Post by: mongourou on August 21, 2017, 02:59:12 PM
The more I dig into this passion of ours, the more I get irritated by how some companies communicate about their history.
I guess it is similar to us with our CV. It is always a bit embarrassing to present a 2 year gap in our resume so we might arrange it by adapting the truth to what we want to communicate to the HR. Or oversell our managerial and technical skills. Human nature!
Some companies have such a long and well-documented history that there is no reason for them to lie (sorry I should say to embellish reality). Names like PP, AP and VC come directly to mind.
But old brands that die a long time ago are sometimes resurrected just for banking on a name. Other companies will be bought back to fill a specific new market. Those new-old companies have little to do with what they were originally known for.
Others have massive gaps in their history with only a few hundred watches built over several decades, others shadowed smaller brands by taking the headlines on some accomplishment that they were not alone to achieve. You even have those very young companies (post 1990) having "Vintage" collections making you believe that they exist for a very long time.
Some lie about their history (also called revisionist histories), some lie about their technical achievements (changing the name of an ETA/Sellita base caliber or even slightly modified at the manufacture is not enough to be called in-house) while other start-up companies will buy old manufacturer names to avoid the pain of creating their own stories: "history=quality=prestige=I can charge you way more for a cheap case and an off the shelf non regulated movement".
But at the end, marketing departments get very good at selling this to people who will not, most of the time, check what is real and what is just fantasy.
One brand that gives me hope for the others is A. Lange & Soehne (even though I probably will never be able to afford one). Look at their website, go through their menu and check their "Our Saxon origin". Here you are, a clear gap between 1948 and 1990 reflecting their actual history.
This is honesty!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Danielo on August 21, 2017, 03:22:45 PM
Post by: annn90s on August 21, 2017, 03:52:04 PM
BTW, just woild like to share this with those who knows and appreciates GS.
http://s1380.photobucket.com/user/annn90s/media/20170609_122417_zpspumwlxf7.jpg.html?sort=3&o=4
Post by: Cocas on August 21, 2017, 04:18:23 PM
Your "brand" here is referring the Watch Company or Watch Brand?
Eg. Q&Q is a watch brand of Citizen Watch Company.
Post by: mongourou on August 21, 2017, 04:30:45 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Cocas on August 21, 2017, 04:32:09 PM
Because I won't bother what and how the "watch brand" watch beautified its history or achievement.
Post by: meoramri on August 21, 2017, 05:32:49 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: asimo on August 21, 2017, 05:41:12 PM
Honest brand maybe " Hamil...", lolex., Omega
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: mongourou on August 21, 2017, 05:44:55 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Danielo on August 21, 2017, 05:45:57 PM
I would say the brand start with " P", and " Ba.."'P' made a killing with their story. Every Tom, Dick & Hairy bought one.
Honest brand maybe " Ham.....", Ro..., Om...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I always get a smile when I see a fella paying big bucks for a story.
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Post by: mongourou on August 21, 2017, 06:04:56 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: mongourou on August 21, 2017, 06:13:11 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Danielo on August 21, 2017, 06:14:44 PM
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Post by: Danielo on August 21, 2017, 06:15:18 PM
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Post by: mongourou on August 21, 2017, 06:21:20 PM
Or Fortis the first watch in space?
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Little doubt about the Omega Speedmaster being the first one worn on the Moon by the second guy who stood foot on it.
But for the first in space, whether you consider Gagarin or Leonov being the first in open space, it will have to be a Russian watch. Not sure about Gagarin but Leonov had a Strela.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Cocas on August 21, 2017, 06:40:15 PM
Post by: TheHobbit on August 23, 2017, 07:31:00 PM
Post by: mongourou on August 23, 2017, 07:32:37 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: TheHobbit on August 23, 2017, 07:47:59 PM
I wan't talking about faking but about honesty. Big difference here.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Ok... how was Panerai not honest?
