Thanks for writing this. Someone had to say it. People have a right to know what they are paying for. At the end of the day, if a consumer wants the product regardless of the quality, they will spend the money. But hoping that people are uneducated enough to take their money is not Okay.
yes, this is a good point. i had a footnote about the Cartier Santos Dual Time but cut it for length. Many will point out that people mostly buy Cartier for their design and not the movements, which is probably true. But the point is customers should still have that info before purchase and be fully aware of the decision they're making.
Really enjoyed this article! Positivity and sugar coating are two different things. Highlighting the best elements of a watch does not have to be accompanied with withholding the undesirable features of it. The media should highlight all aspects of a watch with a critical but respectful lens. Watch media has begun to look more like marketing than journalism, and I mostly ignore it now.
You’re on the money here, Tony. Thanks for sharing a true perspective on the situation. Consumers and collectors are truly the heart here, and although some companies aren’t good at “reading the room” with this, at least we have articles like this that can motivate some to move in the right direction.
I do think some brands (or at least, some people at some brands, as I mention) understand this. Of course, this is also the increasing appeal of indies who seem to “get it”.
I think the issue with "watch media" is that there is a feeling that they are never being truly honest. That there is a tendency to smooth over the rough edges. Not take a definitive stance (and I am mean a negative one) on a watch. It always gets me that there are no watch reviews that give a rating or score. You have scores and ratings in everything. Think like a Rotten Tomatoes review of watches. A watch could get scored on how it fits into its provenance or brand lineage, on how it is made, on how it fits in with other current releases in its same genre, and whether it is a good use of your money. Instead most "negative" reviews tend to share some concerns or displeasure buried deep in the middle of the review, but then somehow come out in the last paragraph or so being neutral/positive.
Putting a score out there is definitive, good or bad. I am not saying that will cure the worlds ills because there is smoothing in those as well. It might make reviews more entertaining though, and that is another thing the "watch media" needs to strive for as well.
It’s funny, I’ve thought about the score thing too - i grew up reading Pitchfork reviews and their rating meant everything. And since watch reviews are already everywhere, it’s one way I’ve thought of differentiating future reviews here (as I decide how much of a role they will play). Thanks for reading.
Thoughtful article. It’s certainly a balance that all serious journalists have to consider. As an enthusiastic consumer, I appreciate where you’re going with this, but if I am foolish enough to spend a lot of money on a watch like the aforementioned Cartier Santos Dual Time without making the effort to know the specs, shame on me. Yes, perhaps I may feel duped, but that’s on me.
fair point. my point is that good media should strive to help customers along this journey. if they don't, they're completely ceding this role they'd ideally play in the larger ecosystem.
Koh made a video with Geoff Hess some years ago, where they said paying $50k for an “Ultraman” Speedy was a sound investment. It’s still up on YouTube.
Before forgiveness comes contrition. Before contrition comes suffering. Have the salesmen suffered enough for us to forgive them? Not yet, not even close.
Thank you so much for this article. I truly believe in open communication ( I am a practicing physician) and I need to be very honest with my patients and their diagnosis and give them options on treatments that through my 26 years of practice, I believe will help them. The watch industry should lay itself bare and allow us (patients) to make our best choice based on honest open communication. I look forward to hearing more about your opinions in regards to those of us who have fallen down the "Watch Collectors Hole"
Super sharp insight--totally agree with almost everything said here. The whole idea of "watch media" is wild when you think about it. It's sort of young and has a lot to figure out still. Newsletters like this one are exactly where the conversation takes place. So thank you, Tony!
Thanks for writing this. Someone had to say it. People have a right to know what they are paying for. At the end of the day, if a consumer wants the product regardless of the quality, they will spend the money. But hoping that people are uneducated enough to take their money is not Okay.
yes, this is a good point. i had a footnote about the Cartier Santos Dual Time but cut it for length. Many will point out that people mostly buy Cartier for their design and not the movements, which is probably true. But the point is customers should still have that info before purchase and be fully aware of the decision they're making.
Really enjoyed this article! Positivity and sugar coating are two different things. Highlighting the best elements of a watch does not have to be accompanied with withholding the undesirable features of it. The media should highlight all aspects of a watch with a critical but respectful lens. Watch media has begun to look more like marketing than journalism, and I mostly ignore it now.
yes, too many people feel this way, sadly. i agree - critical but respectful. thanks for reading as always, Myra :)
Fantastic Mr Traina- well said I appreciate someone with influence saying it.
thanks for reading keith!
You’re on the money here, Tony. Thanks for sharing a true perspective on the situation. Consumers and collectors are truly the heart here, and although some companies aren’t good at “reading the room” with this, at least we have articles like this that can motivate some to move in the right direction.
I do think some brands (or at least, some people at some brands, as I mention) understand this. Of course, this is also the increasing appeal of indies who seem to “get it”.
I think the issue with "watch media" is that there is a feeling that they are never being truly honest. That there is a tendency to smooth over the rough edges. Not take a definitive stance (and I am mean a negative one) on a watch. It always gets me that there are no watch reviews that give a rating or score. You have scores and ratings in everything. Think like a Rotten Tomatoes review of watches. A watch could get scored on how it fits into its provenance or brand lineage, on how it is made, on how it fits in with other current releases in its same genre, and whether it is a good use of your money. Instead most "negative" reviews tend to share some concerns or displeasure buried deep in the middle of the review, but then somehow come out in the last paragraph or so being neutral/positive.
Putting a score out there is definitive, good or bad. I am not saying that will cure the worlds ills because there is smoothing in those as well. It might make reviews more entertaining though, and that is another thing the "watch media" needs to strive for as well.
Good article!
It’s funny, I’ve thought about the score thing too - i grew up reading Pitchfork reviews and their rating meant everything. And since watch reviews are already everywhere, it’s one way I’ve thought of differentiating future reviews here (as I decide how much of a role they will play). Thanks for reading.
Thoughtful article. It’s certainly a balance that all serious journalists have to consider. As an enthusiastic consumer, I appreciate where you’re going with this, but if I am foolish enough to spend a lot of money on a watch like the aforementioned Cartier Santos Dual Time without making the effort to know the specs, shame on me. Yes, perhaps I may feel duped, but that’s on me.
Keep up the good work and solid writing!
fair point. my point is that good media should strive to help customers along this journey. if they don't, they're completely ceding this role they'd ideally play in the larger ecosystem.
Koh made a video with Geoff Hess some years ago, where they said paying $50k for an “Ultraman” Speedy was a sound investment. It’s still up on YouTube.
Before forgiveness comes contrition. Before contrition comes suffering. Have the salesmen suffered enough for us to forgive them? Not yet, not even close.
Thank you so much for this article. I truly believe in open communication ( I am a practicing physician) and I need to be very honest with my patients and their diagnosis and give them options on treatments that through my 26 years of practice, I believe will help them. The watch industry should lay itself bare and allow us (patients) to make our best choice based on honest open communication. I look forward to hearing more about your opinions in regards to those of us who have fallen down the "Watch Collectors Hole"
Super sharp insight--totally agree with almost everything said here. The whole idea of "watch media" is wild when you think about it. It's sort of young and has a lot to figure out still. Newsletters like this one are exactly where the conversation takes place. So thank you, Tony!
That “almost” will keep me up at night!