# Which watch brand has the worst reputation?



## AmirAli (Dec 26, 2011)

In the world of watches reputation is almost everything. A watch brand can make a watch that is of fantastic quality but if they have a bad past then the consumers would probably write them off. For an example seiko has a great reputation for making great affordable reliable watches. But to the high end buyers it's not the same. Even though seiko has the grand seiko line some high end buyers still see them as seikos. Which is in a way bad for seiko because their grand seiko line is great and i believe they can compete with the best from Switzerland when it comes to quality and value. But then on the other hand you have some brands that has had a bad rep from the beginning whereas seiko has a great reputation but just doesn't get much respect from the high end watch buyers. So what brands do you guys think has the worst rep?


----------



## Dakota2cSRT4 (Jan 16, 2012)

Invicta.


----------



## dbakiva (May 7, 2011)

Do we need to go there?


----------



## dualtime (Apr 29, 2008)

Invicta by far..


----------



## bluloo (Nov 24, 2008)

I think you'll get a lot of "Invicta" responses (and for good reason), but I also think it depends on who you ask (and, perhaps a bit on the context).


----------



## AmirAli (Dec 26, 2011)

bluloo said:


> I think you'll get a lot of "Invicta" responses (and for good reason), but I also think it depends on who you ask (and, perhaps a bit on the context).


I thought I would hear a lot of U-boat responses


----------



## StufflerMike (Mar 23, 2010)

Adleron

Aeromatic 1912

Akzent

Alado

Alpha

Alpha Saphir

Alvaro Amorosi

Anderson & Bryl

Andre Belfort

André Mouche

Anne Kramar

ANNO 1827 Hamburg

Ascari

Astroavia

Astron

Baumier

Baxx & Bloom

Belstaff

Bergmann

Bernadino

BOSCE

Bossart

Breytenbach

Buchner-Bovalier

Burgmeister

C. Melchers

Cacalla

Calvaneo

Cantani

Carlo Gallucci

Carlo Monti

Carucci

Cassini

Cavadini

Centia

Charles Conrad

Charles Delon

Charles Raymond

Charles Senard

Chenevard

Chevirex

Cimara

Claude Valentini

Compast

Constantin Durmont

Constantin Weisz

Davis

Decennis

DELMA

Denacci

DETOMASO

Diamstar

Divinus

Donati

Donati Firenze

EDEN

Eichmüller

Elysee

Emile-Frey

Engelhardt

Enzo Bellini

Estana

ETICA

Excellanc

Feinwerk

Firefox

FORESTIER & CIE

Francois-Rotier

Frederique Rothenberg

Gadison Stern

Galileo 1583

Gallucci

Gepetto

Glaswerk

Glaswerk Germany

Goer

Graf von Monte Wehro

Graf von Sponheim

Haas & Cie

Haemmer

Hamberg & Söhne

HARRY MASON

HB & Söhne

Heinrichssohn

Herzog & Söhne

Hindenberg

Hugo von Eyck

INSIGNUM

Ivens & Söhne

J.Wendenburg

Jacques Cantani

Jacques du Manoir

Jaragar

Jeane Melaine

Jean Jacot

Juwelis

Karl Breitner

Khamaro

Kings & Queens

Königswerk

Kronwerk

Krug-Baümen

L. DAVID & SONS

Laurine

Laurini

Lindberg & Goldmann

Lindberg & Sons

Linhart

Linnhoff & Lorenz

Lobor

LOEWENSTEIN

Louis Bolle

Louis Lobel

Louis Valentino

Louis Valon

Lucien Piccard

Lukado

Luv & Kush

Lydia David & sons

M. Johansson

Madison

Marc & Sons

Maria Giesen

Marina Militare

Matterhorn

Medor

Meisterkrone

Meisterzeit

Michel et fils

Minoir

Moneque

MONTALE Paris

Montre Noble

Montres Allison

MZI

Newton & Sons

Nexus

Nomex

Ohsen

Olipai

Olivier Witteaux

Orkina

Oskar Emil

Ottimo

Panzer

Parnis

Pascal Hilton

Perigaum

Persopolis

Phobos

Pierre Chaubert

Pierrini

PIONIER

Pizzaro 1897

PRAETORIAN

R. U. Braun

Raschke Glashütte

Reichenbach

Rene Barton

Rhodenwald&Söhne

Richtenburg

Riedenschild

Robert Frank

Rochmont

Roebelin & Graef

Romilly

Rothenschild

Röthlin

Rover & Lakes

Royal Banker Watches

Rüttli

Sachmann & Benz

Scheffler & Soehne

SMW

Stolzenberg

SWISS CODE RED

SwissStar

Tauchmeister

TAWATEC

THEOREMA

Torgoen

Trias

Triumph

UK GERMAN DESIGN

Vandenbroeck & Cie

Wagner since 1948

Wiltenbach

Windgassen

Wührer & Sons

Yonger & Bresson

Yves Camani

and

Invicta 

and now throw the stones.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

Paul Baldin, it was so bad that it's now gone, didn't stick around more than 2 years; benchmark schlock.


----------



## 80talisten (Jul 24, 2011)

I would say SEA-GULL. Very fine watches for very good prices. People see "China made" as low quality. Sad but true. Its possible I will buy a SEA-GULL watch if I find a model I really like.


----------



## 80talisten (Jul 24, 2011)

Maybe you have a point, but I buy higend Seikos for their high quality, excellent finishing and craftmanship which you wont get from a Swiss brand in the same pricerange. Yes, Swiss brands has the higher prestige but if you want a exlusive swiss timepiece and a high level of craftmanship you must get up high in price.


----------



## gagnello (Nov 19, 2011)

Wow Mike. Oh, and Hublot for my 2 cents.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

It grinds my teeth to see Lucien Piccard there, then again, it's now a 'zombie brand'.


stuffler said:


> Adleron
> 
> Aeromatic 1912
> 
> ...


----------



## hpark21 (Oct 8, 2007)

80talisten said:


> I would say SEA-GULL. Very fine watches for very good prices. People see "China made" as low quality. Sad but true. Its possible I will buy a SEA-GULL watch if I find a model I really like.


Among the so called WI(S), Sea-gull has very good reputation.
(I have a friend who LOVE his watch).

So, I don't know what you are talking about.


----------



## Janne (Apr 16, 2007)

AmirAli said:


> In the world of watches reputation is almost everything. A watch brand can make a watch that is of fantastic quality but if they have a bad past then the consumers would probably write them off. For an example seiko has a great reputation for making great affordable reliable watches. But to the high end buyers it's not the same. Even though seiko has the grand seiko line some high end buyers still see them as seikos. Which is in a way bad for seiko because their grand seiko line is great and i believe they can compete with the best from Switzerland when it comes to quality and value. But then on the other hand you have some brands that has had a bad rep from the beginning whereas seiko has a great reputation but just doesn't get much respect from the high end watch buyers. So what brands do you guys think has the worst rep?


Seen from a WIS point of view, or the Average Joe point of view?


----------



## AmirAli (Dec 26, 2011)

stuffler said:


> Adleron
> 
> Aeromatic 1912
> 
> ...


Talk about putting brands on blast!


----------



## dkouzou (Jun 10, 2008)

@stuffler,mike... where did that list come from?


----------



## 80talisten (Jul 24, 2011)

hpark21 said:


> Among the so called WI(S), Sea-gull has very good reputation.
> (I have a friend who LOVE his watch).
> 
> So, I don't know what you are talking about.


Yes I know but I think in general people dont see Sea Gull watches as "high quality" there are more ignorant watch buyers than the skilled ones.


----------



## hpark21 (Oct 8, 2007)

80talisten said:


> Yes I know but I think in general people dont see Sea Gull watches as "high quality" there are more ignorant watch buyers than the skilled ones.


I think there are difference between having "No reputation" and "Bad reputation".

You gotta have reputation to have bad reputation IMHO.

Sea-Gull has no reputation (since people won't know what brand that is - actually, Chinese people do).


----------



## hpark21 (Oct 8, 2007)

dkouzou said:


> @stuffler,mike... where did that list come from?


I believe that is a list published by a watch magazine (or something like that) which claimed that they won't do a review of these so called "black listed" brands.


----------



## Formerguide (Apr 12, 2011)

Might I suggest that quoting a 7" post for a one sentence comment is somewhat gratuitous? My iPad and browser thanks you in advance. ;-)

Dan


----------



## bluloo (Nov 24, 2008)

Instead of just quoting mike's entire post, maybe the next person, with 
the inclinaton, could quote the entire thread...


----------



## dbakiva (May 7, 2011)

stuffler said:


> Adleron ... Invicta, (et. al.)


Good thing none of these were on my "to buy" list.


----------



## baronrojo (Jul 14, 2010)

These threads are pointless...hang out here and just figure it out. I think the large majority of us have learned which brands to stay away from without even asking. The same way you learn what is respectable you also learn what isn't.


----------



## NutellaBear (May 13, 2007)

stuffler said:


> and now throw the stones.


Wow, what a comprehensive list!

Can I add Rolex? Just for fun.


----------



## gettingstarted (Feb 2, 2012)

fossil. even the jersey shore guys look down at it


----------



## loki_the_bubba (Jan 12, 2012)

Dakota2cSRT4 said:


> Invicta.


Dammit, I'm wearing my Invicta right now. A c.1949 Invicta that I wear ironically.

No, seriously, it's pretty cool.


----------



## mpalmer (Dec 30, 2011)

80talisten said:


> Yes I know but I think in general people dont see Sea Gull watches as "high quality" there are more ignorant watch buyers than the skilled ones.


I would not put Seagull on this list. If you have heard of them you are either WIS or you live in China If you live in China, you know they are legit. If you are WIS you know they are legit. If you are average Joe and have never heard of them, you don't think they have a bad reputation, you've just never heard of them.

I don't think your reasoning for putting Seagull on the list is sound. While the average person has not heard of Seagull, they also haven't heard of Oris, Nomos, Ulysse Nardin, or A. Lange & Sohn either. I would estimate that outside of Tag Heuer, Rolex, Omega, and perhaps (and semi-surprisingly) Cartier and Gucci most average North Americans would not associate any watch brands with excellence. In many cities, you cannot even find a sizable percentage of brands discussed here at a retailer.

If you show up in say, Omaha, the average person would not recognize your Audemars Piguet, JLC, or Breguet from any nice watch you could buy at a mall department store. They would glance at it and think that it looks nice without having any idea of the thousands you paid.

Watch brand awareness is much lower in North America than Europe. If they are not WIS, most have no idea what you are wearing. The same that could be said of Seagull could be said of many brands that cost thousands.


----------



## Formerguide (Apr 12, 2011)

gettingstarted said:


> fossil. even the jersey shore guys look down at it


Wow, possibly the most damning critique possible, LOL...

Dan


----------



## akasnowmaaan (Jan 15, 2012)

Formerguide said:


> Might I suggest that quoting a 7" post for a one sentence comment is somewhat gratuitous? My iPad and browser thanks you in advance. ;-)
> 
> Dan


Oh c'mon, an iPad you can just 'fling' the screen down and you're fine. :-D

The list is great. It's exactly like 'BikesDirect' is in the bike world. They bought up a bunch of old brands and now release ridiculously cheap stuff with them. Their saving grace is they don't try to make the bikes look like the old ones - they're just taking advantage of SEO.


----------



## Popoki Nui (Oct 8, 2008)

loki_the_bubba said:


> Dammit, I'm wearing my Invicta right now. A c.1949 Invicta that I wear ironically.
> 
> No, seriously, it's pretty cool.


BIG difference between Invicta then, and Invicta now! Same name, that's all.

~Sherry.


----------



## Bahoomba (May 1, 2010)

I'll just say I highly agree with the first 15 or so posts here.


