to watches that were previously within reach, and with the prices of everything rising in this hobby, their strong responses had less to do with your perspective and was more of a general zeitgeist about their ability to participate in this hobby is shrinking with no end in sight?
I know this connection is coming from out of left field, but I love your perspectives @pete.mcconvill.watches and wonder if there is any validity to the framework.
The specific moment I'm referencing is around the 9:00 mark, but I found myself having several chin stroking moments throughout the entire talk (if you have the bandwidth/interest).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1PA7mOhQ4Y&t=9m00s
TBH I'd buy it regardless.
But cool point of fact is that the OG maker of the Sea Quartz, Chronosport, is in fact related directly to Momentum, aka St. Moritz Watch.
I think people go right to the assumption the anti-homage or not-for-me crowd are luxury watch snobs when certain words used (e.g. "knock-off") can come off as being of the strong opposite mind. You can make a point without using a word that is perceived as mostly negative. I say "copies" instead for example.
Now I myself am guilty of overanalyzing semantics. We had another spirited debate here about "beginner's watches". Again the word 'beginner' isn't necessarily meant in a derrogatory way but can be perceived as such when read by someone who sees it as downsizing others. Kinda like how "noob" is used.
Once again, I don't see anything inherently inflammatory about your position or posts, and you buy what you like, that's great. But if you're going to make a strong worded argument against something you may be inviting assumptions. Brian's post could be seen similarly but just opposite of yours. He is a bit of a self admitted contrarian though.
There's an interesting fireside chat between Malcolm Gladwell and Ezra Klein on the topic of "identities" and "polarization"— where one of Klein's ideas is that identities tend to root, reinforce, and activate under threat.
The particular example was that vegans often feel like they are under threat of social situations where they don't have any food options, and that constant perception of that identity under threat explains how "some vegans have become the splinter Hezbollah-like offshoot of vegetarians" (my favorite quote).
But I think that framework provides an interesting perspective whenever there is a group that seem to have a hair trigger on certain topics. Thinking about how/why the homage champions might feel like they are under threat—
...I wonder if the homage watch folks feel like they are being priced out of access to watches that were previously within reach, and with the prices of everything rising in this hobby, their strong responses had less to do with your perspective and was more of a general zeitgeist about their ability to participate in this hobby is shrinking with no end in sight?
I know this connection is coming from out of left field, but I love your perspectives @pete.mcconvill.watches and wonder if there is any validity to the framework.
The specific moment I'm referencing is around the 9:00 mark, but I found myself having several chin stroking moments throughout the entire talk (if you have the bandwidth/interest).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1PA7mOhQ4Y&t=9m00s
I think you're assuming only the "homage crowd" is being triggered. You'll note just as many unprompted "homages are immoral" posts out there however.
I do agree though some of it may be tied to identity. Both sides feel compelled to tell people to spend their money"correctly".
I'm not for or against. I would say I'm just that annoying open minded person sitting on the fence.
Lastly, I think everyone, even the wealthy, share in some of the frustration when it comes to accessibility of certain watches. Even if I have the money for a rainbow Daytona it would still be very hard to obtain. It's just different at different levels. And all brands, luxury and affordable alike, do this to us on purpose to always keep us hungry. The best customer base is always a little frustrated after all. We need to have some motivation to buy even if we complain about it.
You have an awesome collection, very diverse and interesting. It shows that you really are a big enthusiast. Many people who beat on homages and call them knocknoffs ( they are, but still its a bit hars, like calling disabled people cripples) come off as people who dont seem to understand the value of money an are snobs. Youre definetelly not one of them and you also made some good points about lack of originality which also bothers me a bit even as a homage owner. But the fact is that right now even spending a 100 on a watch is a strech for me (uni student, middle europe, descending middle class) so as an enthusiast, when I see a well made, seiko nh powered, full stainless solid construction, sapphire protected and also cool looking watch Its a no brainer for me. I cant wait to experience microbrands, vintage, etc once I finish school and get a proper income, but till then, its homage time for me.😃
I guess what Im trying to say is there is definetelly a place for these things. Lack of money, other responsibilities, wanting the look but not the price or even just wanting a decent affordable sapphire chrystal auto with water resistance ( which seiko cant seem to do) can all call for a homage.
