# Raymond Weil watches still considered luxury watches?



## Illyria (Jan 28, 2012)

I have never owned a Swiss watch, but I have saved up some money and plan to buy one in the next two weeks while in the United States.

I really like Raymond Weil watches, but I'm curious how they stand in relation to other Swiss brands. Are they still consired luxury time pieces?


----------



## GlennO (Jan 3, 2010)

'Luxury' is highly subjective and means different things to different people. I think RW make decent watches. Be sure to get a significant discount though. MSRP is pretty high and resale values not that great.


----------



## Formerguide (Apr 12, 2011)

I'm a fan. I think that they make very nice-looking pieces. They sport mostly ETA movements, but the fit and finish is quite good on all the ones I've handled. Their bracelets in particular seem very well made.

As far as "luxury" it's really so subjective, based upon the eye of the beholder. For the general world at large, a $600 quartz Movado is certainly considered luxury. I mean, here in the US, the median income is something like $35k/anum, so obviously a watch that cost a week's salary would be considered a luxury and a exorbitant splurge, if you will. However, on a watch-centric forum, among WIS-types, a $7k Grand Seiko is considered a bargain. It's all about perspective.

If you like the watch, I say go for it. One note, RW watches are readily available on Grey market sites. Also, even at B&M AD's, a healthy discount is generally available. Be certain to seek out a dealer willing to help you out.

Good luck, let us know what you choose, safe travels!

Dan


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

No and never were


----------



## Roller.959 (Nov 29, 2011)

Not considered Luxury watches by many, but fine watches otherwise. Maybe a half-step or step above Hamilton with some offerings, on par with Hamilton with other offerings. Freelancer Chrono is their best IMO. A 25-30% AD discount is reasonable. A little deeper if you go GM.


















Good Luck!


----------



## ebenke (Aug 20, 2012)

Watchbreath said:


> No and never were


x2 - they are fashion watches.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (sucks)


----------



## CitizenM (Dec 9, 2009)

I think if you told the average American, by which I do not mean the other doctor at your clinic or lawyer at the law firm, that you spent $500 on a watch, their head would explode. So yes, I think it's easily within luxury territory.


----------



## Roller.959 (Nov 29, 2011)

ebenke said:


> x2 - they are fashion watches.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (sucks)


Incorrect.


----------



## Swingline888 (Sep 8, 2011)

Roller.959 said:


> Incorrect.


x2 ...he is definitely incorrect.


----------



## Ozy (Aug 10, 2009)

Great watches, no different than any other eta movement caser. Can't figure out the issue nor the attitude toward the brand here. 

Suppose it's as inexplicable as the TAG hate. people say they dislike them, but they aren't sure why.


----------



## ed21x (Feb 11, 2011)

very nicely finished watches. however, overpriced when compared to other brands offering the same movement in similar quality cases (eg. Hamilton, Tissot).

comparable to Baume et Mercier


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Roller.959 said:


> Not considered Luxury watches by many, but fine watches otherwise.


+1.
Absolutely ter~rific watches. I personally think RW is better than Hamilton. Closer to Louis Erard - another homerun of a brand.

But as to WHO considers something to be 'luxury' is another topic altogether.

Why, for me, heck, any watch with a strap is already a "luxury" - that I don't have to carry them in my pocket (another luxury item!) with my change, getting all beat up.


----------



## Mako (Apr 21, 2007)

Ozy said:


> Great watches, no different than any other eta movement caser. Can't figure out the issue nor the attitude toward the brand here.
> 
> Suppose it's as inexplicable as the TAG hate. people say they dislike them, but they aren't sure why.


I agree w/Ozy. Doesn't Panerai use ETA movements which are "panerized" in it's base models by the addition of cosmetic

details?

They make fine watches,bracelets are exceptional and the term "luxury" is most definitely very subjective. Shop around for best

prices thoroughly.

http://www.exero.com/mastergate/secured/boytoys/rayweil.htm


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Ozy said:


> Great watches, no different than any other eta movement caser. Can't figure out the issue nor the attitude toward the brand here.
> 
> Suppose it's as inexplicable as the TAG hate. *people say they dislike them, but they aren't sure why.*


An oxymoron in action: groupthink.


----------



## GETS (Dec 8, 2011)

Illyria said:


> I really like Raymond Weil watches


Then you really should buy one. What we think isn't very important.



Illyria said:


> but I'm curious how they stand *in relation to other Swiss brands*. Are they still consired luxury time pieces


I think that most posters are missing an important part of your question (which I have put in bold font). In relation to many, many other Swiss brands they are not considered luxury.


----------



## CitizenM (Dec 9, 2009)

Well, yeah, compared to Swiss brands ordinary people know of (Rolex, Breitling, TAG Heuer) then no. But in terms of quality and design, I think they're within the realm of TAG and offer a substantially better price.


----------



## dbakiva (May 7, 2011)

Chronopolis said:


> +1.
> Absolutely ter~rific watches. I personally think RW is better than Hamilton. Closer to Louis Erard - another homerun of a brand.
> 
> But as to WHO considers something to be 'luxury' is another topic altogether.
> ...


Quick, somebody send this man a decent pair of slacks.


----------



## dbakiva (May 7, 2011)

Apparently they don't get a lot of love or respect around here, but they some attractively designed pieces, and with ETA movements should be reliable and easily serviced. They may not compete with the higher end brands, and should be available at good discount. If you like them, why not?


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

dbakiva said:


> Apparently they don't get a lot of love or respect around here,...


And yet, when they do - I have noticed a pattern - the love & respect seem to come, consistently from people with superior minds, who, by virtue of that superiority, are better able to resist, or even crush, the onslaught of hype and hivethink regarding things whose quality and value are not in any way synonymous with their putative reputation, whether high or low.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

"groupthink" = fashion watch police.


Chronopolis said:


> An oxymoron in action: groupthink.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

|> They do with me, I sold a bunch.


dbakiva said:


> Apparently they don't get a lot of love or respect around here, but they some attractively designed pieces, and with ETA movements should be reliable and easily serviced. They may not compete with the higher end brands, and should be available at good discount. If you like them, why not?


----------



## Bapou (Oct 3, 2012)

I bought a Raymond Weil watch while on holiday in the Caribbean in February. It looked great but within a few months I started to get problems with the glass. Sent it back to Raymond Weil who confirmed that the anti reflection coating was breaking down, However, they claim that this is not covered by their 2 year warranty as it is wear and tear. So, provided you are happy to replace the glass very six months or so you should be fine.

I wouldn't have another one of these if it came free in cereal box.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

Solution, don't get one that's coated.
If you find one in a cereal box, sent it to me.


Bapou said:


> I bought a Raymond Weil watch while on holiday in the Caribbean in February. It looked great but within a few months I started to get problems with the glass. Sent it back to Raymond Weil who confirmed that the anti reflection coating was breaking down, However, they claim that this is not covered by their 2 year warranty as it is wear and tear. So, provided you are happy to replace the glass very six months or so you should be fine.
> 
> I wouldn't have another one of these if it came free in cereal box.


----------



## CitizenM (Dec 9, 2009)

Bapou said:


> I bought a Raymond Weil watch while on holiday in the Caribbean in February. It looked great but within a few months I started to get problems with the glass. Sent it back to Raymond Weil who confirmed that the anti reflection coating was breaking down, However, they claim that this is not covered by their 2 year warranty as it is wear and tear. So, provided you are happy to replace the glass very six months or so you should be fine.
> 
> I wouldn't have another one of these if it came free in cereal box.


Can you elaborate? photos would be helpful.


----------



## jilgiljongiljing (Jun 20, 2011)

I'm not entirely surprised with that response from RW because in my experience their PR and CS departments are very poor. They have this uber elitist attitude for no valid reason. I couldnt get simple answers from their service department and I have heard incidents of poor treatment by their reps and bad warranty experiences. But there are other brands that share some of these negatives as well. RW isnt the only one. Their watches are very good, anyone who says otherwise is biased. Sure they use stock ETA movements and act like they are a super high end brand when they arent quite all that, but there are so many other brands that use stock ETA movements with nowhere near the casing quality and fit and finish of RW.

The brand gets shot down here a bit too much for no valid reason IMO. In my experience having owned Hamilton, Tissot and Raymond Weil, RW is a clear cut above Hamilton and Tissot in terms of case work, fit and finish and detailing. Their watches are very solid and look great. I'd compare them to Baume & Mercier like someone else suggested. However, I have had great experiences with BM reps and their service department, they were super nice to me and they got back to me real quick with any information I wanted so I guess you can knock off points for such things.

There is no way you can call RW a fashion brand though. Michael Kors, Armani, and other such brands make fashion watches, it is ridiculous to call RW a fashion brand and then call Hamilton or Tissot a proper watch brand. If you can recommend an ETA based watch to someone, you can recommend an RW as well. Agreed their MSRP is inflated, but at a good discount, their quality is very high and you'd struggle to find many watches in that price range matching that.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

jilgiljongiljing said:


> RW...
> 
> Their watches are very good, anyone who says otherwise is biased.
> *The brand gets shot down here a bit too much for no valid reason IMO. *
> ... it is *ridiculous to call RW a fashion brand *and then call Hamilton or Tissot a proper watch brand. If you can recommend an ETA based watch to someone, you can recommend an RW as well.


I guess repetition makes the (sub-cultural) cohesion stronger.