----------



## TK-421 (Mar 11, 2010)

i haven't heard of any of these, except invicta.



stuffler said:


> Adleron
> 
> Aeromatic 1912
> 
> ...


----------



## NutellaBear (May 13, 2007)

TK-421 said:


> i haven't heard of any of these, except invicta.


Dude! Trim your posts! Sheesh...


----------



## gagnello (Nov 19, 2011)

mpalmer said:


> I would not put Seagull on this list. If you have heard of them you are either WIS or you live in China If you live in China, you know they are legit. If you are WIS you know they are legit. If you are average Joe and have never heard of them, you don't think they have a bad reputation, you've just never heard of them.
> 
> While the average person has not heard of Seagull, they also haven't heard of Oris, Nomos, Ulysse Nardin, or A. Lange & Sohn either.


Sorry, but seagull is not in the same league as Nomos and a comparison with Lange is just plain obsurd. Just my opinion of course.


----------



## Steelhead (Jan 30, 2011)

gagnello said:


> Sorry, but seagull is not in the same league as Nomos and a comparison with Lange is just plain obsurd. Just my opinion of course.


To *you* they're not in the same league. To someone who doesn't spend all their free time thinking about watches, they are: the "I've never heard of them" league. That's the point.


----------



## chiko323 (May 28, 2009)

NutellaBear said:


> Wow, what a comprehensive list!
> 
> Can I add Rolex? Just for fun.


But since we're talking about reputation here, wouldn't Rolex have an excellent reputation especially among non WIS?


----------



## bigvatch (Sep 25, 2007)

stuffler said:


> Montres Allison


oh yeah Montres Allison
Invicta doesn't even compare to the level of negative publicity and hate this outfit got and still apparently gets despite being out of operation for some time now.

It's pretty comical
Montres Allison | Facebook


----------



## solesman (Dec 3, 2009)

Hublot.


----------



## Blue bird (Feb 11, 2009)

I gotta go with the other couple of guys who said it here; Hublot for sure.


----------



## James Haury (Apr 10, 2008)

Any Feiko or Fauxlex.


----------



## StufflerMike (Mar 23, 2010)

hpark21 said:


> I believe that is a list published by a watch magazine (or something like that) which claimed that they won't do a review of these so called "black listed" brands.


Mostly identical with a list of a watchmaker regarding watches he is not taking in for repairs.


----------



## Time Talker (Apr 20, 2012)

stuffler said:


> Adleron
> 
> Aeromatic 1912
> 
> ...


Hmmm, I see that SWISS LEGEND isn't mentioned on that list. Does that mean it doesn't qualify as a watch with a bad reputation, or is it not worth mentioning as a brand?


----------



## StufflerMike (Mar 23, 2010)

Time Talker said:


> Hmmm, I see that SWISS LEGEND isn't mentioned on that list. Does that mean it doesn't qualify as a watch with a bad reputation, or is it not worth mentioning as a brand?


Oh well....



> All Swiss Legend watches are meticulously crafted to exacting standards and feature the highest quality Swiss Movements. Combine this with over 2,000 combinations of styles, materials and functions, and you have a watch collection that offers unparalleled quality, variety, style and functionality.


...that's advertisement at its best. "Swiss Automatic" can be read on some dials which isn't lawful according to FHS. On the outside of the watch may only appear the "mouvement suisse" or "Swiss movement" indication. "Swiss automatic" is just nothing and a violation of Section 3 § 3 OSM which requires that the word "movement" appear in full, and be written in the same type-face, of identical size and colour, as the word "Swiss".


----------



## jstroh (Nov 7, 2009)

Let's get this thread back on topic. Or are people afraid to go out on a limb?

I will: Crux.

Not because of poor quality but because there are many here who believe the company took advantage of the case dispute that SAS had with the manufacturer. There was a time when the name Crux was seen as some contagion.

I'm surprised, considering the piling on that's going on in another thread that no one has said Kobold. Prices too high; use of explorer, military, law enforcement too brazen; owner's take on this all too transparent. That's what's being said, at least.

There have been others that have introduced watches that have immediately been ridiculed as "catalog," such as Sonic. But some of those companies have come and gone so most people no longer even consider them viable.

If I think hard enough, I may be able to add a few. I second the suggestions of Hublot and Invicta, but enough said about the latter.

Any other brave souls?

Edit: Just remembered another not held in high regard around here: Bell & Ross.


----------



## Time Talker (Apr 20, 2012)

stuffler said:


> Oh well....
> 
> ...that's advertisement at its best. "Swiss Automatic" can be read on some dials which isn't lawful according to FHS. On the outside of the watch may only appear the "mouvement suisse" or "Swiss movement" indication. "Swiss automatic" is just nothing and a violation of Section 3 § 3 OSM which requires that the word "movement" appear in full, and be written in the same type-face, of identical size and colour, as the word "Swiss".


Thanks for the feedback, you seem to be critiquing the claims made by SWISS LEGEND regarding terminology it uses in describing its watches. But I'm asking about its actual quality as a time piece. Is it a good quality watch? Well made? Reliable? In your opinion, or is it a cheaply made watch that exaggerates its quality of workmanship and overstates its value?


----------



## StufflerMike (Mar 23, 2010)

Time Talker said:


> Thanks for the feedback, you seem to be critiquing the claims made by SWISS LEGEND regarding terminology it uses in describing its watches. But I'm asking about its actual quality as a time piece. Is it a good quality watch? Well made? Reliable? In your opinion, or is it a cheaply made watch that exaggerates its quality of workmanship and overstates its value?


Well, I am not talking about the use of the right or wrong terminology. I am talking about not telling the customer the truth, prentending something it is not, and you ask about quality ? But for your convenience: I do not think it is a quality watch. Members here stated it is. To each his own though. However it does not overstate its value. You get a Swiss Legend for 100 bucks (and more) and that's what it is probably worth.

https://www.watchuseek.com/f71/swiss-legend-quality-186505.html

One last plea: Please read the Sticky on INQUIRIES what to post over there.


----------



## Time Talker (Apr 20, 2012)

stuffler said:


> Well, I am not talking about the use of the right or wrong terminology. I am talking about not telling the customer the truth, prentending something it is not, and you ask about quality ? But for your convenience: I do not think it is a quality watch. Members here stated it is. To each his own though. However it does not overstate its value. You get a Swiss Legend for 100 bucks (and more) and that's what it is probably worth.
> 
> https://www.watchuseek.com/f71/swiss-legend-quality-186505.html
> 
> One last plea: Please read the Sticky on INQUIRIES what to post over there.


Thanks for the input, I appreciate all opinions since I couldn't find a specific forum dedicated to SL here. I was wondering why that was when the brand seems to share a fair segment of the market place.


----------



## KCWrist (Apr 12, 2012)

To be fair to Hublot, I find the design not entirely my speed but Jean Claude Biver is very nice to new owners on TZ and always offers extended warranty to those who post up their new watches. A lot of owners also claim excellent customer service with repairs and such. I will say for the amount they charge Hublot wouldn't be my choice, but I'd take some of JCBs famous cheese.


----------



## John MS (Mar 17, 2006)

Rolex.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

Well, that's one way to stir the pot.


John MS said:


> Rolex.


----------



## TristanZ (Jul 2, 2010)

Why not just say anything not designed and manufactured by white people in Europe and get it over with.

Oh, and that "list" that's been posted in this thread? Find the guy's site and read why those watches are blacklisted. It has nothing to do with quality (he says he hasn't touched any of them) and everything to do with his delicate (and somewhat overdeveloped) "ethical" sensibilities.

Pure WIS B.S.

The Seagull MS177 I owned kept COSC time from Day One until I sold it (months later). Only my Explorer II has matched it, and it remains the only watch I ever regret selling.


----------



## gagnello (Nov 19, 2011)

Steelhead said:


> To *you* they're not in the same league. To someone who doesn't spend all their free time thinking about watches, they are: the "I've never heard of them" league. That's the point.


A little too fired up don't you think? I did say "Just my opinion of course". Your first sentence is kind of reiterating what I said.


----------



## NutellaBear (May 13, 2007)

TristanZ said:


> Why not just say anything not designed and manufactured by white people in Europe and get it over with.


No one here is saying that in the slightest. Many respect Seiko, Citizen, Orient, Sandoz, and yes, Sea-Gull and other Chinese brands. Lack of respect comes from either bad business practices or duplicitous behavior. A family sets up shop in Florida (Swiss Watch International), invents a brand with a foreboding Swiss name (Swiss Legend), claims to create "timepieces steeped in tradition, design, and versatility", claim to implement "old world precision and accuracy", and then goes to China to source and build their watches without ever saying so is duplicitous behavior. The same outfit then victimized more than one genuine and Innovative Swiss watch company (I personally will never forget what they did to Pierre Nobs and Ventura S.A.) is a concrete example of bad business practices. You end up with a bad reputation.

You have another individual that buys a name and the ruins of a fabled Swiss brand (Gevril) and then claims to have been making watches since 1758 is duplicitous. He goes on to claim there are parts remaining on hand to build just a few of an original Gevril design (First Generation Gevril) and then eight years later is still selling these same few remaining parts is a bad business practice seeking to dupe buyers. You leave watch buyers duped into spouting the party line on watch collector boards that "this particular model is made from 1st gen. parts that Sam Friedman owner of Gevril found and put to use...I have a silver dial and they are sweet...all hand made/guilochet dials,custom cases". This is a dishonest business practice and you end up with a bad reputation.

At least that is the way I see it....


----------



## NutellaBear (May 13, 2007)

KCWrist said:


> To be fair to Hublot, I find the design not entirely my speed but Jean Claude Biver is very nice to new owners on TZ and always offers extended warranty to those who post up their new watches. A lot of owners also claim excellent customer service with repairs and such. I will say for the amount they charge Hublot wouldn't be my choice, but I'd take some of JCBs famous cheese.


Biver is so nice he even offers Hublot warranties to owners of fake Big Bangs!


----------



## mpalmer (Dec 30, 2011)

gagnello said:


> Sorry, but seagull is not in the same league as Nomos and a comparison with Lange is just plain obsurd. Just my opinion of course.


I am not saying they are equivalent at all. It is quite obvious they are not. I am only pointing out that the average person hasn't heard of Nomos or Lange anymore than they have heard of Seagull. The typical non WIS would glance at them and think they were nice. That impression would be the same for a Seagull or a 10k watch. Therefore, it would be silly to include Seagull in a conversation of watches that have "the worst reputation." Those who are educated about them are aware that they are not poorly made. Those who do not know about them would simply think 'it's nice' in the same way they would think about the much more expensive brands you seem to prefer.


----------



## gagnello (Nov 19, 2011)

NutellaBear said:


> (I personally will never forget what they did to Pierre Nobs and Ventura S.A.)


What did they do?


----------



## NutellaBear (May 13, 2007)

gagnello said:


> What did they do?


Long story short, Pierre Nobs founded Ventura and had the rights to Ventura Worldwide except for the U.S. because of the Hamilton Ventura watch. Swatch buys the Hamilton ruins but is left with a problem because one of the most valuable assets of Hamilton, the Ventura watch, has a trademark limitation. Pierre works with Swatch and they come to an agreement that they will share the name and Swatch will use Hamilton Ventura and Pierre will use Ventura Design on Time as trademarks.

Pierre is very innovative and comes up with a number of unique designs and patented technology, like the scrolling LED display. He is encourage by investors to expand his offerings and he takes stake money from these investors. Then 2007 happens and the economic downturn. The investors get cold feet and withdrawal their funding. Pierre has a big problem because he has already invested in the expansion. Pierre has to declare the company insolvent and it goes before the court for liquidation. He has enough funding to bring the company out of the insolvency and pick up where he left off. SWI however bids up the price for the assets and buys the company out from under Pierre.