I suppose it depends on how you define "homage", and what styles you find appealing. I won't go out of my way to find a brand that isn't considered a "homage" by some rando on the internet because the watches I find appealing are considered "homages".
I like my Momentum Sea Quartz 30, but to some out there it's a "homage" to some other brand, and therefore unworthy of love. (It's also a filthy quartz)
Even the goats shitting on it, i love the picture.😄
Man I wish I had that watch tho😁
I think that @Mr.Dee.Bater is on to something when he posits that the heat from any "homage/knock-off" debate has a strong status/class element to it. I think that many jump right to price/cost/luxury in their arguments as a way of attacking the perceived gatekeepers or being gatekeepers.
I think that in your personal collection your vintage Alpina are performing a class/status based function for you. Most vintage collectors recognize that the least expensive path to the perception of luxury is through vintage watches. They are rare, and more often than not, gold. They are classy and seem unobtainable. Most collectors are deathly afraid of them. A collection with a large component of vintage, especially dress pieces, has the class niche filled.
Most ardent defenders of homages or knockoffs want the immediate satisfaction of the status based purchase (if Brian is right). I don't collect that way, but very few collect my way either.
There's an interesting fireside chat between Malcolm Gladwell and Ezra Klein on the topic of "identities" and "polarization"— where one of Klein's ideas is that identities tend to root, reinforce, and activate under threat.
The particular example was that vegans often feel like they are under threat of social situations where they don't have any food options, and that constant perception of that identity under threat explains how "some vegans have become the splinter Hezbollah-like offshoot of vegetarians" (my favorite quote).
But I think that framework provides an interesting perspective whenever there is a group that seem to have a hair trigger on certain topics. Thinking about how/why the homage champions might feel like they are under threat—
...I wonder if the homage watch folks feel like they are being priced out of access to watches that were previously within reach, and with the prices of everything rising in this hobby, their strong responses had less to do with your perspective and was more of a general zeitgeist about their ability to participate in this hobby is shrinking with no end in sight?
I know this connection is coming from out of left field, but I love your perspectives @pete.mcconvill.watches and wonder if there is any validity to the framework.
The specific moment I'm referencing is around the 9:00 mark, but I found myself having several chin stroking moments throughout the entire talk (if you have the bandwidth/interest).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H1PA7mOhQ4Y&t=9m00s
That's primarily because these debate are often framed as moral choices, either directly or implied.
The only productive framework is the application of law. That's why I provided that article in the first thread. And the legal protection for these designs have long since expired. The rest is personal taste.
Why did you get answers like that? Easy, it's lowest hanging fruit to attack. This is the Internet. People don't like nuance. The alternative to homages MUST be expensive pieces, don't you know?
Bottom line, shake it off. You know the right of the situation. There's a million watches sitting between homages and expensive pieces. If people can't, or won't, admit their existence, that's on them.
That's primarily because these debate are often framed as moral choices, either directly or implied.
The only productive framework is the application of law. That's why I provided that article in the first thread. And the legal protection for these designs have long since expired. The rest is personal taste.
I think using the test of when state-sanctioned violence is allowed (ie the law) is a pretty useless test of much of anything (except the use of state-sanctioned violence I guess).
The first seems a rare argument, and one I would disagree with (an NH35 is not going to outperform an 8900 co-axial, for a start) though perhaps from a ‘initial looks’ stand point, that difference can be a very thin thing.
After that it’s into the lines between how many differences make something no longer a ‘clomage’ or ‘homage’. Which seems to have lots of… interesting views from all kind of levels of knowledge shall we say.
Having seen Steinhart described in this thread as not making ‘knock offs’ I think I have to give up. There’s more at play than knowledge, specs, aesthetics, or even price here.
As to the very final point — I have yet to see an ‘original design’ 90-130 quid, automatic movement, sapphire Crystal, ceramic bezel, solid steel construction throughout divers watch from anyone but a ‘knock off’ brand. You can barely get Accurist Quartz with a decent design at that price these days.
