# Best of the fashion oriented watches



## watchmanee (Aug 9, 2009)

Which brand do you think worth the money among these fashion oriented watch brands ? 

High End : 
Hermes 
Louis Vuitton 
Chanel 
Christian Dior 
Gucci (debatable) 

Mid-range :
Brera 
Momo Design 
Welder 
Breil 
Burberrys 
Hugo Boss 
Officina Del Tempo 
Lochman 
Ritmo Mundo 

Low-end :
Nixon 
Emporio Armani 
Toywatch
Android 
Lacoste 
Diesel 

Personally I think Hermes watches are well made, a little overpriced for what you're paying but you have to buy into the hype of Hermes brand. It's a very fashionable, yet classy watch to have, but I wouldn't spend my money on the other brands like LV, Gucci or Chanel. 

For the mid-range, Momo Design, Brera, Breil, Welder and Officina del Tempo seem to be really unique in design and you will have to pay the price for them. Again, overprice but you'll have to buy the design novelty, and you can be sure no PP, Rolex, or real watch manufacturers will ever give you the kind of bold, twisted, funky yet high quality designs that these guys offer, with some exception among the new Zenith and Hublot Big Bang recent designs. 

Still I think they're excellent designed watches if you have money to spend. 

On the low end of the scale, I bought into the hype of those Toywatches and they sure sung a lot when you have them on the wrist more so than the real Rolexes (I have the Submariner version), the Emporio Armani provides a good value for the money when you take design into consideration alone, movement talks aside of course. Nixon also had some cult followers among the hypsters in the last few years, although they scream "I am a cool surfer dude looks." 

Among all of these brands, which ones do you think can justify a well money spent ?


----------



## DMB (Sep 9, 2007)

none.


----------



## Beyond 'The Box' (Jan 11, 2008)

DMB said:


> none.


Hate to say it man, but ditto!


----------



## CUTiger (Oct 23, 2008)

DMB said:


> none.


Aren't most of them made by Fossil? I wouldn't wear any of the brands you mentioned.


----------



## watch-man7777 (Feb 17, 2007)

Buy a real watch.


----------



## Andrés (Aug 25, 2006)

None. Sorry.


----------



## Enzotemko (Jun 27, 2009)

I don't recognize any of those as watches.


----------



## NightScar (Sep 4, 2008)

LV owns Zenith and uses their movements in some of their more expensive watches.

If I had to choose, I wouldn't mind owning an LV Tambour:









The Chanel J12 x AP:









Or a Chanel Superleggera:


----------



## RJRJRJ (Apr 5, 2008)

I actually like some of the LVs, and from what I understand they are very well made, though way overpriced.

On the low level, Diesel watches are pretty neat and not expensive.


----------



## James Haury (Apr 10, 2008)

Skagen.


----------



## Enoran (Apr 15, 2009)

Nautica. They are well-made.


----------



## Guest (Aug 10, 2009)

None.

I would buy a Seiko or Citizen over any of those and work my way up from there.

Hamilton, Oris, Sinn, Tissot . . . all better choices and likely for less than most on the list.


----------



## watchmanee (Aug 9, 2009)

How about for aesthetic values, nobody really likes any of these watches ?

Hugo Boss, for example, uses Movado movement for its automatic watch. I think they're good buys if you can get them at 50% off retail, still slightly overpriced but you have to give some premium value to the hype of the brand names.


----------



## Guest (Aug 10, 2009)

watchmanee said:


> How about for aesthetic values, nobody really likes any of these watches ?
> 
> Hugo Boss, for example, uses Movado movement for its automatic watch. I think they're good buys if you can get them at 50% off retail, still slightly overpriced but you have to give some premium value to the hype of the brand names.


And again I disagree.

What does Hugo Boss have to do with high quality timepieces? Even at 50% off. What "aesthetic values" are you referring to? Are you trying to see if someone is impressed by a designer's name?

Frankly I give no value to a name on a watch where the name has nothing to do with high quality watch making.

As I said, Seiko is one of the few watch companies in existence that makes all its own parts and as such is a true watch company. I would buy a Seiko over anything on your list.


----------



## PyroLume (Dec 27, 2008)

NightScar said:


> Or a Chanel Superleggera:


I tried this on during my last vegas trip.. sadly they have discontinued the bead blasted ceramic bracelet and replaced it with some $10 plastic nonsense. They salesman claimed a general lack of interest in the ceramic bracelet.. oh well.


----------



## LUW (May 17, 2009)

None for me either. I would wear a simple Seiko but would not wear any of those.


----------



## Mike Rivera (Feb 21, 2006)

beshannon said:


> And again I disagree.
> 
> What does Hugo Boss have to do with high quality timepieces? Even at 50% off. What "aesthetic values" are you referring to? Are you trying to see if someone is impressed by a designer's name?
> 
> ...


*+1*

I would rather wear a Seiko, Orient, Citizen, etc. over ANY of those watches.

- Mike


----------



## cp_ste.croix (May 13, 2008)

while I wouldn't buy any of them now, my Nixon Rotolog was what got me into this hobby, so I have a soft spot for it and I do enjoy it aesthetically.


