Sent from my AC2003 using Tapatalk

NationOfLaws wrote:I watched that and really thought it spoke more to the problems with having a couple review units travel around than it did with CW’s quality control in general. But Maybe I’ll change my tune when mine arrives (hopefully today)

I did think that would be brought up, and it's a valid point.
There are points he brought up that aren't related to review models.
Hope you enjoy your new watch mate

Sent from my AC2003 using Tapatalk

That review is a real shame. Review unit or not I thought things like misaligned bezels were a thing of the past. Shipping items like that sounds sloppy.

NationOfLaws wrote: ↑Thu Jun 16, 2022 9:46 pm Yeah, I hope that’s a one-off. You’d think they’d closely inspect the review units prior to going out. On the plus side, it’s the only instance I’ve heard of out of all the reviews and anecdotes I’ve seen.

Anecdotally I’d say that CW has improved their QC - I hope yours arrives in perfect condition

He managed to capture why I'm not a fan. To me this is not one of CW's strongest pieces. Bezel and crown issues shouldn't have been there either.

Well, we're all watch reviewers at heart but not everyone has a social media channel but, hey, every opinion has validity.

Click bait? What I'd really like to have heard was "So I spoke to Christopher Ward about my concerns with the bezel alignment and the crown movement and they said..............".

The channel looks to be three years old right now and maybe he's swimming upstream from Chinese Aliex watches so fair play to him: a lot of his video end screens feature the kind of dorky "pully face" which I ask my nine year old grandson not to do so yeah, I'm not impressed!

Is all publicity good publicity? Ask Prince Andrew hahaha

I think he was pretty fair in his assessment, noting it’s a review piece and was likely mishandled by prior reviewers. He also notes that these are his own opinions.

His take on the dimmer bezel lume makes sense, and I pretty much agree with his opinions. He articulated why I’ve been feeling meh on the Aquitaine line.

He had a cool time lapse of the lume fading in there too.

NationOfLaws wrote: ↑Thu Jun 16, 2022 9:46 pm Yeah, I hope that’s a one-off. You’d think they’d closely inspect the review units prior to going out. On the plus side, it’s the only instance I’ve heard of out of all the reviews and anecdotes I’ve seen.

This doesn't always happen. Sometimes after leaving the manufacturer they are passed from reviewer to reviewer without going back to the manufacturer. After the first review the manufacturer is out of the loop. I think the way CW does it is that they send units to their PR agency and then the PR agency handles who gets them. There is definitely some work that needs to be done here. For the C60 Anthropocene one reviewer got a preproduction model that didn't have a bidirectional bezel. It was fine for product photography but it caused a reviewer to give out bad information (now the reviewer is not off of the hook here because he didn't bother to check his findings against the published specs and ask CW for clarification). It just points out that it is far from a perfect system.

rkovars wrote: ↑Fri Jun 17, 2022 4:00 pm For the C60 Anthropocene one reviewer got a preproduction model that didn't have a bidirectional bezel. It was fine for product photography but it caused a reviewer to give out bad information (now the reviewer is not off of the hook here because he didn't bother to check his findings against the published specs and ask CW for clarification).

Remember that thread about his review?! That guy was crazy!

jkbarnes wrote: ↑Fri Jun 17, 2022 4:51 pm

rkovars wrote: ↑Fri Jun 17, 2022 4:00 pm For the C60 Anthropocene one reviewer got a preproduction model that didn't have a bidirectional bezel. It was fine for product photography but it caused a reviewer to give out bad information (now the reviewer is not off of the hook here because he didn't bother to check his findings against the published specs and ask CW for clarification).

Remember that thread about his review?! That guy was crazy!

For sure. He was very much into 'gaming' the algorithm I think. I never doubted that he didn't receive what he said he did. I simply pointed out what the spec sheet said and it is up to him to be more thorough.