“Having seen Steinhart described as not making ‘knockoffs’…”
I think you may have been talking about me, in which case I referred to one specific model, the Titanium GMT (see below), not their entire catalog. Watches, not ‘brands’…I pointed out that San Martin also makes incredible original designs, but ultimately they will go where the money is. Below is the homage I was referring to, versus my Batman, and a Pagani knockoff — I can get down with the Steinhart homage as I think it’s well executed. The Pagani is not an homage — the distinction is clear. An homage brings enough of its own spin to the table beyond a logo swap or dial color change; it’s inspired by, not trying to straight copy. When people talk about a mm missing here or there on the case, that’s the difference between a crap replica and a AAA replica — that’s not ‘design’. This sequence of shots illustrates the difference well I think: knockoff, homage, original.
“Having seen Steinhart described as not making ‘knockoffs’…”
I think you may have been talking about me, in which case I referred to one specific model, the Titanium GMT (see below), not their entire catalog. Watches, not ‘brands’…I pointed out that San Martin also makes incredible original designs, but ultimately they will go where the money is. Below is the homage I was referring to, versus my Batman, and a Pagani knockoff — I can get down with the Steinhart homage as I think it’s well executed. The Pagani is not an homage — the distinction is clear. An homage brings enough of its own spin to the table beyond a logo swap or dial color change; it’s inspired by, not trying to straight copy. When people talk about a mm missing here or there on the case, that’s the difference between a crap replica and a AAA replica — that’s not ‘design’. This sequence of shots illustrates the difference well I think: knockoff, homage, original.
Possibly.
I basically like Steinhart, and San Martin, and Pagani. I would not consider any of them to be the most original watch manufacturers in the world, and certainly wouldn’t see a division between them.
My most recent Pagani was purchased after seeing a version of it on here, and the differences between it and the Omega it homages are obvious. (Don’t have one for a side by side, but I imagine many know what a speedmaster 57 looks like) So… I don’t consider it a knock off:
(The bracelet is from another Pagani watch I own, but fits it and suits it well I think)
My argument has always been that loads of brands ‘knock off’ or ‘homage’ other watches, and that the ones that get a lot of flack now, usually aren’t what they are characterised as.
It’s that characterisation I tend to argue with, including the sweeping use of the term knock off.
In your GMT example, the Pagani is (like most if not all) a pretty straight 1:1 lift, and if there are any changes, it may be one’s so small as to be they are homaging previous Rolex models. The Steinhart makes a number of standout changes, so as you say — well executed. I would prefer it to the Pagani, and may even prefer it to the actual Rolex GMT Master tbh. (Like the minute track on the Steinhart, don’t like Mercedes hands in general — I also prefer their font and kerning on the bezel to the Rolex) In pure design/aesthetic terms of course.
Congratulations Pete! You've gone viral!
To be fair, particularly there, I am talking about the argument as it ranges in general — in this thread specifically and others — rather than directly arguing with you as such.
As to the Rolex/case thing, you’d be surprised how many of those homage watches are not copying the exact proportions/models, and so also have their own design teams — albeit working to a different goal, on how to somewhat emulate a given style of watch/brand, but also work with what they can do and their available movements and their features. As well as any changes they put in place for whatever reason. Funnily enough, over on Reddit, you see their customers request changes, and fairly often those changes then make their way into the watches within a few months (usually, alas, to make the watches more like copies than homage) and surprisingly often.
Just thought you may find that interesting, but my 1mm comment was, as I said, pretty much a joke. Though arguing which companies push design forwards, and how much, and which don’t is a whole other conversation — but does dovetail neatly with how off limits are design features that have been around half a century?
It’s all part of how we think about these things.
And certainly much more than a strange kind of… brand or manufacturer territoriality that can occur.
Do you have any examples of those 100 dollar/pounds watches that are available? Because they are things that interest me.
My favourite watch atm is my Orient Mako II, but even that was referred to as a Planet Ocean homage in a few places.
Lots of watches are homages in that they pull inspiration from other watches, but that is a different conversation.
Check out Timex and Seiko 5, and of course Orient. They do go into the $250 range, but start out at right around $100.
The vintage market is full of “sleeper hits”, you just need to know what to look for. You don’t have to pay a lot to get a lot, but you also need to do your homework. I’m so tired of posting the same thing every week.
Lots of watches are homages in that they pull inspiration from other watches, but that is a different conversation.
Check out Timex and Seiko 5, and of course Orient. They do go into the $250 range, but start out at right around $100.
I have one from each of those brands. Seiko 5s don’t start as low as that anymore round these parts.
And yup… that’s kind of my point on most homages.
