I'm new here and new to watches in general. This place is fantasic for learning and also sharing views. I've certainly opened my mind to brands I never considered and also reconsidered on brands too. Real eye-opener to say the least.
Which leads me to this question, why are some brands looked on with certain disdain? Or even quartz? This will open a can of worms for sure but I hoping to learn more from this and would like to see why people have formed their views on it. Since I started with brands first, lets go there. And this has started because I went out to look for a watch for one of my best friend's (belated birthday) gift.
I would like to add that I found the info on who owns what brands from a thread by SquishPanda- thanks for that, a great find and can be viewed here https://forums.watchuseek.com/f71/who...de-212356.html
Why do people shake their fingers at brands like Hugo Boss, Movado (part of the Movado Group), Gucci (PPR Group), Burberry, Armani, Marc Jacobs, Fossil (Fossil Inc.) So they are fashion watches. From what I've gathered, it tends to be used it rather a derogatory (is that too harsh?) way. A lot of the designs are nice. Which they are because lots of them are designed to tell the time in a funky or stylish setting. When I was looking for Tissot (a brand I picked up here on WUS and got interested in because of the gernerally positive feedback on the brand overall for it's price) my friend (who I want gift for) pointed out how nice some of the Hugo Boss and Armani watches are. I agree as they look nice. They are also quartz so time keeping will be accurate. Which leads me to quartz, why is it deen with disdain? Granted, they look nothing spectcular when comparing an electronic board to the wheels and cogs marvel of a mechanical. But how often does anyone crack open a watch to see the guts of their watches? Firstly lets omit the group who atually do know their watches and can change their own battery, swap around straps/bracelets, do modifications and own repairs. Basically those who own their own set of tools.
That leaves the rest of us. Sure lots of auto have windows on the caseback, but when it's worn on the wrist or you're putting on your watch for the upteenth time, do you stop and admire ALL the time? So if a quartz 'fashion' watch can keep accurate time as a $5k auto, what is the problem? Surely it comes down to snobbery or even envy? They way I see it, people are paying a lot more for the brand because it's tied to a brand who makes designer clothes (think Gucci, Louis Vuitton, Hugo Boss, Armani even Marc Jacobs). It's brands that THEY readily identify with. For example, if I gave a Hamilton watch or an Armani watch to my friend to choose, he'd choose Armani. Keep in mind also we are in Australia and unless you have an interest in watches, not many would have a clue Hamilton is fantastic value for money with a great history to boot.
The way he sees it (and how I used to see it, I've now seen the metaphorical light since joining watch forums) also makes sense. You pay more for brands. It's how they built and structured their business and their success didn't happen overnight or by success. I've read here that a lot of people say Hugo Boss and Armani is junk and overpriced. Can the same be said on their suits? How can the company as a brand be so successful if they were over priced and junk? I think this argument has some merit cause there are plentiful mushroom brands that set ridiculous high retail prices and heavily discount them in hopes of actully getting people to buy them. The two brand I mentions (HB and Armani) set their prices quite high in comparison to another similar styled watch from a lesser know brand yet they are still able to flog their pieces for retail or with a reasonable discount. Buyers aren't as stupid as you think, otherwise mushroom brands will grow into a dominant force in the market place.
For my mate's bday present, I was torn between getting him an Armani or Hugo Boss rather than a Tissot Ballade III he also liked (all quartz). He was with me when I went to look for a mechanical for myself and tried on Tissot's Visodate Heritage, Le Locle and Ballade III. For him, he liked the quartz more because he said it was thinner, therefore nicer and also it was lighter. I will not stamp what my idea of a good watch is, and for him, a watch is there to tell the time. He's not a watch 'conoisseur' and doesn't need all the other fancy stuff a mechanical offers. He doesn't wear watches all the time (h doesn't even own one and hasn't had a watch for many many years) so quartz would also actually be better suited for HIM in this case. For a person who needs to set the time everytime it's worn because the watch may not see any wrist-action for days or weeks at a time wil only make him NOT wear the watch more often due to the inconvenience. And he would not spend further hundreds on a watch-winder either so that's out of the question.
Am I right that people who diss'es the so called fashion ones and quartz are just showing their snobery side or am I missing the point altogether? I plan to get him a Black Tissot Ballade III quartz as I want to get him a quality piece. That's not to say the Hugo Boss, Armani, Gucci, LV, Burberry aren't- far from it. It's just what I would get for myself (but an auto) and who knows, maybe I may convert him and get him interested in watches too and to give other brands a fair go (like Seiko's, surprised me most as I totally underrated them before, but not anymore :D ).
So is there another good looking quartz out there for under $500 I should consider? I'm not made out of money and that's all I want to spend at the time on a present. Any feedback welcomed (even negative ones, if you need to vent your daily nasties, do it here, I'ma newb and can take it in good spirit haha).
I've looked around and Mido is another brand I like designs of, but can't find any retail so I can check out how it looks in real life. I'm in Sydney and happy to drive 100km to find this present for my very good mate! Thanks for reading (as I've stated before, my lack of posts will be made up by wordcount).