# Ranking of watch brands (by price), revised.



## Tien (Jun 13, 2012)

Here comes the revised list as promised in this thread (I've been held up by work): https://www.watchuseek.com/f2/ranking-watch-brands-754520-7.html

Given the number, length and heavy moderating of the replies in the above thread, I think it's quite obvious that the list was a bit difficult to cope with for the thick-skinned.

A couple of clarifications might be helpful:

• The ranking is based on accessibility/exclusivity by price. Specifically, it does not account for the horological prowess of the brand, quality of the brand, the history of the brand, public opinion of the brand, my opinion of the brand. Indeed, my personal preference list would look very different. For example, I rate JLC in the very top and, while in a lower division, I rate Tissot highly. That just means that these brands are good value for the money to me. Reversely, I would not think of wearing some of the super expensive brands. Price does not equal good taste. So is the list meaningless? That's up to you to decide. If you think it's meaningless, it would seem vastly more rational to spend your time on something meaningful rather than worry about the omission of certain watches. I personally think it's meaningful because it contributes to an understanding of how the brands are positioned in the market and which brands that are accessible at different budget levels.

• The price segmentation was primarily based on these lists I've found on WUS: 
https://www.watchuseek.com/attachments/f2/58109d1186436719-top-swiss-watches-brands-watchbrands.jpg
https://www.watchuseek.com/attachme...h-end-mid-range-low-end-watch%20breakdown.jpg
Chronocentric

• My own estimates are based on something equivalent to a trimmed average, i.e. discounting cheap odd lines or exclusive lines. The estimates are rough and may well be faulty. Only in cases when it seemed like a toss-up between one or the other category have I tried to judge the exclusivity by looking at which other brands the particular brand is being sold together with. Country refers to the country of origin, i.e. where the company was founded.

• Lastly, thanks to those who gave constructive and helpful replies. I've made a number of changes to the list as suggested.

Enough babble, here's the list:

*Ultra-level luxury (All) approx > $40,000* 
 Bovet
De Grisogono
Dewitt
F.P. Journe
Greubel Forsay
Lang & Heyne
Philippe Dufour
Richard Mille
Roger Dubois
R.W. Smith
Thomas Prescher
Urwerk
*
Top-level luxury (Swiss) approx $10,000 - $40,000:*
Audemars Piguet
Armin Strom
Blancpain
Breguet
Daniel Roth
Frank Muller
Gerald Genta
H. Moser & Cie
Hublot
Jaeger LeCoultre
Jaquet Droz
Léon Hatot
Parmigiani
Patek Philippe
Piaget
Romain Jerome
Ulysse Nardin
Vacheron Constantin

*Top-level luxury (Other countries) approx $10,000 - $40,000:*
A. Lange & Söhne (Germany)
Benzinger (Germany)
Halda (Sweden)
Harry Winston (USA)
Glashütte Original (Germany)
Van Cleef & Arpel (France)

*Mid-level luxury (Swiss) approx $4,500 - $10,000:*
Breitling
Bucherer
Chopard
Corum
Eberhard & Co
Girrard Perregaux
Graham
IWC
Jaerman & Stübi
Omega
Rolex
Vulcain
Zenith

*Mid-level luxury (Other countries) approx $4,500 - $10,000:*
Anonimo Firenze (Italy)
Bremont (UK)
Bvlgari (Italy)
Cartier (France)
Chanel (France)
Christopher Ward (UK)
Chronoswiss (Germany)
Cuervo Y Sobrinos (Cuba)
Dior (France)
Hermes (France)
Jacob & Co (USA)
Jörg Schauer (Germany)
Kobold (USA)
Linde Werdelin (Denmark)
Louis Vuitton (France)
Panerai (Italy)
Tiffany (USA)

*Entry-level luxury (Swiss) approx $1,500 - $4,500:*
Alpina
Armand Nicolet
Baume & Mercier
Clerc
d.freemont
Doxa
Ebel
Edox
Fortis
Longines
Maurice Lacroix
Oris
Perrelet
Rado
Raymond Weil
Revue Thommen
Tag Heuer
Tudor

*Entry-level luxury (Other countries) approx $1,500 - $4,500:*
Azimuth (Singapore)
Ball (USA)
Bell & Ross (France)
Gucci (Italy)
Junghans (Germany)
Luminox (USA)
Montblanc (Germany)
Mühle Glashütte (Germany)
Nivrel (Germany)
Nomos (Germany)
RGM (USA)
Schaumburg (Germany)
Sinn (Germany)
Sjöö Sandström (Sweden)
Stowa (Germany)
Tutima (Germany)
U-Boat (Italy)

*Premium (Swiss) approx $500-$1,500:*
Atlantic
Certina
Frédérique Constant
Glycine
Mido
Movado
Tissot
Victorinox

*Premium (Other countries) approx $500-$1,500:*
Hamilton (USA)
Laco (Germany)
Seiko (Japan)
Vollmer (Germany)
Vostok (Russia)

*Basic (Swiss) approx < $500:*
Jacques Lemans
Swatch
Wenger

*Basic (Other countries) approx < $500:*
Android (USA)
Armani (Italy)
Bernhardt (USA)
Bulova (USA)
Casio (Japan)
Citizen (Japan)
CK (USA)
Diesel (USA)
DKNY (USA)
Dolce & Gabbana (Italy)
Festina (Spain)
Fossil (USA)
Gant (Sweden)
Guess (USA)
Gul (UK)
HMT (India)
Hugo Boss (Germany)
Ingersoll (USA)
Invicta (USA)
Lambretta (Italy)
Michael Kors (USA)
Orient (Japan)
Poljot (Russia)
Pulsar (Japan)
Sea-Gull (China)
Sector (Italy)
Skagen (USA)
Stührling (USA)
Suunto (Finland)
Swiss Legend (USA)
Timex (USA)
Triwa (Sweden)


----------



## Atoning Unifex (Aug 21, 2012)

Let the games begin.....


----------



## WUSWIS (Aug 14, 2012)

Van Cleef & Arpel

How come?


----------



## Athram (May 31, 2012)

EDIT: alphabetical list, my bad!


----------



## WUSWIS (Aug 14, 2012)

Athram said:


> Cartier needs to be higher. They are certainly higher than Omega and IWC.


Cartier has been ranked in Accessible Luxury - Non Swiss so it's on the same level as Omega and IWC. That sounds about right.


