Why?

Discuss Christopher Ward watches
User avatar
tikkathree
Trusted Seller
Trusted Seller
Posts: 5660
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2014 12:21 am
CW-watches: 1
Location: East Anglia - arr 'aas right buh

Re: Why?

Post by tikkathree »

Kip, you quite correctly point out that CW has been "making people angry since day 1" and my guess is that for every angry soul who vents their spleen at this forum there'll be five, maybe ten others who realise their numerical inferiority and take themselves off and spend their time elsewhere.

I've long held the view which used to be attributed to Voltaire: “I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” and I realise that this is now rather out of fashion and the trend in some circles seems to be "If you don't agree with me you must be wrong."

But this word "hate"? I've raised my children (and now I'm working on the grandsons) to think twice before using the word "hate". Just because you dislike something doesn't mean that you hate it. To me the word "hate" sits right at the far end of a spectrum of emotion and needs to be reserved for those things which are truly, truly bad - discrimination, rape, physical cruelty. Not over-ripe bananas, smoking, professional fouls in football and certainly not the brand of trinket we choose to wear on our wrists. If you don't like my watch then look away, walk away, save yourself the anxiety.

Somebody doesn't like the Bel Canto? That's fine.

Somebody thinks that maybe CW have no business in producing such a watch? That's tantamount to saying that a business shouldn't strive to grow, to excel, to push themselves to climb higher? Really?
These users thanked the author tikkathree for the post (total 5):
MartinnbgChris375gannetLeon O
C60 MKI, MKII, MKIII: "some",
C6 & C60 Kingfishers,
C600 Tritechs,
C63 "some",
C65 "some",
Some other brands
User avatar
nbg
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 11527
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2013 6:43 pm
CW-watches: 14
Location: UK

Re: Why?

Post by nbg »

What forums are you referring to Kip?

There is a thread on TZ-UK, but it is almost universally complimentary. But then again that is a forum with the most discerning and knowledgeable watch collectors. :)

Saw a thread on another forum that was about watches with time on a sub dial and it was mentioned there. Some chap had ordered a Bel Canto and was looking forward to comparing it to his Breguet Tradition and Lange 1.

Hate does seem a rather strange thing to say, in the context of non essential items.

Neil
These users thanked the author nbg for the post (total 2):
Richard Dgolfjunky
Other watch forums of interest:
TZ-UK
User avatar
Kip
The Administrator
The Administrator
Posts: 33729
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 8:45 pm
CW-watches: 149
LE-one: yes
LE-two: yes
LE-three: yes
LE-foura: yes
LE-fourb: yes
LE-five: yes
LE-six: yes
LESeven: yes
Location: New Hampshire, USA

Re: Why?

Post by Kip »

TheBeatles wrote: Sun Nov 06, 2022 12:28 pm An interesting question, Kip

I may need more time to formulate my considered answer.

I absolutely love the C60 Trident 600 range, unbelievable quality and looks for the money.

But I’m in the camp of “I’d never pay over a certain amount for a CW”. My limit would be less than £1500 for a CW.

Particularly the Bel Canto, there are a few I’d pay circa £3000. But, a CW, never ever.
I look forward to your more considered response. In the meantime I am curious. You do not dislike CW. Why would you never pay over £1500 for a CW watch?

Let us assume that money is not an issue. We are not discussing need.

Is this just a personal self imposed limit for CW or all brands? Is it you think the perceived value does not warrant the expenditure over this amount? Let's say money is not the issue. You find a watch style/complication that suits you and quality/finish is the same or very close, and is available from CW at £2000 and a more famous heritage brand for £4000, would you prefer the famous brand? if so why?

I am not judging. I am just trying to understand your perspective.
These users thanked the author Kip for the post:
suicidal_orange
Kip

"Asylum Administrator"


Visit the CWArchives for everything CW. Historical, specs, manuals and resale. It is all there.
sproughton
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 1625
Joined: Fri Mar 22, 2013 1:59 pm
CW-watches: 4
Location: Hertfordshire

Re: Why?

Post by sproughton »

I must admit, whilst I've seen snobbishness when people discuss CW on various forums, I've see it far less often in the last few years. And when it comes to the Bel Canto, I've seen overwhelmingly positive responses from the forums I've visited. In fact I was surprised by how well it has been received across the wider watch internet.
These users thanked the author sproughton for the post:
ROF68
User avatar
mvlow
Senior Guru
Senior Guru
Posts: 644
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2017 7:29 pm
CW-watches: 2
Location: Oregon

Re: Why?