----------



## watchmanee (Aug 9, 2009)

beshannon said:


> And again I disagree.
> What does Hugo Boss have to do with high quality timepieces? Even at 50% off. What "aesthetic values" are you referring to? Are you trying to see if someone is impressed by a designer's name?
> Frankly I give no value to a name on a watch where the name has nothing to do with high quality watch making.
> As I said, Seiko is one of the few watch companies in existence that makes all its own parts and as such is a true watch company. I would buy a Seiko over anything on your list.


Well, I think any watch enthusiasts with some general knowldege would agree that none of these watches worth the offering prices they offer at retail. Thus the point of my asking was to find out what kind of equalibirium in prices do most of us think is the most worthy for any of these watches mentioned above, and since we've established that we "generally" don't buy these because of the quality as traditionally defined by many watch savy persons then obviously the decision making, including putting how much we should pay for them, has to be based on the on the aesthatic level, the designs, the visual presentation that our standard watch manufacturers just simply wouldn't dare to touch (although Zenith is cutting it close lately) . 

I love some of Hermes earlier designs and they are not offered by any other watch-makers, the novelty in the aesthetic element is there, the prestige is there (talking from a fashion-oriented point of view. And seriously now, if you look at some of the designs by Welder or Brera, there's very fresh, modern, funky and unconventional, bold designs that you can't get from any other brands. I like them but yes, I do think they're overpriced considering what you're getting exclusive of the designs, I have Breguet, IWC, Rolex, Chopard, UN in my collection but they don't make these, and beside I won't feel bad if my $200 Toywatch bang the door. Let me put it this way, Does Rolex or Omega make these designs ? No, Does Seiko, Citizen or Oris make these designs ? No. Certainly PP, AP, and VC don't. So, you have to draw the line and you have to pay for the design at least. It's a matter of appreciation to the highest aesthetic level.


----------



## Mike Rivera (Feb 21, 2006)

watchmanee said:


> ... if you look at some of the designs by Welder or Brera, there's very fresh, modern, funky and unconventional, bold designs that you can't get from any other brands. ...


Okay, I better understand what you're asking, but my answer is the same. I don't like "fresh, modern, funky and unconventional, bold designs". I like traditional watch designs and I'd still rather wear a Seiko, Citizen, Orient, or any other traditional watches from non-fashion brands over any of these.

I just couldn't see wearing any of these from a design perspective. I really prefer mechanical automatics (although I finally got over it and now do own a few select quartz models). Also I prefer my watches come from watch manufacturers, not designers.

Just me - that's what I like (since you asked).

- Mike


----------



## keeper (Jul 12, 2009)

beshannon said:


> And again I disagree.
> 
> What does Hugo Boss have to do with high quality timepieces? Even at 50% off. What "aesthetic values" are you referring to? Are you trying to see if someone is impressed by a designer's name?
> 
> ...


I am new to watches (leather jackets are my thing) but I do have a question for this type of statement, esp. since I keep seeing it around the forum: why is it so important that a watch manufacturer make all of the parts in their watches?

Mercedes-Benz and Rolls Royce don't, neither does Lamborghini or Ferrari, and I do not see anyone complaining about their product...is there something unique or endemic exclusively to watches that makes that an important issue?

I do not wish to offend in any way, simply want to learn and understand.


----------



## fireal (Mar 6, 2009)

none imo


----------



## link2derek (Jul 8, 2008)

And none for me either. But my girlfriend likes the LV's and a few of the Coach models.

_*D*_


----------



## socalbreeze (Feb 9, 2009)

I've seen alot of dudes rockin the Chanel J12. Its wayyy overpriced but it does look nice. I also like the LV Tambour. Dont sleep on LV, like Nightscar said, LVMH owns Zenith and uses their movements.

LOL, pretty soon Tag will belong in this category too..


----------



## niles316 (Jul 23, 2008)

Wow..so many seem to be against fashion watches. I don't see anything wrong with them. Their quality isn't lousy...i think many disapprove of the pricing..but isn't it normal to pay more for the brand name? It's like people buying a Mont Blanc pen when a Parker pen writes as well.

How many of us here will still buy a Seiko or an Oris if the name isn't shown on the dial? Don't we buy for the brand name to some extent?


----------



## picanhapilot (Mar 23, 2009)

niles316 said:


> How many of us here will still buy a Seiko or an Oris if the name isn't shown on the dial? Don't we buy for the brand name to some extent?


No.
The more popular variant of Stowa's Flieger/Airman style watches are without logo.


----------



## niles316 (Jul 23, 2008)

picanhapilot said:


> No.
> The more popular variant of Stowa's Flieger/Airman style watches are without logo.


Yes,but these are only a handful out of the many brands out there. N i believe if we do a poll,majority of us (NOT all) buy for the brand name to SOME extent.


----------



## Mike Rivera (Feb 21, 2006)

niles316 said:


> Yes,but these are only a handful out of the many brands out there. N i believe if we do a poll,majority of us (NOT all) buy for the brand name to SOME extent.