This was unnecessary and a scumbag thing to do because SWI at the time had no real vision on how to keep the company going and mostly wanted the trade names and to capitalize off of Pierre's pioneering work and patents. If Pierre was going to walk away it would have been one thing, but he had a passion for watches and was trying to bring the company back to life after a series of unfortunate events. Pierre is heartbroken and bums around for a while, designing some other things -- men's belts I think which is pretty low for someone passionate about watches.

Karma comes back to SWI however, because Swatch declares the original agreement they had with Pierre is null and void because of the liquidation. Swatch launches a barrage of lawyers towards SWI. SWI has no choice but to shut down Ventura and have a fire sale on all the remaining product to try and recoup some of their investment. Thank you Mr. Hayek!

Pierre finds a new investors (Braun GmbH I think, going from memory here) and is able to get the name back from SWI. I think Braun wants Pierre's help with the LED technology he developed. Pierre is able to relaunch the company like he should have been able to do in the first place. And Ventura Design on Time is back and he is now introducing new designs and innovative technology again. He has got a new Sparc model coming out with a mechanical movement running a LED scrolling display.

Phew, that was going to be the shortened version! Sorry, but I like Ventura and I appreciate innovative people.


----------



## NutellaBear (May 13, 2007)

stuffler said:


> Mostly identical with a list of a watchmaker regarding watches he is not taking in for repairs.


Mike, is this the TrustedWatch blacklist or some other source? Just curious, want to read about it.


----------



## Verdict (Nov 3, 2011)

I feel that Grand Seiko is going to grouped with the budget "Seiko" as long as they share the name, unfortunately. Some may find this to their advantage however. 

Off topic but we've all seen the blacklist post in this thread. For all that is mechanical and quartz, please do not quote it, no matter the length of your response, thanks.


----------



## gagnello (Nov 19, 2011)

mpalmer said:


> I am not saying they are equivalent at all. It is quite obvious they are not. I am only pointing out that the average person hasn't heard of Nomos or Lange anymore than they have heard of Seagull. The typical non WIS would glance at them and think they were nice. That impression would be the same for a Seagull or a 10k watch. Therefore, it would be silly to include Seagull in a conversation of watches that have "the worst reputation." Those who are educated about them are aware that they are not poorly made. Those who do not know about them would simply think 'it's nice' in the same way they would think about the much more expensive brands you seem to prefer.


Well said. I understand now. You are right.


----------



## gagnello (Nov 19, 2011)

NutellaBear said:


> Long story short, Pierre Nobs founded Ventura and had the rights to Ventura Worldwide except for the U.S. because of the Hamilton Ventura watch. Swatch buys the Hamilton ruins but is left with a problem because one of the most valuable assets of Hamilton, the Ventura watch, has a trademark limitation. Pierre works with Swatch and they come to an agreement that they will share the name and Swatch will use Hamilton Ventura and Pierre will use Ventura Design on Time as trademarks.
> 
> Pierre is very innovative and comes up with a number of unique designs and patented technology, like the scrolling LED display. He is encourage by investors to expand his offerings and he takes stake money from these investors. Then 2007 happens and the economic downturn. The investors get cold feet and withdrawal their funding. Pierre has a big problem because he has already invested in the expansion. Pierre has to declare the company insolvent and it goes before the court for liquidation. He has enough funding to bring the company out of the insolvency and pick up where he left off. SWI however bids up the price for the assets and buys the company out from under Pierre.
> 
> ...


Now that was a history lesson! Thanks for the summary. That does seem to be an extremely douchey thing to do for sure.


----------



## John MS (Mar 17, 2006)

Watchbreath said:


> Well, that's one way to stir the pot.


Consider the way Rolex watches are perceived by some. The reputation of Rolex watches is determined by how those watches are perceived by others. I can think of no other brand that has such a wide divergence in reputation. To some of us they are indeed classically styled superlative chronometers while to others they are ostentatious wrist jewelery of a dated design.


----------



## Seiko_Licker (Feb 17, 2012)

So far I have only 2 watch brands for which their reputation or my experience with would lead me to never make another purchase from them. They are:

Invicta (Reputation), and
Tissot (Experience + Reputation)

I would also hesitate to purchase any watch from a company that makes other things (I.E. clothes or shoes). Apart from that, there are a few other brands that I tend to shy away from, but this is more due to styling choices than anything else.


----------



## bartonmlee (Apr 25, 2012)

i agree with the perception of watches. i knew nothing about watches before i went on a limb and bought invicta 4561 263/500 and been a fan ever since, even never had an 
issue with customer service, although i've heard how bad they are sometimes but says the same for all brands and seems to cycle in complaints.............just as well for other
brands.


----------



## jilgiljongiljing (Jun 20, 2011)

The Seiko comment is valid IMO. Sure, not worthy of being called worst reputation, but unfortunately to the non WIS eye, a Seiko is a Seiko, the watch they see in the mall, the watch they consider cheap and affordable and nothing special compared to the big boys. This is a real unfortunate perception for Seiko because everyone who has owned one knows their higher end lines match up to quality and in some cases exceed the quality of the big names, but show it to a random person at work and they arent going to take a second glance because they will dismiss it at being just a Seiko, one of the watches they can pick up in the mall for a nice discount.

As for worst reputation, I believe Invicta is going to be popular on that list, deserved? maybe not, there are some qualities to a Invicta for their price point (after discounts) that are still better than your average fashion brand mall watch. Regarding Swiss Legend, well they are well made for the sale prices they go for, fall roughly in Invicta territory, but they have some unique designs I suppose, yes they are hugely inflated when it comes to MSRP, and they don't quite have the rep of similarly priced brands (MSRP wise), but again, considering their price point after easily available discounts, you do get a well made watch. For example, I saw a 60$ SL watch yesterday, yes it was a ridiculous sale of 90%+ off, but it had an SS bracelet with solid links, good SS build on the case, luminous markers, and a Ronda movement, and for 60 bucks, its better than most of the stuff you can pick up for 60 bucks in a mall.


----------



## CitizenM (Dec 9, 2009)

I love all the threads that start "I've got nothing against Seiko, but although Seiko makes a huge variety of models that meet my specifications, I don't want anything from Seiko or Japan for undisclosed reasons."

They even seem to indicate they're aware that Seiko is one of the best watch companies in the world, which makes me wonder what would cause them to universally swear them off in the first place. Perhaps racism? That's just my speculation...I'm not sure.


----------



## Bahoomba (May 1, 2010)

Myself and a friend who also is a member at various sites both know a buy who works for one of the big retail watch chains, maybe the only retail chain that sells high-end stuff. The salesman's store used to carry SL and he honestly considered them a good bang for the buck in a sports watch. Like you, jil, I think they make a decent low-priced watch. Nothing worth killing the brand over.

Just to be a little more expressive: I have never read so many complaints about poor customer service and shoddy workmanship than I have with Invicta. There's an argument that "they sell more, so they get more returns," but that's wishful thinking from their most ardent fan boys. Any jeweler worth his or her salt will tell you the score - either that or turn you away, because most worthy jewelers won't touch Invicta product for repairs in the first place because its well documented that repair parts don't exist far too often.


----------



## MWR1973 (Mar 9, 2010)

gettingstarted said:


> fossil. even the jersey shore guys look down at it


I'll disagree, I think Fossil fills their corner of the market quite nicely. I bought a fossil 12 years ago for 90 bucks and it hasn't had a single problem except changing the battery. And for 10 years it was the only watch I had. It keeps time as well as my swiss quartz movements. They are cheap good looking fasion watches.

If the Jersey shore guys became the brand ambassador for Hamilton I would sell mine.


----------



## myke (Jan 19, 2012)

how about Stuhrling original. Now there is a piece of work


----------



## 29dryden29 (Apr 3, 2012)

stuffler said:


> Adleron
> 
> Aeromatic 1912
> 
> ...


Out of curiosity why do you list this brand? I just picked one up for cheap over the weekend and so far it seems to be pretty decent but then again it is only 5 days old. What gives this one a bad name/reputation?


----------



## steve855 (Jan 18, 2012)

29dryden29 said:


> Out of curiosity why do you list this brand? I just picked one up for cheap over the weekend and so far it seems to be pretty decent but then again it is only 5 days old. What gives this one a bad name/reputation?


Out of curiosity, why repost the whole list AGAIN?


----------



## 29dryden29 (Apr 3, 2012)

steve855 said:


> Out of curiosity, why repost the whole list AGAIN?


I like to go against the grain lol.


----------



## dcdude (Apr 29, 2012)

Based upon their styles, I was going to specifically ask if the cast of Jersey Shore and the Ed Hardy D-bag Nation ("EHDN") gravitated toward Invicta. If they reject Fossil, I'm going to guess "F-yeah!" 

That is, of course, until they can afford that first used Rolex Sub, the choice of new money the world over


----------



## Seele (Jan 9, 2010)

OK, I'll bite: it was a long time ago but I would nominate Sinclair Radionics' "Black Watch".

Planet Sinclair: Other Products: The Black Watch


----------



## Ozy (Aug 10, 2009)

Tag heuer...for their use of eta and pricing vs discount structure....really?

Sometimes the credibility of the opinions which perpetuate the memes that embody the reputation are just as questionable.


----------



## Seiko_Licker (Feb 17, 2012)

Ozy said:


> Tag heuer...for their use of eta and pricing vs discount structure....really?
> 
> Sometimes the credibility of the opinions which perpetuate the memes that embody the reputation are just as questionable.


I don't particularly like TAG, nor do I agree with their pricing structure, but I have to ask - what is wrong with using ETA? Many good watch brands use ETA and put out very nice, respectable pieces. ETA is a good reliable workhorse that can be serviced by pretty much anyone... even Breitling uses it in many models if I am not mistaken, and their prices are generally higher than TAG.

If TAG were using unfinished, standard grade ETA I can see how that may be a problem considering their price point, but this doesn't seem to be the case.

Even so, I think TAG uses Selita now instead of ETA, which IMO is a step down, and their prices stayed the same (maybe even rose..?). If one would be to berate TAG for anything, it would be this and the recent Aquaracer-crown stripping issue.


----------



## Ozy (Aug 10, 2009)

I should have been clearer. I own a Tag, the Aquaracer 500m...it is my equally favourite watch, it had a 26 jewel Selitta movement and it is every bit as good as my Omega...

And i bought it from an AD with very minimal discount.

My above post was my interpretation of the way others judge TAG Heuer, their use of ETA or in this case Selitta and their pricing structure...and is not a reflection of my opinion.

Selitta works great... Im again really unsure what the issue is there. Thats another thread though.



seoulseeker said:


> I don't particularly like TAG, nor do I agree with their pricing structure, but I have to ask - what is wrong with using ETA? Many good watch brands use ETA and put out very nice, respectable pieces. ETA is a good reliable workhorse that can be serviced by pretty much anyone... even Breitling uses it in many models if I am not mistaken, and their prices are generally higher than TAG.
> 
> If TAG were using unfinished, standard grade ETA I can see how that may be a problem considering their price point, but this doesn't seem to be the case.
> 
> Even so, I think TAG uses Selita now instead of ETA, which IMO is a step down, and their prices stayed the same (maybe even rose..?). If one would be to berate TAG for anything, it would be this and the recent Aquaracer-crown stripping issue.


----------



## weaverthebeaver (Jan 22, 2012)

Rolex

Sent from my HTC Sensation Z710e using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Nebuchadnezzar (Nov 1, 2010)

Casio has a bad rep with me. 

Got a DW-5600j after hearing about how tough G-shocks are. LCD screen started fading after owning the watch just over a year. Tried replacing the special battery and the problem persisted. Casio only gives the watch a 1 year warranty (you would think they would have more faith in such a reliable and indestructible product) so no luck there. Further research lead me to discover that they use relatively cheap LCD displays in watches they charge well over a hundred dollars for.


----------



## geoffbot (Mar 12, 2011)

On this board it's obviously Invicta. Not that I fully understand why, aside from their ludicrous RRPs. 

We need to find a new (or at least additional) victim; I'm bored of bashing Invicta now.


----------



## Donut (Aug 27, 2007)

Time Talker said:


> Thanks for the input, I appreciate all opinions since I couldn't find a specific forum dedicated to SL here. I was wondering why that was when the brand seems to share a fair segment of the market place.


As has been pointed out before Swiss Legend is neither Swiss nor a Legend, discuss.


----------



## geoffbot (Mar 12, 2011)

Donut said:


> As has been pointed out before Swiss Legend is neither Swiss nor a Legend, discuss.


Maybe they're being ironic.


----------



## AmirAli (Dec 26, 2011)

geoffbot said:


> On this board it's obviously Invicta. Not that I fully understand why, aside from their ludicrous RRPs.
> 
> We need to find a new (or at least additional) victim; I'm bored of bashing Invicta now.


I'm so surprised that no one has mentioned u-boat


----------



## johnj (Apr 13, 2006)

jilgiljongiljing said:


> The Seiko comment is valid IMO. Sure, not worthy of being called worst reputation, but unfortunately to the non WIS eye, a Seiko is a Seiko, the watch they see in the mall, the watch they consider cheap and affordable and nothing special compared to the big boys. This is a real unfortunate perception for Seiko because everyone who has owned one knows their higher end lines match up to quality and in some cases exceed the quality of the big names, but show it to a random person at work and they arent going to take a second glance because they will dismiss it at being just a Seiko, one of the watches they can pick up in the mall for a nice discount.


Unfortunately, if a watch is not a Rolex, your average person at work might think your Omega is a lower quality brand than a Seiko.


----------



## alexlobov (Feb 4, 2013)

First time poster and felt like this would be a cute thread to rekindle if anyone else is interested.

As someone who is fairly new to the watch obsession, I found this thread super interesting because, to a non-watch-obsessed, the difference in branding can be so important to the success of a watch company and how readily it is adopted by the likes of both watch geeks and the unwashed masses alike. 

Upon starting out on page 1 of this thread I assumed it would devolve into another argument over the relative merits of China-made movements, especially after that long list of brands was posted, many of which were Germasian and the like. I was surprised that this did not happen.

I'm also surprised that there were only a few trolls that said "Rolex" and that nobody bothered feeding them. 

Having said that, with my faith in humanity not yet fully restored, I ask you this: what is the basis for a bad reputation to you? Some of you have said dodgy trade practices and poor service. The former I respect, to the latter I respond that you get what you pay for. But if you buy a Chinese automatic for $150 would you say that the relative value overrides the poor service? And does anyone have any other thoughts on what else contributes to a poor reputation?

Also, FWIW, I truly do hate Hublot and have a moderate distaste for Panerai (which probably comes from living in Asia and seeing its humongous and easily recognizable dials on every second wrist).


----------



## ShaggyDog (Feb 13, 2012)

The only answer to this question is Invicta.


----------



## WnS (Feb 20, 2011)

ShaggyDog said:


> The only answer to this question is Invicta.


I agree, there are several recurring brands that get bashed, but none worse than Invicta - almost unanimously hated by WIS.

Which brand has the worst reputation amongst non-WIS? Whichever watch company shafted them with a large repair/service bill.


----------



## H3RRINGTON (Dec 13, 2012)

86 responses and not a single picture....

Shame on you guys.

My vote is for invicta. I have the 8926ob and like it. However, after hearing about their customer service and lack of quality control, I won't be a reoccurring customer. Oh that and the fact they make things like this


----------



## s.erickson87 (Aug 4, 2012)

H3RRINGTON said:


> 86 responses and not a single picture....
> 
> Shame on you guys.
> 
> ...


...So horrible.


----------



## Crunchy (Feb 4, 2013)

Let me clarify, bad reputation to some does not mean bad watches. Sometimes there are certain stereotypes perpetuated by people in small cases, but these gets associated with the watch brands in certain ways eg:

Solid gold rolex day date: show off lawyer, rapper, or gangster (check out sopranos etc).
Gold day date with diamonds: even more show off, doesnt know much about watches but for display of wealth.
tag: first watch for young executives, yuppie
seiko: frugal & utilitarian
Chanel, gucci, hermes, dior or LV : clueless about watches, bought it when accompanying wife or gf shopping, girly watches
jacob n co: rapper, baller, or wannabe

I do not mean that everyone wearing these watches are the stereotypes, but these are generally some popular misconceptions or judgemental stuff that gets associated with some brands.


----------



## Basel Ab (Feb 24, 2013)

Does anyone have any info about a brand called: *Reichenbach?
They have very nice looking automatic watches and are made in Germany but I don't know about their quality and I cannot find any review for them.
**

*


----------



## brashboy (Jan 7, 2013)

Basel Ab said:


> Does anyone have any info about a brand called: *Reichenbach?
> They have very nice looking automatic watches and are made in Germany but I don't know about their quality and I cannot find any review for them.*


You obviously have not read this thread. Reichenbach is on the famed *blacklist* of watches - reproduced ad nauseum above - so finely made that certain watchmakers refuse to work on them. [Yeah, I know about the watch site's blacklist, but they appear to have just picked up the will-not-repair lists.]

Look at ebay wristwatches. There are three Reichenbachs listed, all over a grand and all fugly. For this kind of dough you can get a really nice (real) watch...


----------



## Vakane (Oct 25, 2011)

Invicta

That's all


----------



## brashboy (Jan 7, 2013)

Vakane said:


> Invicta
> 
> That's all


Sigh, we need a new thread for this: the worst watch brand that is NOT f'n Invicta!!!


----------



## Crunchy (Feb 4, 2013)

I see that many people don't really like new brands that are pricing themselves at patek or beyond's pricing such as Richard Mille and Hublot. These brands produce a very limited number of watches a year, and they are targetting a very niche crowd. Perhaps by pricing most of their products out of the median luxury market, they generate a lot of hate. I'm sure if a richard mille was available for $3-5 k it will be the WIS darling of this decade.


----------



## cbaytan (Oct 2, 2011)

gagnello said:


> Wow Mike. Oh, and Hublot for my 2 cents.





solesman said:


> Hublot.





Blue bird said:


> I gotta go with the other couple of guys who said it here; Hublot for sure.


I really would like to know the story behind the bad reputation of Hublot, they representation is like "haute horlogerie" kind of legendary Swiss brand.


----------



## N8N (Jun 17, 2011)

OK, I expected Invicta, but I don't really get the hate... some of their watches are blatant "homages" and their CS probably sucks, but they are budget priced so you should know what you're getting into (that said, I probably would buy a Seiko or Orient at the same price point.) I also see someone mentioned Montres Allison which to me would have been the obvious answer. But I'm surprised that nobody has yet mentioned Stauer or Steinhausen?


----------



## Perdendosi (May 10, 2012)

N8N said:


> OK, I expected Invicta, but I don't really get the hate... some of their watches are blatant "homages" and their CS probably sucks, but they are budget priced so you should know what you're getting into (that said, I probably would buy a Seiko or Orient at the same price point.) I also see someone mentioned Montres Allison which to me would have been the obvious answer. But I'm surprised that nobody has yet mentioned Stauer or Steinhausen?


My "hate" for Invicta is their ridiculous MSRPs, which really do trick non-WIS into thinking they're getting a better deal than they are, their obnoxious sizes (so yeah, my "hate" goes to U-Boat, too), and my disappointment jealousy that their marketing has worked and people think they're "good" watches.

Steinhausen and Stauer are two different companies. Re Stauer: Say what you will about their attempts to tie their watches to Swiss watchmaking (like Stuhrling and some others) they have good, American customer service, prices that reasonably reflect the value (they've started doing this "appraisal' stuff on the website, but their prices are 25-50% less than "appraisal," unlike the 80-90% off MSRP that Invicta promotes), and you pretty much know what you're getting.

Anyway...


----------



## brashboy (Jan 7, 2013)

Crunchy said:


> Perhaps by pricing most of their products out of the median luxury market, they generate a lot of hate. I'm sure if a richard mille was available for $3-5 k it will be the WIS darling of this decade.


Well, I'm no snot about RM and there would certainly be one on MY wrist. But absent grand fortune or grand larceny, there doesn't seem to be one in my foreseeable future.


----------



## brashboy (Jan 7, 2013)

N8N said:


> OK, I expected Invicta, but I don't really get the hate... some of their watches are blatant "homages" and their CS probably sucks, but they are budget priced so you should know what you're getting into (that said, I probably would buy a Seiko or Orient at the same price point.) I also see someone mentioned Montres Allison which to me would have been the obvious answer. But I'm surprised that nobody has yet mentioned Stauer or Steinhausen?


You nailed it. Why would someone buy a gaudy, dinner-plate sized chinese-made watch with lousy customer service when they could have a Seiko, Orient or other good brands for the same dough? Doesn't buying an Invicta or other bogus discount brand sort of advertise the buyer as, well, the opposite of a WIS? OTOH, Invicta do make a lot of lefty watches, which not many do.

Stuhrling (I refuse to put in the umlaut for this "brand") and Steinhausen are a couple of other "bogus discount" brands that peddle phony discounts off phony "list" prices. If you don't want Seiko/Orient/Citizen/etc., then instead of buying nobody-ever-heard-of-it Chinese brands like these, a feller might as well just buy a replica for the same price; same great Chinese quality but a great name instead, lol (maybe Richard Mille). Better off with the Seiko.

Stauer is different, it seems. Don't know if they are better/worse than the bogus-discount brands, but Stauer doesn't advertise ludicrous, bogus list prices to sell a discount instead of a watch.


----------



## brrrdn (Jun 16, 2008)

Crunchy said:


> I'm sure if a richard mille was available for $3-5 k it will be the WIS darling of this decade.


Still won't be my darling 

Anyway, I never got the impression that Hublot and RM had bad reputation. In fact, Hublot is known for their excellent customer service. I think a lot of people just dislike their designs.


----------



## N8N (Jun 17, 2011)

Perdendosi said:


> My "hate" for Invicta is their ridiculous MSRPs, which really do trick non-WIS into thinking they're getting a better deal than they are, their obnoxious sizes (so yeah, my "hate" goes to U-Boat, too), and my disappointment jealousy that their marketing has worked and people think they're "good" watches.
> 
> Steinhausen and Stauer are two different companies. Re Stauer: Say what you will about their attempts to tie their watches to Swiss watchmaking (like Stuhrling and some others) they have good, American customer service, prices that reasonably reflect the value (they've started doing this "appraisal' stuff on the website, but their prices are 25-50% less than "appraisal," unlike the 80-90% off MSRP that Invicta promotes), and you pretty much know what you're getting.
> 
> Anyway...


I think Stauer has cleaned up their advertising somewhat over the past few years. Definitely in the past they were very Invicta-y in their copy. For whatever reason either I or my parents end up with a subscription to Smithsonian magazine which is actually a fairly entertaining read, but their advertising department has no discrimination whatsoever; at least 50% of the items advertised in that magazine are complete ****e at best and half of those are misleading (e.g. gold-filled "proof" commemorative coins where the ad copy references the price of gold, despite the fact that there's only a tiny amount of gold in these things and the coins are not officially issued by any government mint etc.) and Stauer has been a staple of that type of advertising for years.

I have noticed a distinct improvement in Stauer's copy, although since I've descended into amateur WIS-dom, it's not enough for me to consider buying one. The old ads left a bad taste and quite honestly, their newest offerings still appear a little clunky in the styling compared to vintage stuff (which I've found to be true of a lot of things, not just even watches in general.)


