Which brands are really honest about their past?

[dpkong]

I would think the summary is that luxury watches rely heavily on hype to sell and history is seldom if ever 100% honest.

All marketing has to do is write out their "history" using very intricate, carefully chosen words arranged well enough to let the buyer assume the rest whether from his acute reading abilities (or lack thereof) which are supported by testimonies from fan boys who have already fallen into the trap.

How else could they sell you very expensive watches?

 

[CKL1213]

let's focus back to the thread tittle

"which brands are really honest about their past?"

1)
2)
3)

maybe none...

[Cocas]

There are many watch brands under few watch companies.

Some watch companies granting more autonomy to its watch brands top management.

The watch brands CEO will decide the overall marketing strategies, no right and wrong before the profit and the responsibility that CEO owing to stakeholders, especially the important stakeholder-shareholder.

If I am the watch brands chef designer, I won't even care what CEO lying about and what marketing strategy is
 What I will care is that are the owners of the watch happy about the watch, appreciating the artistic design of the watch.

Just my normal thought about a watch brand.

[Enkidu]

I don't even know what are we disagreeing or agreeing on.
I just know the thread started about some dubious history, dishonesty or blatant lies.
Where most if not all of our info came either from the brand's own website (which cannot be trusted)
........
This is how it ALWAYS ends...

Looking forward to another thread like this in a couple of months time...

Hanz,

It always ends like this because of the subject matter. 

For a topic like the present, there is normally no consensus, and this is to be expected. History is not hard science. History is written by the victor after a war, dictators and the major stakeholders. Some people believe in Ancient Aliens. Some people believe Elvis did not die. Last time we read that Hitler was an evil guy. Now there are people who claim he was a good guy saving human civilization from evil banking cartels. Long debates, numerous YouTube videos. In China, after the fall of every dynasty the new dynasty would re-write the old history. History is a moving platform. We can ask the other side to show proof that what's written in a brand's website about its past is a lie, half truth or hype, but it will be an unhelpful circuitous exercise.

Anyway, the topic of this thread is framed as a positive question, so if you believe a brand is honest about its history, it is YOU who have to say why it is honest, and not asking the other side to say the reason or give examples of dishonesty or hype. 

[TheHobbit]

Well as it is said it the subject matter that is the issue. Fan boys will be fanboys and haters will be haters. We can spin this either way positive or negative, but round and round we go to no end.

My question was very simple... what was listed in Panerai history from their website is what Panerai said about its history, no more no less. Disregard what people have said about Panerai both good or bad, just what is written. So is it twisted? Is it dishonest?

For example, 1890, Panerai was founded in Ponte all Grazie in Florence. Is this a marketing gimmick? To say that is is older then it actually is? Do we need to bring the company incorporation documents? Etc?

1916, Panerai files patent for the Radiomir material. Yet another marketing twist? Do we need to bring and show the patent document itself?

The history timeline on Panerai website only shows what they did in what year. How is this being used by marketing dept to twist Panerai history? Or do I need to show proof of Panerai marketing dept doing it?

Between 1956 to 1972, there were no entry. A gap in their history. Much like Lange no? So honesty? or marketing gimmick to make it seem like there is a gap in their history to make them look more honest?

Anyway, like said earlier, its the subject matter.

[pexus]

I don't even know what are we disagreeing or agreeing on.
I just know the thread started about some dubious history, dishonesty or blatant lies.
Where most if not all of our info came either from the brand's own website (which cannot be trusted)
........
This is how it ALWAYS ends...

Looking forward to another thread like this in a couple of months time...

Hanz,

It always ends like this because of the subject matter. 

For a topic like the present, there is normally no consensus, and this is to be expected. History is not hard science. History is written by the victor after a war, dictators and the major stakeholders. Some people believe in Ancient Aliens. Some people believe Elvis did not die. Last time we read that Hitler was an evil guy. Now there are people who claim he was a good guy saving human civilization from evil banking cartels. Long debates, numerous YouTube videos. In China, after the fall of every dynasty the new dynasty would re-write the old history. History is a moving platform. We can ask the other side to show proof that what's written in a brand's website about its past is a lie, half truth or hype, but it will be an unhelpful circuitous exercise.

Anyway, the topic of this thread is framed as a positive question, so if you believe a brand is honest about its history, it is YOU who have to say why it is honest, and not asking the other side to say the reason or give examples of dishonesty or hype.