Post by: mongourou on August 23, 2017, 07:48:32 PM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: TheHobbit on August 23, 2017, 07:52:01 PM
Is that a joke?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Nope, not that I am aware off. Would like to know.
Post by: mongourou on August 23, 2017, 08:46:22 PM
Few hundreds watches were issued to Italian army between 1936 and the mid 50's with cases, movements and crowns made by Rolex before they switched to less expensive Angelus movements. This was followed by decades of silence before Sly resurrected the brand in the early 90's.
So yes they are collectible but only because they are incredibly rare as they were produced in infinitesimal quantity. Not because of a great history or great achievements.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: TheHobbit on August 23, 2017, 09:25:57 PM
Honestly (pun intended), you can appreciate the esthetic of a watch like Panerai but still realize that their tenuous legacy has been greatly exaggerated by Panerai and Richemont marketing departments.
Few hundreds watches were issued to Italian army between 1936 and the mid 50's with cases, movements and crowns made by Rolex before they switched to less expensive Angelus movements. This was followed by decades of silence before Sly resurrected the brand in the early 90's.
So yes they are collectible but only because they are incredibly rare as they were produced in infinitesimal quantity. Not because of a great history or great achievements.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I agree with you 100% on this. But where in Panerai history were they dishonest? What did they exaggerate?
Post by: Enkidu on August 23, 2017, 09:38:41 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170823/09d42b5faa19ecb5759c245f255e3b3f.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170823/f97c30e28bcd23bd5722e314b49ebcad.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170823/e24b20cd003c035c392dbcedd0995488.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170823/f67995a0417846443c0840d8bc609799.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170823/afe7609f37814cef17c2c8df02bff1c4.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170823/530f9ae2819f3b6814fc48f0c154d1cb.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170823/44904fa4ba015a2f41b712de1497959c.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170823/45b5e0dbb5edbe7462c899f03187d820.jpg)
Sent from my SM-N9208 using Tapatalk
Post by: dpkong on August 23, 2017, 10:01:37 PM
Post by: dpkong on August 23, 2017, 10:08:00 PM
Is that a joke?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well, I don't think Panerai was dishonest. You just don't need to correct your enthusiastic fanboys....
:Cheers:
Post by: Enkidu on August 23, 2017, 10:34:24 PM
Sent from my SM-N9208 using Tapatalk
Post by: TheHobbit on August 23, 2017, 11:01:41 PM
And while I really, really like Rolex, they were not the last to use modified facts for their marketing even back in 1927. After Mercedes Gleitze successfully swam across the Channel on her 8th attempt, our good Hans Wilsdorf sponsored her two weeks later on her "Vindication Swim" to prove she really did it. She failed this time but it did not stop him to advertise about the success of the watch in newspapers.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Technically Rolex was not dishonest in this event. I don't think Rolex modified the facts.
Mercedes did her vindication swim after it was brought to question the legitimacy of her swim after another lady hoax her swim. Rolex learnt of the event and would provide Mercedes with the Rolex wristlet watch in return for a testimonial on how the watch performed.
She did not complete the swim, nor did she wear the wristlet, wearing it around her neck. As reported by the papers at that time "Hanging round her neck by a riband on this swim, Miss Gleitze carried a small gold watch, which was found this evening to have kept good time throughout."
She did give Rolex a testimonial and this was what Rolex advertised in the papers later...
"Rolex introduces for the first time the greatest triumph in Watch-making – ROLEX ‘OYSTER’ – The Wonder Watch That Defies The Elements. MOISTURE PROOF WATER PROOF HEAT PROOF VIBRATION PROOF COLD PROOF DUST PROOF"
"Miss Mercedes Gleitze carried an "Oyster" throughout her recent Channel Swim. More than ten hours of submersion under the most trying conditions failed to harm its perfect timekeeping. No moisture had penetrated and not the slightest corrosion or condensation was revealed in the subsequent examination of the Watch."
