WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

What are the top three watch companies?

13K views 127 replies 65 participants last post by  Veda 
#1 ·
DON'T SAY - IT'S A MATTER OF OPINION! not because it isn't, but because I am explicitly asking for your opinions - which doesn't mean reasons don't need to be given.
Which three companies do you think have consistently produced the best range of watches over the last fifty years say? I suppose two fundamental considerations will be originality of design and technical excellence. I ask as a relative newcomer to the world of horolgy, eager to pick the brains of you boffins out there.
Thanks
 
#5 ·
OK, here goes:

1. Omega - it has a long, distinguished history and has manufactured mechanical watches that incorporate the greatest single advance in watchmaking in 75 years--the Daniels coaxial escapement. The most accurate quartz movement in the world, the Marine Chronometer, was produced by Omega. It's also part of the Swatch Group, which is the 800-pound gorilla of the watch world. Omegas are also the current favorite of James Bond, and some beautiful limited edition watches have followed from that. Omega's not going to go away!

2. Seiko - it produces everything in house and it has a long line of innovations. For the value, it's really hard to beat a Seiko. A Seiko Kinetic is my current "beater" watch. Seiko isn't going away!

3. Rolex - it's recognized as one of the 100 top brands in the world; even non-watch people who would never buy one know what a Rolex looks like. The watches have solid movements and their cases are known for their toughness and water resistance, even down to 3,900 meters for their top of the line diver's model. It was the original watch for James Bond! Times aren't as good as before for Rolex, but they will get by just on their brand and reputation alone.

There! Those are my three nominations!
 
#6 ·
OK, here goes:

1. Omega
2. Seiko
3. Rolex
There! Those are my three nominations!
These spring to mind for me too, pretty much for the reasons you stated.:-! (except the Bond bit!)
(Qualifier - I freely admit that there's an awful lot I don't know about watch manufacturing over the last fifty years. My choices may have been influenced by perceptions and marketing.)
 
#7 ·
PP - By virtue of it's storied history and impeccable finishing.
VC - See "PP".
JLC - Innovative, versatile, and comprehensive line of in-house movements and complications.

Honorable mentions:

GO
IWC

Regards,
Adam
 
#8 ·
My humble opinions on the larger companies. The most desirable and top quality watches for me would be manufactured by:

1. Patek Philippe
2. Lange & Sohne
3. Glasshutte Originale

Vacheron Constantine, Breguet and JLC certainly belong in there also. But if I have to pick just three... I based my list on quality/value and the most desirable watches for me. |>
 
#10 ·
IT'S A MATTER OF OPINION! (did you notice I even copied and pasted that from the OP for extra effect? :-d )

...and did you just call us buffoons???? Oh, nevermind - the word was boffin. Isn't a boffin a penguin or some strange bird? :think:


Pre-1970: Longines, JLC, and PP but there's an argument for VC, Hamilton, and Omega to be in there.

Modern: There are just too many high end companies making awesome products to name only 3, especially if you start talking about independents.
 
#13 · (Edited)
JLC - lots of innovations and patents

The other 2 places can be shared by several companies

Like:
PP and AL&S - outstanding detail, finish
Seiko, Citizen - tech, quality and cost
 
#15 ·
Yes, it is certainly a matter of opinion (and I didn't copy and paste that, either). It matters how one looks at this. Many ways to interpret 'best.'

One person mentioned Hamilton. Hamilton ruled the world for a long time. Makers of the 'electric' watch. How can you not think of Timex? An incredible value which made watches available to every single person on the planet. All in-house, too. Rolex makes a very high quality watch for millions of people every year. That is an amazing accomplishment - and they (with Blancpain) made the first waterproof watch - and many other firsts.

No one mentioned Girard-Perragaux, one of my favorites, a long-time survivor, in-house operation of very high quality and diversity. And then there is Citizen, a huge successful operation with many innovations, and also in-house.

Some of the notable expensive makers don't even fabricate their own movements.

Many ways to say 'best.'
 
#16 ·
Richard Mille - no need for explanation
Harry Winston - Opus line

MB&F - reasons below


Rolex - who else has a foundry and makes their own steel? or is timeless in their design, and developed in the biggest name in horology?

Vianny Halter - design and craftsmanship are outstanding


But i think that Richard Mille and the makers of Harry Winston's OPUS line (Including Vianny Halter) are on top.

IMHO ;-)

Oh, and Francois P. Journe, if not only for his minute repeater or 1/100 chrono. b-)
 
#18 ·
I look at this as a loaded question. You can ask this question and get responses based on:

1) Total sales $/yr
2) Total number of watches sold/yr
3) Subjective opinion on who's watches are of the best quality.

