I don't think a discussion about markup where established high end brands are concerned is a cogent argument. The reason being that their lines of production and reputation have long since proven their products to be of at least acceptable quality. There is very little cause for concern about a Seamaster's construction, for example, regardless of how much markup there is or where it was made. It's a Seamaster and everybody is familiar with it. Dealing with a brand like SWI on the other hand, who don't really benefit from the transparency that comes from having a established product line, you can't be certain what's going on.
Some Swiss markup and profit margin is just the reality of buying a watch. I'd only be concerned with getting something that is actually worth the $900 I paid. That's not chump change, so the construction and materials in the watch need to be of at least a certain level of quality above watches costing much less.Right, and that's the issue. It has a quality movement, this we know. The question is...is the company using the quality movement as a free pass to the "high end" market and doing the rest of the watch at a budget hoping no one will notice or care? Or are the materials and assembly of the watch on par with the movement that's in it and this is just a great deal because SWI doesn't charge the brand markup that Omega does ? This is the part I'm not sure about, and it could be either.To me, if it has a quality movement and construction, it all comes down to the design you love at the budget you can afford. I like the metallic brown dial and it looks like a great watch.