I’ve been following discussions and YouTube videos predicting the future of microbrands and smaller watchmakers, and one name that keeps coming up is Christopher Ward (CW). Personally, I think CW has cemented its place in the industry, but whether they can truly become a luxury brand remains an open question—partly due to their branding.

Christopher Ward was founded on the principle of delivering value through affordable, well-crafted watches. However, recent releases like the Bel Canto, Titanium Twelve, and Moonphase signal a shift. CW is edging beyond the sub-€2,000 category, moving into the mid-tier market, and perhaps even flirting with the luxury segment.

The Bel Canto, in particular, has showcased their capability to produce something extraordinary. Had this watch been released by an established luxury brand, it could easily have sold for 3–5 times the price. This raises the question: could CW evolve into a true luxury brand in the future?

One possibility I see is CW creating two distinct lines—one focusing on high-end luxury pieces, the other maintaining their core mission of accessible, everyday watches. However, one of their biggest hurdle may be their name.

While the name Christopher Ward evokes their British heritage, it also comes across as somewhat generic and lacking the cachet associated with luxury watchmaking. Today nobody buys a CW watch just because it's a CW watch. A true hallmark of a luxury brand is when your name alone inspires desire. Given that Christopher Ward himself is no longer involved with the brand, why not evolve the identity? A subtle shift, like officially adopting the initials "CW" (à la IWC), could better position the brand for a move upmarket while retaining its recognition.

Of course, CW's strength lies in offering exceptional value and catering to price-conscious enthusiasts. But with their evident growth and ambition, this branding challenge could limit their ability to transcend the mid-tier category.

What do you think? Is the "Christopher Ward" name an asset or a liability for their future aspirations? Would simplifying it to “CW” be a smart move? I’d love to hear your perspectives.

You make some interesting points, particularly in the light of the recent releases of what we might refer to as halo models. The question of a name change was a hot topic for a while after Chris left, but as far as I know it is, and has always been, non-negotiable as far as the company is concerned.

Personally I think the name is neither an asset or a liability. I think the watches will be received and judged on their own merits. I do think dropping the rather visually unappealing Christopher Ward from the dial was a smart move; I was even less a fan of the iteration at the 9 position. The applied twin flag motif is smart and unobtrusive. It's interesting you draw parallels with IWC. For me IWC do make some nice watches, I particularly like the new Ingenieur. That said, I've never been a fan of the branding, I think it's weak. 'International Watch Co'? Surely every other watch brand could claim to be an international watch company, it's a bit beige don't you think? I also don't really care to have the place name Schaffhausen on my dial, no more than I'd want Bolton, say. Geneva? OK, at a push. Just Swiss made will suffice.

All this said, IWC have an established rep for making great watches and that's what they trade on. I think CW's watch making prowess is gaining more and more fans. They clearly have shaken up a somewhat staid Swiss traditional watch industry. Like your IWC comparison, I think CW will be judged a hell of a lot more for the watches they make than any concerns over the name of the brand. I think those days are by and large behind them.

Des

strapline wrote: ↑Sun Nov 24, 2024 9:25 am ……That said, I've never been a fan of the branding, I think it's weak. 'International Watch Co'? Surely every other watch brand could claim to be an international watch company, it's a bit beige don't you think? I also don't really care to have the place name Schaffhausen on my dial, no more than I'd want Bolton, say. Geneva? OK, at a push. Just Swiss made will suffice.

Sorry, it’s post number 4 and I’m already taking things off topic but please get back to discussing changing the name once I’ve posted…….


The name international watch company was chosen at the time the company was first founded and was a deliberate nod to a different way of making watches. IWC was founded by an American who wanted to combine American production methods with Swiss craftsmanship. It was something different at the time, but I agree if viewed in a modern context it can seem an odd choice of name.

Schaffhausen is just as important part of the IWC brand as their name which is why it’s usually included as part of their logo. Schaffhausen was specifically chosen as a site due to the ability to use hydro power from the Rhine to power the factory so is also an important part of the company history. Probably more so than just putting their location on the dial.

Anyway, back to discussing CW……

I bet that MF would love to change it

golfjunky wrote: ↑Sun Nov 24, 2024 9:56 am I bet that MF would love to change it

I can only refer you to my comment above, Greg. The last time I recall the matter being discussed (when I and others were sitting around a table with him) there was no question of it changing.

golfjunky wrote: ↑Sun Nov 24, 2024 9:56 am I bet that MF would love to change it

Ah you must be the forumite with an unhealthy obsession about MF!

Are you able to succinctly explain why you think he would like to change the name?

Neil

Christopher Ward just about doubled their sales last year, which is impressive by any measure. Under the circumstances it appears the brand name is fine and it would be unwise to change it in any form and cause any sort of confusion in their marketing.
The hardest part of such a large expansion is staying on top of production, QC and customer service: I imagine they are focusing on these rather than considering messing about with the brand name. As long as they don't do a Jaguar!

nbg wrote: ↑Sun Nov 24, 2024 10:09 am

golfjunky wrote: ↑Sun Nov 24, 2024 9:56 am I bet that MF would love to change it

Ah you must be the forumite with an unhealthy obsession about MF!