----------



## brashboy (Jan 7, 2013)

N8N said:


> I think Stauer has cleaned up their advertising somewhat over the past few years. Definitely in the past they were very Invicta-y in their copy. For whatever reason either I or my parents end up with a subscription to Smithsonian magazine which is actually a fairly entertaining read, but their advertising department has no discrimination whatsoever; at least 50% of the items advertised in that magazine are complete ****e at best and half of those are misleading (e.g. gold-filled "proof" commemorative coins where the ad copy references the price of gold, despite the fact that there's only a tiny amount of gold in these things and the coins are not officially issued by any government mint etc.) and Stauer has been a staple of that type of advertising for years.
> 
> I have noticed a distinct improvement in Stauer's copy, although since I've descended into amateur WIS-dom, it's not enough for me to consider buying one. The old ads left a bad taste and quite honestly, their newest offerings still appear a little clunky in the styling compared to vintage stuff (which I've found to be true of a lot of things, not just even watches in general.)


Well, precisely. I'm not cheering on Stauer and cannot imagine buying one, but at least they don't claim to be selling $1,000 watches for $149.95.


----------



## N8N (Jun 17, 2011)

brashboy said:


> Well, precisely. I'm not cheering on Stauer and cannot imagine buying one, but at least they don't claim to be selling $1,000 watches for $149.95.


but that is *exactly* what they do/did, and more blatantly than Invicta.

Writing - What's Wrong With This Picture? The Stauer Chronograph : MarketingProfs Article


----------



## Ovalteenie (May 4, 2010)

brrrdn said:


> Still won't be my darling
> 
> Anyway, I never got the impression that Hublot and RM had bad reputation. In fact, Hublot is known for their excellent customer service. I think a lot of people just dislike their designs.


You are probably right. I have noticed that there is broadly a certain aesthetic that is deemed horologically-correct by many WIS. Hublot are negatively perceived by some as ostentatious designs from an upstart newer brand favored by sportsmen and celebrities with more money than taste.

I have also heard from Hublot owners of excellent aftersales customer care.


----------



## brashboy (Jan 7, 2013)

N8N said:


> but that is *exactly* what they do/did, and more blatantly than Invicta.
> 
> Writing - What's Wrong With This Picture? The Stauer Chronograph : MarketingProfs Article


In that ad, they definitely did; 90% is a bogus discount piece for sure. But I have seen ads for Stauer that did not involve nearly such high discounts. I guess they should go on the list, too!


----------



## Crunchy (Feb 4, 2013)

cbaytan said:


> I really would like to know the story behind the bad reputation of Hublot, they representation is like "haute horlogerie" kind of legendary Swiss brand.


Why people hate hublot:

1) Very successful marketing. First luxury watch to associate with soccer and the world cup. Having brand ambassador like rappers, nba players, soccer stars and kung fu actors.

2) Wild designs. Some don't really make sense to tell time like the black out watches and zebras except for fashion statement.

View attachment 998583


View attachment 998584


3) Very expensive retail prices. At equivalent price, can buy WUS darlings such as patek, AP, Lange, Breguet and 10 omegas.

4) Uses plenty of outsourced movements, Valjoux and Sellita. Thus not looked uppn as inhouse or horologically good, especially if charging prices like #3

5) People who can afford and actually buy them don't really care about #4 , so they seem to lack understanding about watches but spend so much on their watch thus generating hate among the WIS.

These 5 reasons make the hate, but also reasons why I want a Hublot!


----------



## Sea-Wolf (May 10, 2011)

See, the Watches Blacklist , as discussed here Does anyone have any info about a brand called Reichenbach? , here Black list-is this list reliable? and here, Another "black list">>> .

Cheers


----------



## cbaytan (Oct 2, 2011)

Ok, we all agree contemporary Invictas only deserves to be sold in TV marketing channels with huge discounts. Thanks to Crunchy I learned Hublot makes crazy case designs with crazy prices like Armani, Gucci, fashion brands, comparing to MRSP Hublots are containing almost worthless movements, not for a WIS, I understand that too. 

But now I don't understand why the Seagull dislike this time? Seagull sells nothing it's not promised, movement inside is their top grade movement, simple basic design, and complications sells like $250 with retrograde date, power reserve, open heart etc, I've purchased one ST2505 movement Parnis watch for $50 from Manbu, confiscated by a friend in the first day but I know the watch, pretty accurate decent watch, it's got also retrograde date, power reserve, open heart, then it's confiscated by my friends son who is a soccer player, I know watch is working still perfectly after 1.5 years. maybe we are lucky but Seagull movements are better than that watch and they are priced right. The only thing I can think of is cases could be better and having more water resistance. So I'd like to know what's the fuss about Seagull watches mentioned several times here.


----------



## brashboy (Jan 7, 2013)

Hublots are big like an Invicta, blingy (fugly to many of us - think rappers) and many if not all have completely ordinary movements; you can pretty much buy the same movements from Ofrei.com. They are not bad timepieces at all, just highly overpriced. From another perspective, many consider Hublot buyers to be non-watch-savvy folks with a lamentable taste for the garish. BB Boa Bang or BB Tutti Frutti Red Caviar, anyone?

I don't dislike Hublots personally, and the Chukker Bang appeals to my industrial design side; but there is no way I would spend money on one when I could have a far superior timepiece for the same dough.

I agree with Cbaytan on Seagull. It is precisely what it claims to be and priced accordingly. I hear they are not bad watches at all. I suspect this fact is a key reason Seagull is not on blacklists, plus the fact that you may actually be able to get parts for them.


----------



## Crunchy (Feb 4, 2013)

There is nothing wrong with seagull. Being chinese made and cheap is probably an easy bait for haters to be look down on.


----------



## WWII70 (Mar 4, 2012)

I'm surprised nobody mentioned HAGER

https://www.watchuseek.com/f2/will-...first-american-watch-manufacturer-798852.html


----------



## Jolly Green John (Mar 5, 2013)

I'd say, out of widely sold and well known, Invicta and Fossil. 

I was given a Fossil(formal looking) and the battery died the very next day. Since I am in Dallas, I shipped it to the Fossil headquarters in Dallas and got the watch back after 4 weeks. The day after I got the watch back, the battery died again.


----------



## sgtiger (Feb 13, 2007)

In my opinion, there can absolutely be a difference between brand bias and quality of product. There are many brands that make great watches that can be perceived in a negative light.

Brands that produce cheap watches, good watches and superb watches, but have no brand differentiation so consumers know none-the-better (this is something Swatch Group is intelligent about). Everything is perceived as cheap because that's the bread and butter of the brand. This is what makes it hard to purchase an expensive watch here: *Seiko and Citizen*.

A brand that is not faithful to its heritage, yet makes great watches: *Hamilton*. I love some Hamilton watches. Great design and excellent quality. I also love it because it's American. Oh, wait... no it's not, it's 100% Swatch now. That's what bothers me. What's the real difference between Tissot and Hamilton now?

A brand that is perceived as having too many fakes or only owned by elitists (who wants to be an elitist?): *Rolex*.

Brands that are relatively unknown to the market, and thus are perceived negatively due to country of origin: *Sea-Gull, Poljot, etc.*

Brands that inflate prices and do not deliver that same amount of extra quality compared to some less expensive competition. It boils down to marketing hype: *Tag*. I'd go out on a limb and even argue *Swatch Group's Omega* as well. I'll get flamed for this I'm sure.


----------



## brashboy (Jan 7, 2013)

sgtiger said:


> Brands that inflate prices and do not deliver that same amount of extra quality compared to some less expensive competition. It boils down to marketing hype: *Tag*. I'd go out on a limb and even argue *Swatch Group's Omega* as well. I'll get flamed for this I'm sure.



View attachment 1002950


----------



## sgtiger (Feb 13, 2007)

brashboy said:


> View attachment 1002950


I'll bring the marshmallows.

But in all seriousness, and please excuse my double-negative, I don't think anyone disputes that it doesn't cost Swatch $2,000-$4,000.00 more to build an Omega watch than it does to build one of it's Hamilton, Mido or Longines watches. All offer substantially similar quality, because they share many parts and are manufactured in some of the same facilities. The main difference between the watches is brand recognition. I'll say it again, that's what hurts Seiko, at least in the USA market.


----------



## Crunchy (Feb 4, 2013)

sgtiger said:


> Brands that inflate prices and do not deliver that same amount of extra quality compared to some less expensive competition. It boils down to marketing hype: *Tag*. I'd go out on a limb and even argue *Swatch Group's Omega* as well. I'll get flamed for this I'm sure.


I'm with you on this. Although omega does not have a bad reputation per se, the way they are going with ever increasing prices for basically the same reiterations of the basic models: speedy, seamaster, PO is horrifying. I would buy an omega, but I wouldn't pay the prices they like to charge. They are even pulling put the brand from ADs and putting in boutiques, making it out of reach in retail discounts, but still heavily discounted online or grey market. This sort of makes the brand look very confused.


----------



## geoffbot (Mar 12, 2011)

All watches prices are going up all the time though. Generalisation, of course.


----------



## Lazycollegekid (Nov 19, 2012)

29dryden29 said:


> Out of curiosity why do you list this brand? I just picked one up for cheap over the weekend and so far it seems to be pretty decent but then again it is only 5 days old. What gives this one a bad name/reputation?


I agree. I own two of their watches which both seem well constructed, are finished nicely for their price point, they use real swiss quartz movements and my expierience with their customer service has been positive.


----------



## Lazycollegekid (Nov 19, 2012)

It also seems to me that, from observation, people tend to shy away from Bell & Ross on this forum. I always liked the look of their vintage line of watches (the not square ones) but all I saw was similar arguments to the ones made against Tag and Omega. Theyre made out to be more than they really are with prices and whatnot.


----------



## brashboy (Jan 7, 2013)

Crunchy said:


> There is nothing wrong with seagull. Being chinese made and cheap is probably an easy bait for haters to be look down on.


How come if someone thinks a brand generally is not very good, they are haters? That's a pretty ad hominem way of labeling a simple opinion. I have owned a Rolex but would not buy another b/c they are common, a watch cliche, way overpriced and nothing special horologically for the price. Does that make me a Rolex hater?

Back in the 70s when I was in college and the Members Only brand came out, I bought one of their flight jackets, very cool. Nobody else had one and that was even cooler - for a while. Before long, because they were so cool (still are), every guy had one, so I quit wearing mine... wasn't cutting edge anymore but a me-too item. There are lots of reasons why a person doesn't like something; it doesn't have to be some kind of hatred, bigotry, sour grapes or irrational opposition, dude.


----------



## brashboy (Jan 7, 2013)

geoffbot said:


> All watches prices are going up all the time though. Generalisation, of course.


Sure, name a raw material or watch-making input that is going down. But maybe, just maybe, some brands have more leverage and can get away with sharper-than-inflation price rises because the brand's worshippers (is that the opposite of "haters"?) will pay it? Rolex guys want Rolex, Omega guys Omega, etc. Yeah, I think some price raises are "abusive," as is the practice of cutting off long-time ADs and moving to boutiques. But cash-in-hand eager buyers feed the frenzy, and we can't blame the brands for taking advantage of them; can we?

The biggest competition for Omega and Rolex is not other brands but the millions of USED models they have generated. Rolex makes about 1 million and Omega about 750k watches per year. Buy USED, people!


----------



## geoffbot (Mar 12, 2011)

The opposite of haters is fanboys. Just because one likes/dislikes a brand doesn't make them one of them; its when they recommend or slam the brand in EVERY thread that they become one. IMO.


----------



## BenL (Oct 1, 2008)

hpark21 said:


> Among the so called WI(S), Sea-gull has very good reputation.
> (I have a friend who LOVE his watch).
> 
> So, I don't know what you are talking about.


I agree. Seagull actually has a pretty good reputation, I thought.