Rolex did not advertise that Mercedes completed the swim or that it was worn on her wrist or that is was worn on the earlier swim that took 15 hours to complete.
Ok, you could say that the heat proof, vibration proof, dust proof is a bit of a stretch as it was not proven by the swim.
Post by: dpkong on August 23, 2017, 11:21:41 PM
You listen but you did not hear.
I am responsible for what I said or wrote, not what you heard or read.
;D
Post by: Danielo on August 24, 2017, 06:34:57 AM
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Post by: mongourou on August 24, 2017, 06:38:31 AM
There has been published articles on Panarai's history. Google will help find them for you.Thanks for the tip I would never have thought about that by myself...
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Danielo on August 24, 2017, 06:39:39 AM
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Post by: mongourou on August 24, 2017, 06:40:19 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: asimo on August 24, 2017, 06:41:14 AM
Lolz
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: mongourou on August 24, 2017, 06:42:16 AM
I read somewhere originally they are equipment suppliers to Italian navy , subsequently when the navy requested them to supply time keeping wrist watch , they have to OEM or outsourced since they do not have expertise .. probably they just supply a few hundred n that's it .. until many years later some celebrity bought one n big watch conglomerate bought the company n revive it100% true
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Danielo on August 24, 2017, 06:43:28 AM
That was sarcastic!So was I
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
But I was actually aiding your defence that Panarai's history was twisted by marketing to boost sales with the false impression of what their claims.
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Post by: CKL1213 on August 24, 2017, 07:22:45 AM
each will have their dark little secrets hiding somewhere...
Post by: TheHobbit on August 24, 2017, 07:23:11 AM
Post by: Danielo on August 24, 2017, 07:24:00 AM
Based on Panerai history on its website, I don't see anything that is twisted. Its a simple timeline showing what the company did.You're getting your facts from their website?
Er........
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Post by: TheHobbit on August 24, 2017, 07:36:04 AM
Based on Panerai history on its website, I don't see anything that is twisted. Its a simple timeline showing what the company did.You're getting your facts from their website?
Er........
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Ok... since you imply that their website cannot be trusted.. where should I then refer? Perhaps you can point out what is posted on the Panerai website is not true?
Post by: Danielo on August 24, 2017, 07:54:01 AM
It's open knowledge that that ever a company places in its website has been conjured up by their marketing & branding departments. If you feel that such info is accurate and wishes to trust what they claim is to be fact. Please proceed.Based on Panerai history on its website, I don't see anything that is twisted. Its a simple timeline showing what the company did.You're getting your facts from their website?
Er........
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Ok... since you imply that their website cannot be trusted.. where should I then refer? Perhaps you can point out what is posted on the Panerai website is not true?
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Post by: TheHobbit on August 24, 2017, 07:56:38 AM
It's open knowledge that that ever a company places in its website has been conjured up by their marketing & branding departments. If you feel that such info is accurate and wishes to trust what they claim is to be fact. Please proceed.Based on Panerai history on its website, I don't see anything that is twisted. Its a simple timeline showing what the company did.You're getting your facts from their website?
Er........
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Ok... since you imply that their website cannot be trusted.. where should I then refer? Perhaps you can point out what is posted on the Panerai website is not true?
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Hence by your logic, I cannot trust any website?
Post by: pexus on August 24, 2017, 08:09:56 AM
Not marketing or hype but actual blatant fake claims (this is dishonesty, no?)
like claiming watch is worn during an occasion/event but in actual fact, it was studio shot or pose...
or claiming watch got this and that technical specs but turns out to be untrue.
Post by: CKL1213 on August 24, 2017, 08:23:20 AM
guilty until proven innocent
Post by: mongourou on August 24, 2017, 09:14:46 AM
Am waiting for a proper dishonest advertising example that I can learn from...
Not marketing or hype but actual blatant fake claims (this is dishonesty, no?)
like claiming watch is worn during an occasion/event but in actual fact, it was studio shot or pose...
or claiming watch got this and that technical specs but turns out to be untrue.
