@iain I think the real answer is a little of both. I think the smaller sizes are selling otherwise they wouldn't be making them. However, this can become a self-fulfilling prophecy if there is no choice in size in the lineup.

I have a 7.9 inch wrist and used to only wear 41mm and over, until I got my first 39mm sealander. The 39mm sealander is what I grab to wear more than any other watch. It has opened my eyes to smaller watches and I am thinking about adding a 38mm dune. The sand dune looks amazing with the applied logo on a canvas strap. Just looks relaxing

g99hutton wrote: ↑Tue Oct 03, 2023 7:35 pm \It is pretty simple, they make what the people want and they find that out with market research. The fact that they sell very quickly is testament to the fact that the buyers want them. It can be annoying if you like or suit bigger wrists, but there are plenty of watches up to 43mm still available.

There are plenty of watches much bigger than 43mm still available. G-shock anyone? Omega have just re-introduced the ploprof, which is big by anyone's standards and dive watch size is oftened defined by it's depth rating. The PO range is still available at 45.5mm. I guess their market research is telling them that there is a demand for the number of variations on a theme, that they produce at that size.

And how do you know smaller watches sell very quickly? I look at most brands in my neck of the woods, and it seems to me that most cater for a variety of watch sizes. Hublot make the same watch from tiny to big +. I assume they do that for a reason. Rado's Captain Cook is, or was issued in a few sizes, initially 38 and 45mm, I believe, then they introduced a 42mm (I think that's right).

I agree there there are more smaller sized watches available now, but there is little or no equivalent reduction in larger sized watches. Apart from in certain brands, like CW, who have tried to cash in on a trend. Good luck to them for doing so, but posts here demonstrate that not all are happy with such a decision.

I can't help but think that a smaller watch means less material and higher profit margins. The price has definitely gotten larger as the size gets smaller.

^^^ The Mars inflation index?

I would have thought that would apply more to precious metal cases, but I could be wrong.

Bahnstormer_vRS wrote: ↑Thu Oct 19, 2023 8:20 am ^^^^ The thing is, if you've ever seen a case being manufactured (which I have), it doesn't matter whether the case is going to be 36mm, 38mm, 40mm or 42mm they all start out, before machining, as the same size block of metal.

Guy

Sent from my Galaxy S23 Ultra using Tapatalk

I agree, this is how it usually works in CNC machining in general.

Though I am happy about cases shriking

Enricoo_ wrote: ↑Thu Oct 19, 2023 9:29 am
Though I am happy about cases shriking

Not me, Enrico

My smallest is a Raymond Weil The Beatles LE at 39.5mm (you can probably understand why I made an exception)

Usually I like 41mm at a minimum.

rkovars wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 3:42 pm @iain I think the real answer is a little of both. I think the smaller sizes are selling otherwise they wouldn't be making them. However, this can become a self-fulfilling prophecy if there is no choice in size in the lineup.

Alternatively, it can just deter existing watch owners from adding to their collections.
I mean, I might buy a 40mm twelve at some point, but I would never buy a 36mm.

^^^ Which is why there’s a choice. 36 mm CWs are still relatively new, and they are very popular, proving the demand that was always there for them. I can remember that for a while there was little or nothing offered below 40 mm. Think of this as redressing the earlier imbalance.

JAFO wrote: ↑Thu Oct 19, 2023 11:12 am

rkovars wrote: ↑Wed Oct 04, 2023 3:42 pm @iain I think the real answer is a little of both. I think the smaller sizes are selling otherwise they wouldn't be making them. However, this can become a self-fulfilling prophecy if there is no choice in size in the lineup.

Alternatively, it can just deter existing watch owners from adding to their collections.
I mean, I might buy a 40mm twelve at some point, but I would never buy a 36mm.

Agreed. Even my 40mm wears small on my wrist (to my eyes). I wish they'd do a 45

albionphoto wrote: ↑Mon Oct 02, 2023 5:44 pm

Kip wrote: ↑Mon Oct 02, 2023 9:16 am I might suggest a quick read of this opinion article.

This article is fine evidence that everyone has an opinion. I do struggle with the idea that one watch size is perfect for everyone as the author claims. I'd say this article is worth exactly what I paid for it.

So, "one size fits all" might be true but isn't the same as one size suits all. I like to have choice and variety to pick from.

I'll give CW and some other brands like Omega credit for offering many of their watches in multiple sizes. 41 is my minimum for a sports watch. I've been through several <41 models and have learned the hard way that it doesn't work for me. Yes the trend is still toward smaller watches, but choices are a good thing. I'm absolutely thrilled with my 42mm Trident Pro 300, but I appreciate that they also offer a 40 and 38. A one size fits all mentality rarely works.

Meh. Fashion is driven by the producers, and rarely by the consumer. The need to have people buy something 'new' is what dictates it. Marketing directs the attention. Anything sub 39mm looks ridiculous on me so I'll keep buying what I like, not what 'fashion' tells me to like.

tikkathree wrote: ↑Fri Oct 20, 2023 8:33 pm So, "one size fits all" might be true but isn't the same as one size suits all. I like to have choice and variety to pick from.

On any given day I might reach for a 37 or a 44mm watch, or something between those sizes, or another that’s beyond those sizes. Choice is good. I don’t want my preferences to be dictated to me.