----------



## bacari (Nov 14, 2007)

Tien said:


> . I personally think it's meaningful because it contributes an understanding of how the brands are positioned in the market and which brands that are accessible at different budget levels.
> 
> 
> > I appreciate your committment to revise and complete your list. However, I just don't see the purpose or how this list would help one understand *how *brands are positioned. I'm also not quite sure why one would need a list to figure out which brands are accessible at different budget levels. Probably better to call this a list opposed to a ranking. Just my 2 cents.


----------



## Janne (Apr 16, 2007)

Much better. But, there is still one problem. Within one brand, you can have a watch for 5K USD, and another for 100K Usd, or even more.
Also, some brands ( A Lange&S.) only use precious metal cases, which brings up the price.
Please add HMT ( India)
Sjöö- Sandström , Halda (both Sweden)


----------



## watchma (Jul 11, 2012)

The list is meaningless - You've completely omitted some big and long established players.!?

If you dont know who I'm not telling but these guys have their own forum section!

Meh


----------



## Tien (Jun 13, 2012)

WUSWIS said:


> Van Cleef & Arpel
> 
> How come?


Hmm, that one is straight off the bubble chart but I quickly checked the VC&A website and prices do generally seem to be in the $10,000 + range?


----------



## charlieboy89 (Dec 21, 2011)

This guy wont give up eh?

Gotta give him credit for wasting his time.


----------



## geoffbot (Mar 12, 2011)

*All he's done is listed them by price order so there is no need for any disagreement here whatsoever.

*Feel free to correct him though - for exampleALS's cheapest watch is more like $15k.


----------



## Janne (Apr 16, 2007)

geoffbot said:


> *All he's done is listed them by price order so there is no need for any disagreement here whatsoever.
> 
> *Feel free to correct him though - for exampleALS's cheapest watch is more like $15k.


Exactly what I wanted to say. An ALS is about 15K, but WITH a 18 K gold case. If they started making S/s cases that price would drop well below 10K.
PP's cheapest is what, about 7K? S/s case, quartz movement.


----------



## WUSWIS (Aug 14, 2012)

Tien said:


> Hmm, that one is straight off the bubble chart but I quickly checked the VC&A website and prices do generally seem to be in the $10,000 + range?


Probably has to do with diamonds and metals. I wasn't aware they had anything significant in the time-keeping department.


----------



## geoffbot (Mar 12, 2011)

Janne said:


> Exactly what I wanted to say. An ALS is about 15K, but WITH a 18 K gold case. If they started making S/s cases that price would drop well below 10K.
> PP's cheapest is what, about 7K? S/s case, quartz movement.


Yep. Lange is surprisingly good vfm. Bit like JLC.

Edited: tapatalk being weird!


----------



## Janne (Apr 16, 2007)

.


----------



## Seiko_Licker (Feb 17, 2012)

Way too many fashion brands still present...


----------



## ken_sturrock (Oct 24, 2010)

It's the gift that keeps on giving!


----------



## Athram (May 31, 2012)




----------



## Formerguide (Apr 12, 2011)

Here's a fairly comprehensive list I believe, of US currency. No arguing, since it's price only...

Top tier-
$100 bill

Mid tier
$20 bill
$5 bill

Low tier
$10 bill
Quarter

Common tier
Nickel
Penny 
Yen

Dan


----------



## Watchbreath (Feb 12, 2006)

:-( Grooan, sob.


----------



## Tien (Jun 13, 2012)

Janne, 
I've added your brands. I agree that the price differentiation is complicated by each brand having a wide range of prices. The method used here is something like trimmed average - i.e. at what price point are the main lines accessible, discounting odd cheapies or premium lines with complications/precious metals. In cases these are the main lines, then yeah, that has affected the brand's price rank.

Geoffbot
Thanks for the input. Not sure though where you want the ALS, it's in the highest category (exclusive luxury).


----------



## GETS (Dec 8, 2011)

I actually quite like lists. I don't see why so many people are against these kind of "reference posts"? He's hardly offending anyone so for once I would go along with the "don't like it? - don't read it" advice.

Regards,


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

Citizen's a toughie. Sure they have a lot of watches under $500 (in the USA), but their Chronomasters and The Citizen models start at $2500 (with the quartz versions being the most accurate wristwatches in the world), I'd guess their Exceed lines begin in the $700 - $800 range and top out at $2000. The Signature series hangs out around the $1000 level while the Campanolas have some of the most intricate dial work going and cost three times that. I'm pretty sure their Promaster Dive watches top out around $1000 too and most of their atomic watches list for at least $600. They also must being doing top secret stuff in Japan (like that Appleseed and Mastermind) that go for at least $3000 to $5000.


----------



## Dixan (Oct 10, 2009)

geoffbot said:


> *All he's done is listed them by price order so there is no need for any disagreement here whatsoever.
> 
> *Feel free to correct him though - for exampleALS's cheapest watch is more like $15k.


Yeah, but once again, he's done a horrible job of doing even that. :roll:

Far be it for JLC to need _any_ defending to genuine enthusiasts, but his glaring miscategorization of this well received and very often discussed brand seems like an egregious mistake that only the genuinely misinformed or _truly_ knowledge-less could make. For the record, OP, and for no other reason, JLCs start at around $7,000 (in the US) and there are only a handful of models at under $10,000. The vast majority, likely 95% or more, of their venerated collection cost well above the $10,000 threshold.

The only point being, if you really think brand new JLCs start in the $4,000 range, then you simply have zero grasp of the watch industry in general, and your list is even more meaningless than if it was done with any sort of accuracy. In fact, I'm certain now that you have zero grasp about the reality of the watch industry at all.

Please: Stop The Inanity!


----------



## GETS (Dec 8, 2011)

ljb187 said:


> Citizen's a toughie. Sure they have a lot of watches under $500 (in the USA), but their Chronomasters and The Citizen models start at $2500 (with the quartz versions being the most accurate wristwatches in the world), I'd guess their Exceed lines begin in the $700 - $800 range and top out at $2000. The Signature series hangs out around the $1000 level while the Campanolas have some of the most intricate dial work going and cost three times that. I'm pretty sure their Promaster Dive watches top out around $1000 too and most of their atomic watches list for at least $600. They also must being doing top secret stuff in Japan (like that Appleseed and Mastermind) that go for at least $3000 to $5000.


I think the OP is simply going with a ranking that would reflect the average price range of the brand? For example Longines is a brand of watch I really like and they certainly have watches that deserve to elevate themselves to one higher banding. But in general the OP is probably correct and they deserve to be in the section they have been allocated.