Marketing trick is dishonesty, fake claim is lie.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Danielo on August 24, 2017, 09:26:57 AM
Am waiting for a proper dishonest advertising example that I can learn from...How about McDonald's, they claim to be healthy. There have been articles too that have documented and tested their claims, which opposes McDonald's egregious claims.
Not marketing or hype but actual blatant fake claims (this is dishonesty, no?)
like claiming watch is worn during an occasion/event but in actual fact, it was studio shot or pose...
or claiming watch got this and that technical specs but turns out to be untrue.
So as a consumer, you have the choice to decide if you rather believe marketing/ advertising hype which is heavily bias to themselves or more objective observations which are based on historical literature.
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Post by: hanz079 on August 24, 2017, 09:27:48 AM
We all see it in all kinds of ads...
As for watches, i think best is to do you own due diligence and buy what you actually enjoy wearing.
As for stories... make your own stories when wearing the watch...
Post by: mongourou on August 24, 2017, 09:29:17 AM
Well... marketing 101 is actually putting things in such a way that it blurs the line between reality and fantasy...
We all see it in all kinds of ads...
As for watches, i think best is to do you own due diligence and buy what you actually enjoy wearing.
As for stories... make your own stories when wearing the watch...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: TheHobbit on August 24, 2017, 09:32:12 AM
Am waiting for a proper dishonest advertising example that I can learn from...How about McDonald's, they claim to be healthy. There have been articles too that have documented and tested their claims, which opposes McDonald's egregious claims.
Not marketing or hype but actual blatant fake claims (this is dishonesty, no?)
like claiming watch is worn during an occasion/event but in actual fact, it was studio shot or pose...
or claiming watch got this and that technical specs but turns out to be untrue.
So as a consumer, you have the choice to decide if you rather believe marketing/ advertising hype which is heavily bias to themselves or more objective observations which are based on historical literature.
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
I do not disagree with you on this. Yes there are reports out there that shows that McD may not be 100% truthful. But back to Panerai... Can you then link articles that shows Panerai is not truthful with its history? I am sure you have your basis for doubting Panerai version of its history. Perhaps you can share?
Post by: CKL1213 on August 24, 2017, 09:34:38 AM
Post by: pexus on August 24, 2017, 09:40:20 AM
Am waiting for a proper dishonest advertising example that I can learn from...
Not marketing or hype but actual blatant fake claims (this is dishonesty, no?)
like claiming watch is worn during an occasion/event but in actual fact, it was studio shot or pose...
or claiming watch got this and that technical specs but turns out to be untrue.
Marketing trick is dishonesty, fake claim is lie.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
ah i see...so its semantics...
Post by: pexus on August 24, 2017, 09:41:07 AM
Am waiting for a proper dishonest advertising example that I can learn from...How about McDonald's, they claim to be healthy. There have been articles too that have documented and tested their claims, which opposes McDonald's egregious claims.
Not marketing or hype but actual blatant fake claims (this is dishonesty, no?)
like claiming watch is worn during an occasion/event but in actual fact, it was studio shot or pose...
or claiming watch got this and that technical specs but turns out to be untrue.
So as a consumer, you have the choice to decide if you rather believe marketing/ advertising hype which is heavily bias to themselves or more objective observations which are based on historical literature.
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
McDonalds, Marlborough and their image of a healthy cowboy...
So I am keen to see an example of an equivalent to McDonald of watch in terms of dishonest claims. I am sure its out there, so that we can discuss and dissect with gusto..
Post by: pexus on August 24, 2017, 09:47:04 AM
Well... marketing 101 is actually putting things in such a way that it blurs the line between reality and fantasy...
We all see it in all kinds of ads...
As for watches, i think best is to do you own due diligence and buy what you actually enjoy wearing.
As for stories... make your own stories when wearing the watch...