I do take into account the brand, but the brand has to reflect the product it's placed upon. Since these companies aren't watchmakers, the brand means nothing to me. If I was buying a shirt or purse for my wife, then these brands might be more important because they make shirts and purses (or whatever products they make).

I don't consider watches jewelry, so these brands don't work for me. Here, they're just putting a recognizable name on a watch. I also don't elevate an automobile when a designer's name is on it - all it means is they helped choose colors and materials.

When a brand is placed on a product just to raise the price, I won't buy it. Much like a Rolex baseball hat for $50. I won't pay $50 for a $15 hat because it says Rolex. I will buy their watches though because I feel they are worth the money in that they are truly well made, have a respected history, have traditional designs, and I can resell them for more that I paid for them (since I bought used, several years ago).

These brands are for people who simply want name recognition and I don't feel that describes the typical WUS member. Most of us here like our watches for what they do, how they look, how they perform, the history of the watch or brand, etc. Not because they say "Nike" (or Rolex for that matter) on them.

Just my $.02.

- Mike


----------



## H3O+ (May 23, 2009)

> Nautica. They are well-made.


That they are, but Nautica is owned by Timex, so you're essentially just buying a Timex, which we all agree are well made inexpensive watches.


----------



## brrrdn (Jun 16, 2008)

Not sure if I would ever buy fashion watches, but I have to say I like these David Yurman watches.


----------



## NightScar (Sep 4, 2008)

Mike Rivera said:


> I do take into account the brand, but the brand has to reflect the product it's placed upon. Since these companies aren't watchmakers, the brand means nothing to me. If I was buying a shirt or purse for my wife, then these brands might be more important because they make shirts and purses (or whatever products they make).
> 
> I don't consider watches jewelry, so these brands don't work for me. Here, they're just putting a recognizable name on a watch. I also don't elevate an automobile when a designer's name is on it - all it means is they helped choose colors and materials.
> 
> ...


I think that is some of the misconception, fashion designers isn't really making their own stuff anymore. Sure they make clothes but Gucci suits are made Cornelliani/Zegna, their shades are made by Luxotica and their shoes are made in a factory which also produces Prada, Ferragamo, YSL, etc... So I think that might be a bad analogy.

However, there are exceptions. Hermes are still hand made and they do claim no two bags are the same because of it. LV still manufactures their stuff and never goes on sale to keep their prestige.

Overall, even with watches, we are still paying for the name. I understand though that we would rather pay for a watchmakers name on a watch, as long as it's understood we are paying for the name in one way or the other. I have nothing against designer watches at all. I mean we did have a thread here asking what the main thing one looks for in a watch and most said the looks. Some of these designer watches are really nice and unique (not in a bad way at times). Like the Chanel J12 or LV Tambour, if I want that look, I don't think there are much or any alternatives. If it is a look I am really looking for and fell in love with it, I do not see a reason why I would completely ignore the watch just because it doesn't have an in-house movement or has a watchmakers name attached to it? That's just how I see it and I know that others would rather have the movement than the look and that is acceptable too.


----------



## Guest (Aug 11, 2009)

> why is it so important that a watch manufacturer make all of the parts in their watches?


While this is not a requirement for me, it represents a level of technical expertise and comittment to the quality of the product.

What I object to is the designer name and supposed "cachet" that comes with it, slapped on a watch that most likely contains a $5.00 quartz movement and a steel case/bracelet/strap made in China.

If people like them, that is great, they can buy them.

My view is that you can measure ANY of these so-called "fashion" watches against real watch companies products and decide for yourself.

I'll stick with my view that I would rather wear a Seiko or Citizen over anything on this list.

And for the record, my signature lists what I own and wear which runs the gamut of products.


----------



## watchmanee (Aug 9, 2009)

While we generally don't associate fashion (clothes, leather goods) makers with legitimate watch and jewelry manufacturers, I think we should, however, make a clear distinction on some of the higher quality brands such as Hermes in particular. 

Hermes has been in the watch business since 1912, although not as older and not as established as Cartier with its Santos design in the first decade of 20th century, Hermes has always been a company in which other top high-fashion products are benchmarked against, particularly their leather products, worldly known for their meticulous attention to details by hand-making every single stiches in their products, which later, although not immediately, goes into their standard watchmaking procedures as well. 

Hermes technically started making watches since the the second decade of the 20th century (I don't remember the exact date), although in the 80s and 90s most of their popular watches had movements that were quartz based but they made automatic watches with top quality as well, the design itself was on the upper end of the scale, and certainly on the very top of the ladder in fashion watch industry. From my observation, especially in the last few years, in leau of pushing their watch products to the up market, the finishing and quality in their watch cases are generally higher than generic watch manufacturers like Omega, Tag, and any manufacturers in that level. Let's not bring up VC, PP, Breguet and the upper echelon of the scale in watch industry here. 

In terms of movement I believe Hermes has been dedicating a separate production facility for its watchmaking business since 1970s in Switzerland somewhere. 