Regards,


----------



## marchone (Dec 20, 2007)

What is this effort a reference for? No criticism intended.

Janne's point is well made. Many companies cross-market at different price points. It keeps growth in the family. Example: Buy a Seiko SKX173 and ten years later spring for a MM300. Or better.


----------



## Dixan (Oct 10, 2009)

marchone said:


> What is this effort a reference for? No criticism intended.


I think he thinks this is something that we've needed or wanted for some time now, something important and meaningful for us to reference, and he's doing everyone some great favor. That or he thinks he'll get a prize at the end. If that's the case, I'm rooting for him. I hope it's a cookie.

(Okay, that's entirely too much time wasted on the subject by me. Moving on....)


----------



## Roller.959 (Nov 29, 2011)

Tien said:


> • The ranking is based on accessibility/exclusivity by price. Specifically, it does not account for the horological prowess of the brand, quality of the brand, the history of the brand, public opinion of the brand, my opinion of the brand. Indeed, my personal preference list would look very different. For example, I rate JLC in the very top and, while in a lower division, I rate Tissot highly. That just means that these brands are good value for the money to me. Reversely, I would not think of wearing some of the super expensive brands. Price does not equal good taste. So is the list meaningless? That's up to you to decide. If you think it's meaningless, it would seem vastly more rational to spend your time on something meaningful rather than worry about the omission of certain watches. I personally think it's meaningful because it contributes to an understanding of how the brands are positioned in the market and which brands that are accessible at different budget levels.


My constructive criticism: If this list is based on exclusivity and price, then why bother? The informed buyers can all use Google to determine price and exclusivity, and this "ranking" would do little other than mis-inform uniformed buyers. Further, the brand positioning can change rapidly which would make this list obsolete relatively quickly. So is it vastly more rational to spend my time on something meaningful? Well let's see, I am a member of a watch forum to not only become informed, but offer whatever meager help I can to those newer to the hobby. Therefore, as I endeavor to be a productive member, I'd have to say that anyone looking to learn something about manufacturers and the watches they offer should immediately discount such a list.



Tien said:


> • The price segmentation was primarily based on these lists I've found on WUS:
> https://www.watchuseek.com/attachments/f2/58109d1186436719-top-swiss-watches-brands-watchbrands.jpg
> https://www.watchuseek.com/attachme...h-end-mid-range-low-end-watch%20breakdown.jpg
> Chronocentric


Ok, so you are citing these as sources. How old is this information? I know that Chronocentric has been up since 1998, and by the info on their site, hasn't been content updated since 2005 when the founder committed suicide. Who knows how old that chart is... The other classifications...how old are they? I honestly don't know, but if these are the three prime sources, you may very likely be dealing with obsolete info.



Tien said:


> • My own estimates are based on something equivalent to a trimmed average, i.e. discounting cheap odd lines or exclusive lines. The estimates are rough and may well be faulty. Only in cases when it seemed like a toss-up between one or the other category have I tried to judge the exclusivity by looking at which other brands the particular brand is being sold together with. Country refers to the country of origin, i.e. where the company was founded.


So if your "ranking" (as said should just be called a list) is something equivalent to a trimmed average or price, and the estimates are rough, and based on your estimate of exclusivity, it means that everything said in that first paragraph is highly off. I'd like to see said trimmed average for any manufacturer you applied it to. I'd guess it would likely be off due to lack of knowledge of offerings.

So here are the bullet points I personally take away from this:
1. The need for this list is at best, limited.
2. The list does more to disinform the uninitiated buyer than inform.
3. Little research was conducted.
4. Of the research done, the source documents may be obsolete, and 30% of the sources contains information that is at best seven years old, at worst fourteen years old.
5. Any objectivity in the list is subject to your estimate, trimmed average, or judgement.

I kind of understand what you are attempting, but I believe your method, reasoning, and research to be flawed.


----------



## watchRus (Feb 13, 2012)

I like how the font color gets lighter as we move down the list.


----------



## omega1234 (May 17, 2012)

Hublot in tier 1?


----------



## Tien (Jun 13, 2012)

I don't how anyone can come to the conclusion that the categories imply that each brand has the same price range as the category. Obviously, some brands will be in the lower end of the category, others will be in the higher end of the category. Some will be ambiguously crossing categories. But I welcome Dixan to leave the thread and take his personal issues with him. I'm a member of several online forums and I'm sorry but I never take post count as evidence of anything besides posting a lot (you could be sitting in mom's basement as far as I know).

As for the need of the list, several people have expressed appreciation of it and so each to his own. I personally find it a lot more convenient to have a list than to spend hours on Google. And yes, I didn't spend months on research, deriving statistics on catalogues of watches. If anyone has the time to do so, I'd love to see it. If you think the list is flawed, and worry about newbies being misinformed, why don't you suggest appropriate changes? I invite you to do so.


----------



## howard4tex (Jan 3, 2012)

Dang, my Benrus didn't make it!


----------



## Dixan (Oct 10, 2009)

Tien said:


> I don't how anyone can come to the conclusion that the categories imply that each brand has the same price range as the category. Obviously, some brands will be in the lower end of the category, others will be in the higher end of the category. Some will be ambiguously crossing categories. But I welcome Dixan to leave the thread and take his personal issues with him. I'm a member of several online forums and I'm sorry but I never take post count as evidence of anything besides posting a lot (you could be sitting in mom's basement as far as I know).
> 
> As for the need of the list, several people have expressed appreciation of it and so each to his own. I personally find it a lot more convenient to have a list than to spend hours on Google. And yes, I didn't spend months on research, deriving statistics on catalogues of watches. If anyone has the time to do so, I'd love to see it. If you think the list is flawed, and worry about newbies being misinformed, why don't you suggest appropriate changes? I invite you to do so.


Wow, sensitive and defensive about being inaccurate and inane. About sums it up. Good work.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Well, thanks to the list, now I know with certainty: I am a bottom feeder. (At least when it comes to watches.)
With an occasional dip UP into the upper low class affordables.


----------



## Tien (Jun 13, 2012)

Dixan said:


> Wow, sensitive and defensive about being inaccurate and inane. About sums it up. Good work.


I thought you were done here thick-hide?