I used to own a RW, and have handled several more over the years, and all were superbly crafted.
As for crappy CS, I wouldn't know: the lady seemed purty friendly to me... which kinda prevented me from buying one from her. ;D


----------



## tigerpac (Feb 3, 2011)

As a lawyer I should take offense to this.... but really it's the spending $500 on a watch that offends me more! Spend $500 and you walk out of the store with something worth $100 or less!

Coincidentally, I had a RW (Parsifal automatic, before they turned it into a rolex knockoff) which was actually quite decently finished... as nice as an entry-level tag. Not quite up to WIS standards but had a double AR coated sapphire, with a decorated movement and clear case-back... not bad.



CitizenM said:


> I think if you told the average American, by which I do not mean the other doctor at your clinic or lawyer at the law firm, that you spent $500 on a watch, their head would explode. So yes, I think it's easily within luxury territory.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

:-s "WIS standards", there're standards?


tigerpac said:


> As a lawyer I should take offense to this.... but really it's the spending $500 on a watch that offends me more! Spend $500 and you walk out of the store with something worth $100 or less!
> 
> Coincidentally, I had a RW (Parsifal automatic, before they turned it into a rolex knockoff) which was actually quite decently finished... as nice as an entry-level tag. Not quite up to WIS standards but had a double AR coated sapphire, with a decorated movement and clear case-back... not bad.


----------



## CitizenM (Dec 9, 2009)

tigerpac said:


> As a lawyer I should take offense to this.... but really it's the spending $500 on a watch that offends me more! Spend $500 and you walk out of the store with something worth $100 or less!
> 
> Coincidentally, I had a RW (Parsifal automatic, before they turned it into a rolex knockoff) which was actually quite decently finished... as nice as an entry-level tag. Not quite up to WIS standards but had a double AR coated sapphire, with a decorated movement and clear case-back... not bad.


Lol, I'm an attorney too, I'm just saying, I suspect the average income here at WUS is wayyyy higher than that of the average American. If we judge prices by our office allowance, we might get a grossly inaccurate estimate of what the average American (much less the average human being) means by "luxury watch."

Years ago I bought my first Orient and took it back to some of my old friends I used to go to high school with. "Wow that's really cool...how much was it?" I say $150. "WHOA $150, man, that's a crazy amount to spend on a watch." They were genuinely shocked. So I think we have to be conscious of the non-WUS thinking of the market. I've had compliments from many non-WIS on my Citizen quartzes and they were very impressed that I had a Citizen.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

Illyria said:


> I have never owned a Swiss watch, but I have saved up some money and plan to buy one in the next two weeks while in the United States.
> 
> I really like Raymond Weil watches, but I'm curious how they stand in relation to other Swiss brands. Are they still consired luxury time pieces?


I like RW in general. But just realize that re-sale value is terrible. If you have your heart set on an RW model, either buy it pre-owned or make sure to get an excellent discount if bought new. Pre-owned they typically retail for almost half of what they do brand new. And I mean "Pre-owned," not "used" and in somewhat rough shape.


----------



## masbret (Mar 21, 2012)

I checked out the RW watches at Jared the other day and found the ones I handled to be of very nice quality, they look very solid with nice bracelets and fine dials. I actually considered buying a RW Freelancer with the open heart dial. I guess I will wait for one to pop up on the sale forum.


----------



## John MS (Mar 17, 2006)

Yes indeed. Raymond Weill watches were and are still considered luxury watches.


----------



## westlake (Oct 10, 2011)

Independent Genève-based company making decent watches with 3rd party movements but their retail pricing is absurd and they have horrible residual values. They sell mostly through department and mall stores plus the destination/cruise ship retail system. If you buy new (at retail) make sure you like the watch as there won’t be much left should you want to trade for something else. With those facts not sure I would clasify them as a "luxury" brand.

Probably one of the companies to be most affected by the reduction in Swatch Group movement and hairspring sales given their lack of any significant R&D for in-house production.


----------



## brrrdn (Jun 16, 2008)

Definitely luxury for most people (including me). Probably not luxury for WIS types.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

Tough to consider RW a luxury brand when their quartz models are sold at Wal-Mart. 

I think TAG Heuer made a good decision to sell their timepieces through Macy's. It made them more available to the general public, helped to put their name out there; plus it's Macy's. It's not some cheap discount department store. Wal-Mart on the other hand . . . If you're Timex or Casio, or some No-name brand from China; it makes sense to sell your pragmatic (non-luxury) watches through Wal-Mart. If you're RW, yes; it devalues the brand. So it's hard to think of RW as a luxury brand. Hard to think of it as even entry-level luxury since Longines and Oris have that slot pretty well sewed up between them. If they got their quartz models out of Wal-Mart, it would help.


----------



## jilgiljongiljing (Jun 20, 2011)

Tag has locked down on a lot of pricing flexibility and coupon usage in Macys now. A year or two ago you could combine a few coupons and walk away with a very decent discount from Macys getting all the benefits of buying from an AD. Now though they are quite strict about pricing and they dictate clearance prices as well and you cant use any coupons on those. I missed a good opportunity to pick up an Aquaracer Chronograph on clearance that I could combine a 25% off coupon with. Wasn't in a situation to buy it at that time, but I sort of wish I picked it up when I could. Now its all MSRP, and their very rare clearance watches are like 20% off retail.

I dont know which walmart had RW, I've been to lots of them until a few years ago and I've never seen one, yet I keep hearing about RW's being available in walmart. Was this something they got a batch from a clearance house or grey market discounter and not an official RW sale? I seriously doubt walmart is an authorized dealer for RW for if they were, they would be more widely available. This is like saying Oris, Bretiling, Panerai are all cheap fashion brands because you can find them in Costco. Its not reflective of the status of those brands, availablity online, or in a lower end store doesn't make a well made watch cheap all of a sudden. Its not like walmart is selling 100$ raymond weil watches, its still priced at RW pricing and its the same watch, doesnt mean a thing unless they had a seperate cheaper line for walmart alone which would dilute the brand a bit.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

No, it's not like the situation that used to exist between Costco and Omega awhile back where Costco was selling Grey Market Omega watches. It's not a situation where there was an overflow, and Wal-Mart picked up some RW watches. I've seen quartz only RW models constantly stocked at the one just a short distance from Roosevelt Field mall. Don't know the store number. But here's the address:

1123 Jerusalem Ave.
Uniondale, NY 11553
(516) 505-1580

I was there a couple of weeks ago. They've got RW in that store location.


----------



## jtstav (Jul 11, 2010)

Monocrom said:


> No, it's not like the situation that used to exist between Costco and Omega awhile back where Costco was selling Grey Market Omega watches. It's not a situation where there was an overflow, and Wal-Mart picked up some RW watches. I've seen quartz only RW models constantly stocked at the one just a short distance from Roosevelt Field mall. Don't know the store number. But here's the address:
> 
> 1123 Jerusalem Ave.
> Uniondale, NY 11553
> ...


I've seen them in a few NY Wal-Marts and thought the same thing. I'm not sure if they're an AD though. Either way it does tarnish the brand depending on who's looking at it.


----------



## Apothecarian (Sep 9, 2011)

No. Not a luxury brand.


----------



## Illyria (Jan 28, 2012)

Formerguide said:


> I'm a fan. I think that they make very nice-looking pieces. They sport mostly ETA movements, but the fit and finish is quite good on all the ones I've handled. Their bracelets in particular seem very well made.
> 
> As far as "luxury" it's really so subjective, based upon the eye of the beholder. For the general world at large, a $600 quartz Movado is certainly considered luxury. I mean, here in the US, the median income is something like $35k/anum, so obviously a watch that cost a week's salary would be considered a luxury and a exorbitant splurge, if you will. However, on a watch-centric forum, among WIS-types, a $7k Grand Seiko is considered a bargain. It's all about perspective.
> 
> ...


I really appreciate all of the advice and comments on this thread. I especially liked the article on the history of the watch. I didn't know that Raymond Weil was the first Swiss Watch company to embrace quartz technology. The RW model I was most attracted to was a quartz.

While stateside, I decided ,after reviewing the comments on this thread, to hold off. Like most people, I work hard for my money and purchasing a watch that I really like is important. This thread made me reconsider that purchase.


----------



## Hammondo (Feb 8, 2010)

They are sold in most of the reasonable British jewelery stores and I would consider them on par with Longines, Tissot and Tag Heuer which are sold mostly together. They have some nice models, but I do personally consider them way over-priced (especially by British standards). I like browsing them when shopping, but I would never consider buying them, even at 25% off. I would actually rather buy a Seiko Premier (£750) which retails for half the price of a decent RW!


----------



## Famousname (Jun 20, 2011)

Chronopolis said:


> And yet, when they do - I have noticed a pattern - the love & respect seem to come, consistently from people with superior minds, who, by virtue of that superiority, are better able to resist, or even crush, the onslaught of hype and hivethink regarding things whose quality and value are not in any way synonymous with their putative reputation, whether high or low.


I wept...


----------



## Atoning Unifex (Aug 21, 2012)

Luxury? Not really.


----------



## mpalmer (Dec 30, 2011)

Consider Oris or Stowa instead. They will offer excellent value for money. Nothing wrong with RW. They are not see to be great value for money around here. They are not that sought after so resale value will be fairly low, yet they sell for quite a bit new.


