Mikkei4 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2024 4:17 pm
It's done now but maybe the 2 Anniversary dates should have been celebrated separately with 2 different watches - this watch for the 10years of SH21 but a special version of another watch for the 20 years of CW to celebrate the Value For Money aspect of CW that has enabled so many of their customers to buy into the brand.
I kind of like this idea. Release a Halo watch and another watch that reaches back into the catalog and updates it like they did with the Revival a couple of years ago. Although, the year is still young.
We need a 20th anniversary FLE…
Neil
It would probably end up being a 21 year LE
Life is not a matter of holding good cards, but sometimes, playing a poor hand well. Jack London
iain wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2024 3:29 pm
If I can use a slightly odd analogy, which may work or it may not, but will hopefully illustrate my point, I’m going to have to disagree with these comments.
I see CW as somewhere in this gentrification journey. They may no longer be Barnsley but they certainly aren’t Omega.
I think that’s a very good, if somewhat imperfect, analogy.
Mikkei4 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2024 4:55 pm
I don't think anybody is disagreeing with you re. how good the price is from CW for this type of watch when compared to similar watches from other brands like Oris (as you have shown) and other brands etc. But if this CW watch isn't what somebody likes then it's probably inevitable that the price will be used to express what else (of a more "standard" design) could be bought for that money from other brands that have been "established" for more than 20 years.
I think what you say here and how you have related it (in your earlier post) to the AT you have looked at recently is a logical post. After all only someone daft buys a watch of a style they don’t like, just because on its merits, it is an excellent and well priced example of its genre.
That is a totally different thought process to those who may say “it’s a CW for £4,000, can’t really be worth it, as a BB58 costs less, etc”.
missF wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2024 3:42 pm
I don't believe that the remit of a watch company should be in any way defined - by anyone.
I won't place any restrictions on what I think CW should do next and I won't get strangely upset about them producing a watch that costs more than the last one did.
Just so. The price range on Cartier Tanks on their website is £3100 to £109,000.
As to “Atelier Collection”, I’m sure I’ve seen it used by other companies as well. Isn’t it just a catch-all term for more expensive ranges of watches (implied exclusivity)? You could call it good old marketing BS if you wished to. I, of course, could not possibly comment.
Steve Linguist; retired teacher; pilgrim; apprentice travel writer
Take nothing but pictures, leave nothing but footprints, kill nothing but time
Avoid loud and aggressive persons; they are vexatious to the spirit.(Max Ehrmann)
Again, I agree that it's wrong to say "that the 12 X price isn't justified because I can get a Planet Ocean for less money." I didn't write that.
I think I wrote that I admire CW for creating this watch and doing so at that price but I did say also that I don't like it and wouldn't like it or buy it even if it was at £1k and that if I was going to spend £4k I'd do so on a watch I like, the AT, i.e agreeing with your comment "I won't be getting a 12 X. Not because it isn't worth what they are asking but rather it isn't my style of watch"
These users thanked the author Mikkei4 for the post (total 2):
Mikkei4 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2024 4:55 pm
I don't think anybody is disagreeing with you re. how good the price is from CW for this type of watch when compared to similar watches from other brands like Oris (as you have shown) and other brands etc. But if this CW watch isn't what somebody likes then it's probably inevitable that the price will be used to express what else (of a more "standard" design) could be bought for that money from other brands that have been "established" for more than 20 years.
I think what you say here and how you have related it (in your earlier post) to the AT you have looked at recently is a logical post. After all only someone daft buys a watch of a style they don’t like, just because on its merits, it is an excellent and well priced example of its genre.
That is a totally different thought process to those who may say “it’s a CW for £4,000, can’t really be worth it, as a BB58 costs less, etc”.
Mikkei4 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2024 5:29 pm
Again, I agree that it's wrong to say "that the 12 X price isn't justified because I can get a Planet Ocean for less money." I didn't write that.
Those were my words not yours and weren't meant to be attributed to you personally. Sorry about that. I would rather have a PO than the 12 X.
Steven's post appears right after mine and was reacting to that. His post probably passed mine in the interwebs.