----------



## omega1234 (May 17, 2012)

Tien said:


> I don't how anyone can come to the conclusion that the categories imply that each brand has the same price range as the category. Obviously, some brands will be in the lower end of the category, others will be in the higher end of the category. Some will be ambiguously crossing categories. But I welcome Dixan to leave the thread and take his personal issues with him. I'm a member of several online forums and I'm sorry but I never take post count as evidence of anything besides posting a lot (you could be sitting in mom's basement as far as I know).
> 
> As for the need of the list, several people have expressed appreciation of it and so each to his own. I personally find it a lot more convenient to have a list than to spend hours on Google. And yes, I didn't spend months on research, deriving statistics on catalogues of watches. If anyone has the time to do so, I'd love to see it. If you think the list is flawed, and worry about newbies being misinformed, why don't you suggest appropriate changes? I invite you to do so.


Maybe another tier would be useful, ultra high end (Greubel Forsey, Duffour, Lange & Heyne, etc.)


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Tien said:


> ... why don't you suggest appropriate changes? I invite you to do so.


Every list is an exercise in taxonomy.
If not sifted correctly, it is easy to put man and chicken in the same category, under 'Bipedal (2 legged) animals.'

Moreover, what is true is NOT the same thing as what is merely convincing.
To categorize watches and brands according to price tiers only is probably very convincing, especially to the intellectually untrained.
But here at WUS, most people demand, and deserve better.

By 'better' I mean a more refined and nuanced system of organizing what are essentially things that are judged based on a set of elusive VALUES (symbolism, historical provenance, societal cachet, perception - professional and public, etc) as much for, if not more than, their technological prowess.

Therefore, to lump them all under ONE single umbrella - how much $$$ - is simply useless. 
Actually, worse than just useless: it's odious. For me anyway.

I wouldn't waste my time making a list like this, but if you're up to it, as it seems that you are, I recommend you set up more categories. Example:

1. 'Objective excellence' in technology and innovation, and influence in the industry 
2. 'Value': or in working class jargon, bang for buck.
3. 'Symbolism': social perception and caste recognition
4. Perceived value versus Actual value (as in $ at resale, etc)
5. Owner satisfaction (you'd also need to taken into account levels of education, and their corporate affiliations. We wouldn't want ignorant but happy Invicta owners usurping this carefully arranged pyramid of arbitrary symbols.)
6. After Service, and product longevity...

Etc.

Then, and only then, knock yourself out sorting them by your favorite criterion: price points.


----------



## TristanZ (Jul 2, 2010)

Tien said:


> I don't how anyone can come to the conclusion that the categories imply that each brand has the same price range as the category. Obviously, some brands will be in the lower end of the category, others will be in the higher end of the category. Some will be ambiguously crossing categories. But I welcome Dixan to leave the thread and take his personal issues with him. I'm a member of several online forums and I'm sorry but I never take post count as evidence of anything besides posting a lot (you could be sitting in mom's basement as far as I know).
> 
> As for the need of the list, several people have expressed appreciation of it and so each to his own. I personally find it a lot more convenient to have a list than to spend hours on Google. And yes, I didn't spend months on research, deriving statistics on catalogues of watches. If anyone has the time to do so, I'd love to see it. If you think the list is flawed, and worry about newbies being misinformed, why don't you suggest appropriate changes? I invite you to do so.


There was a great moral philosopher - Chuck Norris, I think - who once said: *He who possesses thin skin should not post personal opinions on forums full of strangers.
*
That goes double when posting pointless lists ranking watch brands on watch forums.


----------



## Tien (Jun 13, 2012)

omega1234 said:


> Maybe another tier would be useful, ultra high end (Greubel Forsey, Duffour, Lange & Heyne, etc.)


This might be a good idea. Where do you think the price cut-off should be and which brands would you include here?


----------



## marchone (Dec 20, 2007)

Probably $50K USD.


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

Chronopolis said:


> Every list is an exercise in taxonomy.
> If not sifted correctly, it is easy to put man and chicken in the same category, under 'Bipedal (2 legged) animals.'


Or under "When thewalrus sees a bee.".


----------



## marchone (Dec 20, 2007)

I've seen this sort of ranking done with shotguns. It required several brands (Beretta comes first to mind) to be included multiple times at different tiers. Only Boss escaped cross posting due being a "Maker of Best Guns Only". 

By the bye, Clapton has been said to be selling off his watches and buying only Boss shotguns these days. He's learning fast.


----------



## Tien (Jun 13, 2012)

TristanZ said:


> There was a great moral philosopher - Chuck Norris, I think - who once said: *He who possesses thin skin should not post personal opinions on forums full of strangers.
> *
> That goes double when posting pointless lists ranking watch brands on watch forums.


Oh, another thick-skinned coward, how adorable


----------



## Atoning Unifex (Aug 21, 2012)

Tien said:


> Oh, another thick-skinned coward, how adorable


I'm usually not a fan of thread-locking but even I think this should be locked. 
The OP is pretty puerile and not really able to have a civilized discussion about something that frankly has been ridiculously oversimplified.


----------



## charlieboy89 (Dec 21, 2011)

Tien said:


> Oh, another thick-skinned coward, how adorable


Keep it up Tien! You could be outta here before reaching 50 posts


----------



## Tien (Jun 13, 2012)

It's not possible to have a civilized discussion with pure ********. I think it's interesting that I have received several PM's from members (some of who are long time members) expressing that they hesitate to post because of the nasty replies that are commonplace. You get what you ask for.

I know for a fact that several members and, most probably lurkers, are frustrated by the defensiveness displayed by a few posters who set the level of condescending tone here.


----------



## CitizenM (Dec 9, 2009)

Tien said:


> Oh, another thick-skinned coward, how adorable


Well, that settles it for me.

I must just be too scared to have opinions differing from the consensus view. Not that I actually believe what I say.


----------



## Tien (Jun 13, 2012)

CitizenM said:


> Well, that settles it for me.
> 
> I must just be too scared to have opinions differing from the consensus view. Not that I actually believe what I say.


There are members here who are too intimidated to post differing opinions because of the nasty replies. They actually refrain from posting, you never see their posts. Do you think that's a good thing?


----------



## omega1234 (May 17, 2012)

Tien said:


> This might be a good idea. Where do you think the price cut-off should be and which brands would you include here?


25 or 50k+


----------



## TristanZ (Jul 2, 2010)

Tien said:


> I know for a fact that several members and, most probably lurkers, are frustrated by the defensiveness displayed by a few posters who set the level of condescending tone here.


I'm assuming the humor of that line was unintentional.


----------



## Janne (Apr 16, 2007)

I think we should give Thien a little bit more "friendliness". He tries to do an almost impossible job. Instead of shooting him down, why not helping him with some constructive ideas, and avoiding negative posts?