----------



## Duder (Aug 18, 2011)

RW is a luxury brand. They make excellent quality watches and for that you pay a higher price. Many people here equate movement with luxury which is incorrect. Resale value also has nothing to do with a something being a luxury either.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

Duder said:


> . . . Resale value also has nothing to do with a something being a luxury either.


I have to disagree. Luxury goods do tend to hold their value extremely well. New Luxury cars being the biggest exception to that rule. However, they do tend to depreciate quite a bit slower than non-luxury models from non-luxury brands. Retainment of value is a big aspect for any luxury good in general. Unfortunately, RW doesn't have that. The undisputed luxury watch brands don't suffer from that issue of very steep depreciation.


----------



## Ovalteenie (May 4, 2010)

Resale value has to do with desirability, of which there are many factors - prestige, quality, rarity, popularity...

Rolex is cited as holding value best on the secondary market - but if it was simply the luxuriance of their watches, or merely the brand name, then Rolex's Cellini range would hold value equally as well as the Oyster professional range. 

In general, luxury brands/goods are high quality and desirable (plus they spend a lot of money on advertising to convince us so), and the more desirable to the wide consumer public they become, the better they hold their value. Hence the secondary market value of any brand or item can vary according to its desirability at a point in time or to the fortunes of the company.

Going back to RW, whether or not it is a luxury watch depends on the individual's perspective of the definition 'luxury watch'. A non-WIS's perception of a 'luxury watch' may be different from that of most people here. Most people here probably do not consider RW to be luxury watches from their perspective. A WIS multi-millionaire may not consider mass-production Rolex or Omega to be luxury watches. 

'Buy what you like'... If a watch brings you great pleasure, then perhaps it is fair to say it is your luxury watch, and be proud of it, regardless of what others think of the brand.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

In watch stores there're near the entrance, hardly a luxury brand.


Duder said:


> RW is a luxury brand. They make excellent quality watches and for that you pay a higher price. Many people here equate movement with luxury which is incorrect. Resale value also has nothing to do with a something being a luxury either.


----------



## Duder (Aug 18, 2011)

Watchbreath said:


> In watch stores there're near the entrance, hardly a luxury brand.


Subjective. If a watch store's inventory consists of Cartier, Rolex, Breitling etc, RW display would be located up front as it is that store's entry level lux brand. If your store sells mostly Seikos, Citizens, Bulova Casio etc, RW would be in the rear bc it's that stores luxury brand.

Middle America dept stores like Kohls and JCP dont include luxury brands in inventory. They dont sell RW, Movado, Tag . They peak at Seiko, citizen and bulovas as fine watches.


----------



## Duder (Aug 18, 2011)

Monocrom said:


> I have to disagree. Luxury goods do tend to hold their value extremely well. New Luxury cars being the biggest exception to that rule. However, they do tend to depreciate quite a bit slower than non-luxury models from non-luxury brands. Retainment of value is a big aspect for any luxury good in general. Unfortunately, RW doesn't have that. The undisputed luxury watch brands don't suffer from that issue of very steep depreciation.


Most people buying luxury watches don't resell them. WIS are not most people.

Luxury cars depreciate at a much higher rate than non luxury cars - compare the percentage drop in price on used kia, toyota vs mercerdes benz


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

Duder said:


> Most people buying luxury watches don't resell them. WIS are not most people.


True. My main point though, regardless of whether or not the item is re-sold or kept, what an individual could fetch for it on the Pre-owned market is an indicator of how much of a luxury product it is considered to be. In some cases, if the majority of consumers even consider it to be a luxury product. Unfortunately RW watches just depreciate far too much after sold as New.


----------



## wuyeah (Apr 24, 2007)

In WIS world Luxury brand basic requirement starts with capability of building an in-House movement.


----------



## jtstav (Jul 11, 2010)

wuyeah said:


> In WIS world Luxury brand basic requirement starts with capability of building an in-House movement.


All of my Seiko 5's would be considered luxury then . I get what you mean though. There are certain unwritten requirements that we as consumers (and WIS) look for in a company for them to be considered a luxury brand. In all honesty though, the consumer base's attitude towards a brand is what deems them "luxury". If you have effective marketing and a good product in the luxury market (even if it's not on par with other lesser known brands) the consumer base will think of you as luxury item. So the answer is to most of us WIS RW is not luxury. However to the market at large; yes RW most likely is seen as a luxury brand. Now if I only had a dollar for every time the word "luxury" has been said in this thread!


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

In my former store, Movado and Swiss Army were at the back on one side and RW was near the entrance next to 
Gucci, Breitling was the first brand you saw walking in.


Duder said:


> Subjective. If a watch store's inventory consists of Cartier, Rolex, Breitling etc, RW display would be located up front as it is that store's entry level lux brand. If your store sells mostly Seikos, Citizens, Bulova Casio etc, RW would be in the rear bc it's that stores luxury brand.
> 
> Middle America dept stores like Kohls and JCP dont include luxury brands in inventory. They dont sell RW, Movado, Tag . They peak at Seiko, citizen and bulovas as fine watches.


----------



## Phrenzy (Nov 20, 2012)

I think that their better automatics belong at the entry level lux band. 

After reading A LOT about them before finally buying the RW don giovanni cosi grande auto chrono that I've been dreaming of since I first saw it in a store window when I was 16 I've come to believe that the pro luxury /anti-luxury argument comes mainly from people conflating their entry level quartz offerings either their better mechanicals and the fact that they don't have a storied 100 year history.

I agree that the rrp on most of their watches is high but a second hand don giovanni, parsifal, freelancer or nabucco is a great buy as is a grey market priced one. I got minequality second hand "like new" for around one fifth the US retail price and around an eighth the Australian price (I don't think the prices have been adjusted since the dollar was at 60 cents).

I like the fact that they are a family owned firm and I like the aesthetic of their collections and I will never forget how solid and precise the first DGCG I got to try on felt. 

In fact my early experience with that watch led to years only liking through look of large rectangle watches on my wrist. I'm trying hard to break that thinking, especially as I need a new daily watch and another Chinese don Giovanni look alike isn't practical or needed now I have the real thing.

Anyhow if you take each watch they make in isolation they do make luxury watches, just not exclusively luxury watches.


----------



## ebenke (Aug 20, 2012)

Raymond Weil seems like a fashion trend type watch. Arguable however.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (sucks)


----------



## Lee Jones Jnr (Nov 5, 2012)

ebenke said:


> x2 - they are fashion watches.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (sucks)


They are? I didn't realise, what line of clothing did RW make their name with?


----------



## Lee Jones Jnr (Nov 5, 2012)

In the 'league table' I would place RW alongside Longines, Oris etc


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

Not me.


Lee Jones Jnr said:


> In the 'league table' I would place RW alongside Longines, Oris etc


----------



## Lee Jones Jnr (Nov 5, 2012)

Watchbreath said:


> Not me.


Probably not the first time you have been wrong though?


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

:-d Used to sell all three.


Lee Jones Jnr said:


> Probably not the first time you have been wrong though?


----------



## Lee Jones Jnr (Nov 5, 2012)

Watchbreath said:


> :-d Used to sell all three.


Me too.
You found the price/fit/finish differed?


----------



## ed21x (Feb 11, 2011)

it is a matter of market vs WIS perception though. 

To the general public, Raymond Weil, Baume et Mercier, Tissot, and Tag are all 'luxury' brands because they are a step above Fossil, Diesel, Michael Kors, Guess, and Emporio Armani watches. 

To the WIS, the bar is quite a bit higher. I would argue that Omega defines the boundary between luxury and entry level to the WIS.



So it goes:

ALS/AP/PP 

Really Expensive High End
-----JLC-----
High End

IWC

High End
-----Rolex-----
Luxury

Panerai/Breitling

Luxury
-----Omega----- 
Entry Level


Tag/ Longines/ Raymond Weil/ Baume et Mercier


Entry Level
-----Hamilton/Tissot----- 
Fashion


Fossil/Diesel/Armani Exchange/Michael Kors


----------



## umarrajs (Oct 18, 2012)

Not really. They are what I would call "sensibly priced for regular folks" and you can expect a 25% discount from an AD and about 40-45% from the GM.


----------



## pantagruel (May 30, 2010)

ed21x said:


> it is a matter of market vs WIS perception though.
> 
> To the general public, Raymond Weil, Baume et Mercier, Tissot, and Tag are all 'luxury' brands because they are a step above Fossil, Diesel, Michael Kors, Guess, and Emporio Armani watches.
> 
> ...


----------



## ed21x (Feb 11, 2011)

lol how long have you been waiting to post that?


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

Longines offered more.


Lee Jones Jnr said:


> Me too.
> You found the price/fit/finish differed?


----------



## Lee Jones Jnr (Nov 5, 2012)

Watchbreath said:


> Longines offered more.


More what?
I am just a simple shopkeeper, If you could speak in sentences that would really help me to keep up!


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

Quality


Lee Jones Jnr said:


> More what?
> I am just a simple shopkeeper, If you could speak in sentences that would really help me to keep up!


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

Lee Jones Jnr said:


> Probably not the first time you have been wrong though?


That seems like a rather obnoxious statement in response to a person who is disagreeing on a matter of opinion.


----------



## Lee Jones Jnr (Nov 5, 2012)

mleok said:


> That seems like a rather obnoxious statement in response to a person who is disagreeing on a matter of opinion.