No watch brand can survive without marketing. Marketing comes up with a suggestion, audience make their own conclusion
Put a picture of an actual current watch model next to an old picture of a diver wearing a discontinued vintage model, albeit the same brand. And a fanboy will then conclude that if he goes out and buy this model, he is as heroic and brave as the divers of the old...
Is this dishonesty? Some say yes...
Post by: hanz079 on August 24, 2017, 10:27:55 AM
Case: Tag Heuer caliber 1887 "claimed" to be in house. But found out to be a Seiko Caliber....
Now from what we know. During the launching of the caliber 1887, Mr.babin (TH CEO at that time) "claimed" that they developed the caliber fully in house and took them 3 years of R&D.
Part of the Q and A during the launching...
"Back in January 2006, we started looking at every mechanical chronograph on the market, and none made the grade in terms of our criteria — high-volume production, unbeatable reliability, easy maintenance and reasonable manufacturing cost. So we set out to make our own, and three years later came up with a beauty.
The turnaround time for a new movement — from first draft to final product — is between 3 and 5 years. The Calibre 1887 is at the front end of the timeframe. But we didn’t rush anything, we took our time, we didn’t make any compromises. When it was completely ready, we launched. As always, the number one priority was to produce the best possible product."
Then the dissecting began and it was revealed that the caliber is indeed from Seiko.
Once it was in the open, Mr.Babin did come out to admit...
His reply at WUS...
"Hi, I'm J.C. Babin the CEO of TAG Heuer, and YES, the new Caliber 1887 is based on a SII (Seiko Instruments Inc.) TC78 platform developped and patented in 1997 (filing) and eversince produced in very limited quantities, apparently for Junghans and Seiko watches in Japan. The caliber we propose and announced last week in London is a major evolution of this platform even though I aknowledge that the overall construction may look similar at first glance. However, the TAG Heuer movement is much different in terms of components, size and eventually performances, not to mention it is manufactured (all its key components including plate, bridges, assortment, cannon pinion, eccentrics etc....) in Switzerland in TAG Heuer workshops of Cornol (Cortech - a company owned by TAG Heuer and already producing TAG Heuer and Zenith cases) and La Chaux-de-Fonds (where we have also the HQs and where we added 30.000 sq feet more last year for movements assembling and other manufacturig projects) as well as from "best in class" partners such as Nivarox.
- Dimensions: it's broader (29.3 mm vs 28 mm) and thinner (7.13 mm vs 7.27 mm)
- Therefore the main plate, bridges - especially the chronograph bridge - and oscillating mass have been significantly modified to allow this evolution
- Its assortment is a swiss asortment specifically developped by Nivarox for TAG Heuer, and allowing to improve further accuracy and shocks resistancy
- New assortment centring of the balance wheel also specifically developped by KIF, a leading swiss expert company in balance wheels centrings
- Change and development of a new swiss engineered cannon pinion to increase time-setting overtime reliability
- Redesign of the fixing of ball bearings of the mass to contribute reducing the thickness
- Adjustements to pass the famous "60 TAG Heuer torture tests" in terms of accuracy, reliability, thermical and physical shocks resistancy, chemical agressions etc....
We have today already 45 TAG Heuer people working full time on that project in Switzerland and work with 21 other suppliers for additional parts, most being swiss. Total investment is several tenth of mio USD.
I would therefore qualify that movement as really in-house and manufactured by TAG Heuer even though, yes, the original IP has been acquired from SII. Please note that the original SII Caliber has always been praised by watches experts.
I hope I answer your questions as well as our fellow Watchuseek lovers !!!
Good evening - JCB"
I remembered Bremont was in a similar predicament by announcing a fully "in house movement" but proven to be a designed and made by La Joux Perret.
These 2 cases are the only blatant "truth distortion" cases that comes to mind.
Post by: pexus on August 24, 2017, 10:31:57 AM
It happened when i was not a WIS, so I don't have much knowledge on this.
So it was during a launch that those claims were made? Was there any posters or advertising? Was there an actual Tag model produced with this movement?