It would be equally difficult to a list of cars. MErcedes: from the cheap and cheerful A- class, all the way to Maybach.
Many watch manufacturers have the same business idea. Cheap crap for the masses, expensive quality for the WIS.
Seiko corporation is a master in this.

Thien, do you intend to include the Boutique brands?


----------



## omega1234 (May 17, 2012)

Janne said:


> I think we should give Thien a little bit more "friendliness". He tries to do an almost impossible job. Instead of shooting him down, why not helping him with some constructive ideas, and avoiding negative posts?
> 
> It would be equally difficult to a list of cars. MErcedes: from the cheap and cheerful A- class, all the way to Maybach.
> Many watch manufacturers have the same business idea. Cheap crap for the masses, expensive quality for the WIS.
> ...


+1


----------



## marchone (Dec 20, 2007)

Janne said:


> Cheap crap for the masses, expensive quality for the WIS. Seiko corporation is a master in this.


I believe it is a more sophisticated marketing concept than this. Buy a Seiko SKX when in your 20s, then an MM300 in one's 30s, and upgrade to a Spring Drive in your 40s. Which you will then have for life. (If you can afford the service charges when you're on a fixed income in retirement. Tongue firmly planted in cheek.)


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

Tien said:


> It's not possible to have a civilized discussion with pure ********. I think it's interesting that I have received several PM's from members (some of who are long time members) expressing that they hesitate to post because of the nasty replies that are commonplace. You get what you ask for.
> 
> I know for a fact that several members and, most probably lurkers, are frustrated by the defensiveness displayed by a few posters who set the level of condescending tone here.


You're not exactly doing anything to lower the tempterature in this thread either. It's the internet. It's watches. Let's set our 'righteous indignation' dial to an appropriate level.


----------



## Janne (Apr 16, 2007)

Sure, what I mean is that they have watches between 100 $ and what, over 20K?

You can spend your whole life collecting according to your buying power and only buywatches made by the Seiko Corp.


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

marchone said:


> I believe it is a more sophisticated marketing concept than this. Buy a Seiko SKX when in your 20s, then an MM300 in one's 30s, and upgrade to a Spring Drive in your 40s. Which you will then have for life. (If you can afford the service charges when you're on a fixed income in retirement. Tongue firmly planted in cheek.)


Absolutely. You start fostering brand loyalty early on - if your first watch was a Seiko, you'll remember it, and all the adventures you went on with it, fondly, and want to recreate some of that in your 30s and 40s and 50s.


----------



## CitizenM (Dec 9, 2009)

I totally disagree. Seiko doesn't make cheap crap. They make really good affordable watches and really good luxury watches and really good haute horology.


----------



## pantagruel (May 30, 2010)




----------



## Janne (Apr 16, 2007)

Alba and Pulsar are not exactly Houte horology.
I wrote Seiko corporation, not Seiko full stop.


----------



## Atoning Unifex (Aug 21, 2012)

charlieboy89 said:


> Keep it up Tien! You could be outta here before reaching 50 posts


Feel like a wager?
$50 before 100 posts. 
Just kidding. I don't gamble anymore courtesy of lessons learned as a student.


----------



## GinGinD (Feb 29, 2008)

If you post a provocative topic you will receive provocative replies. It's to be expected. That said, I'll remind you all of WUS rule #2. Too many posts have gotten too personal.

Next warning gets the thread closed. 

Jeannie


----------



## CitizenM (Dec 9, 2009)

Never had an Alba, but nothing wrong with a Pulsar.


----------



## Janne (Apr 16, 2007)

Ok, I should maybe not have used the word crap, maybe beeter so say just cheap.


----------



## fastward (Aug 6, 2010)

Somebody mentioned that we get cookies. 
Seriously, where are the cookies?


----------



## Tien (Jun 13, 2012)

Janne,
Sure I will add any brand. Which ones do you have in mind and where to place?

I'm will also probably add a new ultra luxury category as per Omega1234's suggestion.


----------



## marchone (Dec 20, 2007)

Janne said:


> Ok, I should maybe not have used the word crap, maybe beeter so say just cheap.


Perhaps good to great value for money at every price point? The very same can be said for Swatch brands. That is only where they differ. Seiko uses the same corporate name where Swatch differentiates brands far more successfully.

On another note, Seiko is not Invicta at any price point.


----------



## Emre (May 16, 2012)

Tien said:


> *Exclusive luxury (Swiss) approx > $10,000:*
> Audemars Piguet
> Blancpain
> Bovet
> ...


I say well done, well time spend, thank you for the list.

I believe its fairly listed even though you listed my *Glycines* into lower mid market,their chronos or homages stretch to the upper mid market due to your pricing grids, but at the end its Glycine's fault if they are not more appreciated. From a dynasty to low mid watches, they should think twice.Their great grandfathers were creating exclusive luxury timepieces and jewelery now they are at Top 100 last decades.

You could add maybe the* ' Ingersoll'* to the Basic List, with their Yankee Dollar watch history they deserve to be in the list, its an American Company originally but nowadays owned by a British subsidiary of the Chinese company Herald Group. Also *'Tutima'* you can add to upper mid market German watch brand.Another addition can be ' *Revue Thommen ' *with the* ' Vulcain' *know how now.

Such a pity that* Hamilton* with the *Buren* know how melted in the company is ' Basic ' class, the microrotor Buren with 54 hours power reserve would cry to this now. Also *Frederique Constant* in ' Basic ' class has now *Alpina* know how, which once a time was manufacturing inhouse movements. Pity for those companies gain for the new owners.*'Fossil'* with the* ' Zodiac' *under the roof should also boost.* Breitling* is a great example how they turned the* Kelek* know how to the stretch to exclusivity with their inhouse movements.Hope the others will turn that vintage know how also into cash through good marketing and climb the stairs in such classification within WIS and public. They should earn their appreciation.Another sad story with the *Movado*, *Zenith* partner once upon a time, developing the ' El Primero ' against* Heuer, Buren, Breitling, Dupraz* chronographs, should also update itself.

I would say these brands i mentioned above have more heritage than their actual status.


----------



## Janne (Apr 16, 2007)

Laco ( Germany)

if you go into the German watches Forum, there is a list of German brands.

JLC should go into thevabove category, not many watches under 10K.

plus you have an originally Cuban brand, name eludes me at the moment.


----------



## TristanZ (Jul 2, 2010)

Here are a few that could be added:

RGM (Roland G. Murphy)
Wempe
Bucherer
Vollmer
U-Boat
Christopher Ward
Habring
Porsche Design
Itay Noy
Urwerk
Otium
Nivrel
Louis Vuitton
Vogard
Muhle Glashutte
H. Moser & Cie.
Tutima
Towson
Meistersinger
Ball
JeanRichard
Eberhard
Hautlence
Temption
Jorg Schauer (as opposed to Stowa)
Sattler
Schaumburg
Armin Strom
Ebel
Azimuth
Benzinger
Harwood
Edox


----------



## Janne (Apr 16, 2007)

Hanhart. Germany

Prim. Czech Republic

Titan. India


----------



## yialanliu (Jul 6, 2011)

Thanks for the thread, useful for comparison shopping.

Although I do believe some comments like JLC is maybe a tier too low.
I also believe Seiko/Citizen to be interchangeable so I'd put them in the same tier, but it's your list. Especially since you already removed GS to its own tier, I would say it probably drops Seiko to the 500 bucket rather than its current place.


----------



## marchone (Dec 20, 2007)

The lists are missing about 20 micro-brands. I'm sure I've missed some.

Armida
Benarus
Crepas
Gerlach
Ginault
Helenarou
Helson
Hexa
JS Iceland
Korsbek
Magrette
Max Bill
Mk II
Orange
Pita
Prometheus
Raven
SAS
Wilson


----------



## TristanZ (Jul 2, 2010)

Atlantic
d. freemont
Bernhardt
Armand Nicolet


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Apr 30, 2005)

> Given the number, length and heavy moderating of the replies in the above thread, I think it's quite obvious that the list was a bit difficult to cope with for the thick-skinned.


We haven't moderated anything except for possible bad language, and obvious Rule violations. I said it was a heavy task because we have to read all the replies in a controversial thread like this and keep and eye on things. Now we have another 70 posts in 9 hours to sift through.
OP this topic has been tried before and if you care to search you would see that.


----------



## pantagruel (May 30, 2010)

With Invicta on the list you also need to have brands like Swiss Legend, Stuhrling, and Android.


----------



## westlake (Oct 10, 2011)

As a statement of *your* opinion on the watch market segmentation and/or your own buying philosophy - it's an interesting read. From that premise I would be interested to hear how or why your tastes or buying/owning history of these brands influences their placement (or not) in a Tier.

As an _*objective *_assessment of a watch brand tier structure, it's a slow motion train wreck.


----------



## Tuff_Guy_Tony (Feb 22, 2012)

WUSWIS said:


> Cartier has been ranked in Accessible Luxury - Non Swiss so it's on the same level as Omega and IWC. That sounds about right.


Where does Ball land on this list?


----------



## Kittysafe (Nov 28, 2011)

You put Omega in the $4-$10,000 range but my Seamaster 300m ceramic bezel automatic retails for $3500
and I bought mine from a forum member here for $2800 + fees, came out to around $3k, so I'd adjust Omega
in the list.


----------



## gagnello (Nov 19, 2011)

I'm sorry but this is just a lame subject. Why is this getting so much traction?? The OP put together a list based on price. Great! Who cares? Why does something like this strike such a nerve with everyone? Buy a watch for what you like and pay for it what you think you can comfortably afford. No reason to get fired up about a stupid list.


----------



## ken_sturrock (Oct 24, 2010)

Gagnello! This thread is awesome. It’s broad, subjective and sets up comparisons. It factors in technology, personal insecurity, money, perceptions, exclusivity and delusions of value. In short, it’s an invitation to bear your own personal watch-related cross to the party and then rant and rave with everyone else.

Why we’ve got: Seiko Freaks, Mechanical Purists, Boutique Buyers, In-House Snobs, Cheap Skates, Swiss Fanatics, Compulsive List Makers, Invicta Fan Boys, Newbies, Newbie Bashers, Amateur Market Analysts, Quartz Pragmatists, ETA Apologists, Parade Rainers, Failed Rolex Owners, Serial Flippers, Search Non-Users, Horological Historians, Snarky One-Line Writers and One-Brand Obsessives. We're all here. You’re never alone. Not on WatchUSeek you’re not.

OK, break’s over…


----------



## Kittysafe (Nov 28, 2011)

ken_sturrock said:


> Gagnello! This thread is awesome. It's broad, subjective and sets up comparisons. It factors in technology, personal insecurity, money, perceptions, exclusivity and delusions of value. In short, it's an invitation to bear your own personal watch-related cross to the party and then rant and rave with everyone else.
> 
> Why we've got: Seiko Freaks, Mechanical Purists, Boutique Buyers, In-House Snobs, Cheap Skates, Swiss Fanatics, Compulsive List Makers, Invicta Fan Boys, Newbie Bashers, Amateur Market Analysts, Quartz Pragmatists, ETA Apologists, Parade Rainers, Failed Rolex Owners, Serial Flippers and One-Brand Obsessives. They're all here. You're never alone. Not on WatchUSeek you're not.
> 
> OK, break's over&#8230;


Thanks Osho


----------



## CitizenM (Dec 9, 2009)

ken_sturrock said:


> Gagnello! This thread is awesome. It's broad, subjective and sets up comparisons. It factors in technology, personal insecurity, money, perceptions, exclusivity and delusions of value. In short, it's an invitation to bear your own personal watch-related cross to the party and then rant and rave with everyone else.
> 
> Why we've got: Seiko Freaks, Mechanical Purists, Boutique Buyers, In-House Snobs, Cheap Skates, Swiss Fanatics, Compulsive List Makers, Invicta Fan Boys, Newbies, Newbie Bashers, Amateur Market Analysts, Quartz Pragmatists, ETA Apologists, Parade Rainers, Failed Rolex Owners, Serial Flippers, Search Non-Users, Horological Historians, Snarky One-Line Writers and One-Brand Obsessives. We're all here. You're never alone. Not on WatchUSeek you're not.
> 
> OK, break's over&#8230;


Ugh seiko people are the worst.


----------



## Roller.959 (Nov 29, 2011)

CitizenM said:


> Ugh seiko people are the worst.


Yeah. Almost as bad as those one brand obsessives.


----------



## Ozy (Aug 10, 2009)

Tien said:


> There are members here who are too intimidated to post differing opinions because of the nasty replies. They actually refrain from posting, you never see their posts. Do you think that's a good thing?


Ok, I'll admit it. I'm one of these people.