It seems that most opinions will fall into the 3rd category based on the answers given. What will likely influence the answer is the financial status of the poster.

So my opinion FWIW (in no particular order):

Seiko (based solely on diverstiy of product)
PP (based of fit/finish)
Toss up Omega/Rolex (based on popularity...not necessarily quality)

I tend to have champagne taste, with a beer wallet o|
 
#22 ·
In no particular order:

Rolex
Omega
PP

with IWC nipping at their heels
 
#23 ·
Omega gets way to much love on this forum, seriously top 3?! Not even on the radar for top 3 or 5 for that matter. My top 3 are based off of Swiss only and for various reasons.

PP
Lange
Rolex
 
#25 · (Edited)
Hey Nasty, the top 3 business aside, why does it bother you so much that Omega gets alot of love on WUS? Just b/c it isnt' Rolex or Tag ( i.e. on the tip of the tongue of the non-WIS masses)... or isn't Panerai or Kobold ( i.e. a trendy brand for WISes) doesn't mean that it's an overrated company. Nothing against those brands I mentioned specifically...I just think alot of this comes to personal preference.
 
#24 ·
Here is the correct answer:

PP: Quality, craftsmanship, complications, history, desirability...

JLC: Innovation.

Rolex: Iconic brand that is probably responsible for the watch market as we know it today.

Honorable mention: Seiko...in house, innovative, affordable, expensive...
 
#30 ·
I don't think Omega is overrated or overlooked anywhere.
They do fine, as they ought.
You can't do a thread like this without criteria.
Is it sales, history, horologic gee wizardry?
 
#50 · (Edited)
that's because you spend too much time on watch forums, tragic:-d

in terms of sales worldwide, they are very high. i read somewhere #2 behind rolex in the mid range luxury bracket. however, i think they are overlooked in the U.S. in comparison to its competition. aside from the advertising figures, the article linked below does mention that rolex, tag, and cartier are the three best selling brands in 2007. with breitling fourth.

i'd be willing to bet in the U.S., sales and "brand awareness" are low as compared to the rolexes and tags and breitlings. europe and asia, it's a different matter. ( i do think advertising is a good thing for watch companies)

i live in a metropolitan city. outside of a few WIS friends, it's been my experience that virtually no one has heard of Omega. ( that's despite bond movies that are shown once every three or four years.)

Top 25 Watch
Advertisers
U.S. market, 2007
Rank Brand Amount
($ million)
1. Rolex 47.10
2. Breitling 27.07
3. TAG Heuer 24.73
4. Citizen 19.85
5. Movado 15.87
6. Cartier 15.04
7. Seiko 11.02
8. Timex 10.21
9. ESQ 9.36
10. Omega 9.25
11. Bulova 9.03
12. Raymond Weil 8.09
13. Gucci 6.06
14. Patek Philippe 6.03
15. Ebel 5.95
16. Dolce & Gabbana 5.75
17. Chanel 5.72
18. Hublot 5.28
19. Jaeger-LeCoultre 4.77
20. IWC Schaffhausen 4.42
21. Ulysse Nardin 4.28
22. Rado 3.92
23. Montblanc 3.85
24. Carl F. Bucherer 3.76
25. Bulgari 3.68
Source: TNS Media Intelligence
http://www.watchbizz.com/archive/wt_2008_03/WT_2008_03_217.pdf
 
#31 ·
Just to throw some opinions around

Rolex - for reasons stated previously, but I also think they do an unusually good job of combining functionality and aesthetics. (Consider for example Submariner, which is a great dive watch but also looks great in a dressy context)

Seiko - for reasons stated previously. I think they probably make the best $90 new automatic in the world (snk809), (I'm open to suggestions if someone knows of a better one)

Not sure about the third one. I might say Omega but it would be mostly because of the Speedmaster Professional... but Lemania should get as much credit for that one. Besides, that's almost half a century ago, and since then they haven't really improved on the watch... if anything reduced it by getting rid of column wheel.

just my opinions.
 
#33 · (Edited)
Well thanks guys! I can't help being struck by the fact that, despite my request in the OP, so many posters couldn't resist insisting that it was just a matter of opinion. Couldn't people disagree about THAT? You might say its all about personal taste, and I might say its not about personal taste at all, its about, materials, engineering, efficiency, reliability and design etc. etc. Would that mean that whether or not such things are just matters of opinion, would be a matter of opinion?