At least Babin went to a public forum to admit...so he did not crack under pressure... ;D
Post by: hanz079 on August 24, 2017, 10:34:04 AM
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...
Post by: hanz079 on August 24, 2017, 10:37:56 AM
good one..was thinking about the 1887 just now..
It happened when i was not a WIS, so I don't have much knowledge on this.
So it was during a launch that those claims were made? Was there any posters or advertising? Was there an actual Tag model produced with this movement?
At least Babin went to a public forum to admit...so he did not crack under pressure... ;D
I don't think there are any posters or ads stating the in house claim.
It was the Q and A with Mr.Babin during the launching.
And yes there were watches made that are fitted with the caliber 1887, it remains in production until now.
But I think they are planning to make use of the newer Caliber 01 now... it might still take some time but I believe that is the route they are taking.
I think the Caliber 01 is really in house. I think...
Post by: pexus on August 24, 2017, 10:42:03 AM
good one..was thinking about the 1887 just now..
It happened when i was not a WIS, so I don't have much knowledge on this.
So it was during a launch that those claims were made? Was there any posters or advertising? Was there an actual Tag model produced with this movement?
At least Babin went to a public forum to admit...so he did not crack under pressure... ;D
I don't think there are any posters or ads stating the in house claim.
It was the Q and A with Mr.Babin during the launching.
And yes there were watches made that are fitted with the caliber 1887, it remains in production until now.
But I think they are planning to make use of the newer Caliber 01 now... it might still take some time but I believe that is the route they are taking.
I think the Caliber 01 is really in house. I think...
Maybe the community would have been more forgiving if he declared his stance during the launch?
IP from Seiko + our investment/work/efforts = in house brand (from our perspective)
Post by: mongourou on August 24, 2017, 10:42:33 AM
http://paneraiworld.blogspot.my/2007/07/the-history-of-panerai.html?m=1
Nice article describing the Panerai history (they obviously have an interesting story even though patchy) which is in fact the story of vintage Rolex pocket watch.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: TheHobbit on August 24, 2017, 10:44:54 AM
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...
Panerai? Don't know if it was a marketing error but they did mess up...
Panerai Bronze... we will not issue again
Panerai PAM318 with its stock standard movement
I am sure there are other things Panerai messed up on...
Post by: hanz079 on August 24, 2017, 10:46:23 AM
For our Paneristi friends and those of us just curious:
http://paneraiworld.blogspot.my/2007/07/the-history-of-panerai.html?m=1
Nice article describing the Panerai history (they obviously have an interesting story even though patchy) which is in fact the story of vintage Rolex pocket watch.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Care to point out which part is the dishonesty and lies (distortion of truth)?
I would say the 2 people that wrote the book? It was found out that they have their part in authenticating some franken watches and some higher up Risti got burned... badly i might add...
Post by: pexus on August 24, 2017, 10:47:43 AM
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...
Panerai? Don't know if it was a marketing error but they did mess up...
Panerai Bronze... we will not issue again
Panerai PAM318 with its stock standard movement
I am sure there are other things Panerai messed up on...
yeah..those were huge boo boo....caused a lot of ill feelings that persisted till today...towards the brand, among the followers...
Post by: TheHobbit on August 24, 2017, 10:51:17 AM
For our Paneristi friends and those of us just curious:
http://paneraiworld.blogspot.my/2007/07/the-history-of-panerai.html?m=1
Nice article describing the Panerai history (they obviously have an interesting story even though patchy) which is in fact the story of vintage Rolex pocket watch.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks for the article...
But not to play it down, lets go back to the origin of my question.
This was the original post that started this...
"Hi All,
The more I dig into this passion of ours, the more I get irritated by how some companies communicate about their history.
I guess it is similar to us with our CV. It is always a bit embarrassing to present a 2 year gap in our resume so we might arrange it by adapting the truth to what we want to communicate to the HR. Or oversell our managerial and technical skills. Human nature!
Some companies have such a long and well-documented history that there is no reason for them to lie (sorry I should say to embellish reality). Names like PP, AP and VC come directly to mind.
But old brands that die a long time ago are sometimes resurrected just for banking on a name. Other companies will be bought back to fill a specific new market. Those new-old companies have little to do with what they were originally known for.
Others have massive gaps in their history with only a few hundred watches built over several decades, others shadowed smaller brands by taking the headlines on some accomplishment that they were not alone to achieve. You even have those very young companies (post 1990) having "Vintage" collections making you believe that they exist for a very long time.
Some lie about their history (also called revisionist histories), some lie about their technical achievements (changing the name of an ETA/Sellita base caliber or even slightly modified at the manufacture is not enough to be called in-house) while other start-up companies will buy old manufacturer names to avoid the pain of creating their own stories: "history=quality=prestige=I can charge you way more for a cheap case and an off the shelf non regulated movement".
But at the end, marketing departments get very good at selling this to people who will not, most of the time, check what is real and what is just fantasy.
One brand that gives me hope for the others is A. Lange & Soehne (even though I probably will never be able to afford one). Look at their website, go through their menu and check their "Our Saxon origin". Here you are, a clear gap between 1948 and 1990 reflecting their actual history.
This is honesty!"
This is Panerai history from its website.
http://www.panerai.com/en/about-panerai/history.html (http://www.panerai.com/en/about-panerai/history.html)
So my question:
Which part of Panerai history is marketing hype?
Post by: mongourou on August 24, 2017, 10:55:20 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: dpkong on August 24, 2017, 11:01:00 AM
I thought Panerai and hype were synonyms.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
:Laughing_on_floor:
Fanboys are out to play....
Post by: hanz079 on August 24, 2017, 11:03:39 AM
I thought Panerai and hype were synonyms.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
:Laughing_on_floor:
Fanboys are out to play....
Oh Donald... I wouldn't say fanboys as in the hardcore kind... but some facts to keep the discussion going would be dandy...
Since the topic is on marketing dishonesty (which I guess all agree is kinda normal)
But as in flat out lies and distortion of truth... I gave 2 examples... and I am waiting for more...
I am after all... a fanboy... of everything watches... as long as they are reliable...
Post by: hanz079 on August 24, 2017, 11:06:32 AM
I thought Panerai and hype were synonyms.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Depending on what you follow.
Adidas Yeezy is also synonym with hype...
As with any collab sneaker project...
But we are on the topic of dishonesty and lies...
If you ask me? At this day and age? Panerai hype train is over... but we are not on that topic are we?
Post by: dpkong on August 24, 2017, 11:11:04 AM
I thought Panerai and hype were synonyms.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Depending on what you follow.
Adidas Yeezy is also synonym with hype...
As with any collab sneaker project...
But we are on the topic of dishonesty and lies...
If you ask me? At this day and age? Panerai hype train is over... but we are not on that topic are we?
Some equate hype to dishonesty, as is not telling the truth. Others want to see a blatant lie.
And you don't qualify as a fan boy.
:Cheers:
Post by: TheHobbit on August 24, 2017, 11:12:35 AM
Post by: hanz079 on August 24, 2017, 11:16:15 AM
I thought Panerai and hype were synonyms.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Depending on what you follow.
Adidas Yeezy is also synonym with hype...
As with any collab sneaker project...
But we are on the topic of dishonesty and lies...
If you ask me? At this day and age? Panerai hype train is over... but we are not on that topic are we?
Some equate hype to dishonesty, as is not telling the truth. Others want to see a blatant lie.
And you don't qualify as a fan boy.
:Cheers:
Eh? How is hype dishonest?
Strong demand + Limited availability = Hype
Now some might say watch companies can ramp up production to meet demand... but those are business decisions based on the climate of luxury branding and playing with the perception of "exclusiveness" which I have earlier stated... For Panerai... The hype trainhas left town...