I get your history shifts stand and all that. 
But not the second part

Someone made a claim.  Yes, its a positive question, with potential of leading into an educating discussion, all in good spirit. 

But it was lacking in specifics to keep the discussion objective.  No? So what's wrong with asking for examples, specifics in order to keep the discussion objective?

I said to my neighbour..your family is noisy.
My neighbour in return ask me...I see...When were we noisy? How were we noisy? All so the discussion can reach a consensus of understanding each other , give and take.
Then how?  I tell him I dont have to clarify to him when and how he was noisy as it will only make us go in circles?
But I can further suggest to him to start explaining to me why his family is not a noisy bunch instead?

[Danielo]

Well, at least this thread got everyone involved.

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

[Cocas]

I think Cyma watch is honest about its history but seems that the write-up is too short and summarized.

By the way, I hope there are fanboys or / and haters to write about Cyma...

Good name, bad name are better than no name.

[Enkidu]

My question was very simple... what was listed in Panerai history from their website is what Panerai said about its history, no more no less. Disregard what people have said about Panerai both good or bad, just what is written. So is it twisted? Is it dishonest?

Whether your question was simple or otherwise, I can't comment. But clearly the Original Poster has raised a question, and we don't (or cannot) answer a question with another question. If one cannot see this, inevitably it always ends like it always does.

[TheHobbit]

My question was very simple... what was listed in Panerai history from their website is what Panerai said about its history, no more no less. Disregard what people have said about Panerai both good or bad, just what is written. So is it twisted? Is it dishonest?

Whether your question was simple or otherwise, I can't comment. But clearly the Original Poster has raised a question, and we don't (or cannot) answer a question with another question. If one cannot see this, inevitably it always ends like it always does.

In that case, I would respond Panerai.

[Enkidu]

I said to my neighbour..your family is noisy.
My neighbour in return ask me...I see...When were we noisy? How were we noisy? All so the discussion can reach a consensus of understanding each other , give and take.
Then how?  I tell him I dont have to clarify to him when and how he was noisy as it will only make us go in circles?
But I can further suggest to him to start explaining to me why his family is not a noisy bunch instead?

Hmmm, I think I know where you are coming from but the example may not be appropriate because in your example, you and your neighbour are probably attempting to reach a compromise as good neighbours. The nature of the OP's question is surely not for a "compromised" answer.

[dpkong]

I said to my neighbour..your family is noisy.
My neighbour in return ask me...I see...When were we noisy? How were we noisy? All so the discussion can reach a consensus of understanding each other , give and take.
Then how?  I tell him I dont have to clarify to him when and how he was noisy as it will only make us go in circles?
But I can further suggest to him to start explaining to me why his family is not a noisy bunch instead?

Hmmm, I think I know where you are coming from but the example may not be appropriate because in your example, you and your neighbour are probably attempting to reach a compromise as good neighbours. The nature of the OP's question is surely not for a "compromised" answer.

I on the other hand differ. If your family is noisy, you would know it. Do you really need to ask for specifics?

Back to the question of which brand is honest about their past, I've replied that my opinion is none are completely honest just like politicians. They are happy to let you assume any positive traits but will be quick to counter any negative ones if they can.

[pexus]

I said to my neighbour..your family is noisy.
My neighbour in return ask me...I see...When were we noisy? How were we noisy? All so the discussion can reach a consensus of understanding each other , give and take.
Then how?  I tell him I dont have to clarify to him when and how he was noisy as it will only make us go in circles?
But I can further suggest to him to start explaining to me why his family is not a noisy bunch instead?

Hmmm, I think I know where you are coming from but the example may not be appropriate because in your example, you and your neighbour are probably attempting to reach a compromise as good neighbours. The nature of the OP's question is surely not for a "compromised" answer.

I on the other hand differ. If your family is noisy, you would know it. Do you really need to ask for specifics?

Back to the question of which brand is honest about their past, I've replied that my opinion is none are completely honest just like politicians. They are happy to let you assume any positive traits but will be quick to counter any negative ones if they can.

exactly...!!

but the issue is I don't believe my family is noisy and would therefore like to ask for specifics so that we can iron things out and see if I am indeed mistaken  or perhaps its the other party? 
Its quite clear on there are those who think a brand did not fake their history on their website, there are those who think other wise and there are those who find this interesting and would like to learn more.  So, i thought a little specifics will go a long way.