What a good job that the person it was directed at has a better sense of humour than you do then.
I have no problem with being obnoxious when required, but that wasn't an example.


----------



## Lee Jones Jnr (Nov 5, 2012)

Watchbreath said:


> Quality


Words are free you know, don't worry about running out!

Don't get me wrong, I am not championing RW by any means, but in my experience the quality level is on a par with Longines. I suppose that the 'level' can come down to fractions, so if I were pushed maybe I would say RW is half a step down from Longines which is half a step down from B&M which is half a step down from Tag Heuer etc etc.

I suppose I perceive the status of a brand partly by association. Here in the UK RW is generally sold as the base brand in places that also stock Omega, Breitling, Tag Heuer, Chopard etc rather than being the top brand in places that sell Seiko, Citizen, Guess etc.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

You'll find reading my posts that I'm not long winded like many around here.


Lee Jones Jnr said:


> Words are free you know, don't worry about running out!
> 
> Don't get me wrong, I am not championing RW by any means, but in my experience the quality level is on a par with Longines. I suppose that the 'level' can come down to fractions, so if I were pushed maybe I would say RW is half a step down from Longines which is half a step down from B&M which is half a step down from Tag Heuer etc etc.
> 
> I suppose I perceive the status of a brand partly by association. Here in the UK RW is generally sold as the base brand in places that also stock Omega, Breitling, Tag Heuer, Chopard etc rather than being the top brand in places that sell Seiko, Citizen, Guess etc.


----------



## Lee Jones Jnr (Nov 5, 2012)

Watchbreath said:


> You'll find reading my posts that I'm not long winded like many around here.


Innit.


----------



## jvh (Jul 8, 2012)

Over here, RW is placed slightly below TAG, Longines and above Tissot, Hamilton. I have one of their Tangos and the bracelet is the best I have seen and felt. For the price, I do feel they make excellent watches.


----------



## tomjoad (Jul 18, 2011)

ed21x said:


> it is a matter of market vs WIS perception though.
> 
> To the general public, Raymond Weil, Baume et Mercier, Tissot, and Tag are all 'luxury' brands because they are a step above Fossil, Diesel, Michael Kors, Guess, and Emporio Armani watches.
> 
> ...


Really, I'm not intending to start a flame war, but you put Breitling and Panerai over Omega? Really, Omega makes luxury watches that are nearly on par with Rolex (which you correctly placed on a higher position) and offer in-house movements. Sorry, but Panerai just uses Unitas movements and slaps them into similar cases and charges $6k plus. And Breitling? Seriously? Unless you've somehow heavily weighed their superquartz movement, it seems to be out of touch.
I'm not intending to brand bash, in fact I like both Breitling and Panerai, but if you ask me among the well known luxury brands, I view the list as followed:

1) Rolex
2) Omega
3) Breitling
4) Tag Heuer

And Panerai isn't included because it is not a well-known luxury brand. They make great and nice watches, but they are a niche company which does not have a full line of offerings like the others.


----------



## ebenke (Aug 20, 2012)

What tomjoad sounds reasonable.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (sucks)


----------



## Lee Jones Jnr (Nov 5, 2012)

ebenke said:


> What tomjoad sounds reasonable.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (sucks)


Yeah.

I personally would consider Omega and Breitling to be on a level but I wouldn't argue with that 4 brand league. I actively dislike Rolex personally, not relevant but I will say it whenever I can.


----------



## boostin20 (Sep 20, 2010)

I would definitely put Omega near Rolex in the "tiers" because of the in-house mov'ts. Personally, I hold any company that slaps a decorated eta in their case on the same level. When choosing from them I just get what appeals to me at the time, regardless of whether it's RW or Breitling.

On a different note, I got an email from an AD about a limited edition chronomat with Breitling's first in-house mov't. I hope that's a precursor to what's to come from Breitling.


----------



## tomjoad (Jul 18, 2011)

ebenke said:


> What tomjoad sounds reasonable.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (sucks)


I did forget to add that I find Tag to be slightly above the RW and on par with Longines and BM. I put them on par with Longines due to their history in the watch industry, although price wise Longines competes at the lower end of the luxury market (making them a terrific value).

RW in the grand scheme of things would be in between Hamilton and the Tag/Longines region. Nothing wrong with their offerings, just make sure you get atleast a 25% discount off MSRP from an AD.


----------



## natesen (Mar 6, 2012)

boostin20 said:


> I would definitely put Omega near Rolex in the "tiers" because of the in-house mov'ts. Personally, I hold any company that slaps a decorated eta in their case on the same level. When choosing from them I just get what appeals to me at the time, regardless of whether it's RW or Breitling.
> 
> On a different note, I got an email from an AD about a limited edition chronomat with Breitling's first in-house mov't. I hope that's a precursor to what's to come from Breitling.


Breitling has had in house movements for years now and they are really nice movements.

Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

You know the "grand scheme of things'!?


tomjoad said:


> I did forget to add that I find Tag to be slightly above the RW and on par with Longines and BM. I put them on par with Longines due to their history in the watch industry, although price wise Longines competes at the lower end of the luxury market (making them a terrific value).
> 
> RW in the grand scheme of things would be in between Hamilton and the Tag/Longines region. Nothing wrong with their offerings, just make sure you get atleast a 25% discount off MSRP from an AD.


----------



## ebenke (Aug 20, 2012)

tomjoad said:


> RW in the grand scheme of things would be in between Hamilton and the Tag/Longines region. Nothing wrong with their offerings, just make sure you get atleast a 25% discount off MSRP from an AD.


I prefer Hamilton over RW by a tick, but agree its a notch or so below Tag Heuer

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (sucks)


----------



## tomjoad (Jul 18, 2011)

Watchbreath said:


> You know the "grand scheme of things'!?


Yep, or at least how I subjectively see watch brands. Doesn't mean I don't own them or that a low ranking one wouldn't be my favorite. Example - if I bought a Rolex today, it wouldn't be my favorite, that title would go to my Constellation which was given to me by my wife for our wedding. Sure, the Rolex would be a better watch, but in my collections grand scheme, it would always be playing second fiddle.

But its up to you to figure out your grand scheme.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

I kinda figured that our already.


tomjoad said:


> Yep, or at least how I subjectively see watch brands. Doesn't mean I don't own them or that a low ranking one wouldn't be my favorite. Example - if I bought a Rolex today, it wouldn't be my favorite, that title would go to my Constellation which was given to me by my wife for our wedding. Sure, the Rolex would be a better watch, but in my collections grand scheme, it would always be playing second fiddle.
> 
> But its up to you to figure out your grand scheme.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

Used to sell TAGs as well, RW held together far better.


ebenke said:


> I prefer Hamilton over RW by a tick, but agree its a notch or so below Tag Heuer
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (sucks)


----------



## cameron202105 (May 23, 2012)

I would consider it a "fashion watch" but if want one they always have good deals on them at Costco which is grey market but I'm ok with it


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

Like there's a great selection at Costco. Now why doesn't Costco have 'Aussie Bites' anymore?


cameron202105 said:


> I would consider it a "fashion watch" but if want one they always have good deals on them at Costco which is grey market but I'm ok with it


----------



## tomjoad (Jul 18, 2011)

ebenke said:


> I prefer Hamilton over RW by a tick, but agree its a notch or so below Tag Heuer
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk (sucks)


I preferer Hamilton's designs over RW, but I don't think they are better than Hamilton. RW watches are much more nicely finished.


----------



## waldoh (Nov 20, 2011)

I know nothing about RW but my opinion on them is that they are "mall watches". Yes I know higher end brands are sold in malls but I'm talking about the JCPenny or Macy's. 

In before someone mentions TAG. The cheaper TAGs are nothing special, but the more expensive stuff is really nice.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

:-s Who knew, that a tread on Raymond Weil would go on like this?


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

waldoh said:


> I know nothing about RW but my opinion on them is that they are "mall watches". Yes I know higher end brands are sold in malls but I'm talking about the JCPenny or Macy's.


Higher end brands are also sold in Macy's. And not just TAG Heuers.


----------



## Lee Jones Jnr (Nov 5, 2012)

Watchbreath said:


> :-s Who knew, that a tread on Raymond Weil would go on like this?


You?


----------



## William2 (Apr 7, 2012)

Watchbreath said:


> :-s Who knew, that a tread on Raymond Weil would go on like this?


That's only because comments like the above extend it!


----------



## pz93c (Sep 29, 2007)

This was an interesting thread. 

I see these from time to time in pawn shops. I'll have to pay more attention.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

I'm surprised that a pawn shop would take one, they drool over Rolex.


pz93c said:


> This was an interesting thread.
> 
> I see these from time to time in pawn shops. I'll have to pay more attention.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

Watchbreath said:


> I'm surprised that a pawn shop would take one, they drool over Rolex.


They'll take nearly anything for a low-ball price offer that's accepted by a customer needing money for his watch.

I see far more TAG Heuers in pawn shop windows than Rolex. And by a wide margin.


----------



## Lee Jones Jnr (Nov 5, 2012)

Monocrom said:


> They'll take nearly anything for a low-ball price offer that's accepted by a customer needing money for his watch.
> 
> I see far more TAG Heuers in pawn shop windows than Rolex. And by a wide margin.


I would have thought that there are simply far more Tag Heuers sold?


----------



## pz93c (Sep 29, 2007)

Usually, depending on the store, a few Rolex, couple of Tag, couple of Omega and just about every store has a couple or few Movado's.


The majority tends to be oversized, blingy fashion watches and lower priced watches... Citizen, Bulova, Invicta etc. 

However, occasionally there will be good vintage watches, too.


----------



## J.david (Dec 24, 2012)

Monocrom said:


> Higher end brands are also sold in Macy's. And not just TAG Heuers.


At the Macy's i work at we have Baume & Mercier, Tag Heuer, Longines, RW, Hamilton and a few other swiss watches...

Definitely would consider RW a luxury brand but wouldn't compare it to a Baume & Mercier. Quality is just so different.


----------



## bamagrad03 (Dec 6, 2011)

In terms of build quality, they're luxury. In terms of brand "prestige" they aren't.

If you care about getting a watch built in quality on par or exceeding a Tag, for a fraction of the price (as long as you don't pay retail), then RW is your brand. The Freelancer and Nabucco lines are top notch and compete with everything Tag makes short of a Grand Carrera.

However, RWs lower end pieces really damage its brand perception. They need more like the Freelancer chrono and less like their lower end quartz.


----------



## Phrenzy (Nov 20, 2012)

My first watch crush was on a don Giovanni cosi Grande, black chrono with tan leather. It's a superbly made watch that I now own but when I was around 16 a generous jewler let me try one on and I was instantly impressed by how well it was made, how weighty and substantial it was.

This led to some confusion after reading watch forums and seeing how RW were attacked and how much better tag or ML were I was left with the impression that these watches must be made of unobtainium, run for 10, 000 years without a service and could survive atmospheric reentry without scratch.

I constantly read from people who own RW that the build quality is equal to or better than anything they own and I think the the DGCG dual time zone, jump hour or the better nabucco chronos are equal to absolutely anything in their rrp price bracket and beats with a stick anything you can get for the grey market or second-hand price.

RW are taking steps to remedy this situation though, they've recently launched a new entry level lux primarily quartz brand called 88 rue de something or other. Hopefully this will mean a tightening of their brand because they don't get half of the kudos they deserve on this forum.


----------



## Phrenzy (Nov 20, 2012)

I forgot to add that I'm surprised that in this rarified air of elite watch collectors who are constantly marketed too with movies about lone craftsmen going blind toiling with a loupe for months over a single time piece on the tippest top of the matterhorn, that there isnt more traction in the idea that RW are special because they are a truly family owned business where the founder and man who's name is on the watch has real input on the design.


----------



## Famousname (Jun 20, 2011)

Phrenzy said:


> I forgot to add that I'm surprised that in this rarified air of elite watch collectors who are constantly marketed too with movies about lone craftsmen going blind toiling with a loupe for months over a single time piece on the tippest top of the matterhorn, that there isnt more traction in the idea that RW are special because they are a truly family owned business where the founder and man who's name is on the watch has real input on the design.


Now where I'm from, we call the above two posts "a good hide-tanning"! LOL!


----------



## vanman920 (Mar 15, 2013)

I currently have a Tango chrono and a Tango with the blue dial. The fit and finish on the watches are fantastic an comparable to watches well above their price point. They also attract a fair amount of attention and what I mean by that is people not only notice the watch but know just by the appearance that it is a quality piece. Resale is somewhat of the issue. They are not a well known brand and therefore that is the reason for the resale issue. I for one don't care to much about the resale as much as quality because I buy them to keep.


----------



## Classik (Sep 24, 2010)

Very good watches especially for the price. The parisfal model I own feels every bit as well built as my blancpain. I believe they are independent also... 

Sent from my Mobile. Please excuse any typos.


----------



## jamwires (Dec 16, 2012)

I have a RW Maestro, and in terms of build and quality, it's a cut above my Hamilton and Frederique Constant. The bracelet is great too. I would agree it's more on par with Tag Hauer or Baume in the quality department. As far as perception and resale, it doesn't seem quite at the level of Tag or Baume. But I think that's something that just might take a while. 

They're also an independent company if I'm not mistaken. There aren't many of those around anymore, it seems.

*Note - my FC is a lower model. I'm sure their manufacture pieces would be higher quality.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

Now you went and woke up the RW bashers.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

Watchbreath said:


> Now you went and woke up the RW bashers.


Grrr ... Where's my sledge-hammer?! :-d


----------



## Duder (Aug 18, 2011)

Every RW I have come across has been better quality than Tag. Then again, most watches I have come across have been better than Tag.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

Duder said:


> Every RW I have come across has been better quality than Tag. Then again, most watches I have come across have been better than Tag.


I like certain TAG Heuer models. True, RW makes nice watches. Ironically though one of the advantages for watch-lovers is that RW timepieces aren't appreciated much by the general public. A 25%-30% discount is common when buying RWs new. 40% Pre-owned. And 50% off when used but in excellent shape. I know RW isn't happy about that. But it's nice if you're an enthusiast.


----------



## Vakane (Oct 25, 2011)

Rw is as good as Tag... Tag is not as good as everyone thinks...

P.s. if you guys see the ad for the Nabucco..... You would know why they don't sell as much.... I tried poking my eyes out!!!

Their freelancer looks better than a lot of watches that are several thousand dollars more expensive and IMO it's cousin the carrera.


----------



## westlake (Oct 10, 2011)

Monocrom said:


> I like certain TAG Heuer models. True, RW makes nice watches. Ironically though one of the advantages for watch-lovers is that RW timepieces aren't appreciated much by the general public. A 25%-30% discount is common when buying RWs new. 40% Pre-owned. And 50% off when used but in excellent shape. I know RW isn't happy about that. But it's nice if you're an enthusiast.


You are being a bit too kind. Their resale values are low, probably below 50% in great condition. They stuff the retail chain and sell to just about anyone who wants an account. They are very popular in mall stores, large chains and mid-priced department stores - which diminishes overall appeal versus other brands _they want_ _to_ compete against. None of this has anything to do with quality (actual or perceived), but their ubiquitous presence in so many retail locations of varying quality doesn't make for much brand exclusivity - which is reflected in low re-sale values.


----------



## Duder (Aug 18, 2011)

Rw competes directly with Tag - go to any department store and you will find these brands side by side. Tag I believe is marketed to a younger market with casual designs, and rw more conservative dressy pieces. Rw in the past was a little stuffy, but lately the designs seem more youthful. Both rw and tag are entry level luxury brands.


----------



## bamagrad03 (Dec 6, 2011)

Duder said:


> Every RW I have come across has been better quality than Tag. Then again, most watches I have come across have been better than Tag.


I'm guessing you never held a Carrera Day/Date or a Grand Carrera (and I'm certainly no Tag apologist).


----------



## Duder (Aug 18, 2011)

Rw competes directly with Tag - go to any department store and you will find these brands side by side. Tag I believe is marketed to a younger market with casual designs, and rw more conservative dressy pieces. Rw in the past was a little stuffy, but lately the designs seem more youthful. Both rw and tag are entry level luxury brands.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

Duder said:


> Rw competes directly with Tag - go to any department store and you will find these brands side by side. Tag I believe is marketed to a younger market with casual designs, and rw more conservative dressy pieces. Rw in the past was a little stuffy, but lately the designs seem more youthful. Both rw and tag are entry level luxury brands.


Normally I don't think it hurts a brand to have ADs located inside of malls or shopping centers. Though they need to be choosy which shopping centers (Those in high-end neighborhoods) and which stores inside malls. Having Macy's as an AD doesn't seem to hurt TAG Heuer one bit. Having Wal-Mart sell their quartz watches definitely hurts RW's perception as a luxury brand.


----------



## Watch OCD (Dec 14, 2012)

i started my watch journey from swatch/casio as a kid and then my first significant purchase was a RW...back then it was considered mid-luxury (at least in my opinion)..i would say what Baume & Mercier is right now...a lil higher than Fredrique constant maybe.... i always thought Tag and RW were same level with Tag being more sporty and RW a little classy. then i handled both together and felt RW was better build quality.

then during the years...RW started trying to enter luxury...it started using precious metals and stones...jacking up prices...in a desperate attempt to be considered luxury..and thats where they got lost....and now they are not taken too seriously. 
the build quality etc, is still very good on par or maybe better than Tag IMO, but the brand image has lost its lustre....i still own a couple of RWs Quartz and Auto and they both are solid very well built watches


----------



## Charlie Music Fan (Oct 26, 2013)

Those of us concerned with the word "luxury" mostly care about what other people think of our watch and by extension us. Many of us can't aford Brietlings and Rolexes, or believe it's ridiculous to spend that much on a watch even if we can. So, I became interested in RW watches because I like the look of them a lot and because I believe they are reasonably priced compred to other Swiss brands. Is Rolex going to do a better job for me than RW? I wanted a Swiss watch because I know any of them are good brands and RW seems to fit what I'm willing to spend.


----------



## Enoran (Apr 15, 2009)

Raymond Weil is imo a entry luxury brand. Straight-up competitors with Tag & Longines. However, I do not get how RW can be considered a Fashion Brand as I have read before ...

Right here in Singapore's Marina Square Shopping Mall, you have all three mono-brand boutiques within 30 steps of one another. Maurince Lacroix & Tissot are there as well.
A good place to visit if you have the eye for some entry-level luxury eye candy.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

Used to sell all three - no.


Enoran said:


> Raymond Weil is imo a entry luxury brand. Straight-up competitors with Tag & Longines.
> Right here in Singapore's Marina Square Shopping Mall, you have all three mono-brand boutiques within 30 steps of one another. Maurince Lacroix & Tissot are there as well.
> A good place to visit if you have the eye for some entry-level luxury eye candy.


----------



## Charlie Music Fan (Oct 26, 2013)

Monocrom said:


> True. My main point though, regardless of whether or not the item is re-sold or kept, what an individual could fetch for it on the Pre-owned market is an indicator of how much of a luxury product it is considered to be. In some cases, if the majority of consumers even consider it to be a luxury product. Unfortunately RW watches just depreciate far too much after sold as New.


I'm always more interested in whether something is quality than if it's considerd luxury. They are not the same thing. Some of the "luxury" watches may not be as well constructed as some of the "quality" ones. I just bought a RW Tango quartz with a blue dial and it's easily the highest quality watch I've ever owned so I'm thrilled. I have no intention of ever re-selling any watch I've owned so resale value never concerns me. What I'm getting from this thread is that RWs are well built watches but for some reason (snobbery could be one) they lack the cache that makes them a luxury item. Most of my friends are very impressed with my piece and the difference between it and your average mainstream timepiece is huge.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

Charlie Music Fan said:


> I'm always more interested in whether something is quality than if it's considerd luxury. They are not the same thing. Some of the "luxury" watches may not be as well constructed as some of the "quality" ones. I just bought a RW Tango quartz with a blue dial and it's easily the highest quality watch I've ever owned so I'm thrilled. I have no intention of ever re-selling any watch I've owned so resale value never concerns me. What I'm getting from this thread is that RWs are well built watches but for some reason (snobbery could be one) they lack the cache that makes them a luxury item. Most of my friends are very impressed with my piece and the difference between it and your average mainstream timepiece is huge.


Welcome to WUS.

Truth is, I had a similar take on things as you do. I discovered though that even though certain brands are not a good value and are firmly in the "luxury" class ... Doesn't mean you don't get increased quality. You get quality. It's not just snobbery or snob appeal. You do usually get increased quality. You just end up paying a large premium for it AND the name printed on the dial. Just how it is with this hobby. Thus, not a good value. But increased quality in general.

Also, recognized luxury goods do indeed tend to hold their value quite well compared to non-luxury ones. And not just with watches. I'm into a variety of different pieces of EDC gear. Whether it's a pen, knife, watch, key-fob, etc.; the luxury ones just don't depreciate as steeply as the more common ones. Even when the latter tend to be very good quality too. Also, main topc of discussion in this thread is whether or not RW watches are luxury watches. I like RW. Definitely quality watches. Though from what I've seen, entry-level luxury would be a fair categorization overall.


----------



## Renaissance Reddy (Dec 22, 2012)

I've had my RW Nabucco for nearly two years now. To this day, I still don't know whether or not it's a "true" luxury brand. But what I do know is that the fit and finish on it, as well as the quality of materials used far surpasses anything I would've ever in a million years expected from this sector of the watch hierarchy. I was truly surprised at how well built and well finished every single part of it was. It might not get the looks or recognition a Tag would, but on your wrist, it'll look and feel absolutely brilliant.


----------



## Fi33pop (Aug 5, 2013)

Charlie Music Fan said:


> I'm always more interested in whether something is quality than if it's considerd luxury. They are not the same thing. Some of the "luxury" watches may not be as well constructed as some of the "quality" ones. I just bought a RW Tango quartz with a blue dial and it's easily the highest quality watch I've ever owned so I'm thrilled. I have no intention of ever re-selling any watch I've owned so resale value never concerns me. What I'm getting from this thread is that RWs are well built watches but for some reason (snobbery could be one) they lack the cache that makes them a luxury item. Most of my friends are very impressed with my piece and the difference between it and your average mainstream timepiece is huge.


I second you on the quality vs luxury. I have a Tango as well, the case is really well constructed, but the dial looks like its made of plastic.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

Yep, there're well made, but not a luxury brand.


----------



## mikegoldnj (Jun 19, 2012)

Where would you place Zenith in this hierarchy?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## sduford (Nov 24, 2013)

Depends on how you define luxury. To many people if it is not made with precious metals, very expensive, overpriced, ridiculously priced or all of the above, then it isn't luxury.

For me luxury equates more with quality, finish, design, comfort. In that case many RWs can be considered luxury.


----------



## rightrower (Feb 19, 2013)

buy what you like. period.

brand value and status is relative to company marketing as well as consumer buying their manufactured perception.

this will inadvertently influence the resale value of the watch in preowned/used market.

imagine if rw are wore by all a-listers around the world, the desirability and resale value would also go up. but if you don't like the watch, why would you buy? 

one brand comes to my mind-uboat. 

Sent from my LG-F240K using Tapatalk


----------



## Luis_Leite (Dec 31, 2013)

not sure if luxury, but my father were one for about 3 decades and only problem with the watch was the harsh treatment he gave it, so many dents on the case the gold plating started "to peel/crack", but he was and still is a 1 watch at a time man, so it was 24h a day in his wrist. He recently gave it to me and I have event created a post on it today, however in my amateur opinion ,and if you want to be picky,put the brand in the pseudo luxury watch. It will not be found in the top 10 brands or top 15, but it's still luxurious enough to be notice by colleagues and commented upon. You will most probably NOT rival Rolexs, Omegas , A Lange or Patek Philippe,but you will be a step above the average Tissot/Seiko buyer for sure, probably on par with Baume & Mercier and Oris.....



Re-enforcing the idea that I am quite the amateur and this is just an opinion.


----------



## jamwires (Dec 16, 2012)

I no longer own my RW Maestro, as I gave it to my brother. I'm almost to the point of buying my Rolex, and have been handling a LOT of watches lately before making my decision. I really think TAG Hauer is the best comparison for Raymond Weil. The finishing and casework on RW is very, very good - in fact higher than its price bracket competitors. The movement inside is fairly bland, and not that well decorated, which can also be expected for this price point.

Entry-level luxury sums up RW perfectly, but the case/dial work is above that, IMO. But again, who cares how it's this company is perceived? I can definitely tell you though, that if you buy one of their nicer pieces, you'll never get tired of looking at it. The dial on the maestro entertained me everyday.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

This has become a real zombie thread. What's the position of the Moon at the moment?


----------



## Fazzx (Feb 5, 2013)

What the take on RW now - we are entering 2016....


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

I still like the brand.


Fazzx said:


> What the take on RW now - we are entering 2016....


----------



## prairieoyster (Oct 31, 2013)

I have more expensive watches, but I have no problem wearing my Freelancer in situations that call for "luxury". I like the way mine looks, that's all that matters to me.


----------



## StufflerMike (Mar 23, 2010)

Fazzx said:


> What the take on RW now - we are entering 2016....


Wasn't luxury, isn't luxury, will not be luxury.


----------



## ev13wt (Oct 21, 2013)

If you can get up to 40% off msrp, its Invicta class.

I can't stand the name of the brand either. Can't stand chr. ward, longines, b&m, lecoultre either. Sorry. They might be nice watches but the names make me cringe.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

How about the Ikepod - Seaslug or Platypus?


ev13wt said:


> If you can get up to 40% off msrp, its Invicta class.
> 
> I can't stand the name of the brand either. Can't stand chr. ward, longines, b&m, lecoultre either. Sorry. They might be nice watches but the names make me cringe.


----------



## arcadelt (Apr 25, 2010)

...and so the thread slowly died...


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

It'll be back.


arcadelt said:


> ...and so the thread slowly died...


----------



## Veda (Sep 17, 2009)

Good gold Calatrava alternative. The public won't know...


----------



## White Bread (Oct 9, 2015)

stuffler said:


> Wasn't luxury, isn't luxury, will not be luxury.


This. Next Thread


----------



## MG18 (Jun 24, 2015)

I think some of the Maestros selling for 65-70% off brand-new at Jomashop right now are probably pretty decent buys if you plan on hanging on to them--it's a really nice looking traditional dress watch.


----------



## Sevenmack (Oct 16, 2011)

CitizenM said:


> I think if you told the average American, by which I do not mean the other doctor at your clinic or lawyer at the law firm, that you spent $500 on a watch, their head would explode. So yes, I think it's easily within luxury territory.


If I told my doctor that I spend as much as $400 on a watch, he would have me hospitalized. He wears a Caravelle from the early 2000s that has been his go-to for years. Now my old doctor, he wore a Raymond Weill Freelancer and an Omega Speedmaster, both of which got him cursed out by the missus.

As for Raymond Weill: Great watches. Not nearly as well-respected around these parts as they should be for numerous reasons, including the fact that they don't use in-house movemens; the fact that using outsourced movements has been the norm for watchmaking for most of history doesn't factor into that thinking. Weill's Maestro Moon Phase is one of the best looking watches of its type in the $1,000-to-$2,000 range. So if you like the Weill, buy it. Wear it in great health.


----------



## windupp (Sep 21, 2015)

"Now my old doctor, he wore a Raymond Weill Freelancer and an Omega Speedmaster"

Ha, ha, I've got both of those watches, too. The Freelancer is very impressive and stacks up well in build quality to the Omega. Impressively well set up and mine runs 3-4 sec/day slow whether its on its face, side or on my wrist. They do sweat the details at RW and it's a family owned company.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

The perception of luxury is mostly about marketing. Is RW a luxury watch brand?.... No.

Then again, most of the ones carrying the label "Luxury"..... Aren't either.


----------



## drhr (Mar 14, 2011)

Did we define/agree on "luxury"? If so I missed it but I'd need that b4 attempting an honest answer . . .


----------



## scosmoss (Sep 15, 2015)

jilgiljongiljing said:


> Tag has locked down on a lot of pricing flexibility and coupon usage in Macys now. A year or two ago you could combine a few coupons and walk away with a very decent discount from Macys getting all the benefits of buying from an AD. Now though they are quite strict about pricing and they dictate clearance prices as well and you cant use any coupons on those. I missed a good opportunity to pick up an Aquaracer Chronograph on clearance that I could combine a 25% off coupon with. Wasn't in a situation to buy it at that time, but I sort of wish I picked it up when I could. Now its all MSRP, and their very rare clearance watches are like 20% off retail.
> 
> I dont know which walmart had RW, I've been to lots of them until a few years ago and I've never seen one, yet I keep hearing about RW's being available in walmart. Was this something they got a batch from a clearance house or grey market discounter and not an official RW sale? I seriously doubt walmart is an authorized dealer for RW for if they were, they would be more widely available. This is like saying Oris, Bretiling, Panerai are all cheap fashion brands because you can find them in Costco. Its not reflective of the status of those brands, availablity online, or in a lower end store doesn't make a well made watch cheap all of a sudden. Its not like walmart is selling 100$ raymond weil watches, its still priced at RW pricing and its the same watch, doesnt mean a thing unless they had a seperate cheaper line for walmart alone which would dilute the brand a bit.


Costco actually strategically places their stores in upper middle class neighborhoods so not exactly an accurate comparison.


----------



## rfortson (Feb 18, 2012)

So much pomposity in this thread. To the average person a watch costs $50-$100. Ten times that is certainly luxurious for a watch, snobbery or egos aside.

RW is an honest luxury watch with nice touches for useability and looks. Of course you can spend 100x more and get much better quality, but it doesn't diminish RW or other watches in the price range. 

Sent from my HTC Desire Eye using Tapatalk


----------



## rfortson (Feb 18, 2012)

By the way, RW isn't sold at Wal-Mart like someone said (probably to "prove" it's not a luxury watch) but it is sold at Sam's Club, same as Costco. I see RW at my Sam's, right next to the Citizens, TAGs, Omegas, and Cartiers. Not sure if they are at the Costco in California that also has the Patek Aquanaut.

Sent from my HTC Desire Eye using Tapatalk


----------



## MrNurse (Oct 2, 2012)

An easy way to look at RW is to compare it to care brands. An RW is like a Buick. It's not really luxury.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

I take it that you haven't seen any ''Roadmasters" from the 50's?


MrNurse said:


> An easy way to look at RW is to compare it to care brands. An RW is like a Buick. It's not really luxury.


----------



## drhr (Mar 14, 2011)

MrNurse said:


> An easy way to look at RW is to compare it to care brands. An RW is like a Buick. It's not really luxury.


riding in anything over walking is a luxury and luxury item . . .


----------



## MrNurse (Oct 2, 2012)

Watchbreath said:


> I take it that you haven't seen any ''Roadmasters" from the 50's?


I'm referring to today's cars. Buick is nowhere near the level of Mercedes let alone a Porsche or a Maserati, etc.



drhr said:


> riding in anything over walking is a luxury and luxury item . . .


I have only owned luxury cars and I wouldn't consider a Honda a luxury car, nor would any car person. Acura is the luxury division of Honda just as Infiniti to Nissan, or Lexus to Toyota.


----------



## drhr (Mar 14, 2011)

MrNurse said:


> I'm referring to today's cars. Buick is nowhere near the level of Mercedes let alone a Porsche or a Maserati, etc.
> 
> I have only owned luxury cars and I wouldn't consider a Honda a luxury car, nor would any car person. Acura is the luxury division of Honda just as Infiniti to Nissan, or Lexus to Toyota.


yeah, ok whatever . . .


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

Well, I'm at the age now where I tend to live a lot in the past, then again, you made a 'blanket statement'.


MrNurse said:


> I'm referring to today's cars. Buick is nowhere near the level of Mercedes let alone a Porsche or a Maserati, etc.
> 
> I have only owned luxury cars and I wouldn't consider a Honda a luxury car, nor would any car person. Acura is the luxury division of Honda just as Infiniti to Nissan, or Lexus to Toyota.


----------



## MrNurse (Oct 2, 2012)

Watchbreath said:


> Well, I'm at the age now where I tend to live a lot in the past, then again, you made a 'blanket statement'.


It's a relative statement. There are many other cars of the time that are much more luxurious than a Buick. For car people, when you mention "luxury car", Buick is definitely not the brand that comes to mind. Just as when you mention luxurious watch, I don't think many people would think RW. 
I've owned Porsche's for years and when I think of the cheaper BMW, Mercedes, Audi, etc I think of them as entry-level luxury cars.
Bottomline is that RW isn't luxury to me.


----------



## drhr (Mar 14, 2011)

MrNurse said:


> It's a relative statement. There are many other cars of the time that are much more luxurious than a Buick. For car people, when you mention "luxury car", Buick is definitely not the brand that comes to mind. Just as when you mention luxurious watch, I don't think many people would think RW.
> I've owned Porsche's for years and when I think of the cheaper BMW, Mercedes, Audi, etc I think of them as entry-level luxury cars.
> Bottomline is that RW isn't luxury to* me.*


this was missing b4 but now that you insert it, good for you . . .


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

Were you around in the 50's?


MrNurse said:


> It's a relative statement. There are many other cars of the time that are much more luxurious than a Buick. For car people, when you mention "luxury car", Buick is definitely not the brand that comes to mind. Just as when you mention luxurious watch, I don't think many people would think RW.
> I've owned Porsche's for years and when I think of the cheaper BMW, Mercedes, Audi, etc I think of them as entry-level luxury cars.
> Bottomline is that RW isn't luxury to me.


----------



## nm4710 (Sep 22, 2009)

MrNurse said:


> It's a relative statement. There are many other cars of the time that are much more luxurious than a Buick. For car people, when you mention "luxury car", Buick is definitely not the brand that comes to mind. Just as when you mention luxurious watch, I don't think many people would think RW.
> I've owned Porsche's for years and when I think of the cheaper BMW, Mercedes, Audi, etc I think of them as entry-level luxury cars.
> Bottomline is that RW isn't luxury to me.


It's all subjective. I used to love Porsche but have lost all respect for the company in the last 10 years. The horrible IMS problems, the awful electric steering, the lack of decent standard equipment, and the rather mediocre performance for huge sums of cash have really turned Porsche into a poseur's car. Case in point the Mercedes AMG GT winning Motortrend's driver's car of the year. I am not lying when I say a 2016 Mustang has better steering feel than a 2016 911 (and it pains me to admit that).

Again point is...it's all subjective. Porsche was once a performance brand...now it's tried to morph into a luxury brand and has failed at both feats. Brands are constantly re-inventing themselves and perception is in the eye of the beholder.

NM


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

nm4710 said:


> the awful electric steering, the lack of decent standard equipment,


First, many of us appreciate you can buy a 911 with a minimum of extraneous stuff, but then I am no stranger to the track.

The electric steering outcry is most often coming from people who haven't driven a 991 and almost certainly haven't driven one on the track. For gosh sake I had a 911 Cup that had it before the street cars and defy anyone to argue it lacked feel. The difference is analogous to aluminum vs carbon fiber bikes when you get used to it you learn what is filtered out is what you DON'T want to feel anyway. Not such a big deal on a freshly paved track but on a track with ripples in the braking zones and especially on the street in off camber turns and pock marked pavement. The mid-corner feel is so outstanding I swear you could put lay a quarter on the apex of a turn and after running over it I could tell you if it was heads up or tails up. The feel is DIFFERENT but what you want to feel is there and more pronounced due to less "noise" in your hands and butt. Those crying heresy are the same group that hate automated manual gearboxes, while I love the interaction with a 3 pedal car there is no question I am quicker in a car with an SMG, dual clutch or a dog box. The feel is indeed there and much of the high frequency useless feedback is gone, plus less parasitic losses and less weight. People still love and worship cars like the 993 GT2 but the were horribly flawed cars in the light of the 991, especially the GT cars.

Oh and RW is not a luxury watch.


----------



## MrNurse (Oct 2, 2012)

nm4710 said:


> It's all subjective. I used to love Porsche but have lost all respect for the company in the last 10 years. The horrible IMS problems, the awful electric steering, the lack of decent standard equipment, and the rather mediocre performance for huge sums of cash have really turned Porsche into a poseur's car. Case in point the Mercedes AMG GT winning Motortrend's driver's car of the year. I am not lying when I say a 2016 Mustang has better steering feel than a 2016 911 (and it pains me to admit that).
> 
> Again point is...it's all subjective. Porsche was once a performance brand...now it's tried to morph into a luxury brand and has failed at both feats. Brands are constantly re-inventing themselves and perception is in the eye of the beholder.
> 
> NM


Don't kid yourself. A 2016 Mustang is nowhere close to the level of a 911, let alone the new 2016 911. I've driven many cars as well as a couple of Mustangs.

I don't want to turn this into a car debate but the IMS issues have been gone still 2009/2010 with the DFI engines. 
Motortrend is garbage. Look up the Evo Magazine Car of the Year 2015 video. The AMG GT S has disconnected steering feel. It ranked pretty low when compared to real DRIVERS cars. The Porsche GT4 is like God's gift to real drivers who want a pure driving car and well optioned is $100,000. It ranked first ahead of the Ferrari 488 GTB, McLaren 675 LT, Camaro Z/28, GT3 RS, Lamborghini Aventador SV, and more. It's one of the last naturally aspirated, 6-speed manual driver's car when everything else has gone automatic and turbo.
Their fit and finish is top notch. Porsche ranked highest for the third consecutive year in initial quality.

Porsche has so many amazing driver's car like the 911 GTS, 911 GT3, 911 GT3 RS, GT4, etc. They have refined their electronic steering in their top tier cars to be very responsive, direct, and accurate. The 911 variations have won multiple car of the year comparisons and other comparisons.

and much more...


----------



## ilitig8 (Oct 11, 2013)

MrNurse said:


> The Porsche GT4 is like God's gift to real drivers


Currently, there is no road legal car I lust after some track time with than a GT4. The only thing I can knock about it on paper is the rather pedestrian engine for a P-car GT. This is the car P-car enthusiasts have been begging for since the Boxster came out and really starting frothing at the mouth since the Cayman debuted.


----------



## MrNurse (Oct 2, 2012)

ilitig8 said:


> Currently, there is no road legal car I lust after some track time with than a GT4. The only thing I can knock about it on paper is the rather pedestrian engine for a P-car GT. This is the car P-car enthusiasts have been begging for since the Boxster came out and really starting frothing at the mouth since the Cayman debuted.


I've driven soooo many Porsches on the track and many cars in general. I have a heavily optioned GT4 currently being built and delivered to me in April. 

If they gave it a similar engine to the 911 GT3, it wouldn't be around $100,000 anymore. Since it's a slightly detuned 911-S engine it is very easy to gain power with headers, exhaust, and tune. 
Evo Magazine described this rather well. The GT4 beat out all the supercar competition because it's a driver's car where you can actually extract and enjoy its potential on the street. Some cars like the McLaren 675 LT are too fast for regular driving on the street where it's scary fast in 2nd gear and by the time you're in 3rd gear you'll be arrested. You'll only be able to extract just a fraction of the car's potential on the road. The fastest car isn't always the most fun and the most fun car isn't always the fastest.

Come on over to the car talk thread!


----------



## nm4710 (Sep 22, 2009)

Guys,
The point was luxury is subjective. Just as some may love Porsche and feel it's the penultimate sports car brand and others will find it overpriced and overrated. 

NM


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

rfortson said:


> So much pomposity in this thread. To the average person a watch costs $50-$100. Ten times that is certainly luxurious for a watch, snobbery or egos aside.


Sorry, but if prices themselves equaled "luxury;" every brand could simply jack up prices alone..... And claim to be a "luxury" brand.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

rfortson said:


> By the way, RW isn't sold at Wal-Mart like someone said....


The nearest Wal-Mart by me, near Roosevelt Field mall, is one of their super store locations. And yes, just awhile back, did used to sell the least expensive Raymond Weil Nabucco model. Lately, haven't seen it sold there. Seems RW realized it wasn't a good marketing move.


----------



## Monocrom (Nov 11, 2010)

nm4710 said:


> Guys,
> The point was luxury is subjective. Just as some may love Porsche and feel it's the penultimate sports car brand and others will find it overpriced and overrated.
> 
> NM


A person can point to a chair and say why a La-Z-Boy is luxurious compared to a wooden stool with three pegs for legs. Why can't the same be done with watches? It's not subjective at all with chairs. Why should it be so with watches?

Honestly, I think certain individuals don't want to admit that they can't explain to someone with a genuine interest in watches why they paid thousands of dollars, for something that is simply labeled a "luxury" watch from their favorite brand(s). They say things like the price is justified to them. When deep down, it really bothers them because they truly don't know why they paid *that* much. To them, an explanation of "I simply wanted it and can afford it" or, "I don't have to explain why I like it. I just do." Sounds reasonable. But it's not even good enough for themselves. And of course, they'll never openly admit it to others.

Best to point out anything that sets a watch apart from others. That is why we get arguments such as in-house movement vs. ETA. Ironically, that in-house movement of that limited edition watch costing 5 or 6 figures from ________, is going to die in about 20 or 30 years. Yet, that bog-standard ETA movement in a nice case is going to be easy to find parts for several decades down the road.

So is "luxury" now somewhat defined as having a useless paper-weight on your wrist a couple of decades down the road, after having paid 5 or 6 figures for it? No, hold on; that's not entirely accurate. A completely dead watch isn't going to be heavy enough to function as a paper-weight. Especially not with this idiotic ceramic watches trend. (I'm sorry, but for those of us who have knowledge and understanding of advanced ceramic formulas; it's blatantly clear why this trend in watches is idiotic.) Yet, the very same folks who genuinely can't define "luxury" as it pertains to watches, are the most vocal that theirs' are indeed in that category.

Truth is it bothers them that they fell for the marketing hype. Either that, or they don't want to admit that they have no clue why their _______ model watch is so much better than a genuinely comparable RW model. Don't want to admit that all they really have to go on is slick marketing and a really high price-tag. Two things you won't find with a Raymond Weil.

It's a lot like taking a *modern day* gold plated watch. If you scratch the surface just a tiny bit to see what lies underneath, to see how many microns of plating, of substance exists..... you're going to be horribly disappointed. That's one thing I've learned about the so-called "luxury" end of this hobby after more hours dedicated to researching it than it actually deserves.

By the way, you can tell which individuals aren't bothered by that. The ones who simply bought a watch either as a short-term investment, or those who simply bought what they liked and don't care that they bought something overpriced. Perhaps even obscenely overpriced. They wanted it, they could afford it, they bought it.... period!

Yeah, those are the ones who *aren't* going to get upset or mad as Hell by what I posted above.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

ebenke said:


> x2 - they are fashion watches.


If we're making **** up, let me jump in and say that I am batman.

Raymond Weil is a Swiss watchmaker, and one of the last independent ones.

RW significantly customizes external movements (e.g., their moon-phase complication) and their watches are extremely well made.

If we are talking about brands that do not have in-house movements as fashion watches, then many more would fall under the category.


----------



## Metlin (Dec 15, 2010)

MrNurse said:


> I have only owned luxury cars and I wouldn't consider a Honda a luxury car, nor would any car person.


I don't always feel like I'm at the top of the gene pool, except when I am reading WUS' Public Forum.


----------



## duffin123456 (Apr 9, 2014)

They're what I consider "faux luxury", similar to Frederique Constant and the likes. A decent watch from okay brand that's priced expensive and marketed well enough just to get their feet into the luxury world. 

Sent from this stupid Tapatalk app


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

Right.


duffin123456 said:


> They're what I consider "faux luxury", similar to Frederique Constant and the likes. A decent watch from okay brand that's priced expensive and marketed well enough just to get their feet into the luxury world.
> 
> Sent from this stupid Tapatalk app


----------



## UnicornW (Feb 17, 2021)

nm4710 said:


> Guys,
> The point was luxury is subjective. Just as some may love Porsche and feel it's the penultimate sports car brand and others will find it overpriced and overrated.
> 
> NM


Luxury to me denotes a nonessential item that has good design, materials and perceived value; and is pricey. Luxury items in the same category also has different prices of entry.

RW is luxury, price point is entry level, and is not exclusive. RW has a young history compared to other Swiss brands but it has its place during the Quartz crisis. And it remains an independent watch Maison passed down to legacy. Only two other Swiss brands can claim autonomy.

Ultra luxury and the snobs who attest by them have history, an elite clientele following and unattainable even for some of this forum. Even ultra luxury snobs can't even afford the item they high appraise. And most do not know the history of the brands or what other 2 Swiss brands are independent and yet discredit RW.

A Rolls Royce Phantom is psychologically desirable because it is unattainable except for the ultra rich. An Ultra Luxury item. A Mercedes S Class is less expensive than a Rolls Royce. A Lexus ES is a luxury car that is attainable. I would not consider them comparable. You do get unbelievable execution with a Rolls but it is worth at least 5 units of Lexus ES. One cannot compare a Vacheron to RW. You can compare a Vacheron to a Rolex in precious metal and say the Rolex is cheaper.

RW watches impress well made timepieces with bejeweled finishes. I held side by side a RW Tango chrono and a Formula 1 TH. The quality of the case and bracelets are comparable with RW with a more bejeweled finish. I collect RW now since I can just admire the beautiful design and execution. I also held side by side the materials and execution of a RW Freelancer with a metal bracelet and a Brietling Avenger. The finishes are not that much better in the Brietling. It also costs at least 3 units of RW Freelancers and way more if you buy grey market prices.

One word denials or curt replies to discredit arguments without explanation is just gaslighting.


----------



## UnicornW (Feb 17, 2021)

Watchbreath said:


> Well, I'm at the age now where I tend to live a lot in the past, then again, you made a 'blanket statement'.


I read your previous posts - Impresses gaslighting of a narcissist.


----------