I do have to say the sentiment he is talking about is further than just Reddit. I am seeing a lot of '$4800 is too much for a CW' without acknowledging what the watch is or showing any comparisons.
Life is not a matter of holding good cards, but sometimes, playing a poor hand well. Jack London
The 3x multiplier seems to be getting a lot of 'press' in this thread. However, does anybody really know what it is 3 x of exactly?
As I recall, Mike France stated it is "3 times cost" (that's nearly verbatim, but I can't remember exactly), but is that
- cost of parts
- cost of parts and labour
- cost of parts, labour, packaging and distribution
- cost of parts, labour, packaging, distribution, marketing, R&D, and anything else that is considered related to that watch
It's a pretty subjective thing, which is likely why Mike France keeps this catchphrase deliberately succinct/vague. Unless we know exactly, it's just marketing waffle which means nothing and just serves to confuse and possibly infuriate people (as shown within this thread).
Let's be honest, it's just another number which suits their agenda because it sounds better than their competitors, but cannot be proven either way.
Mikkei4 wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2024 5:29 pm
Again, I agree that it's wrong to say "that the 12 X price isn't justified because I can get a Planet Ocean for less money." I didn't write that.
Those were my words not yours and weren't meant to be attributed to you personally. Sorry about that. I would rather have a PO than the 12 X.
Steven's post appears right after mine and was reacting to that. His post probably passed mine in the interwebs.
I do have to say the sentiment he is talking about is further than just Reddit. I am seeing a lot of '$4800 is too much for a CW' without acknowledging what the watch is or showing any comparisons.
Thank you for the explanation, I appreciate it and my apologies for grabbing the wrong end of the stick.
It looks great. I recall remarking when the C60 Concept was released that it would look even cooler with a monochrome look and this achieves that and more.
I wouldn't buy this, but would consider a regular priced 12 now with the new micro-adjust and the smaller case.
I assume at 41mm and with the end links it will wear larger than the lug to lug suggests but the movement may not fit in the regular 12 case.
triffidman wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2024 5:41 pm
The 3x multiplier seems to be getting a lot of 'press' in this thread. However, does anybody really know what it is 3 x of exactly?
The 3x multiplier is a fairly standard starting point for pricing products; or certainly was when I was doing a product development/management job.
Basically it’s the sale price of a product broken down into:
1/3 capital cost i.e. the physical cost of the product and it’s manufacturing.
1/3 operational cost i.e. staff, rents, sales and marketing etc.
1/3 gross margin i.e. profit before tax and other such external costs.
The boundary between capital and operational cost is nowhere as clear cut as this, but this is the basic accounting principle.
These users thanked the author timor54 for the post:
A1soknownas wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2024 6:15 pm
It looks great. I recall remarking when the C60 Concept was released that it would look even cooler with a monochrome look and this achieves that and more.
I wouldn't buy this, but would consider a regular priced 12 now with the new micro-adjust and the smaller case.
I assume at 41mm and with the end links it will wear larger than the lug to lug suggests but the movement may not fit in the regular 12 case.
During the preview Wil stated that 41mm was as small as they could go.
I would check out Mike's real world pics. I don't know his wrist size but it wears really well on him.
Life is not a matter of holding good cards, but sometimes, playing a poor hand well. Jack London
Maybe the whole thing is just some fantastic PR and market research for ongoing pricing..... What a way to test the waters!
(And I'm firmly in the "Love It" camp - price is so subjective, and for what I have seen you're getting pretty good bang for your buck! Do I wish it was cheaper? Of course, who wouldn't? But not at the expense of the design, materials or movement).
These users thanked the author GrahamB for the post:
A1soknownas wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2024 6:15 pm
It looks great. I recall remarking when the C60 Concept was released that it would look even cooler with a monochrome look and this achieves that and more.
I wouldn't buy this, but would consider a regular priced 12 now with the new micro-adjust and the smaller case.
I assume at 41mm and with the end links it will wear larger than the lug to lug suggests but the movement may not fit in the regular 12 case.
During the preview Wil stated that 41mm was as small as they could go.
I would check out Mike's real world pics. I don't know his wrist size but it wears really well on him.
He was asked his wrist size on Facebook, it’s 6.75”.
These users thanked the author OllyW for the post:
