# Why the Hublot Hate????



## KiwiDivemaster

I am new to this forum (1 post.....) I have had the same Rolex Submariner two tone for ten years and never felt the urge to get another watch until recently.

My father's watch bug (he collects Patek/Breguets/Blancpain/Vac/Corum) has finally got a hold of me and I am wanting to branch out.

I was looking at APs but recently walked into the local Hublot store near my place (NYC) and I tried on a Hublot Big Bang all stainless steel with the standard rubber strap. It felt amazing on my arm, so well balanced, and looked great on me. I felt right at home with it on my wrist.

I talked to a buddy of who collects watches and has a Hublot F1 King Power India watch. He said he has never had any issues with it reliability wise.

I came on this forum to seek council and get people's feedback on Hublot the brand before I made a buying decision.

Look... I get Hublot isn't a Breguet and has been around since 1775, but why all the hate? Do they mechanically fall apart? Do they have horrible customer service? Are people just upset because they market through Jay-z? Do they depreciate in value so bad it has people gutted? Can somebody please school me on the Hublot hate on this forum?


----------



## Monocrom

"Hate" is a strong word. Perhaps "big dislike" would be a better term.

Two reasons I've seen mentioned on WUS are . . . Generally ugly watches at ridiculously over-inflated asking prices for what they offer. Not saying both are completely valid. Am saying that those are the two biggest answers you're likely to get for the "big dislike."


----------



## Levelman

I like the HBB myself. 
And ultimately you should wear what you like and not worry for one second what someone else thinks about it. 
Hublot builds quality watches. They won't fall apart on you, and their customer service is very good from what I understand. 
Overinflated prices? Yes. But that's not unlike many watch brands - Panerai comes to mind, though many here will find sacrilege in that statement. 

If the HBB moves you, then buy it and wear it well. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Matty01

Im not sure what Hublot offer internally, but they are expensive and I find them too busy and too gaudy... but each to his own. They are pretty polarising, but that is ok because it means there are plenty out there who love them, and are entitled to do so ... enjoy


----------



## toph

They make watches from interesting materials and designs but use pretty basic movements. I think some are very nice, would I pay pay 15k for a decent hublot. . . No chance. 7 or 8k is a bit more realistic and about right.


----------



## KiwiDivemaster

Everyone concerned, thanks for you help and insight. I am not concerned about the over inflated price (I see that in a number of companies) or people's opinions of the looks. Great to hear they don't fall apart that was my main concern . I have plenty of time to get a classic dress watch, for now I just want a fun weekend watch and this will fit the bill. Cheers all.


----------



## Kasaasta

I've had a KP Zirconium foudroyante and it was amazing. I regret selling it and I'll most likely get another one. What comes to pricing, most valuable watches are over priced. Basic AP Offshore chrono is 20000 €. Yeah... but I still want one too 
I don't like the design of all Hublot's but then again who likes all the models of one brand. No one. If you want a Hublot, you should get one. They are very nice watches and resale prices are climbing all the time. Quality is top notch too.


----------



## retrodrive

My take on this is that WUS community, including myself, is pretty geeky about watches, movements, details and history of timepieces. In general, this sort of public does not like when a brand uses a bunch of rappers to promote their product. I would also agree that they charge too much for the movements they use. That being said, I have a Big Bang simply because I like the look and it feels good to wear it to non-official fun events.


----------



## KiwiDivemaster

Thx retrodrive. So I was pretty on the mark then. No company history and gorilla brand awareness through highly visible celebs causes traditionalists to dislike Hublot. I can't blame Hublot. How else are they supposed to get their name out there quickly being relatively new and faced with power house brands in their space like AP that have been around for literarily hundreds of years?

Im with you they don't have the "specialty" movement and sophistication of a Patek but love the look. Think I'm going to pull the trigger for pure watch wearing enjoyment and look towards to my next watch for something will a little more "history".


