Amor Vincit Omnia wrote: ↑Fri Nov 08, 2024 9:46 am
I wonder to what extent people who just want a watch, one watch, you know, to tell the time (they walk among us, apparently, and I’ve heard it said they might even be quite numerous) would even look at a Bel Canto. I think they’d make much more sense of a Trident or Sealander.

I’m not sure these people exist in any meaningful number anymore! In my, albeit limited circle of friends, colleagues and work aqaintences very few have a watch in the more than 1000 pound range. And if they do it is more likely than not a Rolex (men and some women) or a Cartier (women). Most wear either a Garmin or other such device or an Apple watch. Or nothing at all.

I tend to agree with the notion that a brand is defined by its best known model rather than its entry point model. Sometimes the best known model and the cheapest/entry point model are the same these days but I think the best known model is closer to being one form of brand recognition. This is more complicated than it first seems. Some brands are known for themselves, Rolex anyone? As a group we are definitely not the norm. We probably know more about watches than the vast majority of casual shoppers (normies) and 98% of people selling watches too. I had a poke about some websites and here are a couple of examples I found where the defining model certainly isn't the entry point.

Omega - Defining watch - Speedmaster/Moonwatch or Seamaster (properly the Diver 300M) - Entry Point is a Deville Tresor at $4,800
Rolex - Defining watch - Datejust, Submariner, Daytona - Entry Point - Oyster Perpetual
CW (2024) - Defining watch - Bel Canto (this has changed and will no doubt change again) - Entry point C63 Valour $675

What the average person in the street thinks is hard to guess but I suspect that they would go by brand first and then maybe an association such as Rolex e.g., tennis, F1, golf etc, or Omega James Bond, moon, olympics. Anything else would be a secondary or tertiary consideration until the time to pay comes up.