Are you able to succinctly explain why you think he would like to change the name?

Neil

Why would anyone want to head up and run a company with someone else’s name above the door. The name of a guy that you prob fell out with and I highly suspect have bad blood with.

Wait I hear an announcement coming…

“We are pleased to announce that as part of our 20 year anniversary celebrations we have decided to flush away 20 years of increasing brand awareness and start again with a new brand name. The new brand name will be decided upon by a bunch of random folk who post about watches on an Internet forum”.

Nope it’s not going to happen, nor should it. There is absolutely no business rationale to change the name.

The watches speak for themselves. There are many owners of high end “luxury brands” that are happy to buy CW watches.

Neil

golfjunky wrote: ↑Sun Nov 24, 2024 9:56 am I bet that MF would love to change it

Rebrand to EVERTON? Nah!

I don't claim to watch every facebook/youtube/instagram watch channel but I don't remember the last time that "influencers" WETF they are tried to make anything of the brand name.

It might be early in the day but I'm trying to think how the brand names Citizen/Seiko/Omega/IWC/Panerai/San Martin/Rolex/Hamilton/Porsche Design/Swatch represent the identity and personality of the person heading up the business.

golfjunky wrote: ↑Sun Nov 24, 2024 10:15 am

nbg wrote: ↑Sun Nov 24, 2024 10:09 am

golfjunky wrote: ↑Sun Nov 24, 2024 9:56 am I bet that MF would love to change it

Ah you must be the forumite with an unhealthy obsession about MF!

Are you able to succinctly explain why you think he would like to change the name?

Neil

Why would anyone want to head up and run a company with someone else’s name above the door. The name of a guy that you prob fell out with and I highly suspect have bad blood with.

Would that be the same person who was happy to allow the name of someone else on the dial in the first instance, when if he wasn’t happy with using CW’s name he wouldn’t have allowed it to happen?

Neil

tikkathree wrote: ↑Sun Nov 24, 2024 10:32 am

golfjunky wrote: ↑Sun Nov 24, 2024 9:56 am I bet that MF would love to change it

Rebrand to EVERTON? Nah!

I don't claim to watch every facebook/youtube/instagram watch channel but I don't remember the last time that "influencers" WETF they are tried to make anything of the brand name.

It might be early in the day but I'm trying to think how the brand names Citizen/Seiko/Omega/IWC/Panerai/San Martin/Rolex/Hamilton/Porsche Design/Swatch represent the identity and personality of the person heading up the business.

Everton you say?

You could be onto something there!

A rebrand in honour of Everton’s most famous player…

Dixie Dean…

I offer the DWC

Dixie Watch Company.

With Birkenhead appearing under DWC as part of the branding.

Neil

strapline wrote: ↑Sun Nov 24, 2024 9:25 am Personally I think the name is neither an asset or a liability. I think the watches will be received and judged on their own merits. I do think dropping the rather visually unappealing Christopher Ward from the dial was a smart move; I was even less a fan of the iteration at the 9 position. The applied twin flag motif is smart and unobtrusive.

I don’t have an issue with the name and don’t see it as a big issue that the man himself has moved on-at least there is a history to the name and it isn’t just something consultants have come up with. The main issue I had was some of the branding on the watches as it felt like CW struggled given the various iterations of the logo. Personally I thought the plain ‘Christopher Ward’ branding was the worst iteration! Long slightly vanilla name despite my point above on it actually meaning something! I also wasn’t a fan of ‘Chr. Ward’. It suggested they were struggling a bit with branding but others I’m sure will know more/correct me. I liked the early ‘CW’ logo but think the Twin Flags is a good and recognisable design (especially the recent-ish applied version on dials) and a decent compromise e.g keeping the brand name but not putting it on the dial. Plus it is quite versatile and they’ve used it well in advertising but also incorporating it in designs like the Twelve.

But they still need a name behind the logo and I’d agree the brand name is well established now and despite personnel changes I don’t see a good reason to mess with what is working. Any change risks being a bit synthetic or being designed by committee so could end up a bit bland and lose the history.

nbg wrote: ↑Sun Nov 24, 2024 10:26 am “…The new brand name will be decided upon by a bunch of random folk who post about watches on an Internet forum”.

I had the same thought. As a luxury brand I think “Wardy McWardFace” is perfect.

Seriously though… I’m inclined to think the name is fine. Plenty of other watch companies are named after founders without a problem. Perhaps just because it’s an English name and we’re (I assume) mostly native English speakers on the forum, we find it sounds less exotic and ‘luxury’ than a French or Swiss name, for example.

I’m also not sure the current range is really that wide in terms of price points. The most expensive model is just over 7x the cheapest. Without going through every brand, instinct tells me that’s not very wide compared to others. So I’d question whether an offshoot is really necessary.

Finally, I’m not sure how differentiated a premium offshoot would be if generated by the main brand. To use a car analogy: While Porsche is owned by VW, it’s luxury in its own right, since it existed beforehand. But in my mind a Lexus is still just a more expensive Toyota (with apologies to any Lexus owners…)