Seiko need to fix their naming schemes
Every product ever created will have an internal product code the company uses to identify it, but these should never be public facing names.
On some websites, when I type Seiko 5 GMT, they show me this:
while I wanted this:
And it's Seiko's fault, as they both are Seiko 5 GMT watches.
Now I have to know reference numbers if I want to be more precise.
Descriptive or evocative names can spark curiosity and engagement among consumers. Seiko's alphanumeric codes may fail to capture attention or inspire interest.
While Seiko is a reputable brand, its naming strategy is a missed opportunity for more effective marketing and consumer engagement.
20 comments
Sort by
Xak
Welcome to my WatchCrunch profile.
Member since
Last active: 1 month ago
7.50” / 19.05 cm
Makes a lot of sense but you might as well be howling at the moon Xak. Seiko gonna do what it wants to do.
I think there’s something to be said for the fans and enthusiasts taking ownership of the naming rights. I don’t always agree with some of the names, but it’s a super cool and unique aspect of collecting Seikos.
I suspect they stick to codes for a couple of reasons:
It's used to for internal tracking/production already.
They don't have to worry about whether their code translates into other languages well.
Point two might seems silly, but many companies over the years have found themselves in an awkward situation because a name either means something else in a different language, or sounds a lot like a something else in a different language.
A great example is the Hyundai Kona, that is sold as the Hyundai Kauai in Portugal and Iceland because Kona is similar to other words in their native languages.
Reference numbers be damned, it's their fight.
But they need to name the watches as well!
I'd call this one a Seiko 5 GMT 2 (as a combination of "5 GMT" and "Explorer 2).
Try working in a Japanese motorcycle shop in the 1980's 😂
They make so many different models that it is probably not realistic to come up with a unique name for each. Alphanumeric codes might be boring, but they allow for universal, easy, and precise differentiation between models and colorways.
They make so many different models that it is probably not realistic to come up with a unique name for each. Alphanumeric codes might be boring, but they allow for universal, easy, and precise differentiation between models and colorways.
They dont have to. They could name field watches a certain way and dive watches another way. If I search for a name, even if I don't find the exact model, it would be something similar
Agree. It's a an annoying Seiko Deception. It would be better if Seiko Deploy a better naming convention to avoid confusion! ❤️😁❤️😁
How about the Seiko Austere GMT and the Austere Stealth GMT?
How about the Seiko Austere GMT and the Austere Stealth GMT?
These are good names. The problem starts when you put too many different watches under the name. Saying I'm buying a Seiko 5 Sports says nothing about what type of watch I'm taking about
Giving the customer a boatload of options has it's drawbacks but more choices is good no?
I remember back in the day when bands would peter out of names and merely issue something like Led Zeppelin IV. Now imagine Seiko 5 MXVlll.
Giving the customer a boatload of options has it's drawbacks but more choices is good no?
I remember back in the day when bands would peter out of names and merely issue something like Led Zeppelin IV. Now imagine Seiko 5 MXVlll.
I'm not against choice. Seiko just need to better categorize and name their watches. That's why the community has been doing it for them. The new 62 mas reissue deserved an official name
I think they could at least put names to specific lines, even if not to every model. When Crunchers give reference numbers (which may as well be skus) rather than pictures I've long since stopped looking up the watch being discussed.
SRPK29 or SRPJ81 ? You lost me at SR...
*looks at Casio* 👀
While it can be hard to remember many of the reference numbers, I have no issue with how Seiko does it. The deeper you get into Seiko, the more sense it starts to make.
While it can be hard to remember many of the reference numbers, I have no issue with how Seiko does it. The deeper you get into Seiko, the more sense it starts to make.
For a lot brands, you don't have to get deep for their offerings to make sense
Seiko cranks out so many models that it really doesn't make sense to name them. Aside from GS, they are (at heart) still creating consumer products. Most consumers only associate a brand with a watch, not a name for a specific model.
Seiko cranks out so many models that it really doesn't make sense to name them. Aside from GS, they are (at heart) still creating consumer products. Most consumers only associate a brand with a watch, not a name for a specific model.
It would help a lot if Seiko had a flagship line they are known for
It would help a lot if Seiko had a flagship line they are known for
But that's really not how that brand operates, outside of Grand Seiko or Credor. Seiko tailors quickly changing models to regional demand. The entry-level watches are largely about choice, not heritage or continuity. Casio and Citizen take a similar approach, and while they name their product lines in a more granular fashion, the individual models simply have a code.
But that's really not how that brand operates, outside of Grand Seiko or Credor. Seiko tailors quickly changing models to regional demand. The entry-level watches are largely about choice, not heritage or continuity. Casio and Citizen take a similar approach, and while they name their product lines in a more granular fashion, the individual models simply have a code.
It makes sense. That's probably a similar situation to Xiaomi in the phone market