Post by mvlow »

missF wrote: Sun Nov 06, 2022 1:29 pm



Most people if you ask them will tell you that their opinions are their own, and they’re not influenced by the views of advertisers or other watch enthusiasts.
However, most people (in any sphere of life) are far far more influenced by social pressures to belong and be part of the crowd than they are following their own thoughts. So opinion (whether researched or ridiculous) quickly becomes mantra, and reciting mantra quickly becomes the easiest way to bond as a group and therefore feel comfortable in the world.

We all do this. Humanity would fall apart if we didn’t use powerful methods to keep us bonded together in groups. The cognitive dissonance that occurs when we change one of our mantras, change our mind, move to a different way of thinking, is massive, and truly very disorienting and difficult. It literally feels like we’re losing all of our safety. This is why it’s so difficult to get one person to change their political allegiance and cross the floor, even when they have experienced years of horror at the hands of ‘their’ party.

Exactly my thoughts. Much of this has been true of human beings since the beginning of time, but has now been amplified a thousand fold Because of the Internet. It is interesting that CW's success is because of the Internet as they are online only, but it is also the source of their most vitriolic critics. In some watch forums you will see the vocal minority chanting, CW is crap, followed by the thousands of sheep replying "yeah."

Certain sheep will follow their chosen group no matter what. If you were to separate the sheep individually from the group, get them out of their basement, and talk to them face to face, you might actually get a more reasoned response. Alas that is mostly impossible in today's Internet age. The bottom line, the Internet has allowed the sheep to shout from the rooftops in a way they never could in the past. If you separate a gang member from his or her buddies, they tend not to be as brave while on their own without their fellow gang members standing next to them. I would hazard a guess it is the same with Internet trolls. If you get them out of their basement and talk to them one on one, they would no be so obnoxious in their opinions.
These users thanked the author mvlow for the post:
jkbarnes
Malcolm


CW C60 Vintage Hamilton Khaki Field Sinn 104 CW C65 Vintage GMT Monta Oceanking Elliot Brown Holton
Mikkei4
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 3280
Joined: Sat Jan 21, 2017 7:20 pm
CW-watches: 0

Re: Why?

Post by Mikkei4 »

tikkathree wrote: Sun Nov 06, 2022 3:30 pm
Somebody thinks that maybe CW have no business in producing such a watch? That's tantamount to saying that a business shouldn't strive to grow, to excel, to push themselves to climb higher? Really?
Many years ago when working in a relatively early stage IT environment much of our fault reporting was hand written onto paper sheets. 1 of our younger members of staff was way ahead understanding IT than the rest of us so he offered to write a computer based reporting program and brought in his own PC to show what could be done.

That PC was 1 of the original square desktop Apple PCs. Imagine where we'd all be if Apple didn't "strive to grow, to excel, to push themselves to climb higher". So there's no reason why CW shouldn't produce out of the ordinary watches ! The Bel Canto and others haven't been to my taste so I didn't order any but that's my problem or loss not CW's.

Haters or detractors ? They'll be missing out on a lot by being less open-minded. Personally and generally I read their comments and ignore or forget them. Life is too short.
User avatar
Caller
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 2029
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2014 11:44 pm
CW-watches: 2
Location: Hua Hin, Thailand

Re: Why?

Post by Caller »

I am interested where the hate is as well. I now only use one other forum apart from here. Over there, I haven't seen any hatred. Some like it, others don't. One described it as hideous, But also praised the finishing. But he is open about his strong views on what he does and doesn't like. I attribute that to his being American! I jest. He is also a very generous member giving away watches he no longer has an interest in. I think he has a CW, I could be wrong. Some over there are members here and I think at least three from over there have ordered it. There has been some humerous comment about the chime, or 'ping' as it has also been called.

It's interesting that some members here are coming out with all sorts of stuff to explain the hate, whereas the other half are saying, 'what hate'?
'Tis me
Didier.O
Senior
Senior
Posts: 110
Joined: Sat May 01, 2021 10:08 pm
CW-watches: 2

Re: Why?

Post by Didier.O »

The semi-hate I've seen is just a few posts on Watch Crunch or Youtube comments, but it really seems to come from people that thing CW got stuck in 2005. What I've seen mostly is just praise or justified dislike. Sometimes both at the same time.