I think people go right to the assumption the anti-homage or not-for-me crowd are luxury watch snobs when certain words used (e.g. "knock-off") can come off as being of the strong opposite mind. You can make a point without using a word that is perceived as mostly negative. I say "copies" instead for example.
Now I myself am guilty of overanalyzing semantics. We had another spirited debate here about "beginner's watches". Again the word 'beginner' isn't necessarily meant in a derrogatory way but can be perceived as such when read by someone who sees it as downsizing others. Kinda like how "noob" is used.
Once again, I don't see anything inherently inflammatory about your position or posts, and you buy what you like, that's great. But if you're going to make a strong worded argument against something you may be inviting assumptions. Brian's post could be seen similarly but just opposite of yours. He is a bit of a self admitted contrarian though.
ah, beginners watches. I was in this discussion, let's not bring it back mate)
I mean, there's a lot of different original watches on a market, like really A LOT, new, used, modern, vintage, you name it. But 'clomage' brands are not replicating the looks of random watches. They do EXACTLY the status symbols. That's why people say that not buying homages means dropping big bucks.
We can argue about the intention, and how it makes no sense to buy a budget version of a status symbol (because status symbols are ALL about the price), but it is what it is.
We can also argue that some watches are only popular because they are luxury items, but let's put it that way.
If a person want a Submariner that bad, that they are willing to get a 'clomage', than they are not on the market for all this cool original watches. Anyone can open Chrono24 right now, and find tons and tons of vintage pieces, anyone can explore the micro brand scene and find themselves a lot of cool stuff, it's not some sacred unattainable knowledge, its just here, literally on your fingertips after 1-2 hour of research. But they don't want this stuff, they want a Submariner.
Possibly.
I basically like Steinhart, and San Martin, and Pagani. I would not consider any of them to be the most original watch manufacturers in the world, and certainly wouldn’t see a division between them.
My most recent Pagani was purchased after seeing a version of it on here, and the differences between it and the Omega it homages are obvious. (Don’t have one for a side by side, but I imagine many know what a speedmaster 57 looks like) So… I don’t consider it a knock off:
(The bracelet is from another Pagani watch I own, but fits it and suits it well I think)
My argument has always been that loads of brands ‘knock off’ or ‘homage’ other watches, and that the ones that get a lot of flack now, usually aren’t what they are characterised as.
It’s that characterisation I tend to argue with, including the sweeping use of the term knock off.
In your GMT example, the Pagani is (like most if not all) a pretty straight 1:1 lift, and if there are any changes, it may be one’s so small as to be they are homaging previous Rolex models. The Steinhart makes a number of standout changes, so as you say — well executed. I would prefer it to the Pagani, and may even prefer it to the actual Rolex GMT Master tbh. (Like the minute track on the Steinhart, don’t like Mercedes hands in general — I also prefer their font and kerning on the bezel to the Rolex) In pure design/aesthetic terms of course.
You’re still conflating two different things. Loads of brands homage others, usually icons, yes…but loads of brands do not knock off (plagiarize) other brands. These are two different things which I clearly illustrated in my previous reply. I can give several more examples of actual homages if you’d like. Homages are perfectly fine, but little in Pagani or SMs catalog is.
It always strikes me as odd when people say they’re fans of factories like San Martin when they don’t support their original designs like this:
and instead go for their knockoffs:
That shows that they’re not truly fans of San Martin or Pagani, they’re actually fans of Rolex, Patek, Omega, Grand Seiko, etc.
Of note, the founder of San Martin himself lamented that his own designs don’t sell, and that he has no choice but to keep producing knock-offs because that’s what sells. To me, that speaks volumes.
But, as always, be happy with what you have brother…that’s the most important thing, no matter what I or anyone else thinks.
Malcolm Gladwell is not very bright.
I quoted Ezra Klein, not Gladwell.
You’re still conflating two different things. Loads of brands homage others, usually icons, yes…but loads of brands do not knock off (plagiarize) other brands. These are two different things which I clearly illustrated in my previous reply. I can give several more examples of actual homages if you’d like. Homages are perfectly fine, but little in Pagani or SMs catalog is.
It always strikes me as odd when people say they’re fans of factories like San Martin when they don’t support their original designs like this:
and instead go for their knockoffs:
That shows that they’re not truly fans of San Martin or Pagani, they’re actually fans of Rolex, Patek, Omega, Grand Seiko, etc.