If you can justify the price, I think what is unique about Hermes is you're getting a top notch high fashion designs, which are distinctively "Hermes," you can identify a Hermes watch from a mile way by its designs (the Clipper, the Nomade, the Harnais, or the highly unique Dressage) and respectable by anyone below it (not Gucci, LV, Chanel or Dior here) and on the plus sign, Hermes' movement was exclusively handled by Michel Parmigiani and now trying to establish its own Vaucher movement which is standard in all Hermes watches.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

|> Hermes - Dressage


----------



## watchmanee (Aug 9, 2009)

Watchbreath said:


> |> Hermes - Dressage


Indeed, designed exclusively by Parmigiani with the touch of the swinging 60s in mind. :-!


----------



## niles316 (Jul 23, 2008)

How often have we seen comments that says Bell & Ross is overpriced or Tag watches cost much more than an equivalent of another brand? These are not considered fashion watches,yet we don't think it's absurd when someone pays $1000 for a Tag with a 2824 movement when u can get that kinda movement in a Hammy for half the price. So to me,as long as the watch is well made (in the sense that it tells accurate time n can last for decades),does it really matter whether it's a fashion brand? It's just a watch with a name on it. If we are unhappy about paying more for the brand name,then many of us should also be staying away from Fortis,Sinn,Tag,Kobold,etc with 2824 movements for example since they cost over $1k. Why are they so expensive? Those models that i picked are just normal auto movement without COSC.

If we think that those who buy a Hugo Boss watch or any other fashion watches as people who just wanna flaunt using the brand name,what of those who buy reputable watch brands with cheap stock movements in them?

All i'm saying is,let's not judge n turn one's nose up at fashion watches unless the quality really sucks.


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

:-s How does Christiaan van der Klaauw fit in, since he uses a 2824?


niles316 said:


> How often have we seen comments that says Bell & Ross is overpriced or Tag watches cost much more than an equivalent of another brand? These are not considered fashion watches,yet we don't think it's absurd when someone pays $1000 for a Tag with a 2824 movement when u can get that kinda movement in a Hammy for half the price. So to me,as long as the watch is well made (in the sense that it tells accurate time n can last for decades),does it really matter whether it's a fashion brand? It's just a watch with a name on it. If we are unhappy about paying more for the brand name,then many of us should also be staying away from Fortis,Sinn,Tag,Kobold,etc with 2824 movements for example since they cost over $1k. Why are they so expensive? Those models that i picked are just normal auto movement without COSC.
> 
> If we think that those who buy a Hugo Boss watch or any other fashion watches as people who just wanna flaunt using the brand name,what of those who buy reputable watch brands with cheap stock movements in them?
> 
> All i'm saying is,let's not judge n turn one's nose up at fashion watches unless the quality really sucks.


----------



## jewelerman (May 20, 2008)

I think you are asking the wrong crowd.These are branded watches and sell to a different type of watch wearer.even though Hermes is an over priced luxery brand, it does use better movements and wormanship compared to a few of the other brands.I own and still wear an early Gucci that was worth the money(bought at cost)and still will defend the early Quality of these timepieces.fashion branded watches are mostly overpriced,bought for the element of design,and are to be worn for a few years and then replaced.Anyone who gets caught up in paying more then $100 for a fashion name is over paying.


----------



## hpark21 (Oct 8, 2007)

I hear that CalvinKlein watches offer great bang for the buck. CK watch division is owned by Swatch group and uses genuine ETA movement.

See this article where they tear down ETA movement and he was using CK version of ETA 2004.

https://www.watchuseek.com/showthread.php?t=216945

I have seen a CK automatic for less than $200 on ebay new so it is not bad at all.


----------



## LUW (May 17, 2009)

niles316 said:


> Wow..so many seem to be against fashion watches. I don't see anything wrong with them. Their quality isn't lousy...i think many disapprove of the pricing..but isn't it normal to pay more for the brand name? It's like people buying a Mont Blanc pen when a Parker pen writes as well.
> 
> How many of us here will still buy a Seiko or an Oris if the name isn't shown on the dial? Don't we buy for the brand name to some extent?


I guess the problem isn't the watch _per se_, but the brand. Most guys here do not think of their watches as jewelery items, so nobody wants to have their watches associated with a fashion brand that is not an original watch brand. I at least think of it that way. But I'm sure most of these watches are good and well made, and even some do look nice.


----------



## Isthmus (Feb 13, 2006)

CUTiger said:


> Aren't most of them made by Fossil?


I was about to say the same thing.

I also have to ask if they are Fashion watches, then how is any one the "best" over the other? It sounds to me that construction while nice in some of the pricier ones is probably nice only "skin deep" (open one and see how far the attention to detail extends). Also if most of these fashion watches are made by only a small handful of large companies, such as fossil, shouldn't the title of "best" be going to the actual manufacturer?

BTW, that list forgot two heavyweights in the fashion watch game:

- Swatch; and
- Kenneth Cole

Both of those companies make a huge array of fairly original designs which are very popular, if for different reasons.

Another major fashion brand that is very distinct is Skagen, which from a styling POV if probably my favorite fashion brand.


