Bahnstormer_vRS wrote: ↑Fri Apr 28, 2023 11:02 am @golfjunky

golfjunky wrote: ↑Fri Apr 28, 2023 9:03 am
Haha, I mean it. i really liked the Sealander (yes the GMT was a EXP2 copy) it even made me a customer again.

Okay Greg.

Let's keep it simple and, as is said 'a picture paints a thousand words'.

You believe one of theses watches is a copy of the other.



Photo by @ItsAliveJim




Photo by @Internaut


I think I need to go to Specsavers.

Guy



Sent from my XPERIA 5 III using Tapatalk

I’ve never understood why it’s referred to as an Explorer 2 rip off, you could never mistake them for each other, even in the same colours. It does look quite similar to this one though.

golfjunky wrote: ↑Fri Apr 28, 2023 11:24 am Yes to us geeks there is a number of differences but i know that Joe blogs from across the bar would think im either wearing a bad fake Rolex or even worse a Copy of a Rolex.

Really?

In which case Joe Bloggs would definitely need to go to Specsavers.

Guy

@OllyW - thanks for that.

I hadn't got around to searching out a photo of the Grand Seiko, but that was going to be my next post.

Guy

I think you both know that the blue dial is a different kettle of fish in the discussion.

There are also individuals who clearly have some type of obscure agenda.

There's another thread in the public sub-forum on watchuseek where a heated debate is going on about how much of a copy CW is to other watches. If you examine the signatures of people exclaiming The Twelve is a rip-off, you'll notice those same people own other watches that are intentionally borrowing designs from other brands. Some even more so than Christopher Ward. It's hard to take those people serious when they have blatant double standards.

see CWOTD thread today.

golfjunky wrote: ↑Thu Sep 07, 2023 2:27 pm see CWOTD thread today.

I think this is referring to my post from yesterday where someone mistook my Sealander gmt for an Explorer 1. I looked online for some Explorer 1 images and whilst it is very different from the Sealander I can see how, from a distance, at a glance, one might be mistaken for the other.

I get that out and out copies are not really on but for certain iconic watch styles (eg sports bracelet) there is only so much you can do to to be different. I think CW succeeds in this as do a few others (Traska springs to mind as another).

Bahnstormer_vRS wrote: ↑Fri Apr 28, 2023 11:37 am

golfjunky wrote: ↑Fri Apr 28, 2023 11:24 am Yes to us geeks there is a number of differences but i know that Joe blogs from across the bar would think im either wearing a bad fake Rolex or even worse a Copy of a Rolex.

Really?

In which case Joe Bloggs would definitely need to go to Specsavers.

Guy

In which case Joe Bloggs would probably walk into Poundland

My view…

- I doubt that anyone who knows anything about watches would actually think (or state) that a Sealander, whether 3 hander or GMT, looks anything like an Explorer or Explorer 2. Unless they were looking for a reaction; a bit of gentle trolling.
- I also doubt that non watchy Joe Bloggs would think a Sealander variant was a Rolex variant. Because they wouldn’t recognise either!

I have just been out for breakfast. I clocked the watch of a short sleeved chap sitting about 12’-15’ away. It took a number of glances to identify the watch, with reasonable certainty, as a TT Ceramic Submariner. There is no way he was able to recognise the watch I am wearing.

Neil

'Wearing a nice watch is like wetting yourself in a dark suit, it gives you a warm feeling but nobody else notices'

I think the main gripes about CW in the WIS community tend to involve the logo and its many iterations, the name which to some sounds like a fashion brand, the lack of in-house movements, and sort of a lack of a brand identity. A lot of their releases also tend to be derivative of other well-known brands and references.

I really think rolling out in-house movements would go a long way towards boosting their reputation. I'm sure they are headed in that direction.

I love their stuff personally, and everything comes at a price. Part of the reason they are so affordable is that they outsource movements.

MichaelMD wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 1:38 pm I really think rolling out in-house movements would go a long way towards boosting their reputation. I'm sure they are headed in that direction.

I hope they retain their current strategy of a couple models using an in-house movement and everything else using a movement that is reliable but relatively easily serviceable.

nbg wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 10:12 am
- I doubt that anyone who knows anything about watches would actually think (or state) that a Sealander, whether 3 hander or GMT, looks anything like an Explorer or Explorer 2.

Neil

Well, with the GMT model, that was my immediate reaction at first sight. I wasn't the only one.

You have to be honest, before their new investment, MF said, words to the effect of, 'enough of the homage, we have moved on from that'. Now they have a retro range.

On the whole, I think CW get's pretty good feedback in the WIS World, especially from those that own them. On TWF, there are several members that own more than one (like me), there is also more than one obsessive, with several CW's. More than one is also on here under other guises. When new members come on asking for advice on their 1st 'proper' watch, CW are regularly mentioned.

Yes, the logo thing is still wheeled out, but I think the general consensus is that they have now got that right.

A turn off for some - it was mentioned in a thread over there the other day - is their hyperbole on advertising and MF could do with being told to let others do the talking. He is a bit of a marmite character. But at the end of the day, by progressing the way they have done, which is a good thing, albeit with moving their prices out of the cheap newcomer status, as a consequence, they are now under more scrutiny.

But the biggest thing that might surprise some members here, especially those who have limited exposure to the wider WIS World, is that they hardly feature at all.

With regards to your last sentence, nor do any other micro’s though.

Once found could the CW 3x pricing structure go against them? The prices have increased but anyone doing a bit of homework would prob find out this info (even more so was cw is online only) could that original pricing idea ever be forgotten or now changed? How much does it cost Rolex to make a £7k Sub?

golfjunky wrote: ↑Fri Sep 08, 2023 7:02 pm With regards to your last sentence, nor do any other micro’s though.

But do you really view CW as being a microbrand? I think they are established mainstream now. Certainly in the UK. I may be the only person that wears one in Thailand. I took one to Vietnam a few weeks ago as well. But they don't really have a presence there!

My last sentence applies to a lot of brands, mainstream or otherwise, it was just for those that mention here that CW is the only forum they use. It must give a distorted view on thiings.

There was a thread recently over there, and I truly am not sure off the top of my head, what brand it was about, but someone asked the question, why does brand x never get a mention here. I had never given it a thought.

But generally, unless a brand has a new release that is notable, or a member posts about a new watch, which generates discussion, some brands never really get mentioned. You are as likely to read about vintage watches, citizen and seiko, as much as you would about any of the so-called big boys.