Price Increase

Discuss Christopher Ward watches
timeisofthessence
Senior
Senior
Posts: 72
Joined: Fri Apr 13, 2012 4:08 am
CW-watches: 2
Location: new york, ny

Re: Price Increase

Post by timeisofthessence »

My point is not that prices are naturally rising. My point is that cw at full retail price is not necessarily a good value compared with similarly featured watches from other brands.

This is meaningful because cw promotes itself as a value brand.
User avatar
Avo
Junior
Junior
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:35 pm
CW-watches: 1
Location: California

Re: Price Increase

Post by Avo »

Nicky J wrote:I still think that CW are good value for money. Using the same Sellita SW200 / ETA movements as Tag, Christian Dior at a fraction of the price - CW gets my vote:-)
But no longer at a fraction of the price of Tissot or Hamilton.

The excellent CW customer service (including the truly exceptional 5-year warrany with the even more exceptional payment of international shipping both ways on repairs) has to be factored in, however, and still makes the lower-priced CWs a very good value.
User avatar
Mortis
Forum Menace
Forum Menace
Posts: 2932
Joined: Wed Oct 14, 2009 11:48 pm
CW-watches: 12
LE-two: yes
LE-three: yes
Location: Surrey

Re: Price Increase

Post by Mortis »

Increasingly CWL are moving away from the "value" bracket.

My first was a C8 at circa £250 four years ago. That watch would now set me back £400. This pricing means that CWL are more expensive than competitors such as Hamilton and Tissot, as well as small brands like Steinhart and Timefactors.

Can the expense be justified? Maybe. I would expect a 15% discount* from a new CWL, which would make it much more sensible, so maybe they are priced with the expectation of most sales being at a discount. Furthermore, the NN sales and similar still make the brand retail in the "good value" category.

However, I suspect that in the next five years brands will have to either buy movements from someone other than Swatch (and the Swiss stuff will go to the big boys so that means China) or make their own. The C900 is clearly an indication, alongside the increased prices, that CWL will be moving into the new movement arena (albeit a movement that a number of, presumably independent, brands will share).

They shift 15-20k watches per year, so whatever they do it is working. :thumbup:

* I do wish the other half had consulted me before going "all in" on a Monopusher!
User avatar
welshlad
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 11301
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 12:33 am
CW-watches: 27
Location: Yorkshire, UK

Re: Price Increase

Post by welshlad »

Mortis wrote:* I do wish the other half had consulted me before going "all in" on a Monopusher!
Ah, but that would have ruined what must have been the most fantastic surprise. Think of the missed 15% discount as the cost of love! ;)
Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future. - Niels Bohr
User avatar
mabotham
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 2909
Joined: Mon Jul 12, 2010 11:10 am
CW-watches: 5
LE-two: yes
Location: Chesterfield

Re: Price Increase

Post by mabotham »

The prices do seem to have jumped up.

I wouldnt buy at full price knowing they do a 10% discount and NN watches regularly.
Also, watches for sale from other members offer a good discount & are usually in perfect condition.

Saying that, I was willing to pay full price for the Makaira Elite; but then a discount code was posted so I used that. Bonus.
User avatar
Kansas City Milkman
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 2520
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 11:08 pm
CW-watches: 14
Location: Surrey

Re: Price Increase

Post by Kansas City Milkman »

Avo wrote:
Nicky J wrote:I still think that CW are good value for money. Using the same Sellita SW200 / ETA movements as Tag, Christian Dior at a fraction of the price - CW gets my vote:-)
But no longer at a fraction of the price of Tissot or Hamilton.

The excellent CW customer service (including the truly exceptional 5-year warrany with the even more exceptional payment of international shipping both ways on repairs) has to be factored in, however, and still makes the lower-priced CWs a very good value.
Interestingly the recent survey didn't seek CW comparison against Tissot and Hamilton, maintaining a focus on some other brands such as Omega amongst others. I was surprised as I'd see these in competition with CW in certain watch sectors.

That said clearly the brand has aspirations and I'd see CW moving away from the value angle but always maintaining a cost advantage over more expensive brands.
User avatar
akirk
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 3422
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:59 pm
CW-watches: 0

Re: Price Increase

Post by akirk »

I have probably mentioned it before - but value doesn't have to mean cheap - if the CWL philosophy of quality at a reasonable price (i.e. without sky-high markups due to advertising / sponsorship / etc.) then that allows them to play at any (or indeed many!) price levels...

so moving up to higher price levels isn't necessarily indicative of losing value - but about how they pitch their brand - it can still allow them to offer value within that price level...

Alasdair
Tracking Christopher Ward watch prices on ebay globally at Watchroll
Tracking Bremont watch prices on ebay globally at Watchtrace
User avatar
Kansas City Milkman
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 2520
Joined: Mon Sep 24, 2012 11:08 pm
CW-watches: 14
Location: Surrey

Re: Price Increase

Post by Kansas City Milkman »

akirk wrote:I have probably mentioned it before - but value doesn't have to mean cheap - if the CWL philosophy of quality at a reasonable price (i.e. without sky-high markups due to advertising / sponsorship / etc.) then that allows them to play at any (or indeed many!) price levels...

so moving up to higher price levels isn't necessarily indicative of losing value - but about how they pitch their brand - it can still allow them to offer value within that price level...

Alasdair
Very true. I guess when you look at the high quality of CW against more expensive brands 'good value' will undoubtedly be linked to relative price and therefore cost.

I do agree that CW can still represent value at a higher price point and my view is that is where the brand is heading.
User avatar
akirk
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 3422
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:59 pm
CW-watches: 0

Re: Price Increase

Post by akirk »

Kansas city milkman wrote:
akirk wrote:I have probably mentioned it before - but value doesn't have to mean cheap - if the CWL philosophy of quality at a reasonable price (i.e. without sky-high markups due to advertising / sponsorship / etc.) then that allows them to play at any (or indeed many!) price levels...

so moving up to higher price levels isn't necessarily indicative of losing value - but about how they pitch their brand - it can still allow them to offer value within that price level...

Alasdair
Very true. I guess when you look at the high quality of CW against more expensive brands 'good value' will undoubtedly be linked to relative price and therefore cost.

I do agree that CW can still represent value at a higher price point and my view is that is where the brand is heading.
I am sure that they are - it is a simple move to increase profit margins :)

Alasdair
Tracking Christopher Ward watch prices on ebay globally at Watchroll
Tracking Bremont watch prices on ebay globally at Watchtrace
User avatar
poppydoodlesdad
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 2352
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2011 10:27 pm
Location: Nowhere, man

Re: Price Increase

Post by poppydoodlesdad »

Mortis wrote:Increasingly CWL are moving away from the "value" bracket.

They shift 15-20k watches per year, so whatever they do it is working. :thumbup:
Maybe, but even these numbers don't come close to the likes of Rolex, Omega etc so, like (relatively) low volume manufactures in other industries, cars for instance, it may be that CW is having / wanting to increase its margins. To justify the higher price point though it has to produce more 'exclusive' models and be seen to be in the 'high end' arena?

Just an idea......
"You can get help from teachers, but you are going to have to learn a lot by yourself, sitting alone in a room." Dr. Seuss

Some watches
User avatar
akirk
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 3422
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2012 9:59 pm
CW-watches: 0

Re: Price Increase

Post by akirk »

it is also good to have a progression of watches / price points so that they can get people in from all ages / wealth points and then if coming in with the cheaper watches - take them up the price brackets as they can afford more...

CWL is still a very young company

Alasdair
Tracking Christopher Ward watch prices on ebay globally at Watchroll
Tracking Bremont watch prices on ebay globally at Watchtrace
User avatar
borderman
Trusted Seller
Trusted Seller
Posts: 1191
Joined: Sat Jun 18, 2011 7:43 pm
CW-watches: 7
Location: Staffs

Re: Price Increase

Post by borderman »

Nicky J wrote:I still think that CW are good value for money. Using the same Sellita SW200 / ETA movements as Tag, Christian Dior at a fraction of the price - CW gets my vote:-)


+ one :thumbup:
Dave
3 CW ladies for my wife.
User avatar
Avo
Junior
Junior
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:35 pm
CW-watches: 1
Location: California

Re: Price Increase

Post by Avo »

When CW debuted in 2005, they were selling a watch with a Swiss mechanical movement for £99, a fantastic price. Today, eight years later, essentially the same watch costs three times as much. Yes, I know there are various out-of-CW's-control reasons for that, but still it's a striking loss of value.

I have no interest whatsoever in "brand positioning". I care about the object I receive for the money I pay, and not what anyone else thinks about it. By that standard, CW is far less of a value today than it was eight years ago.
User avatar
welshlad
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 11301
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 12:33 am
CW-watches: 27
Location: Yorkshire, UK

Re: Price Increase

Post by welshlad »

Avo wrote:When CW debuted in 2005, they were selling a watch with a Swiss mechanical movement for £99, a fantastic price. Today, eight years later, essentially the same watch costs three times as much. Yes, I know there are various out-of-CW's-control reasons for that, but still it's a striking loss of value.

I have no interest whatsoever in "brand positioning". I care about the object I receive for the money I pay, and not what anyone else thinks about it. By that standard, CW is far less of a value today than it was eight years ago.
Fair enough, but no-one ever paid £99 for the C5. The £99 was a trial offering alongside two higher price experiments, to test out where the demand curve was. Chris has stated that no-one took up the £99 price because they perceived that the watch must be poor quality to be available at that price. So it's not a fair statement to say that the price has tripled since 2005.

I still think the C5 and most of the CWL range represents pretty good value for money for the quality on offer. Sure, there are other competitors with similar value for money, but CWL is still on the whole a very attractive brand proposition.
Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future. - Niels Bohr
User avatar
Avo
Junior
Junior
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 9:35 pm
CW-watches: 1
Location: California

Re: Price Increase

Post by Avo »

welshlad wrote:Fair enough, but no-one ever paid £99 for the C5. The £99 was a trial offering alongside two higher price experiments, to test out where the demand curve was. Chris has stated that no-one took up the £99 price because they perceived that the watch must be poor quality to be available at that price. So it's not a fair statement to say that the price has tripled since 2005.
I was going by the famous TimeZone review by David Malone, posted on 25 November 2005 (link available from the CW online reviews page). In the review, Mr. Malone says that he paid for the watch ("exchanging emails with Chris Ward before buying the watch was a pleasure"), and that the price in the UK is £99. So at least one person paid this price.
  • Similar Topics
    Replies
    Views
    Last post