[asimo]

any comments on Breitling ?

[mongourou]

Notice in the end Mr.Babin stated that in HIS viewpoint, the amount invested, work done, modifications done... it qualified as "In house" even though the IP is from Seiko.
A case of moving the goal posts to suit your own ends...

I am curious to know when if any other watch brands do the same?
Now I am not saying this from a marketing standpoint, but general claims made by watch brands and later proven to be false...
Some examples would be good. From Panerai or Rolex or whoever...

I found this one from Steinhart:

https://www.steinhartwatches.de/en/st1-premium

"And since a number of our own design performance and manufacturing have been incorporated into the caliber through us and our Swiss partners, we think it deserves its own name: We are proud to present to you on this page our STEINHART ST.1 Premium in three color options."

Specifications:

Base caliber ETA Unitas 6497-1, 16 1/2''

They called it their own but they also mentioned later in the article that it is a base ETA. Strange!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hanz079]

Notice in the end Mr.Babin stated that in HIS viewpoint, the amount invested, work done, modifications done... it qualified as "In house" even though the IP is from Seiko.
A case of moving the goal posts to suit your own ends...

I am curious to know when if any other watch brands do the same?
Now I am not saying this from a marketing standpoint, but general claims made by watch brands and later proven to be false...
Some examples would be good. From Panerai or Rolex or whoever...

I found this one from Steinhart:

https://www.steinhartwatches.de/en/st1-premium

"And since a number of our own design performance and manufacturing have been incorporated into the caliber through us and our Swiss partners, we think it deserves its own name: We are proud to present to you on this page our STEINHART ST.1 Premium in three color options."

Specifications:

Base caliber ETA Unitas 6497-1, 16 1/2''

They called it their own but they also mentioned later in the article that it is a base ETA. Strange!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They just "renamed" the caliber. No where does it states it is "in-house"

Still waiting for your take on Panerai though...

[mongourou]

Notice in the end Mr.Babin stated that in HIS viewpoint, the amount invested, work done, modifications done... it qualified as "In house" even though the IP is from Seiko.
A case of moving the goal posts to suit your own ends...

I am curious to know when if any other watch brands do the same?
Now I am not saying this from a marketing standpoint, but general claims made by watch brands and later proven to be false...
Some examples would be good. From Panerai or Rolex or whoever...

I found this one from Steinhart:

https://www.steinhartwatches.de/en/st1-premium

"And since a number of our own design performance and manufacturing have been incorporated into the caliber through us and our Swiss partners, we think it deserves its own name: We are proud to present to you on this page our STEINHART ST.1 Premium in three color options."

Specifications:

Base caliber ETA Unitas 6497-1, 16 1/2''

They called it their own but they also mentioned later in the article that it is a base ETA. Strange!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They just "renamed" the caliber. No where does it states it is "in-house"

Still waiting for your take on Panerai though...

"our new hand-wound movement for our premium segment has now reached completion"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hanz079]

Notice in the end Mr.Babin stated that in HIS viewpoint, the amount invested, work done, modifications done... it qualified as "In house" even though the IP is from Seiko.
A case of moving the goal posts to suit your own ends...

I am curious to know when if any other watch brands do the same?
Now I am not saying this from a marketing standpoint, but general claims made by watch brands and later proven to be false...
Some examples would be good. From Panerai or Rolex or whoever...

I found this one from Steinhart:

https://www.steinhartwatches.de/en/st1-premium

"And since a number of our own design performance and manufacturing have been incorporated into the caliber through us and our Swiss partners, we think it deserves its own name: We are proud to present to you on this page our STEINHART ST.1 Premium in three color options."

Specifications:

Base caliber ETA Unitas 6497-1, 16 1/2''

They called it their own but they also mentioned later in the article that it is a base ETA. Strange!



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

They just "renamed" the caliber. No where does it states it is "in-house"

Still waiting for your take on Panerai though...

"our new hand-wound movement for our premium segment has now reached completion"


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ok... the way I read it is that they have a "new" hand wound movement which is a base ETA6497 modified by them and deserved their own name for the caliber.
They stated it was a base ETA.
They stated they did some tweaks and modifications.
They surmised that the tweaks are enough (in their own standards at least) to warrant a "name" for that caliber.

So where is the problem exactly?

[mongourou]

No problem the way you read it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TheHobbit]

Still waiting for your take on Panerai though...

I would indeed be surprised if we ever find out .....