For me the 'why' is smth I just reserve judgment on. I would definitely pay 3k for a CW, to me they're mature enough in some of their design language and audacity to command smth like this. And I feel that they have enough to step up their game.

One big 'if' on whether or not I could come to that 'why' question are the movements CW use (and I admit it's not an easy question). I know they have the SH21, but it is quite limited in use cases as it is now. Perhaps they could work on making it slimmer, etc. I just dont see myself paying 3k+ for a Sellita, unless it's been highly modified (and Im not talking complication modified, but deeply modified - increased power reserve at 4hz, etc.) and regulated. The very reason I'm increasingly looking at Tudor and Oris for my next piece (and they command more or less the same 3-4k price) is the MT and Caliber 400 movements. They make all the difference to me (interestingly, looking for a 36mm I just couldnt see myself spend 2.2k on their Sellita-powered BB36, and considered the x261 Quartz Grand Seiko instead).
User avatar
Amor Vincit Omnia
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 29894
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 7:34 pm
CW-watches: 3
Location: Norfolk, UK

Re: Why?

Post by Amor Vincit Omnia »

I am reminded of this:

CE08DCDB-E52B-4F82-B920-6134A08D101D.jpeg

You can read the whole of the relevant article in the Snippets section of the Archive: ”The New Movement in Time”

Prejudice is not new.
Steve
Linguist; retired teacher; pilgrim; wannabe 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)
BobMunro
Senior Guru
Senior Guru
Posts: 526
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2015 11:08 am
CW-watches: 11
Location: Cheshire, UK

Re: Why?

Post by BobMunro »

Well I'm not sure hate is the right word - for me that's a bit too strong. Perhaps disrespect is nearer the mark.

Why? Not 100% sure but I have some views. CW are a relatively new brand - some would say upstarts! History and tradition play a big part in attraction - rightly or wrongly.

They started selling cheap (a relative term, even £300 for the early models is more than 90+% of the population would pay for a watch). That perhaps stuck with a lot of people who now see CW making (and selling like hot cakes) £3,000 watches and exclaim 'really?'

The 'Rolex' of the internet probably didn't earn too many brownie points with the serious watch collectors. They are not in any league that would see Rolex playing - although having said that a Submariner, even at RRP is clearly not worth 10x a Trident 600. That raises this spectre of perceived value - a Rolex Sub at £6k is perceived as value by many (myself included). Using a car analogy - Mercedes own Maybach, BMW own Rolls Royce Motors - both target the same demographic, and the vast majority of people would immediately assert RR is the superior brand yet both are superb (and no, I do not own either!).

But I do own 13 CWs and am proud to do so and be associated with the brand - and in saying that I own a number of five figure watches (whether that's something to be proud of or idiotic is subject to discussion (even with myself at times). I like to think I buy what I like, not what others perceive as superior in some way.
These users thanked the author BobMunro for the post (total 3):
Richard DnbgROF68
Time flies whether you're having fun or not. The choice is yours.
User avatar
A1soknownas
Senior Guru
Senior Guru
Posts: 519
Joined: Sat Jun 22, 2019 7:40 pm

Re: Why?

Post by A1soknownas »

I think you provided many of the answers in your own post. There will be many different reasons or a combination of some which lead people to either think I wouldn't spend that much or, I simply won't consider the brand (or hate if used dramatically without the traditional strength of meaning).

- No matter how vain it may sound brand means a lot. A watch at £1.5k+ is not a casual decision - It almost needs to be perfect for many.
- A watch is not just the sum of its technical parts and specification, it is heritage, prestige, trust and importantly marketing - Something CW just don't do well or enough of until recently. To purposely not do the marketing others do underpins their values but has consequences.
- The brand tried to be disruptive, there will consequences and this will not change overnight.
- They have made fundamental mistakes with releases - mis-aligned text, wrong water resistance, lack of quality control etc.
- Where mistakes have been made, they have sometimes been almost disingenuous in their responses to some customers.
- The CEO is very public and may not be to everyone's liking - Fair enough believe in your brand but don't mislead people or be overly boastful and not deliver.
- The brand appears unbelievably stubborn.
- They have pursued a position in the market for many years been low cost compared to others and then even undermined that price by sales and discounts which creates confusion to the customer as to what value their watches should hold.
- They are internet only and a very small player. The only way some barriers can be broken is to handle them in person. There is not enough volume out in the public and you can't see them in a shop window. This limitation directly reinforces the perceived cheapness of the watches and brand however unfounded.