Of note, the founder of San Martin himself lamented that his own designs don’t sell, and that he has no choice but to keep producing knock-offs because that’s what sells. To me, that speaks volumes.
But, as always, be happy with what you have brother…that’s the most important thing, no matter what I or anyone else thinks.
I quite agree.
All 3 of my Pagani’s are not 1:1 copies. They are certainly in the Omega style but there is no model they are direct copies of. Sometimes the features are blended from models, and in all cases, they have departures. (I’m not gonna keep throwing the pics up, I imagine people are fed up with them by now anyway, and some are set against them enough they don’t even notice the differences. They’re in my gallery plenty, and am happy to go through the differences.)
When their ‘moonwatch’ homage took off, some of their customers persuaded them to make it more like the original, and take differences out (the date window being most noticeable) but at the same time they took it off with colours and textured dials. (even pre Moonswatch fever)
But as you say, it’s going to be the more direct homages that sell best.
I don’t much like those personally either, so I understand the basic concept.
So I am not really conflating the two — I am just also aware of how close lots of watches drift to each other. For a current example, the rather nice Citizen Tsuoya is very close the basic Oyster Perpetual. And the history of the Submariner and some of its little borrows (and Rolexes history in general being not dissimilar to what we see now in some ways…) is well known. I think.
What I don’t like is when the ‘eh, not for me’ (which I have for ninety percent of Seikos divers, and most Rolexes, including the dated sub) turns into sort of… crusades. And talking down. And moving that out to the people who do like them. And then hypocrisy or the dash of dishonesty. It leaves a bad taste in the mouth.
I think people are going to be surprised when the various companies more original offerings do take off, because they do exist, and are decent. They even have stands in boutiques in Asia, from pictures I have seen.
Plus, helps keep Seiko doing well — all those NH movements xD
I quoted Ezra Klein, not Gladwell.
Oh I know. That was just more of me blurting out my thoughts.
I read your original post and while it was basically a discription of your collecting philosophy and not an attack on what others buy after seeing some of the wars kick off on other forums the subject is usually split into two camps. One is buy what you like and the other you should spend your money on what I like. The second position normally splits into you’re too poor to have the real one just save up for the real one and you should spend your money on watch’s you don’t like but are original and I like them. I these two positions are very insulting I don’t need anyone to preach to me how much and what to spend my hard earned money on. So I think due to the history of this long running argument your post was answered by some on both sides as part of the argument as to why you should spend your money on what I like. Therefore the two sides link it to money straight away rather than than “this is how I collect and here is why “as was the intention of the post I believe. While you didn’t want to talk about money it will always end there on this subject when you get the large numbers you got in the conversation.
I read your original post and while it was basically a discription of your collecting philosophy and not an attack on what others buy after seeing some of the wars kick off on other forums the subject is usually split into two camps. One is buy what you like and the other you should spend your money on what I like. The second position normally splits into you’re too poor to have the real one just save up for the real one and you should spend your money on watch’s you don’t like but are original and I like them. I these two positions are very insulting I don’t need anyone to preach to me how much and what to spend my hard earned money on. So I think due to the history of this long running argument your post was answered by some on both sides as part of the argument as to why you should spend your money on what I like. Therefore the two sides link it to money straight away rather than than “this is how I collect and here is why “as was the intention of the post I believe. While you didn’t want to talk about money it will always end there on this subject when you get the large numbers you got in the conversation.
Thanks for the response and your point makes sense however looking at the responses you left something out in your analysis of the you should buy what I like crowd.
Yes, there is a terrible 'you're too poor to own what you should by' element in many "anti" knockoff posts.
However there is an equally terrible tendency for the "pro" knockoff community to lead with "you're to dumb/gullible/status conscious" to people that want the originals.
Thanks for the response and your point makes sense however looking at the responses you left something out in your analysis of the you should buy what I like crowd.
Yes, there is a terrible 'you're too poor to own what you should by' element in many "anti" knockoff posts.
However there is an equally terrible tendency for the "pro" knockoff community to lead with "you're to dumb/gullible/status conscious" to people that want the originals.
True I didn’t consider that. I haven’t come across that luckily perhaps my collection doesn’t warrant jellousy 😂