Just call me Ozy Wallflower


----------



## marchone (Dec 20, 2007)

ken_sturrock said:


> Gagnello! This thread is awesome. It's broad, subjective and sets up comparisons. It factors in technology, personal insecurity, money, perceptions, exclusivity and delusions of value. In short, it's an invitation to bear your own personal watch-related cross to the party and then rant and rave with everyone else.
> 
> Why we've got: Seiko Freaks, Mechanical Purists, Boutique Buyers, In-House Snobs, Cheap Skates, Swiss Fanatics, Compulsive List Makers, Invicta Fan Boys, Newbies, Newbie Bashers, Amateur Market Analysts, Quartz Pragmatists, ETA Apologists, Parade Rainers, Failed Rolex Owners, Serial Flippers, Search Non-Users, Horological Historians, Snarky One-Line Writers and One-Brand Obsessives. We're all here. You're never alone. Not on WatchUSeek you're not.
> 
> OK, break's over&#8230;


I'll have whatever he's having. Make that two!


----------



## marchone (Dec 20, 2007)

gagnello said:


> I'm sorry but this is just a lame subject. Why is this getting so much traction??


I want to see where it goes and if the OP takes any suggestions in. What else are internet fora for? Everybody loves a good train wreck. Besides, every once in a while I learn something.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

I have some very insightful things to say about the psychology behind the desire to make such a list to begin with.
But if I were to exercise my freedom of speech here, no matter how enlightening and helpful to those who may never have thought about this issue, I would prolly get booted out for being unfriendly on these levels: personal, cultural, political, and socio-economic.


----------



## marchone (Dec 20, 2007)

Aw, go on ... give it a go.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

marchone said:


> Aw, go on ... give it a go.


You gonna pay my bail?


----------



## marchone (Dec 20, 2007)

If such a thing were possible I'm certain they'd be a kitty set up in no time at all.


----------



## geoffbot (Mar 12, 2011)

Chronopolis said:


> I have some very insightful things to say about the psychology behind the desire to make such a list to begin with.
> But if I were to exercise my freedom of speech here, no matter how enlightening and helpful to those who may never have thought about this issue, I would prolly get booted out for being unfriendly on these levels: personal, cultural, political, and socio-economic.


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

Ha! I knew you'd be hot on my heels!



geoffbot said:


> View attachment 835263


----------



## Sabresoft (Dec 1, 2010)

ljb187 said:


> Citizen's a toughie. Sure they have a lot of watches under $500 (in the USA), but their Chronomasters and The Citizen models start at $2500 (with the quartz versions being the most accurate wristwatches in the world), I'd guess their Exceed lines begin in the $700 - $800 range and top out at $2000. The Signature series hangs out around the $1000 level while the Campanolas have some of the most intricate dial work going and cost three times that. I'm pretty sure their Promaster Dive watches top out around $1000 too and most of their atomic watches list for at least $600. They also must being doing top secret stuff in Japan (like that Appleseed and Mastermind) that go for at least $3000 to $5000.
> 
> View attachment 834484


Also their Attesa range is slightly lower priced than the Exceed range, but still has many watches over $1000.


----------



## gagnello (Nov 19, 2011)

ken_sturrock said:


> Gagnello! This thread is awesome. It's broad, subjective and sets up comparisons. It factors in technology, personal insecurity, money, perceptions, exclusivity and delusions of value. In short, it's an invitation to bear your own personal watch-related cross to the party and then rant and rave with everyone else.
> 
> Why we've got: Seiko Freaks, Mechanical Purists, Boutique Buyers, In-House Snobs, Cheap Skates, Swiss Fanatics, Compulsive List Makers, Invicta Fan Boys, Newbies, Newbie Bashers, Amateur Market Analysts, Quartz Pragmatists, ETA Apologists, Parade Rainers, Failed Rolex Owners, Serial Flippers, Search Non-Users, Horological Historians, Snarky One-Line Writers and One-Brand Obsessives. We're all here. You're never alone. Not on WatchUSeek you're not.
> 
> OK, break's over&#8230;


Touche.


----------



## westlake (Oct 10, 2011)

ken_sturrock said:


> Gagnello! This thread is awesome. It's broad, subjective and sets up comparisons. It factors in technology, personal insecurity, money, perceptions, exclusivity and delusions of value. In short, it's an invitation to bear your own personal watch-related cross to the party and then rant and rave with everyone else.
> 
> Why we've got: Seiko Freaks, Mechanical Purists, Boutique Buyers, In-House Snobs, Cheap Skates, Swiss Fanatics, Compulsive List Makers, Invicta Fan Boys, Newbies, Newbie Bashers, Amateur Market Analysts, Quartz Pragmatists, ETA Apologists, Parade Rainers, Failed Rolex Owners, Serial Flippers, Search Non-Users, Horological Historians, Snarky One-Line Writers and One-Brand Obsessives. We're all here. You're never alone. Not on WatchUSeek you're not.
> 
> OK, break's over&#8230;


Now THIS could be a great thread. "Your new Delta Tau Chi watch name is:" or maybe "Watch Freak Tiers"
Great stuff...


----------



## Janne (Apr 16, 2007)

It is fascinating when even intelligent and usually nice forumers jump on the "ridiculing" bandwagon. You now who I mean....

I do not think you guys would give those answers if the OP was sitting across your table. What about coming up with some constructive ideas or if you think this thread is a joke, not posting?


----------



## GETS (Dec 8, 2011)

Janne said:


> It is fascinating when even intelligent and usually nice forumers jump on the "ridiculing" bandwagon. You now who I mean....
> 
> I do not think you guys would give those answers if the OP was sitting across your table. What about coming up with some constructive ideas or if you think this thread is a joke, not posting?


I have to agree with that although I do not know who you mean?

The biggest constructive criticism I have of the list set up is that $10,000 and above (as the top tier) is just far, far too big. That's only £6,200!

I would have had it broken up into:

$10,000 to $20,000
$20,000 to $40,000
$40,000+

Whilst a list based on price is by no means a definitive guide to quality, history, value, design, innovation etc it is a list with some merit and some interest. I would recommend the change I have suggested above and I would do a bit more research on some of the brands and current pricing though.

Regards,


----------



## omega1234 (May 17, 2012)

GETS said:


> I have to agree with that although I do not know who you mean?
> 
> The biggest constructive criticism I have of the list set up is that $10,000 and above (as the top tier) is just far, far too big. That's only £6,200!
> 
> ...