I visited my local AD recently and almost all hot (or perceived to be hot) models 3-4 years back are freely available... and WITH discounts to boot...
Post by: dpkong on August 24, 2017, 11:26:47 AM
informal
noun
noun: hype
1.
extravagant or intensive publicity or promotion.
"she relied on hype and headlines to stoke up interest in her music"
synonyms: publicity, advertising, promotion, marketing, exposure; self-promotion; informal ballyhoo, promo
"her work relies on hype and headlines"
a deception carried out for the sake of publicity.
plural noun: hypes
verb
verb: hype; 3rd person present: hypes; past tense: hyped; past participle: hyped; gerund or present participle: hyping
1.
promote or publicize (a product or idea) intensively, often exaggerating its importance or benefits.
"an industry quick to hype its products"
synonyms: publicize, advertise, promote, push, boost, merchandise, build up; informalplug
"a stunt to hype a new product"
You were thinking of noun and I was thinking of verb
"...often exaggerating its importance or benefits" could also include history
Post by: TheHobbit on August 24, 2017, 11:36:34 AM
For our Paneristi friends and those of us just curious:
http://paneraiworld.blogspot.my/2007/07/the-history-of-panerai.html?m=1
Nice article describing the Panerai history (they obviously have an interesting story even though patchy) which is in fact the story of vintage Rolex pocket watch.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Care to point out which part is the dishonesty and lies (distortion of truth)?
I would say the 2 people that wrote the book? It was found out that they have their part in authenticating some franken watches and some higher up Risti got burned... badly i might add...
I am sure there was lots of running around on that one... the worst part about that incident... they shot the messenger. Sigh....
Post by: mongourou on August 24, 2017, 11:41:05 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: Danielo on August 24, 2017, 11:49:40 AM
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Post by: hanz079 on August 24, 2017, 11:59:56 AM
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)
So what do we know?
I showed some examples... which is not elaborated on.
Then it is all semantics and one liners with nothing to go on...
This is how it ALWAYS ends...
Looking forward to another thread like this in a couple of months time... :Cheers:
Post by: dpkong on August 24, 2017, 12:26:58 PM
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?
;D
Post by: CKL1213 on August 24, 2017, 12:27:05 PM
"which brands are really honest about their past?"
1)
2)
3)
maybe none...
Post by: Cocas on August 24, 2017, 12:28:31 PM
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.
Post by: Enkidu on August 24, 2017, 03:44:22 PM
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... :Cheers:
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.
Post by: TheHobbit on August 24, 2017, 04:15:27 PM
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.
Post by: pexus on August 24, 2017, 04:18:26 PM
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... :Cheers:
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?
Post by: Danielo on August 24, 2017, 04:23:21 PM
Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk
Post by: Cocas on August 24, 2017, 04:25:15 PM
By the way, I hope there are fanboys or / and haters to write about Cyma...
Good name, bad name are better than no name. :D
Post by: Enkidu on August 24, 2017, 04:32:31 PM
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.
Post by: TheHobbit on August 24, 2017, 04:48:31 PM
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.
Post by: Enkidu on August 24, 2017, 04:59:16 PM
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.
Post by: dpkong on August 24, 2017, 05:50:39 PM
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.
Post by: pexus on August 24, 2017, 05:56:02 PM
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? :Cheers:
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.
Post by: asimo on August 24, 2017, 07:46:21 PM
Post by: mongourou on August 26, 2017, 06:53:31 AM
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
Post by: hanz079 on August 26, 2017, 07:45:46 AM
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...
Post by: mongourou on August 26, 2017, 07:49:19 AM
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
Post by: hanz079 on August 26, 2017, 08:22:26 AM
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?
Post by: mongourou on August 26, 2017, 08:29:30 AM
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Post by: TheHobbit on August 28, 2017, 11:15:18 AM
Still waiting for your take on Panerai though...
I would indeed be surprised if we ever find out .....