----------



## Isthmus (Feb 13, 2006)

keeper said:


> I am new to watches (leather jackets are my thing) but I do have a question for this type of statement, esp. since I keep seeing it around the forum: why is it so important that a watch manufacturer make all of the parts in their watches?
> 
> Mercedes-Benz and Rolls Royce don't, neither does Lamborghini or Ferrari, and I do not see anyone complaining about their product...is there something unique or endemic exclusively to watches that makes that an important issue?
> 
> I do not wish to offend in any way, simply want to learn and understand.


Your analogy fails to take one thing into consideration. while the automotive companies you mentioned don manufacture many of the parts they use, they do work hand in hand with those who do to design them test them and ultimately they assemble the vehicles that use them themselves.

Most of the brands (if not all of them) mentioned in the OP's initial post where qualified as being better than others, with no argument explaining what made them so. on top of that those pieces are not made by these companies using outsourced parts, but rather they are made and designed by 3rd party manufacturers ENTIRELY, and branded with the design house's brand. Big difference.


----------



## watchmanee (Aug 9, 2009)

Isthmus said:


> I was about to say the same thing.
> 
> I also have to ask if they are Fashion watches, then how is any one the "best" over the other? It sounds to me that construction while nice in some of the pricier ones is probably nice only "skin deep" (open one and see how far the attention to detail extends).


If you read my comments about Hermes (of course it's an exception) then you know where I am heading with the thread.



> Also if most of these fashion watches are made by only a small handful of large companies, such as fossil, shouldn't the title of "best" be going to the actual manufacturer?


Of course not, are you saying that brands like Breguet, Blancpain, GO, Jaquet Droz are also made by Swatch ? It doesn't work that way.

Fossil might own Burberrys, but the movement inside the higher end Burberry automatic models are at least better than Fossil's generic lines (which are mostly cheap quartz anyway). Of course, they're still not worth the $700+ they're charging for them. And the finishing quality in Burberrys are better as well.


----------



## Isthmus (Feb 13, 2006)

I was referring to swatch the watch brand not the brands owned by Swatch Group Ltd.


----------



## niles316 (Jul 23, 2008)

Funny u mentioned CK cos that was what i wore today. It's an ETA quartz with sapphire crystal n screwdown crown. I bought it for around $200. Some may consider it expensive but i have no regrets cos i don't see this design on other brands.


----------



## Tragic (Feb 11, 2006)

You just can't ruin your "street cred" in forums liking the wrong watches.


----------



## ecunited (Jul 22, 2009)

I think that if someone gains pleasure from being able to look at their wrist and think "I have a bad-ass watch!" multiple times a day, more power to them. If someone likes the design of a Brera and values that feeling at $600, then it's a good deal for them.


----------



## h2xmark (Feb 28, 2009)

i remember a small article in International watch magazine a while back about Hermes, they are a manufactor and have a couple of there own movements now, swiss made. Looked like some nice stuff, it would be something you would not see on everybodys arm like some of the other stuff out there


----------



## watchmanee (Aug 9, 2009)

Isthmus said:


> I was referring to swatch the watch brand not the brands owned by Swatch Group Ltd.


Noted. b-)


----------



## keeper (Jul 12, 2009)

watchmanee said:


> If you read my comments about Hermes (of course it's an exception) then you know where I am heading with the thread.


I am a leather jacket guy, relatively new to watches, and I do not want to derail the thread, but while hermes leather products are good, they are badly over-priced, and that can also be said for many of their other items IMO.

$500 for a scarf? $10,000 for a leather pocket book? Their leather jackets are good, but I wouldn't say that there are not others equal to or better...Hermes is a pure fashion brand.


----------



## keeper (Jul 12, 2009)

Isthmus said:


> Your analogy fails to take one thing into consideration. while the automotive companies you mentioned don manufacture many of the parts they use, they do work hand in hand with those who do to design them test them and ultimately they assemble the vehicles that use them themselves.
> 
> Most of the brands (if not all of them) mentioned in the OP's initial post where qualified as being better than others, with no argument explaining what made them so. on top of that those pieces are not made by these companies using outsourced parts, but rather they are made and designed by 3rd party manufacturers ENTIRELY, and branded with the design house's brand. Big difference.


For cars, some testing is required, but there are many parts just outsourced by spec, and added into the vehicle when it is constructed...

As for watches, the movement is clearly important, but 99.9% of the public could not care if the watch has a battery in it, an auto movement, or tiny monkeys on treadmills, they only care how does the watch case/dial look.

I am on a few indiana jones gear/leather jacket forums, and the issues are similar, if you walk down the street, 99.99% of the public won't know what hide you are wearing, let alone whether it is "SA" (screen-accurate). A person can spend all of eternity trying to obtain the "perfect" indy jacket, as they can in a watch, but it will never happen.

As I said, the movement is important, but I do not feel that a company that expends all of its energies on the appearance of the watch is necessarily any lesser than a watch manufacturer that does both movements and their cases. Just my HO.


----------



## watchmanee (Aug 9, 2009)

keeper said:


> I am a leather jacket guy, relatively new to watches, and I do not want to derail the thread, but while hermes leather products are good, they are badly over-priced, and that can also be said for many of their other items IMO.
> 
> $500 for a scarf? $10,000 for a leather pocket book? Their leather jackets are good, but I wouldn't say that there are not others equal to or better...Hermes is a pure fashion brand.


Hermes is not just a fashion brand, in the leather good markets they're arguable the Crème de la Crème in the very high-end of fashion market. As with everything in luxury, you have to pay for the prestige. Logic goes out the door. 

Still, when we are talking about their watches, they're not badly prices if you take into account this "intangible" prestige element. Fashion concious people will still seek their products and pay, regardless.


----------



## Isthmus (Feb 13, 2006)

keeper said:


> As I said, the movement is important, but I do not feel that a company that expends all of its energies on the appearance of the watch is necessarily any lesser than a watch manufacturer that does both movements and their cases. Just my HO.


then it sounds like you're the target customer for fashion watch brands. I think you'll find that amongst collectors the interest is in real watch companies, not in branded fashion watches.


----------



## keeper (Jul 12, 2009)

Isthmus said:


> then it sounds like you're the target customer for fashion watch brands. I think you'll find that amongst collectors the interest is in real watch companies, not in branded fashion watches.


Not sure about that, take Laco for instance. Their movements are off the shelf, but I think their flieger line is superb and an incredible value. While the fliegers are certainly not going to be considered "trendy" by the Hollywood crowd, I think they are rather stylish... :think:


----------



## keeper (Jul 12, 2009)

watchmanee said:


> Hermes is not just a fashion brand, in the leather good markets they're arguable the Crème de la Crème in the very high-end of fashion market. As with everything in luxury, you have to pay for the prestige. Logic goes out the door.
> 
> Still, when we are talking about their watches, they're not badly prices if you take into account this "intangible" prestige element. Fashion concious people will still seek their products and pay, regardless.


IMO their leather products are so overpriced as to be on the edge of hilarious. I would put an Aero, Vanson or LW against them in terms of leather quality and jacket construction any day... but I digress, this is WOT.


----------



## Enzotemko (Jun 27, 2009)

Ralph Loren is a good example of a high fashion designer who is actually very serious and interested in high quality watches. He now puts them out with the help of high end industry leaders.

There may be others, but my impression of 'designer' names on watches is that they are inferior products in general.

On the other hand, I have seen Italian and Japanese quartz watches of very high modern (cool) design using Seiko movements. These are very slick watches from $100 to $400 dollars. See Miyake.


----------



## bogmanfan (Jun 19, 2007)

I was given a gift of an Emporio Armani Meccanico for my birthday a few years back and I think it's a gorgeous watch. Really well made, timekeeping is spot on. Guilloche dial is easily a match for my Dubey & Schaldenbrand. Applied rose gold numerals, sapphire crystal. Admittedly it's a limited edition to commemorate 10 years of the watch line, so it may be higher quality than their other models.
To be honest, if I photoshopped a high-end watch manufacturer's name onto the dial and posted a pic I'd get plenty of oohs and aahs from the watch snobs on here. I don't usually buy watches from fashion designers, but to say they're all rubbish is just snobbery in my opinion.


----------



## Reno (Sep 23, 2008)

I wouldn't spit on a J12 :think:










even the white one... for the summer b-)


----------



## s15driftking (Sep 7, 2009)

NightScar said:


> LV owns Zenith and uses their movements in some of their more expensive watches.
> 
> If I had to choose, I wouldn't mind owning an LV Tambour:


This watch deserves more tha a "fashion" status in my opinion. Just because its marked LV doesn't mean its cheap and or only capable of earning a "fashion" status.

I personally love the design! I would like to own one some day. Not the exact one shown, but the LV277


----------



## SquishyPanda (Mar 13, 2008)

why do so many people come into the Fashion Watch forum just to say "I wouldn't buy any of the crappy watches this forum discusses?"

A lot of "real" watch companies put off-the-shelf movements into their own distinct cases, then enthusiasts spit on "fashion" watch makers for doing the same thing :think: Granted, you're less likely to find an ETA in a Fossil, but when it comes to Miyotas (I'm about to say something abhorrent, and i know it) how much really separates Laco from Invicta? (Aside from the pisspoor qc, cs, and borderline unethical marketing, I know)

Watches in general aren't strictly practical, and many of us buy "outdated" and "obsolete" mechanical technology because we adore the intricacy and craftsmanship of it, not because we demand split-second accuracy. Similarly, a lot of watches warrant some attention just because we like the way they look. Why buy an SKX007 over a Monster or vice-versa? They're the exact same movement in a different case, and priced similarly. You buy one because you like the way it looks more than the other. Why spend $3000 on a ceramic Chanel (I don't really know how much those cost, just an example) and not a Submariner? Because everyone has a Submariner or something that looks like it, and it's more important to that buyer to have something unique and eye-catching than something with a lot of history and cachet, but doesn't look all that special to 99% of people.

You can draw conclusions about what kind of character would spend good money on aesthetics rather than quality, but that's just being kind of catty, I think. It's not like they're spending your money.


----------



## ecunited (Jul 22, 2009)

SquishyPanda said:


> why do so many people come into the Fashion Watch forum just to say "I wouldn't buy any of the crappy watches this forum discusses?"
> 
> A lot of "real" watch companies put off-the-shelf movements into their own distinct cases, then enthusiasts spit on "fashion" watch makers for doing the same thing :think: Granted, you're less likely to find an ETA in a Fossil, but when it comes to Miyotas (I'm about to say something abhorrent, and i know it) how much really separates Laco from Invicta? (Aside from the pisspoor qc, cs, and borderline unethical marketing, I know)
> 
> ...


Also - with few exceptions, everyone is spending their money (good or bad) on aesthetics. One might limit his/her consideration set based on "quality", features, size, value for the money, etc. But at the core, most of us are buying watches because they look great on our wrists.


----------



## Ecko (Dec 14, 2009)

I find it funny that some people put down watches like Fossil because they say they are just about the look of the watch and nothing else. The look is what makes all of us buy the watches we do. Nobody will buy an ugly watch just because it has a certain movement inside, we buy it because of how it looks. 

As for quality well, my first watch was a Fossil that I bought over 15 years ago and it's still ticking. I wore that watch every damn day for over two years, then it became my work watch.

Say what you will but, Fossil makes some good looking watches that can take a beating as well as a watch three time it's price.

I also wonder if the people putting down these watches have ever even owned one of them?


----------



## CLEANS-HIGH (Feb 26, 2009)

I think Gucci watches are very well made and the bracelets are excellent, I don't know much about Hermes but that they are expensive, I like Kenneth cole watches and have 2 of them one with a rubber strap Japanese movement and one that I just picked up at TJ max for 100.00
Brown carbon fiber on the dial and on the sides of the case, leather strap (very well done I might add) Swiss ISA movement and a sapphire crystal, It had a retail tag of 475.OO. Very nice watch, I believe most of the fashion watches are made by select companies Like Tommy hilfiger (movado) coach (movado) I am not sure who if not the company makes Kenneth cole watches.


----------



## taint it sweet (Aug 27, 2009)

beshannon said:


> And again I disagree.
> 
> What does Hugo Boss have to do with high quality timepieces? Even at 50% off. What "aesthetic values" are you referring to? Are you trying to see if someone is impressed by a designer's name?


Are you implying that you haven't bought any of your watches based on aesthetic value?? I would venture to say that before you focus on things like movement, comfort, etc. the watch has to catch your eye..just like people saying that personality is all that matters are lying...you're not likely to get to know their personality if you're not attracted enough to the "shell" that covers it...


----------



## Ecko (Dec 14, 2009)

I think the only real difference between "fashion" watches and other brands are the amount of different designs that are put out. Fossil may have a large number of watches to choose from but their quality has been top notch for me. I never had one stop working and that is after years of abuse.


----------



## thesmoth (Jan 27, 2010)

I know guess? watches are in the low end category, but what about Guess collection watches? They are advertised as being swiss made with swiss movements (mostly quartz).

Some of them are quite expensive (500-1000$), but there is a nice simple one for $235 canadian that my girlfriend really likes.


----------



## Paul Curtis (Feb 8, 2010)

These are all the beautiful and fantastic watches and they are in vogue and fashion these days. All the wrist watches are extremely popular as well as demandable for sure.


----------



## abraz (Aug 9, 2008)

I love the Diesel design.
Sometimes it's nice to have one fashion in the collection.


----------



## IanC (Jul 3, 2010)

> Well, I think any watch enthusiasts with some general knowldege would agree that none of these watches worth the offering prices they offer at retail.




Highly debatable. There are no shortage of "real" watch brands that just repackage ETA movements with chinese components and then go into full marketing blitz mode about "made in swiss"(Actually assembled from chinese components in switzerland), "exclusive" "timeless classic" "bold" "example of a style" "precious" so on so forth and selling it at an incredible markup in the 4 or 5 digit range.

Brand names and marketing command large price premiums, even if the actual quality of the watch itsef is the same a sub $100 watch(although nobody will actually admit it, they will insist they can feel the quality).


----------



## Mitch47 (Sep 18, 2010)

thesmoth said:


> I know guess? watches are in the low end category, but what about Guess collection watches? They are advertised as being swiss made with swiss movements (mostly quartz).
> 
> Some of them are quite expensive (500-1000$), but there is a nice simple one for $235 canadian that my girlfriend really likes.


As a new member, I found this thread and it is so interesting for a watch newbie like myself! I have been searching for a watch for my girl and perhaps for myself too. GC watches look nice and although I am not a pro in issues like machinery/movement, the Swiss Made sounds good. GC watches are made by Sequel AG, which is owned by Timex. So basically, a Timex hearth with a fancy fashion cover. That doesn't sound too bad.

Mitch


----------



## Mitch47 (Sep 18, 2010)

Mitch47 said:


> As a new member, I found this thread and it is so interesting for a watch newbie like myself! I have been searching for a watch for my girl and perhaps for myself too. GC watches look nice and although I am not a pro in issues like machinery/movement, the Swiss Made sounds good. GC watches are made by Sequel AG, which is owned by Timex. So basically, a Timex hearth with a fancy fashion cover. That doesn't sound too bad.
> 
> Mitch


I finished my search for a watch. I purchased a Bulova for my girl. Anyways, I think I made a mistake saying that Sequel AG manufactures GC watches. I read that they are only responsible for the marketing and logistics part. So who makes GC watches anyways? What does the Swiss Made actually mean?

Mitch


----------



## FineQualityWatches (Jul 23, 2010)

Among your high end watches, there really is not one that is worth the premium you pay for the name alone. As time pieces, they are all just fine at keeping time, but so is a Timex. If I had to go with one, I'd opt for Hermes, because its cachet is not quite so trendy as the others.' I agree that Gucci is debatable.

In the mid range category there, again, is no real distinction. I'd go with Momo and Burberry only because their names alone suggest the ultimate in cool or in tweedy traditontionalism. 

None in the low end. I'd leave out Android all together. I have not had good experiences with them (I own two). 

Interesting question.


----------



## sogolonmovement (Oct 6, 2010)

I'm really "in love" with this timepiece, designed for the fashion-forward youth. It's the settimana junior from Ochs and Junior...

for the little hipster in your life&#8230; « the sogolon movement: timepiece news, reviews and lifestyle


----------



## srmdalt (Feb 20, 2008)

niles316 said:


> Wow..so many seem to be against fashion watches. I don't see anything wrong with them. Their quality isn't lousy...i think many disapprove of the pricing..but isn't it normal to pay more for the brand name? It's like people buying a Mont Blanc pen when a Parker pen writes as well.
> 
> How many of us here will still buy a Seiko or an Oris if the name isn't shown on the dial? Don't we buy for the brand name to some extent?


+1 Yes you are 100% correct. This is a sort of reverse-snobbery against the brands, because of their cheese factor. But it is still hypocritical, because Rolex and Panerai, for example, are marked up as high as many of these fashion brands. Panerai doesn't use in-house movements in all models (in fact not in many), and I know Rolex has used an outside (?Zenith) movements at least in it's Daytona at some point. Ton's of "traditional" watches use Eta's and Sellitas.

It's just not "cool" to dig fashion brands (it really isn't, actually), but it doesn't need to elicit quite degree of vitriol it seems to.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

ecunited said:


> Also - with few exceptions, everyone is spending their money (good or bad) on aesthetics. One might limit his/her consideration set based on "quality", features, size, value for the money, etc. But at the core, most of us are buying watches because they look great on our wrists.


+1 Amen bro.
If one thinks about how a watch looks, and is persuaded by one and not another, then he is already participating in "fashion" - which is not to be confused with "trend".
Fashion is about looking good, and how people share in that wave of subjectivity that puts a stamp to a time.
What? B&R is NOT a fashion watch? Yeah, right. Whoever seriously believes that needs to get out the closet more often. Maybe for good.


----------



## Ananda (Feb 28, 2008)

To answer the original question... Which are worth the money? I honestly don't know. I know I wouldn't spend any of my money on them. But that's me. I have and wear a Gucci which was my father's; so I wear it more for sentimentality than personal horological pleasure/taste. If I saw a Hermes or a Chanel in the wild I'd definitely be intrigued. I guess at the end of the day I'm more your standard WIS... whatever that means?


----------



## snowfox (Dec 22, 2010)

keeper said:


> IMO their leather products are so overpriced as to be on the edge of hilarious. I would put an Aero, Vanson or LW against them in terms of leather quality and jacket construction any day... but I digress, this is WOT.


They do make nice leather for cameras though 










OT but what bike do you ride? I like Aero a lot. They custom sculpted my last jacket with CE protector pads inside.


----------



## Tempvs Ex Machina (Feb 7, 2009)

snowfox said:


> They do make nice leather for cameras though
> 
> 
> 
> ...


@snowfox: Nice camera. A Leica, right? Which model is it?

@this post: Honestly, I think some fashion watches look great, while others look too mainstream. There are some that explore new watch designs, i.e. Bvlgari and Louis Vuitton, and I think they do a good job of it. Would I get one? Probably not, especially given the price - they have to be justified with functional brilliance. Even if these fashion names partnered with a high-end and reputable watchmaker, I'm not sure they make the quality cut. The Ferrari/Panerai watch I may consider because the watches source Panerai's in-house movements. The same goes for the Ralph Lauren watch shown below, which houses IWC's movement. I would much rather have these brands team up with name brand watchmakers than to make their own watches. Most fashion brands, however, do not make the quality cut in my book, even in terms of aesthetics. The mainstream design approach seems copied over from the popular watchmakers with "easy" tweaks to some of the design elements. On top of that, they can source ETA movements with relative ease. This is a complete turn off for me as it is a consequent afterthought of mass _accessorizing_ of fashion branding, IMHO. Give me originality, either aesthetically or mechanically (both if you want my consumption); and give me soul.


----------