----------



## timefleas

I like Hublot, particularly some of the Big Bangs, and actually had no knowledge of any celeb connection, not that it would have mattered. What I don't like has been stated repeatedly above--very simple movement at obscene prices, _significantly _more obscene than Panerai, Rolex and most of the other mid to high-enders. And, unfortunately, there are too many blingy, special editions that look more like something that you would expect to see on the Shopper's Channel, than in a fine watch boutique.


----------



## aksingh

I personally think HBBs look really good esp the carbon fibre dial models, but the problem many have are that for the price they have very basic movements plus it being the footballers/reality stars choice of watch makes it be seen as more of a fashion brand than watch brand by many WIS and when Mr Biver, the CEO, says he doesn't look at his watch to see the time, he has a cell for that, it doesn't help.


----------



## Monocrom

aksingh said:


> . . . and when Mr Biver, the CEO, says he doesn't look at his watch to see the time, he has a cell for that, it doesn't help.


He actually said that??

What a moronic statement.


----------



## aksingh

He said it to explain why he made the All Black and why it didnt matter if it was hard to read the time, but his watches are all about the aesthetics not the engineering.


----------



## Monocrom

aksingh said:


> He said it to explain why he made the All Black and why it didnt matter if it was hard to read the time, but his watches are all about the aesthetics not the engineering.


Plenty of other brands make all black watches. Personally, I think they look ridiculous. But at least the CEOs of those other brands are intelligent enough to come up with better answers as to why they make them.

Call me crazy, but to me a watch should be about both engineering and aesthetics. If it's only about the latter, then why even bother? A Men's bracelet can pull off the look without the engineering far better.


----------



## ToExist

Everyone is different…just buy what you like. Every brand has their haters…but your the one who is going to have to wear it…not them.


----------



## rmani

i just joined this site. looking to learn more as well. I really love the hublot look but am also concerned that it won't garner the respect rolex or omega seem to have from everyone.

what do you guys mean by movements? i am very new to watches. I own a clerc that was given to me as a graduation present a few years ago.


----------



## retrodrive

Movement is the mechanical assembly of the watch. Hublot have high quality Swiss movements but they don't make them in-house. To some it matters a lot but I could care less. If you like the look and would like a high-end name to go with it, look into Audemars Piguet Royal Oak Offshore. Personally I like the look of Hublot a lot better on my wrist. It just looks more proportionate and the attention to detail seems higher as well.


----------



## OntheRoad

aksingh said:


> He said it to explain why he made the All Black and why it didnt matter if it was hard to read the time, but his watches are all about the aesthetics not the engineering.


I was pretty neutral on Hublot until now. However, this seems like a much better reason to dislike Hublot than inflated prices and ugly designs!


----------



## Trel

M. Biver has said lots of things about watches. Everything about Hublot he says, however, always comes down to wanting to be memorable and revolutionary.

If Hublot went bust in a few years but was remembered for five hundred years as a company that pushed the boundaries, challenged convention, and permanently changed the way watches are perceived, I think he might actually be OK with that.

It's not about the movements. Breitling and IWC are respected and they use off-the-shelf motors in most of their pieces. Rolex is respected and its movements are, let's be honest, ugly tracteurs. Rolex, Breitling, and IWC are old, respected names; Hublot is not.

The 'hate' is really more of resentment, I think. A lot of traditional horology fans pay homage to the Pateks and the Breguets of the world for their history of craftsmanship. To them, Hublot just popped on the scene last Tuesday and declared itself a heavyweight.

I'll be honest, I don't like half of Hublot's designs, but then, I don't think you could like them all and not be a little cracked. I think you're supposed to love some and hate some. You're definitely not supposed to feel neutral about any of them.

The older models (MDM-era) were far subtler and even the solid gold Classic model elicits little more than a 'hey, neat.' response. Even the smaller, plainer Classic Fusions get great response from strangers. In Formula 1 terms, Hublot is very much Red Bull Racing: an immediately-successful, young team bending the rules as far as they can and getting up the nose of the Ferraris and McLarens (and their fans) of the world.


