ajax87 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 30, 2022 2:46 pm Point out the brand name in this image, please...

It's on the back.

Let's see now.... the new FLE design is fixed and will be revealed within 24 hours so what other chestnuts can we rake over? Ah yes, the brand name.

Not only am I untroubled by having another man's name on my person (I sit here wearing Charles Tyrrwhit shirt and trousis and Marks & Spencer socks), when I found these watches, Christopher Ward was the name of the working founder still "in situ" and the only thought I had was to push for a rebrand to "Wera Watches" after the name of the original occupier of the sofa

Would I proudly promote Swoosh watches? Sounds like a domestic cleaning device.

Twin Flags? no.

CW Watches? Sounds too much like a character from a 70's tv drama.

A "stronger" man's name? What... like Buzz Lightyear? Leave it out.

Ward Watches works for me.

What about DYR Watches after Do Your Research? Too close to those Daniel whasisname watches.

Maidenhead Watches? "Is that a Maidenhead on your wrist Pete?" I rest my case m'lud.

Ward Watches sounds ok.

This is an interesting discussion, and I suppose, mostly academic. While I’m not an expert on branding or marketing, I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night, so I’ll weigh in. I also watch a lot of Shark Tank (Lion’s Den for our UK members), so I practically have an MBA.

To me, the most compelling reason to consider changing the name is because the namesake has left the company and gone on to start (with or through his sons) another watch company. While that company has gone belly up, one could argue it makes for potential confusion in the market place.

At the end of the day, I imagine any decision to change the name would be drivien by market research and market forces. I would think it’s quite a big deal to change the name, and would therefore only be done for really compelling reasons.

Just stick with Christopher Ward, they tend to be shortened to CW when discussed on line and over time they will be known by that by more and more people.

By the time they celebrate their centenary they will probably be called CW by everyone in the same way no one really says The International Watch Company anymore, although that is still written in full on their case backs.

You can quote me on this and if I’m wrong in 2105 then if you come and see me then I’ll buy you a beer to apologise.

Here's my musings. The brand name is a tricky thing.

I don't like the period in an abbrevation such as Chr. Ward - to be honest I don't really like to see an abbreviation at all. However I think just Ward is a bit too short, I think, rather like Ball.

Trident is a good length for a watch name, but changing the name completely is a big decision, and some names may well be taken already.

I have 6 CW watches - 3xC65 with the nine o'clock name and recessed logo, 2xC7 with an applied logo, no name, and a C60 with a centred 2-line Christopher Ward, but no logo - I like them all and can't really pick a favourite. If anything I would prefer the C65s without the numbers at 12 and 6, but it's no deal breaker.

I like the C7 applied logos, but that's tricky, as it has been achieved by having an individual moulding, if you will. Its black and silver, and red and silver on my two C7's to match the dial colour. I like it, but you need a different version for every dial colour.

Maybe you could pick a standard applied logo colour such as red and white, black and white or even silver and gold, and have a standard applied logo for every watch. The all-metallic silver and gold might look good.

I would quite like to see a Raymond Weil/Vacheron treatment - smaller font, and centred all on one line, with an applied logo, just to see how it works.

I imagine CW have given this a lot of thought anyway.

Name changes don't go well after the company has been established. CW has 17 years of hard fought brand equity in the name. There would also be the inevitable murmuring about what is going on behind the scenes and will the company be around in 10 years. Logos and word marks come and go. Sometimes with really radical change. Changing the company name is something all together different.

I am not convinced a name change would do much for the brand. That said, I do like taking the name off of the dial. Something about it rubbed me the wrong way.

I don't think there is a pressing need to change the name, the company seems to be on the ascendancy with models that sell well and the halo effect and acclaim the Bel Canto has received.

The logo did used to attract a lot of debate, much of it negative however I don't recollect any debate about the name itself.

If they did think about changing the name, I think the most obvious change would be just to use "CW". As an accountant I can point to many of the big players in my profession that have done similar - Price Waterhouse Coopers are now simply PWC with no mention at all of their former long name.

Changing to a completely new name could cause confusion and damage the brand value you have built - does anyone remember Royal Mail briefly re-branding as Consignia....and then changing back to Royal Mail a short time later!

Dunkin' Doughnuts shortened it's name to just plain Dunkin' for all intents and purposes. Maybe Christopher Ward keeps the name but rebrands as simply "Ward"



Sent from my Galaxy S20 using Tapatalk

MichaelMD wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 3:27 pm Dunkin' Doughnuts shortened it's name to just plain Dunkin' for all intents and purposes. Maybe Christopher Ward keeps the name but rebrands as simply "Ward"



Sent from my Galaxy S20 using Tapatalk

or just CW Watches.

MichaelMD wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 3:27 pm Dunkin' Doughnuts shortened it's name to just plain Dunkin'

If CW wants to rebrand, I think an approach like this makes the most sense. It’s much like the previously mentioned Kentucky Fried Chicken transitioning to KFC.

Perhaps it should be MF Watches.....

FloridaPhil wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 7:47 pm Perhaps it should be MF Watches.....

Now Phil you know that suggestion would really upset Greg!

Neil