CW don't need to sell to everyone to be a success, this is proven with the C1 BC. It is a long journey to reach the hearts of the watch buying public, especially when you take some turns along the way, but I am sure they are heading in the right direction.
These users thanked the author A1soknownas for the post:
albionphoto
User avatar
jkbarnes
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 6287
Joined: Wed May 24, 2017 8:39 pm
CW-watches: 3
Location: Virginia, USA

Re: Why?

Post by jkbarnes »

You raise some very interesting points.
A1soknownas wrote: Sun Nov 06, 2022 5:33 pm - They are internet only and a very small player. The only way some barriers can be broken is to handle them in person. There is not enough volume out in the public and you can't see them in a shop window. This limitation directly reinforces the perceived cheapness of the watches and brand however unfounded.
Does anyone think being internet only puts are hard limit on the average prices CW can charge? It’s one thing to charge $3k+ for an exceptional LE, but what’s the limit people might pay for a watch they can’t handle first?
These users thanked the author jkbarnes for the post:
golfjunky
Andrew
“In the name of God, stop a moment, cease your work, look around you.” ~ Leo Tolstoy

C65 Trident Vintage | C65 AMGT LE | C63 Sealander (36mm)

Find me on Instagram @jkbarnes
User avatar
mvlow
Senior Guru
Senior Guru
Posts: 644
Joined: Sun Oct 29, 2017 7:29 pm
CW-watches: 2
Location: Oregon

Re: Why?

Post by mvlow »

jkbarnes wrote: Sun Nov 06, 2022 5:39 pm You raise some very interesting points.
A1soknownas wrote: Sun Nov 06, 2022 5:33 pm - They are internet only and a very small player. The only way some barriers can be broken is to handle them in person. There is not enough volume out in the public and you can't see them in a shop window. This limitation directly reinforces the perceived cheapness of the watches and brand however unfounded.
Does anyone think being internet only puts are hard limit on the average prices CW can charge? It’s one thing to charge $3k+ for an exceptional LE, but what’s the limit people might pay for a watch they can’t handle first?
There are other watch companies that are Internet only and their watches enthusiastically sell for more than any standard CW. Monta comes to mind, with their latest Skyquest model priced at $2,495. I think it is more the perceived value that stops people from paying over a certain price for various watch brands, not necessarily the brand being Internet only. Citizen is known for it's Eco-drive solar technology at the lower end of the pricing spectrum. When they release a higher end watch such as the Series 8 automatic for $2,000, they tend to get a lot of hate. The watch may be worth $2,000, but because some perceive Citizen to be in the sub $1,000 category, they will troll the watch no matter how good it is.
These users thanked the author mvlow for the post:
jkbarnes
Malcolm


CW C60 Vintage Hamilton Khaki Field Sinn 104 CW C65 Vintage GMT Monta Oceanking Elliot Brown Holton
User avatar
Amor Vincit Omnia
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 29894
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 7:34 pm
CW-watches: 3
Location: Norfolk, UK

Re: Why?

Post by Amor Vincit Omnia »

^^^ In other words: be good, stay in your box and don’t get ideas above your station. Jude the Obscure.
Steve
Linguist; retired teacher; pilgrim; wannabe 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)
User avatar
iain
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 1679
Joined: Sun Mar 01, 2015 3:13 pm
CW-watches: 0

Re: Why?

Post by iain »

Which other brands to people seem to have a large amount of distain for?

Christopher Ward
Bremont
Hublot
Rolex
Tag

And what is the common denominator between all these? Before I share my thoughts, I’d probably better clarify two of those on that list.

Rolex didn’t garner the same degree of animosity when you could just walk in and buy one. This has been quite recent thing and the hate is down to perception of how they operate and the brand image rather than their watches

Tag hate is also relatively recent (In watch brand terms) Heuer seems to have pretty much university acclaim, it’s only since the merger to become Tag Heuer have they been the subject of much ire.

The link therefore is time. Newer brands seem to suffer from this more than those established ones. Even the hate for Rolex and Tag is driven entirely by newer practices rather than anything else

Why is this? I don’t know but there certainly seems to be a link there.
“Watch Enabling Parenting Genius”
Dickchins, March 22