----------



## watch3

well put! I think its a gorgeous brand I just picked one up looks amazing and feels great on my wrist. I think Mr. Biver's comment is very funny and kind of true I kind of like it. These watches along with AP's and Pateks and watches in this ball park are not used to tell time they are used to emphasize prestige and class. I think if the buyers of these watches are really honest with themselves they did not buy it so they can simply know the time. And I think hublot also gives that prestige and class you would expect from a watch at that price. IMHO


----------



## Emre

nothing against the watch personally, not my style though, but a marketing fail. Especially with this one above. If you are fine associating yourself with this watch and its marketing direction, its on your cost. As for me, Hublot, is a market exercise like Invicta at higher cost with no 80% off


----------



## watch3

he wears two as a reminder of his two children,


----------



## Monocrom

watch3 said:


> . . . And I think hublot also gives that prestige and class you would expect from a watch at that price. IMHO


No offense, but when I think of "class," I don't think of an advertising campaign featuring an elderly man who looks as though he was brutalized by a sadistic manic. (Even if that elderly gentleman insisted on his picture being used for that campaign.)


----------



## Monocrom

watch3 said:


> he wears two as a reminder of his two children,


No. The actual reason is that his biggest professional rival wears GMT models almost exclusively. He also wants a watch that can track two different timezones. But instead of just getting a GMT model himself, he decided to wear two watches due to a pathetic petty rivalry thing.


----------



## Emre

watch3 said:


> And I think hublot also gives that prestige and class you would expect from a watch at that price. IMHO


I don't think so, at that price tag you get a JLC DeapSea, Reverso...which is for me and I believe for most WUS more classy, and if you like crowded dial, inhouse Breitling will still have more prestige than a Hublot in that price range.For non WIS, Rolex is ready to go also in that range, which nobody would use Hublot and Rolex in the same sentence for prestige. IMHO



Monocrom said:


> he decided to wear two watches due to a pathetic petty rivalry thing.


CEO pathetic, Ambassador pathetic


----------



## watch3

zyk1on said:


> I don't think so, at that price tag you get a JLC DeapSea, Reverso...which is for me and I believe for most WUS more classy, and if you like crowded dial, inhouse Breitling will still have more prestige than a Hublot in that price range.For non WIS, Rolex is ready to go also in that range, which nobody would use Hublot and Rolex in the same sentence for prestige. IMHO
> 
> CEO pathetic, Ambassador pathetic


Really? you think brietling gets more respect than a hublot? I would disagree, I think most would disagree also. Among my friends and I, a bunch of them have a breitling some have a Rolex but when they see my hublot they are always shocked and very impressed. It is just in another league of watches IMHO. Some rolex's rival it greatly IMO the yacht master 2 is a great piece I would choose over a hublot but the typical submariner or datejust I dont think compares to a hublot. I agree the le coutre is also very classy but it is a different type of class. I feel it is a more clean proffessional look. While the hublot gives a sporty edge. As for marketing it is in on hublots website that he wears 2 as a reminder for his two children.


----------



## Emre

watch3 said:


> Really? you think brietling gets more respect than a hublot? I would disagree, I think most would disagree also. Among my friends and I, a bunch of them have a breitling some have a Rolex but when they see my hublot they are always shocked and very impressed. It is just in another league of watches IMHO. Some rolex's rival it greatly IMO the yacht master 2 is a great piece I would choose over a hublot but the typical submariner or datejust I dont think compares to a hublot. I agree the le coutre is also very classy but it is a different type of class. I feel it is a more clean proffessional look. While the hublot gives a sporty edge. As for marketing it is in on hublots website that he wears 2 as a reminder for his two children.


watch3, I understand your reaction as a Hublot owner. Apologies if it sounded harsh, I dont mean it as an authority like archie's introduction post - i am a world wide luxury watches authority !!! -.