It seems obvious to me that questions about how well engineered, well designed and well finished a given watch is, AND questions (though this is perhaps more controversial) about how original and stylish it is, though they may be hard to settle, are questions about what is objectively the case, not questions about how things seem to this or that person. If you insist that such questions are matters of personal opinion it immediately follows that there could be nothing for us to disagree about - no point whatever in giving reasons to think one thing rather than another. If 'Rolex is better than Omega' just means 'I like Rolex better than Omega' then none of us could ever be in a position to disagree about THAT - after all you know what you feel better than I do - but then we'd have absolutely nothing to talk about! All we could do would be to inform others about which feelings we happened to have - and why should I be interested in that?
If you have ten times more disposable income than me, you will be able to think seriously about getting wathces I had better not think about at all. On my income I'd better not start wanting a PP, but things may be different for you. But that doesn't mean we couldn't give a series of reasons for the view that PP are a better watchmaker than say Rolex or Omega. I can just say something like - well if I had the money I would prefer this watch to that one for these reasons etc. etc.

Whether a judgement is subjective depends on what its a judgement about, not on the fact that some particular person has made it. (There are no judgements that no particular person has made.) So just because its me rather than you that is making a particular statement doesn't mean that I'm just stating my personal opinion.
It seems obvious to me that horology is a genuine craft which combines engineering and art in something like the way that architecture or cabinet making does. So people can make mistakes about what has horological value - just because someone thinks a watch is good doesn't mean it is. That means we can have reasonable debates about which watches are better than others (etc.) and those debates are not about how each of us happens to feel.
Even judgements about what is ugly and what is beautiful are hard to think of as mere expressions of personal preference. Downtown Detroit is uglier than downtown Amsterdam - and if you disagree with that there's something wrong with your aesthetic sense; Mozart's Requiem Mass is more beautiful than Paul Simon's Graceland album; Angelina Jolie is more beautiful than that woman I saw stuffing meat into her mouth at McD's yesterday... The idea that beauty is in the eye of the beholder has always struck me as crazy - just because I like something, it doesn't mean its good - I MIGHT BE WRONG. (When I first heard Charlie Parker and Stravinsky I didn't like them - I have since learned that I was missing something). The fact that people disagree about what is beautiful doesn't mean that there's not such thing as genuine beauty.

People don't want to come across as arrogant or conceited or know it all - so if you're friend tells you he's fallen in love with a Russian diver by Invicta you (because you don't want to be a jerk) start talking about how its all a matter of personal taste and how he should just get what he likes. The fact is that he should come to realize that there are other watches which are a bit like his beloved Russian diver, but which aren't so go damn tasteless. You might show him some and point out to him the differences, and he might start to cotton on. If he did, he might look at the bling-bling watch he liked yesterday and realise his mistake. That sort of thing happens all time - once I listended to Queen all the time, now I listen to Bach and Charlie Parker - once I ate corn-dogs all the time now I eat salmon and spinach - but its a brave man that tells his friend that he's crazy to like this or that because it lacks all aesthetic value...

Of course I'm not worried about coming across as arrogant and conceited...

I don't have a clue what the best three wathmakers are because I know SO LITTLE about watches - I'm going to go away and research the companies you experts have recommended. I cautiously suggest that the most original design I've seen amongst dive watches - which are the kind of watch I like best because they are both elegant and sporty - is the Seiko Black Monster.
 
#43 ·
I have a lot of respect for companies like Seiko, Omega, Breitling and Rolex (I own watches from three of the four), but I can't see how anyone can put them ahead of top tier manufacturers such as PP, AP, VC, JLC, IWC, Breguet, Lange & Sohne or GO, all of which are capable of making timepieces that the others currently cannot.

Although it could be argued that Rolex makes the best sports watches in the world (can of worms officially opened), they cannot be compared to the complications that the top manufacturers can produce.

Picking three from the top tier is simply a matter of taste. For me they are:
PP
AP
JLC
 
#44 ·
I have a lot of respect for companies like Seiko, Omega, Breitling and Rolex (I own watches from three of the four), but I can't see how anyone can put them ahead of top tier manufacturers such as PP, AP, VC, JLC, IWC, Breguet, Lange & Sohne or GO, all of which are capable of making timepieces that the others currently cannot.

Although it could be argued that Rolex makes the best sports watches in the world (can of worms officially opened), they cannot be compared to the complications that the top manufacturers can produce.

Picking three from the top tier is simply a matter of taste. For me they are:
PP
AP
JLC
Do you mean that PP, AP, VC, JLC, IWC, Breguet, Lange & Songe and GO make better mechanical movements than e.g. Rolex, Omega or Tag? If so, can you explain what you mean. Is it a matter of making movements with more 'complications', or a matter of making more accurate movements, or both. Are you speaking only of the technical design of the movement or also of the aesthetic design of the watch as a whole? Oh - and any chance of spelling out those initials for the uninitiated?
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top