----------



## Crunchy (Feb 4, 2013)

geoffbot said:


> The opposite of haters is fanboys. Just because one likes/dislikes a brand doesn't make them one of them; its when they recommend or slam the brand in EVERY thread that they become one. IMO.


Especially when new threads are made just to ridicule a brand....


----------



## cbaytan (Oct 2, 2011)

brashboy said:


> Sigh, we need a new thread for this: the worst watch brand that is NOT f'n Invicta!!!


Since Rolex is the first and only name, watch illiterate social status seeker's can think of, we can open another worst brands thread starting from the third brand. No matter how Rolex is technically good.

(God bless the troll)


----------



## brashboy (Jan 7, 2013)

geoffbot said:


> The opposite of haters is fanboys. Just because one likes/dislikes a brand doesn't make them one of them; its when they recommend or slam the brand in EVERY thread that they become one. IMO.


Good working definition of "fanboy" that works for me.


----------



## Pipwatch (Jan 17, 2012)

John MS said:


> Rolex.


Absolutely. Not a single serious complication for decades, 'classic" (i.e. no innovation) designs in the main but still suckering millions with their adverts. Unhappily, I still have too many of these from my early years of being a newbie sheep.. Baaaa duuhh..


----------



## Pipwatch (Jan 17, 2012)

Invicta is a probable. Out of interest (and cos it was cheap), I bought off the 'bay an Invicta 300M Grand Diver II NH35A. The shiny red lettering on the dial is UGLY - looks (and feels) cheap and nasty! No more of these monsters..

Other brands like Calvaneo, Meyers and Thomas Earnshaw (hate this concocted think-it-sounds-posh label!!) seem to have been created for auction sites, particularly Catawiki. Dubious stuff.


----------



## Robbie Steadman (May 26, 2016)

Daniel Wellington


----------



## Palmettoman (Apr 6, 2013)

OK, great idea. I'm trying to figure out to do it right now. Give me a minute...:think:



bluloo said:


> Instead of just quoting mike's entire post, maybe the next person, with
> the inclinaton, could quote the entire thread...


----------



## LCandela (Feb 13, 2017)

There was a Ginault evisceration thread not long ago that started with the typical "amazing" shill review. I think that was as bad as I've seen a brand slammed on here.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Synequano (May 2, 2012)

Every brand have had their share of problems,even the more expensive ones

My friend has an AP RO chrono that leaked before...luckily it was fixed under warranty..but it took several months

Once my out of warranty Panerai with 7750 movt produced a weird screeching noise...the rotor was loose inside the case

However nothing like a guy that got his Pam back from service center but they forgot one of the CG screw...


----------



## Medusa (Feb 6, 2010)

Everyone of my watches that cost over 4k have had problems that required them sent in for warranty.

None of my Invictas ever broke or stopped telling time.

None of my quartz watches ever broke or stopped telling the perfect time.

I'm gonna say the worst watch companies are the ones that only exist on the internet or a Kickstarter.


----------



## LesserBlackDog (Jun 24, 2011)

Pipwatch said:


> Absolutely. Not a single serious complication for decades, 'classic" (i.e. no innovation) designs in the main but still suckering millions with their adverts. Unhappily, I still have too many of these from my early years of being a newbie sheep.. Baaaa duuhh..


You really thought it was worth digging a four-years-dead thread out of the grave just for this?


----------



## Strmwatch (Mar 1, 2016)

LCandela said:


> There was a Ginault evisceration thread not long ago that started with the typical "amazing" shill review. I think that was as bad as I've seen a brand slammed on here.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Actually...it was 2 or 3 of the same people constantly slamming the company because they didn't like the answers from the Q&A thread. Some even got some well deserved forum vacations because of it.

As for the "shills"...interesting take. I've read quite a few non-WUS reviews and they were equally as impressed with the watch. I guess they must be "shills" too huh?

For the record...no I do not own one, nor was/is it on my "radar".


----------



## run23 (Jul 12, 2009)

LCandela said:


> There was a Ginault evisceration thread not long ago that started with the typical "amazing" shill review. I think that was as bad as I've seen a brand slammed on here.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


The brand seemed to be slammed so much that I began to suspect people were paid to talk s### about the brand. I've never seen people get so emotional about a watch company's marketing tactics before.


----------



## EnderW (Mar 16, 2015)

John MS said:


> Rolex.





Pipwatch said:


> Absolutely. Not a single serious complication for decades, 'classic" (i.e. no innovation) designs in the main but still suckering millions with their adverts. Unhappily, I still have too many of these from my early years of being a newbie sheep.. Baaaa duuhh..


Rolex has worst reputation.... ok. 
Please send me those many from your days as newbie sheep. I'll even pay you what you paid for them at the time of your purchase.

PS. Newsflash - Rolex has GMT, Chronograph, Annual Calendar dual timezone (Skydweller), moonphase (cellini). And no innovation is a stretch - from materials (smelting own steel and gold), to clasps - they innovate but their design changes are slow. That is how they keep resale value of old ones up and consistent demand for new ones. Consistency and slow design change...


----------



## LCandela (Feb 13, 2017)

Strmwatch said:


> Actually...it was 2 or 3 of the same people constantly slamming the company because they didn't like the answers from the Q&A thread. Some even got some well deserved forum vacations because of it.
> 
> As for the "shills"...interesting take. I've read quite a few non-WUS reviews and they were equally as impressed with the watch. I guess they must be "shills" too huh?
> 
> For the record...no I do not own one, nor was/is it on my "radar".


A tad emotional considering I didn't even say what I thought of the brand, just observations from a thread.


----------



## LCandela (Feb 13, 2017)

run23 said:


> The brand seemed to be slammed so much that I began to suspect people were paid to talk s### about the brand. I've never seen people get so emotional about a watch company's marketing tactics before.


It is what it is, I guess. Hard to slam one company for homages and not others. If indeed the round-about pay for review is true, it's a tactic... I guess it's effective. I could see why it rubs people the wrong way also.


----------



## Strmwatch (Mar 1, 2016)

LCandela said:


> It is what it is, I guess. Hard to slam one company for homages and not others. If indeed the round-about pay for review is true, it's a tactic... I guess it's effective. I could see why it rubs people the wrong way also.


They offered a discount on the price of the watch if you gave a review, which you didn't HAVE to do...it was an honor thing. It's not like you signed a contract.

They weren't paying anyone money to purchase the watch or review it. The "slammers" didn't like the PR/marketing. In all honesty they were the ones that seemed like they were being paid to slam it with just how nasty some of them became, hence the forum "vacations".

Like I said...I don't have one, nor do I plan on buying one so I have no proverbial dog in that hunt.


----------



## jupiter6 (Jan 8, 2015)

Robbie Steadman said:


> Daniel Wellington


Why?
There's a difference between bad reputation and you not liking something.


----------



## yankeexpress (Apr 7, 2013)

Reputations can be bought, therefore they are tainted. 

Buy what you like and enjoy it. Ignore the rest.


----------



## Pipwatch (Jan 17, 2012)

EnderW said:


> Rolex has worst reputation.... ok.
> Please send me those many from your days as newbie sheep. I'll even pay you what you paid for them at the time of your purchase.
> 
> PS. Newsflash - Rolex has GMT, Chronograph, Annual Calendar dual timezone (Skydweller), moonphase (cellini). And no innovation is a stretch - from materials (smelting own steel and gold), to clasps - they innovate but their design changes are slow. That is how they keep resale value of old ones up and consistent demand for new ones. Consistency and slow design change...


Perhaps instead of 'innovations', I should have used the more specific term 'complications'. Except for super-hardened steel (like Montfort have used), what functional value do these new fangled materials add?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Pipwatch (Jan 17, 2012)

LesserBlackDog said:


> You really thought it was worth digging a four-years-dead thread out of the grave just for this?


You found time to post yours?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## run23 (Jul 12, 2009)

Strmwatch said:


> They offered a discount on the price of the watch if you gave a review, which you didn't HAVE to do...it was an honor thing. It's not like you signed a contract.
> 
> They weren't paying anyone money to purchase the watch or review it. The "slammers" didn't like the PR/marketing. In all honesty they were the ones that seemed like they were being paid to slam it with just how nasty some of them became, hence the forum "vacations".


Yeah. I don't get why people are so hard on Ginault for offering a discount for a review (that doesn't have to be a good review), but give Rolex, Tag and Omega a pass for paying millions of dollars to celebrities to wear a watch. I'm unlikely to ever buy a Ginault or any other homage, but I applaud the creative and scrappy marketing.

[sorry to get off topic here]


----------



## Rad knight (Dec 27, 2014)

run23 said:


> Yeah. I don't get why people are so hard on Ginault for offering a discount for a review (that doesn't have to be a good review), but give Rolex, Tag and Omega a pass for paying millions of dollars to celebrities to wear a watch. I'm unlikely to ever buy a Ginault or any other homage, but I applaud the creative and scrappy marketing.
> 
> [sorry to get off topic here]


Same here. I never even heard of Ginault until now. You have to applaud them because marketing is usually the largest cost to a business's value chain. If it costs half as much to pay for reviews than it is for traditional marketing, more power to them. Not exactly ingenious but still smart.

As far as worst reputation goes, undoubtedly Invicta. It's easy to say stuff like Swiss Legends and others like that but Invicta seems to have a scorched earth policy toward production and marketing. I hope they know who their target market is. They do appear to have a couple of nice pieces amongst all the rabble. They take big and homage (and gaudy) and mutate the hell out it. Those Venom's and Grand Divers are hideous and I find it hard to believe that they can offer a 300M dive watch for under $200... especially with all that gold and MOP. I also love their take on sales RRP: $1,500.00 - Your Price: $129.00. I don't hate them but I think that one day, when they figure out who they want to be, they could be a serious player in the medium range watch market.


----------



## WnS (Feb 20, 2011)

run23 said:


> Yeah. I don't get why people are so hard on Ginault for offering a discount for a review (that doesn't have to be a good review), but give Rolex, Tag and Omega a pass for paying millions of dollars to celebrities to wear a watch. I'm unlikely to ever buy a Ginault or any other homage, but I applaud the creative and scrappy marketing.
> 
> [sorry to get off topic here]


I can see Ginault's marketing strategy, American Hand Made and an 'inhouse' movement with similar specs to an 'ETA'.

But they want $1300 for a Rolex homage?????

I guess this has nothing to do with reputation. It's quite possible they have outstanding customer service.


----------



## uptempo (Mar 21, 2016)

80talisten said:


> Yes I know but I think in general people dont see Sea Gull watches as "high quality" there are more ignorant watch buyers than the skilled ones.


The general public don't see Seiko as high quality, and they wouldn't see Rolex that way if Rolex also made $100 watches.


----------



## Blue Note (Oct 15, 2016)

Trump















Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Wandering Ben (Mar 5, 2012)

Blue Note said:


> Trump
> [iurl="https://www.watchuseek.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=11447650&d=1491664560"]
> 
> 
> ...


Did this actually exist? Or is it a mod/franken?


----------



## brooklynfanatic (Apr 24, 2017)

uh oh. let the trump bashing commence


----------



## Wandering Ben (Mar 5, 2012)

brooklynfanatic said:


> uh oh. let the trump bashing commence


Either way I'd wager few WIS would buy a Trump branded watch. And they are probably not as good as a Seiko


----------



## eblackmo (Dec 27, 2014)

Wandering Ben said:


> Did this actually exist? Or is it a mod/franken?


He definitely had his own line of watches. Don't know how representative the fake daytona is though. It looks more like a steinhart. Hey I am kidding....come on.....

*"I will build a great watch-and nobody will build a watch better than me. I will build a great, great watch.*" Mr. Trump explained....

http://wornandwound.com/trump-announces-trump-by-trump-watches/

Honestly as a non american all I can do is look on with awe.


----------



## Perseverence (Dec 12, 2016)

stuffler said:


> and now throw the stones.


None of the watches I own made your list!


----------



## Strmwatch (Mar 1, 2016)

How about we all SKIP with the damn politics...this is a WATCH forum. 

We get enough of that BS from the "media".


----------



## eblackmo (Dec 27, 2014)

Strmwatch said:


> How about we all SKIP with the damn politics...this is a WATCH forum.
> 
> We get enough of that BS from the "media".


What? People can't have differing opinions? You should see the world from where I am sitting. You do have a point though we should keep the BS to watches because this is a watch forum.


----------



## georges zaslavsky (Feb 11, 2006)

Invicta,Tag and Bremont


----------



## jupiter6 (Jan 8, 2015)

eblackmo said:


> What? People can't have differing opinions? You should see the world from where I am sitting. You do have a point though we should keep the BS to watches because this is a watch forum.


At least make your differing opinion on the topic. America having our backs has nothing to do with bad brands. Besides, a lot of people come here so they don't have to discuss politics, not discuss it more.

A lot of responses here are kind of worthless anyway. Replying with a one word answer e.g. Omega (settle down - it's an example) with no reason whatsoever is pointless.


----------



## Wandering Ben (Mar 5, 2012)

Strmwatch said:


> How about we all SKIP with the damn politics...this is a WATCH forum.
> 
> We get enough of that BS from the "media".


Nothing to do with politics. If Trump made a "homage" Daytona he deserves the criticisms we will make about it like we do with knockoff invicta sub homages. It's fair game. If Bernie Sanders made a knockoff Nomos the results will be same


----------



## Strmwatch (Mar 1, 2016)

Wandering Ben said:


> Nothing to do with politics. If Trump made a "homage" Daytona he deserves the criticisms we will make about it like we do with knockoff invicta sub homages. It's fair game. If Bernie Sanders made a knockoff Nomos the results will be same


The post I was referring to had NOTHING to do with watches...it was a purely political post hence my comment and why I didn't quote what he posted.


----------



## Paul_S (Feb 14, 2017)

Back on topic...

Worst reputation: Invicta, forever Invicta, always and endlessly.


----------



## TwentiethCenturyFox (Mar 8, 2014)

With the group Invicta.


----------



## LesserBlackDog (Jun 24, 2011)

Pipwatch said:


> You found time to post yours?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


This may shock you but at my typing speed it takes about 14 seconds to type a post of this length.

[Edit] Nope, I just timed it, it took 7.


----------



## GreenManalishi (Feb 3, 2017)

Invicta for sure. I tried explaining to someone that the MSRP of $599 is just made up garbage, but he wouldn't listen. I guess the home shopping "experts" are quite convincing.


----------



## Wandering Ben (Mar 5, 2012)

Back on topic I think watches with worst reputation within WUS (and deservedly) are ones made by companies that aren't watchmakers. I.e fossil, Gucci, Michael kors, Burberry, Guess, Trump. Things they sell at malls here. BTW despite what I read here I've yet to find a Seiko at a shopping mall


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

No.


Wandering Ben said:


> Back on topic I think watches with worst reputation within WUS (and deservedly) are ones made by companies that aren't watchmakers. I.e fossil, Gucci, Michael kors, Burberry, Guess, Trump. Things they sell at malls here. BTW despite what I read here I've yet to find a Seiko at a shopping mall


----------



## EnderW (Mar 16, 2015)

Wandering Ben said:


> Back on topic I think watches with worst reputation within WUS (and deservedly) are ones made by companies that aren't watchmakers. I.e fossil, Gucci, Michael kors, Burberry, Guess, Trump. Things they sell at malls here. BTW despite what I read here I've yet to find a Seiko at a shopping mall


Generalizations are never good.
Seikos are sold in every mall I've ever visited - from JC Penney, Sears, Macys to little kiosks in mid-floor. And Seiko has everything from amazing Credor and GS, to outstanding SARB, to great value Seiko5, to dirt cheap quartz.

And plenty of non-watch brands are making outstanding watches.... from obvious ones like Cartier, to Hermes, Bvlgari, Ralph Lauren, Tiffany
Bvlgari Octo is a beauty. Ralph Lauren safari watches are pretty sweet, many w JLC movements inside


----------



## Stoshman (Jun 26, 2015)

Sea-Wolf said:


> See, the Watches Blacklist , as discussed here Does anyone have any info about a brand called Reichenbach? , here Black list-is this list reliable? and here, Another "black list">>> .
> 
> Cheers


I am simply shocked - SHOCKED, I tell ya! - that such a fine watch as Montres Allison made that list, especially after Terry Allison himself dedicated one of his models to Walt Odets and myself!









Man, I'll never live _that_ down! 

(For those unfamiliar with the circumstances: at the time, both Walt Odets and I were associated with _TimeZone _and had excoriated Terry over his cheap Chinese knock-offs that he was selling for many hundreds if not thousands of dollars. The model he 'dedicated' to us was a tongue-in-cheek way to get even with us.)


----------



## cedargrove (Mar 10, 2011)

Blue Note said:


> Trump
> View attachment 11447650
> 
> View attachment 11447658
> ...


How does one use the tachymeter with this?


----------



## Wandering Ben (Mar 5, 2012)

EnderW said:


> Wandering Ben said:
> 
> 
> > Back on topic I think watches with worst reputation within WUS (and deservedly) are ones made by companies that aren't watchmakers. I.e fossil, Gucci, Michael kors, Burberry, Guess, Trump. Things they sell at malls here. BTW despite what I read here I've yet to find a Seiko at a shopping mall
> ...


We've been shopping at different malls then. I speak from personal experience.

I think Cartier probably has made enough good ones to be called a watchmaker now!


----------



## Wandering Ben (Mar 5, 2012)

EnderW said:


> Wandering Ben said:
> 
> 
> > Back on topic I think watches with worst reputation within WUS (and deservedly) are ones made by companies that aren't watchmakers. I.e fossil, Gucci, Michael kors, Burberry, Guess, Trump. Things they sell at malls here. BTW despite what I read here I've yet to find a Seiko at a shopping mall
> ...


(Continued)

Tell me Cartier is not a watchmaker when they have this: http://www.ablogtowatch.com/cartier-rotonde-de-cartier-grande-complication-watch/

An in-house movement!

If Ralph Lauren can do the same I'm going to respect them


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

Wandering Ben said:


> BTW despite what I read here I've yet to find a Seiko at a shopping mall


You can easily find Seiko and Citizen in a Macy's, or other department stores. But, it's much harder finding mechanical watches from them (with the possible exception of Seiko 5s) in the mall.


----------



## brooklynfanatic (Apr 24, 2017)

back off topic,i cant help myself. trump vs invicta, who would you choose and why?


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

brooklynfanatic said:


> back off topic,i cant help myself. trump vs invicta, who would you choose and why?


----------



## Pipwatch (Jan 17, 2012)

LesserBlackDog said:


> This may shock you but at my typing speed it takes about 14 seconds to type a post of this length.
> 
> [Edit] Nope, I just timed it, it took 7.


You must have been as bored as I am feeling right now..

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## yankeexpress (Apr 7, 2013)

Wandering Ben said:


> Back on topic I think watches with worst reputation within WUS (and deservedly) are ones made by companies that aren't watchmakers. I.e fossil, Gucci, Michael kors, Burberry, Guess, Trump. Things they sell at malls here. BTW despite what I read here I've yet to find a Seiko at a shopping mall


Delete Fossil from your list. Fossil has a movement factory in Switzerland producing the well received automatic movement they call STP1-11.

http://www.ablogtowatch.com/visit-stp-watch-movement-manufacture-fossil-group-answer-eta/


----------



## Wandering Ben (Mar 5, 2012)

mleok said:


> brooklynfanatic said:
> 
> 
> > back off topic,i cant help myself. trump vs invicta, who would you choose and why?


 Good one!


----------



## Wandering Ben (Mar 5, 2012)

yankeexpress said:


> Delete Fossil from your list. Fossil has a movement factory in Switzerland producing the well received automatic movement they call STP1-11.
> 
> http://www.ablogtowatch.com/visit-stp-watch-movement-manufacture-fossil-group-answer-eta/


I stand corrected. Thanks! My watch knowledge has been a bit outdated


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

Cartier - watchmaker, phrase Horus, you've seen the Light.


Wandering Ben said:


> We've been shopping at different malls then. I speak from personal experience.
> 
> I think Cartier probably has made enough good ones to be called a watchmaker now!


----------



## TaxMan (Nov 3, 2016)

I vote for Stuhrling Original. They do everything bad that Invicta does, but without something like the 8926 in their lineup to redeem them from the bottom of the pile.


----------



## eblackmo (Dec 27, 2014)

jupiter6 said:


> At least make your differing opinion on the topic. America having our backs has nothing to do with bad brands. Besides, a lot of people come here so they don't have to discuss politics, not discuss it more.
> 
> A lot of responses here are kind of worthless anyway. Replying with a one word answer e.g. Omega (settle down - it's an example) with no reason whatsoever is pointless*.*


I like all watches equally. Therefore have nothing bad to say.... I am all about the love. Thanks for the advice btw. I choose to ignore it.


----------



## tirod3 (Jan 16, 2017)

eblackmo said:


> I like all watches equally. Therefore have nothing bad to say.... I am all about the love. Thanks for the advice btw. I choose to ignore it.


I haven't read all the posts yet I'm amazed we've found not only someone who likes Invicta but also Armitron. That is certainly commendable.


----------



## watchnewbie2793 (Apr 4, 2016)

Invicta and Hublot!


----------



## Paul_S (Feb 14, 2017)

In a nod toward Stuhrling Original, I fixed one for my sister's friend (full details and pics here). It was nearly brand new but had stopped.

A HUGE piece of packing-peanut foam was wedged under the balance wheel.










Here's a another pic for size comparison.










So Stuhrling Original might displace Invicta, which at least seems to have a Quality Control department (...instead of a Design Department).


----------



## fliqua (Dec 29, 2016)

though there are lots of brand that are worst than invicta, invicta would still win this thread


----------



## jupiterfang (Mar 27, 2010)

MKII has the worst reputation on deliver time  But this can not stop any fan to wait for 3 years to get a MKII


----------



## Triton9 (Sep 30, 2011)

I think its unfair to fault all those affordable brand since many of their watches are selling at very low margin.

If people expect great customer service , quick response, great QC and very affordable prices is impossible. 

Bad reputation shall be directed at those brand selling their watches at sky high prices and yet can't delivered as promise. Buyer expectation shall be realistic. You want better response and good customer service, be prepared to pay more. It stupid to fault those Chinese mushroom brand since their watch can be selling as low as $10( You still expect they have a dedicated website or ciustomer service to handle your enquiry? LOL Are you dumb?)

I recently saw a thread about a customer complaining about non response from Kobold. These watches are selling at few thousands and yet cant even response a email?
This is what I call 'Bad Reputation'.


----------



## chosenhandle (Dec 11, 2014)

I think it is not right to compare the lower price chinese and russian watches against much more expensive european or japanese counterparts. Within the groups watches have track records of performing better or worse than their counterparts. It is easy to say Invicta has a bad reputation, but as compared against its peers? Personally, I wouldn't own a Citizen watch simply because I think the seiko movements are so much more robust and easily repaired, but that doesn't make them a "bad" watch, just one that I don't want to own.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

chosenhandle said:


> I think it is not right to compare the lower price chinese and russian watches against much more expensive european or japanese counterparts. Within the groups watches have track records of performing better or worse than their counterparts. It is easy to say Invicta has a bad reputation, but as compared against its peers? Personally, I wouldn't own a Citizen watch simply because I think the seiko movements are so much more robust and easily repaired, but that doesn't make them a "bad" watch, just one that I don't want to own.


Unless it's a Grand Seiko, or you do the work yourself, who's going to bother repairing a Seiko movement? It's just beyond economic repair.


----------



## chosenhandle (Dec 11, 2014)

mleok said:


> Unless it's a Grand Seiko, or you do the work yourself, who's going to bother repairing a Seiko movement? It's just beyond economic repair.


sorry, should have been clearer. I only have Grand Seikos and Ananta's. I have a bunch of 60's-70's classics, but they never need work.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

I am resurrecting this thread. So, shoot me.
But it's been 8 years.
That's enough time for lakes to drain, cities to form, and for watch brands to do... or die.

The infamous Stuffler's List is on page 1, so go see that.

Never mind the ones that have since disappeared.
There are some that have steadily gained in reputation, and JUSTLY, I would add. PARNIS, to take the most glaring example. Yes, still "lowly" in the eyes of many, but they have improved a great deal -- enough to draw buyers away from their betters in some cases.

Why?
Many of those brands are actually no worse than your standard Seiko / Orient of that price range. I'd even argue many (CANTANI, CAVADINI, etc) look MUCH better than the similar designs put out by Seiko, etc. at similar prices. 
Just on the LOGO alone, for example, many of these "condemned" brands win over Seiko.

The point is, many of those "despised" brands have climbed up through their own hard work, and with NO help from those who condemn them.

Which ones have you ACTUALLY EXPERIENCED to testify on their behalf?
Or condemn even harder, if called for?


----------



## 6R35 (Jun 26, 2020)

Chronopolis said:


> I am resurrecting this thread. So, shoot me.
> But it's been 8 years.


Gee thanks. Your post count is unbelievable! Ever consider getting another hobby? Or maybe going outside?


----------



## RobMc (Dec 27, 2015)

6R35 said:


> Gee thanks. Your post count is unbelievable! Ever consider getting another hobby? Or maybe going outside?


what's your problem li'l fella?


----------



## RobMc (Dec 27, 2015)

It depends. Worst rep amongst WuS types, or worst rep amongst the general population?


----------



## geckobros (Mar 9, 2009)

6R35 said:


> Gee thanks. Your post count is unbelievable! Ever consider getting another hobby? Or maybe going outside?


I find his posts entertaining. Have a good day.


----------



## Buick (Mar 21, 2019)

Yema seems to be doing a good job of undermining their own brand, of the stories of faults and appalling customer service on here are anything to go be. Which is sad, because they make some good looking and well proportioned watches, with a distinct identity


----------



## Seabee1 (Apr 21, 2017)

The brand with the worst reputation is going to be the brand the member dislikes most.


----------



## StufflerMike (Mar 23, 2010)

6R35 said:


> Gee thanks. Your post count is unbelievable! Ever consider getting another hobby? Or maybe going outside?


Why, oh why, am I under the impression you have something to sell and aiming at 100 posts ??


----------



## 6R35 (Jun 26, 2020)

StufflerMike said:


> Why, oh why, am I under the impression you have something to sell and aiming at 100 posts ??


Nope. I only own one watch and I'm not selling.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Buick said:


> Yema seems to be doing a good job of undermining their own brand, of the stories of faults and appalling customer service on here are anything to go be. Which is sad, because they make some good looking and well proportioned watches, with a distinct identity


I too have heard some unflattering things about Yema, which is unfortunate, as I was hoping to get one, one of these days. Now I am less sure if I should.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

RobMc said:


> It depends. Worst rep amongst WuS types, or worst rep amongst the general population?


See that's the thing. 
Other than for a handful of super famous brands, the general public has no idea.
So the judgment ought to fall on WUS types, but WUS types suffer from all sorts of delusions themselves.

I venture to guess - no hard data, just experience - 95% of the watch brands are more or less comparable in terms of functionality, performance, ad probably in fit n finish too. That's why I compared Seiko chronos (under $200) with the likes of CAVADINI and CANTANI, which are also comparably priced.

And yet, the latter get poop thrown at them especially by those who've NEVER actually had one, when they might be as perfectly competent as any other maker's. (Not that cheaper Seiko chronos get praised around here, but they're also not outright scorned.)

I mean, watches at a certain range and below are not like baked goods, whose quality is determined by some secret recipe.


----------



## 8100 RPM (Feb 12, 2017)

Ginault is very polarizing.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

8100 RPM said:


> Ginault is very polarizing.


Apparently so.
I do recall reading a bit of one thread where this was discussed.

I get it that people could like or dislike a brand / model.
But the issue seemed to be something more than that.
Was it some serious QC problem? Or was it the fact it was _yet another_ Sub homage that cost too much?


----------



## Sinanamus (Oct 7, 2019)

Chronopolis said:


> Apparently so.
> I do recall reading a bit of one thread where this was discussed.
> 
> I get it that people could like or dislike a brand / model.
> ...


There is extremely strong evidence found elsewhere that the founder of Ginault was a counterfitter before starting Ginault.

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk


----------



## Kjong (Mar 27, 2020)

Invicta


----------



## Earthjade (Jan 5, 2018)

Among the general public, no brand has a bad reputation because they're just watches (and who buys watches these days?). 
Among this community, it depends on what your poison is:


Rolex - too expensive, artificially constrained supply, nightmare ADs and "no better than my $500 Steinhart" (no, really guys)
Fashion brands - because they're SOOOO popular (but actually not really)
Invicta - a common butt of WIS jokes, like the Irish (sadly)
Hublot - gaudy and ugly and more expensive than a lot of posters here can afford
Seiko - because misaligning bezels causes puppies to go to hell


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Sinanamus said:


> There is extremely strong evidence found elsewhere that the founder of Ginault was a* counterfitter before starting Ginault.*


Wow.
By that I mean, wow that people are so strict in their morality - if that's what that is -- as to take that to use it against the man.

Or, maybe I have no morals.
But I just don't see what his past has to do with the watches he is offering NOW, if his watches are as advertised.

If he were a convicted criminal of some heinous and harmful crime, THAT would of course be VERY different.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

The list - if you would take the time to look at it -- is made up almost entirely of "low prole" brands, with NO chance of getting a seat at the table, so to speak.
No brand that is "upper middle" to "upper out of sight" is on the list, no matter how much we WISs might malign them, for aesthetic reasons.

My point is, the 'black list' is so composed based essentially on "classism" more than any other criterion. That is to say, on the symbolic and semiological value (low class) of these brands, rather than their factual value as socio-economically humble (but more often than not, honest) time-telling machines.

I have to wonder why CASIO is not on the list.



Earthjade said:


> Among the general public, no brand has a bad reputation because they're just watches (and who buys watches these days?).
> Among this community, it depends on what your poison is:
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## Earthjade (Jan 5, 2018)

Because no WIS hates Casio. Except maybe an analog purist here or there.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Earthjade said:


> Because no WIS hates Casio. Except maybe an analog purist here or there.


Is that so?
Even the process by which this comes to be true is mysterious. (To me.)

Many or most of the "low-prole" brands probably use the very same movements and parts - or those made by the same factory -- that are in CASIO and many other "middle class" brands.


----------



## Dufresne (Dec 20, 2012)

Among WIS-types, Kobold has to be up there.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ross2187 (Sep 16, 2016)

Armchair Horological Historians have a strong love / HATE of Doxa, depending on which of it's time period you favor.

(Full discretion, I just bought a 300T and love it)


----------



## Talktochad (Feb 3, 2020)

Dakota2cSRT4 said:


> Invicta.


agree


----------



## Seddyspaghetti (Jun 22, 2020)

Invicta for sure.
But Steinhart is up there for me as well.


----------



## Wandering_Watcher10 (Sep 30, 2016)

For some odd reason people on these forums despise Raymond Weil because they are sold in department stores such as Macy's. (Disclosure: I own 2 RWs and love them both)

People also have a general dislike/distaste for Tag because of marketing, and because they "sneakily" used Seiko's movement Technology a few years back.


----------



## cattusmaru (Jul 23, 2020)

Watchbreath said:


> It grinds my teeth to see Lucien Piccard there, then again, it's now a 'zombie brand'.


Now I am thinking of the captain of the USS Enterprise (NCC 1701 D) when you reference that brand.

Anyone else besides me? 

Sent from my LM-V405 using Tapatalk


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

OH, I've been referencing that brand for quite a spell, my main watch now for 58+ years.


----------



## cattusmaru (Jul 23, 2020)

Watchbreath said:


> OH, I've been referencing that brand for quite a spell, my main watch now for 58+ years.


Congrats on that news!

Have you heard of the Vulcain watch brand and does it spell anything noteworthy maybe.

Sent from my LM-V405 using Tapatalk


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

cattusmaru said:


> Congrats on that news!
> 
> Have you heard of the Vulcain watch brand and does it spell anything noteworthy maybe.
> 
> Sent from my LM-V405 using Tapatalk


Seen a few, but really didn't catch my eye.


----------



## kranskypants (Sep 28, 2021)

Ozy said:


> Tag heuer...for their use of eta and pricing vs discount structure....really?
> 
> Sometimes the credibility of the opinions which perpetuate the memes that embody the reputation are just as questionable.




absolutely. how can they charge so much for an eta?!!!!1


----------



## One-Seventy (Mar 25, 2019)

kranskypants said:


> absolutely. how can they charge so much for an eta?!!!!1


Welcome from 1999, when presumably watches used to be priced at cost-plus!


----------



## entropy96 (Nov 9, 2010)

Except people (the average Joe or Jane) do look down on Casio. Wearers are generally assumed to be cheap or poor. That's the connotation Casio wearers get.


Earthjade said:


> Because no WIS hates Casio. Except maybe an analog purist here or there.


----------



## entropy96 (Nov 9, 2010)

Casio and Timex are assumed by the general public as watches worn by the masses and "no class" by the non-WIS who view the Submariner or Datejust as the "ultimate" watch in the world of haute horlogerie 🤣

AP (particularly the RO and RO Offshore) gets a lot of hate for being associated with rappers, despite the fact AP belongs to the "Holy Trinity" with Patek and VC.

Grand Seiko for being "just a Seiko" in the eyes of the non-WIS.


----------



## RLSL (May 4, 2016)

Not sure if it's been posted but Seven Friday


----------



## Pongster (Jan 7, 2017)

Dakota2cSRT4 said:


> Invicta.


Is invicta the plural of invictus?  or is it invicti? 

i guess it’s an abstract noun so technically no plural form.

good thing it’s unconquerable.


----------



## hogwldfltr (Sep 2, 2012)

Dakota2cSRT4 said:


> Invicta.


 Nuff said.


----------



## Shiny-Lights (Nov 16, 2018)

invicta 1000x


----------



## jgrant7719 (May 20, 2017)

Invicta for sure, would also add MVMT

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk


----------



## zztopops (Aug 4, 2021)

*ROLEX* hands down, no contest!

Show me another brand that can elicit the degree of vitriol at the mere mention of the 'R' word. Sheesh its the equivalent hash power of a bitcoin blockchain with the amount of effort invested ....

554 posts (and counting) in 4 days


----------



## Perseverence (Dec 12, 2016)

Kobold has a terrible one. Invicta can be divisive. 

Sent from my SM-G889A using Tapatalk


----------



## Jzeynn (Dec 23, 2013)

When I first saw the thread title the ones that came to mind were Rolex and Invicta. Too bad it's an old thread.

The answer depends heavily on whether we're talking reputation from a WIS or non-WIS perspective.


----------



## Solarisminor (Jan 23, 2020)

I hear a lot of bad stuff about Hublot, but I have never owned one and I would love a Big Bang.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

Seiko is renowned for their mediocre accuracy and alignment issues. Even their retailers are aware of it. Only buy online if you enjoy playing the Seiko lottery.


----------

