Yes agreed it's just so much more balanced/symmetrical to the eye compared to the photo of the "real thing" on the previous page of this thread. But then I'm a logical kind of person, to more of a creative then perhaps the left justified is better?

I am happy to move on from the failures of the website launch in terms of glitches. At least CW addressed these in the chat.

I am less happy on the issue of the cringeworthy copy that has now been removed - clearly they agree with most of the opprobrium otherwise it would still be there, so why not hold a hand up and explain where on earth it came from? Did they sign off on the hatchbacks in car parks-type stuff? If you don't address it properly, the wound continues to fester. But I can let that one heal, and see what the future copy looks like. If it improves, then the past is past and I'm happy.

On the logo, I admit I am a broken record - because they totally refused to comment on the UPPER CASE logo. If they have a nice font in UPPER CASE on the rotor (and so many of us said we like it!) why not be prepared to at least discuss it in the chat as an option on the dial, instead of blanking repeated posts by forumites in the chat?

MF didn't come across as arrogant as he did in the last chat, but I still get the distinct impression that there was a huge disconnect in the aims of the chat.

We were sold it as an opportunity to address the rebrand and our concerns. It seemed that the CWL strategy was to pay brief lip service to the broad concerns of the forum, while ducking the tough questions, and to then try to sucker us with pictures of some eye candy watch designs to turn the discussion away from the rebrand and onto the future design. I also got the distinct impression they were not the least interested in listening to our suggestions. That's fine if they can be certain they are exactly right in the current direction, yet common sense evaluation of the cock-ups recently should tell them that they might just benefit from trialling some concept mock-ups of the logo, even if just in prototype.

Unless the forum is dead wrong and their EXTENSIVE market research tells them, for example, that people just love the lower case on the dial and upper case on the rotor, but hate that same upper case on the dial. Logic tells me that that doesn't make sense, though.

This was a damage-limitation exercise for them only, they couldn't give a toss about listening to the forum but just want us to stop posting our angst which can't be great for any newbie buyers who do any cursory googling to research the brand.

Rant over.

Tyke wrote:

Such a shame it won't have that logo justification, great balance and IMO that would sell just as many to their worldwide audience and find a decent number of buyers on here as well

I missed the chat as my iPad was playing up and wouldn't log onto the forum without hanging while it made its mind up. Catching up with this thread has proven to be a nice way to spend a couple of minutes and I have to agree the image above is a vast improvement on the proposed CWL version. The offset logo type just doesn't look right at all. I am not normally a fan of multi date windows but this one looks fine opposite the large power reserve. It also looks like there is a stealth cover to partially obscure the yesterday and tomorrow dates which helps.

Well I'm distinctly unimpressed with the left aligned logo at 12 o'clock and for me it's a case of being different for the sake of it, it has little aesthetic merit and I see it as nothing more than a cheap sales gimmick, and unlike other views aired here, I'm feeling no warmth from either of the two new offerings shown and I hate the hands. It just feels to me that they're a company blowing in the wind, looking for something to stick. Let's be blunt, they might just as well have shut down CW and started another new company completely.

But hey-ho, it's their company, so good luck to them.

tempus fugit wrote:On the logo, I admit I am a broken record - because they totally refused to comment on the UPPER CASE logo. If they have a nice font in UPPER CASE on the rotor (and so many of us said we like it!) why not be prepared to at least discuss it in the chat as an option on the dial, instead of blanking repeated posts by forumites in the chat?

Chris did address the question at the end of the chat, he said that they tried it and preferred the one they went with. What more were you looking for? I'd suggest that the reason he didn't discuss having upper case as an option was because it wasn't an option - it was a discussion about the brand not a design meeting.

I do like the fact that the hour batons are under the dial rather than on top, it adds another layer without looking bulky. It's a very cohesive design IMO & I can't help but wonder why if they are centre justifying for designs at 6 o'clock (Moonphase) they can't do the same for 12 o'clock? Is that simply because the name plate on the Moonphase is shaped that way & they don't want the cost of remodelling the entire face plate so they'll put up with it, or they think it looks better that way, in which case why not the other non- 9 o'clock designs?

Tempus makes a lot of good points but ultimately it's their company, they don't have to listen and will succeed or fail by what they are doing - some here will buy in, the rest of use will become merely interested bystanders and wait to see if a U turn occurs.

tempus fugit wrote:On the logo, I admit I am a broken record - because they totally refused to comment on the UPPER CASE logo. If they have a nice font in UPPER CASE on the rotor (and so many of us said we like it!) why not be prepared to at least discuss it in the chat as an option on the dial, instead of blanking repeated posts by forumites in the chat?

...

Unless the forum is dead wrong and their EXTENSIVE market research tells them, for example, that people just love the lower case on the dial and upper case on the rotor, but hate that same upper case on the dial. Logic tells me that that doesn't make sense, though.

They didn't "totally refuse" to comment on the UC logo. They said it wasn't for them. And then someone (sorry, can't remember who it was) posted a mock-up with the UC logo on the dial and, sure enough, it didn't look as good as the mixed UC/LC logo, IMHO. So, to me, they were proved right.

People seem to be thinking that the branding and logo are still up for debate. They aren't. CWL have already committed to it, invested in it, and made their decisions. Switching to UC on dials and marketing materials would be hugely expensive now. So it's time to either like it or lump it and move on. It won't be changed, at least not until the next formal branding review a few years down the line.

As for the rest of your post, I honestly think you've blown this massively out of proportion.

That logo work when it is on the left but to use a left justified logo at 12 just looks silly!

The Naf wrote:Some eye candy from chat...

Wasn't there for the chat, interested to read the transcript and the outcome.

Basically I'm just here to laugh at that logo. Jesus was it bad on the C65 but look at this insanity!

welshlad wrote:People seem to be thinking that the branding and logo are still up for debate. They aren't. CWL have already committed to it, invested in it, and made their decisions. Switching to UC on dials and marketing materials would be hugely expensive now. So it's time to either like it or lump it and move on. It won't be changed, at least not until the next formal branding review a few years down the line.

As for the rest of your post, I honestly think you've blown this massively out of proportion.

There isn't supposed to be a rebranding review down the line, Chris said it's this one forever....... he hopes!

Bahnstormer_vRS wrote: beleive that with the size / position of the sub-dials, to have the logo @ 12 but left justified is correct, as it fills what will otherwise be blank space in the 12-3 quadrant that would occur if you have it centred and centre justified @ 12; plus this would crowd up against the Power Reserve sub-dial. If that makes sense.

What, you mean as in 98% of all watches and the subsequent photo shop show the centred logo works just fine.

Whilst I joined the chat part way through, it was from a phone with intermittent signal, so all in all a bit disjointed. Looking forward to reading the transcript.

It seemed to me from the snipits that I did get that MF didn't contribute much and it was nearly all Chris, but not sure if that was really the case?

Neil

Tyke wrote:There isn't supposed to be a rebranding review down the line, Chris said it's this one forever....... he hopes!

He said that it's "forever", but also acknowledged that all companies evolve their branding over time, which is clearly indisputable - and nicely illustrated by the article that Adrian provided a link to in respect of watch brands.

IMO the logo justification on that looks like a printing / manufacturer fault.
It would look like you're wearing a seconds/reject watch on your wrist.
Hardly an image cw would hope for.

However, that's what it will be. Case of Hobson's choice, like it or leave it.

Leave it