Those are my personal opinions, and we are here in this forum as watch enthusiasts. We love em all, and its nobodies business to judge your timepieces. You like it you wear it. Point is your opinion and you appreciate with buying and wearing it. I am just not in that opinion thats all and is my subjective opinion.At the end of course, it might have at some points to appreciate, I just am not interested in it.

About the environment in wild and spotted watches and their acceptance it varies a lot in the culture , continent you live. Here, were I am recently people have those yellow gold Rolex Daytonas, which I simply dislike big time.And when they wear it lose just to shake them to show off, to make em sit on their wrist - I just am not attracted.

Use your Hublot in good days, and don't mind my subjective opinion.


----------



## watch3

zyk1on said:


> watch3, I understand your reaction as a Hublot owner. Apologies if it sounded harsh, I dont mean it as an authority like archie's introduction post - i am a world wide luxury watches authority !!! -.
> 
> Those are my personal opinions, and we are here in this forum as watch enthusiasts. We love em all, and its nobodies business to judge your timepieces. You like it you wear it. Point is your opinion and you appreciate with buying and wearing it. I am just not in that opinion thats all and is my subjective opinion.At the end of course, it might have at some points to appreciate, I just am not interested in it.
> 
> About the environment in wild and spotted watches and their acceptance it varies a lot in the culture , continent you live. Here, were I am recently people have those yellow gold Rolex Daytonas, which I simply dislike big time.And when they wear it lose just to shake them to show off, to make em sit on their wrist - I just am not attracted.
> 
> Use your Hublot in good days, and don't mind my subjective opinion.


thanks alot my friend, Id love to read up more on movements of these watches can you direct to me a link?


----------



## Emre

Many luxury brands with Hublot are using outsourced movements and modifying them, name it their own caliber series ( Longines, Tag, Breitling, Tudor, IWC... ), mainly from Swatch Group ETA.Feel bad for Longines who has a great background but forgotten in the ETA cue to be re-positioned.It looks like nowadays it moves up with Omega though. But since ETA has anounced that it will limit the ebauche sales, some brands reacted positively and approaching their manufacture movements. Breitling has already done it, with the help of ' Kelek ' know how. Most of the watchmakers, whether had their inhouse calibers since the beginning or they have acquired other companies and their know how. Like Breitling through Kelek, like Zenith through Martel Watch Co ( from UG - the chronograph specialist), maybe Zenith won't be able to beat the Breitling-Buren-Heuer-Depraz alliance in producing the first automatic chronograph caliber in 1969, who knows.Could Omega come up with the moon watch without Lemania?Or Heuer before Tag without Leonidas, would those vintage time pieces so collectable as they are now?

Therefore is not a big deal to use imported ebauche and modify them, thats nowadays the most common practice. Not that I am an expert, just trying to learn the brand and lines I am interested in and that goes through the history. And Hublot is not in my list.If you like long reads on these topics you can start with : https://www.watchuseek.com/f2/smoke-mirrors-part-1-eta-grades-explained-458060.html#post3383841


----------



## ultramantaro

when you have multiple real or fake threads on a watch brand on this forum ... something is definitely wrong.

IMHO they are overpriced and just screams "look at me." They are for the nouveaux riches, footballers and those who prefer shelling their $ and believe in their own world of good taste. Stuff that only rappers and rock stars should wear. Then again, there are ppl who might just like how they look and their exotic case materials, though a very small %


----------



## Kasaasta

I like certain Hublot's and I've owned a KP zirconium foudroyante. Awesome watch, great craftmanship and a beautiful piece on all counts. I regret selling it but got a very good offer for it. I don't see the point in looking down on Hublot's. I'd wear one over any Rolex any day. They just don't do anything for me. Hublot's got inhouse movements so there's even less to bash. Their marketing is clever to anyone who understands marketing. 
I must say that I'm not a fan of all their models. Some do look too busy.


----------



## SlickTime

I'm not an expert by any means but if Hublot is as over priced as people say they are, and as overpriced as they appear to be, then that should be a very good and strong reason for strongly disliking them. Purchasing an expensive item should give you a feeling of satisfaction. However, purchasing an outrageously overpriced item should make you feel like you were just got robbed, and were taken for a fool. I think Rolex is overpriced as it is... if Hublot is worse I certainly wouldn't take it lightly.


----------



## Kasaasta

Usually people who can't afford things say they're overpriced. That goes to many other things as well.

I didn't feel my Hublot was overpriced since was able to buy it + I really enjoyed it. It was a beautiful watch.
On the other hand - if I would be able to buy a Sub for $500 I know I wouldn't enjoy it since can't wear a Rolex. But hey, that's just me.


----------



## Kasaasta




----------



## Monocrom

Kasaasta said:


> Usually people who can't afford things say they're overpriced. That goes to many other things as well.


Normally I would agree. But I've already noticed at least a few members posting in this topic who own much more expensive watches than what Hublot offers. And those members don't seem too impressed (based on what they've posted).


----------



## Kasaasta

Personal preference. Some like other brands because of the heritage. I really like ROO's as well. PP makes outstanding watches but I wouldn't buy one because they don't speak to me. I guess that makes them overpriced for me, if looking at price vs appeal. To someone looking to buy a watch I'd say that seek out something you like, buy it for the best possible price and don't pay too much attention to other people's opinion about the brand. If you love it, it's good.


----------



## jaross

Hublot is overpriced because for what they are you can get better. If you want something modern and unique, with different materials, different colors, and little history *(Which I FULLY respect -more so then the average Rolext to be sure!)* then why not get something with an interesting and innovative movement too?


----------



## Kasaasta

Well, I think it all comes down to personal preference. Even though your examples are different to usual watches and therefore present another level of uniqueness, I still value Hublot higher. Why? Because to me those are quite ugly. Even if they have unusual inhouse movements. The design doesn't please my eye -> I wouldn't wear them -> no value to me. I do agree that 20k is a lot for a Hublot, but it's a lot for any watch. A $50 Swatch does a better job at telling the time but that's not the point with valuable watches.


----------



## jaross

Kasaasta said:


> Well, I think it all comes down to personal preference. Even though your examples are different to usual watches and therefore present another level of uniqueness, I still value Hublot higher. Why? Because to me those are quite ugly. Even if they have unusual inhouse movements. The design doesn't please my eye -> I wouldn't wear them -> no value to me. I do agree that 20k is a lot for a Hublot, but it's a lot for any watch. A $50 Swatch does a better job at telling the time but that's not the point with valuable watches.


That makes sense to me. We have different tastes. I am a little surprised you don't like the hautlence, though, I think they can look fairly similar to Hublot.


----------



## Tictocdoc

I personally like a few of their models, big bang tourbillon skeleton comes to mind..and as for the celebrity endorsement I don't think I would ever buy a watch just because so and so has one, but I certainly would avoid buying one because so and so has one...


----------



## Trel

I don't put much stock in the "it's rubbish because it's overpriced" argument. In all honestly, effectively every luxury-leaning mechanical or quartz is overpriced, and often at a ridiculous margin.

True story: My father purchased a Rolex 5513 in 1970 for 230 bucks, which was expensive, but not cripplingly so. The 2013 version of the no-date Sub retails for 7100 usd. If Rolex pricing simply followed the rate of inflation, a no-date Sub would cost 1450 USD, give or take.

If Hublot wants to charge what they charge, more power to them. If we, as consumers, stop buying, then prices will come down until we resume buying.

I don't wear a Hublot because it's some horological triumph, I wear it because it's brash, loud, fun, cool-looking, it evinces a Devil-may-care attitude, and it's generally worn by other people who feel the same....

....wait....come to think of it: no one's truly hating on the watches themselves, just the *owners*!


----------



## Kasaasta

Trel said:


> I don't wear a Hublot because it's some horological triumph, I wear it because it's brash, loud, fun, cool-looking, it evinces a Devil-may-care attitude, and it's generally worn by other people who feel the same....
> 
> ....wait....come to think of it: no one's truly hating on the watches themselves, just the *owners*!


Well said


----------



## dreamchrono

I was never a fan of Hublot as i always thought that most of them were either too large or over the top but that was untill i recently purchased a Big Bang 41mm for a customer and fell in love with it. Its just a beautiful watch and you really have to see it in the flesh to appreciate it. I am also a fan of sport watches and rubber straps in general and this watch just looks great with the different materials and carbon fibre face. I ended up buying one for myself and havent taken it off my wrist yet. They really got it right with this model.


----------



## Watch OCD

never owned one
but have heard only good things about Hublot's
i was personally hooked on the SS Big bang and it was my dream watch.
but then Hublot over did their whole big bang promotion thing. it has 1000's of varieties of 'special editions' of the same watch
every sports team has one for example.
and that for me is a big set back. 
it has become so commercialized that i wouldnt buy it. i see 100s of fakes everywhere, and some really bad ones with broken pushers for goodness sake
this has completely ruined the image of Hublot, for me. 
although i still admire the BB design and when i see someone wearing an authentic one, 
not sure if its gonna last as long as a Rolex Sub which u previously have.
to me hublot is like POP music, u like it, its catchy but wudnt buy it


----------



## Kasaasta

Yeah, I have to agree about the million limited editions... On the other hand, AP has so many of them too. Enough is enough anyways 
I'd still buy a basic BB or one of the earlier KP's


----------



## johnperregaux

Ive got the fusion and it is alright, not worth it really. For the price Id much rather have a true classic. which I do.. lol


----------



## ElegantMess

CEO pathetic, Ambassador pathetic[/QUOTE]

You call Biver pathetic? I would read a bio first. He ran Omega, saved blancpan, resurrected AP, retired, built Hublot to the level that LVMH bought it, used the cash to buy BNB (who can make anything). Creates a 18k gold that doesn't scratch (I've seen it) what's next? Not even Nostradamus could guess that.


----------



## Emre

aksingh said:


> I personally think HBBs look really good esp the carbon fibre dial models, but the problem many have are that for the price they have very basic movements plus it being the footballers/reality stars choice of watch makes it be seen as more of a fashion brand than watch brand by many WIS and when Mr Biver, the CEO, says he doesn't look at his watch to see the time, he has a cell for that, it doesn't help.





aksingh said:


> He said it to explain why he made the All Black and why it didnt matter if it was hard to read the time, but his watches are all about the aesthetics not the engineering.


the ' pathetic ' thing was for the CEO's explanation.

And I correct you at resurrecting AP, AP's CEO for 21 years was Henri Meylan . Biver was never in AP.

He might have some success stories but c'mon, which CEO builds such an argument for a stealth watch?


----------



## iim7v7im7

*Some thoughts...*

It always amazes me how intensely strangers will engage in impassioned debates on the merits of luxury items and their makers. It's kind of silly don't ya think?

Trying to address the OP questions. Here in my experience of brand hatred in the luxury watch World. There usually is a nexus of one or more of the following attributes:

1) Companies that break historic traditions in their aesthetics
2) Companies that copy other watch companies designs
3) Companies who charge a premium for their product
4) Companies with aggressive overt marketing campaigns
5) Companies with a short history

Now, Hublot certainly a company that touches all of these elements so the fact that it incites criticism should be no surprise.

- It's use of materials is non-traditional and many designs are Avante-garde, 
- its watch designs pay homage to some Genta designs of the 1970s, 
- they are very expensive watches, 
- they use special and limited editions like running water and associate heavily with celebrities and 
- they are a young company.

Other than that, I can't think of a single reason...

It really is a tremendous success and JC Biver is indeed one of the marketing giants of the modern watch era. Today, with LVMH capitalization it is a top luxury watch producer. Their watches are about melding of uncommon materials and is very fashion forward. They have never attracted me or interested me in the least. Watches are personal accessories. They are functional pieces of man-jewelry. I wear what makes me smile and Hublot owners I am sure smile when they look upon their wrists.

My $.02


----------