That's exactly what I suggested, hopefully the OP will change it.


----------



## marchone (Dec 20, 2007)

Objectively, the price levels don't match the brand's offerings. Some are just wrong; others straddle several price tiers. That point has been made by several members and no adjustments have been made. As it is now it reads like a department store directory in Asia. There is no rhyme or reason to it.


----------



## Janne (Apr 16, 2007)

GETS said:


> I have to agree with that although I do not know who you mean?
> 
> The biggest constructive criticism I have of the list set up is that $10,000 and above (as the top tier) is just far, far too big. That's only £6,200!
> 
> ...


what I mean is that some very intelligent, nice forumers are exhibiting a pack behaviour.
Something atypical of them. They would never do that eye to eye with the OP, so why do it now?

I agree with the $ banding.

I am not sure where the OP lives, maybe he is translating the currency wrong?
His levels are more like Cayman Islands Dollar. (1 KYD = 1.25USD)


----------



## GETS (Dec 8, 2011)

Janne said:


> They would never do that eye to eye with the OP, so why do it now?


It's safer.


----------



## marchone (Dec 20, 2007)

GETS said:


> It's safer.


In this case it's not that simple. Even a moderators has expressed negativity.


----------



## Atoning Unifex (Aug 21, 2012)

I agree Janne that in normal face-to-face situations that some of these comments would not be expressed. 
However, if confronted by something as simplistic as this list, I'm sure I would say something, it would just be said diplomatically.


----------



## GETS (Dec 8, 2011)

marchone said:


> In this case it's not that simple. Even a moderators has expressed negativity.


I have a feeling that you suspect that you know the answer (maybe I suspect the same) but it is the "truth" that cannot be spoken!


----------



## Janne (Apr 16, 2007)

Ifeel too that the OP has undertaken an virtually impossible task, but I prefer to help than to flame/sink.


----------



## Janne (Apr 16, 2007)

It is 18hours ago the OP was last on WUS.
Maybe he did not feel welcomed. It would be quite sad, would it not?


----------



## marchone (Dec 20, 2007)

Janne said:


> Ifeel too that the OP has undertaken an virtually impossible task, but I prefer to help than to flame/sink.


I don't think it's impossible at all; it's just daunting. But as long as any one brand that crosses price points gets stuck in one tier it has failed right then and there. I added 19 brands to the discussion. I haven't seen an update. He may have quit.


----------



## marchone (Dec 20, 2007)

Janne said:


> It is 18hours ago the OP was last on WUS.
> Maybe he did not feel welcomed. It would be quite sad, would it not?


_"If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen."_ --- President Harry S Truman


----------



## Chronopolis (Apr 8, 2009)

marchone said:


> He may have quit.


I am willing to wager that he's out shopping. JLC or ALS.


----------



## marchone (Dec 20, 2007)

You kill me.


----------



## marchone (Dec 20, 2007)

GETS said:


> I have a feeling that you suspect that you know the answer (maybe I suspect the same) but it is the "truth" that cannot be spoken!


Quite right.


----------



## Tien (Jun 13, 2012)

I spent way too much time here yesterday already but I'll update the list in the coming days. Big thanks to those of you who are being genuine and my apologies to the moderators for causing extra work. Cheers!


----------



## Roller.959 (Nov 29, 2011)

Tien said:


> I spent way too much time here yesterday already but I'll update the list in the coming days. Big thanks to those of you who are being genuine and my apologies to the moderators for causing extra work. Cheers!


Against my better judgement, but since the Eagles aren't on until tonight...

As you are continuing...assuming you are using AD pricing...and you are still trying to do this by average prices alone.

On average, you might find Hamilton moves up one. >$1500
Oris would move up one. >$1500
Orient gets broken up into three offerings, similar to Seiko and Grand Seiko.
Orient stays as is.
Orient Star up one. >$500
Royal Orient up two. >$1500
Citizen has to be adjusted, but I don't know how to break it out like Seiko and Orient.
Montblanc gets broken up into three offerings, like Seiko and Orient.
Montblanc 4810 stays in $1500-$4500
Montblanc Le Locle moves up two. >$10000
Montblanc Villeret moves to whatever the new ultra high-end category is going to be. >$35000
Add Clerc. At AD pricing, you are probably looking at >$1500 and maybe >$4500
Add Cuervo Y Sobrinos. At AD pricing you are looking at >$4500.
JLC up one. >$10000
Add Dewitt to whatever the new ultra high-end category is going to be. >$35000

EDIT: And you might want to ensure you include the missing offerings from the WUS site sponsors and advertisers.


----------



## LCheapo (Jul 14, 2010)

It's not impossible, it's just lots of work. To make it useful, I suggest to convert the list into a table, with the brands ordered alphabetically, and with check marks for price ranges (and other attributes, see below) covered or available from this brand. That is, the price ranges would become attributes (columns), so if a brand offers watches in a certain price category, it would get a check mark in that column.

To make the list (more) useful one could add more categories, subjective ones like 'street recognition' or 'WIS recognition', and objective ones like 'watches >50mm', 'precious stones&metals', 'chatons/anglage/polish', 'owned by (SWATCH/LVMH/Richemont)', 'starts from ETA ebauches', etc. etc., and maybe with picture links to examples.


*brand
**<$500
**$500-1k
**$1k-2k
**$2k-5k
**$5k-15k
**$15k-50k
**>$50k
**large watches >50mm
**group
*brand AxxxLVMHbrand Xxxx-

Everybody loves lists! b-)


----------



## CitizenM (Dec 9, 2009)

I've been inspired to rank colors by tier.

*Tier 1:
*Red
Violet
Orange

*Tier 2:
*White
Yellow
Blue
Black

*Tier 3:
*Green
Cyan
*
Non-Luxury Colors (Unranked)
*Gray
Brown
Pink

Of course, Tier 1 has to be the Big Three, and I'm pretty comfortable on the sub-luxury colors, but tier 3 is pretty hard. I kind of feel green could be a tier 2 color and white could be a tier 3, but green has two Es and white only has one E, so consequently, I'm somewhat confident it should be ranked higher. It goes without saying, of course, that how much the sound of each color weighs is a seriously important factor.


----------



## marchone (Dec 20, 2007)

May I suggest that Tier 1 should be the Primaries, red , blue, and yellow, that make up all the rest? The Dark Knight, Rolex, of course, is black, or the absence of color.


----------



## eliz (Apr 5, 2012)

1 question.. Ive seen many people seperating the GS line from the 'rest' of the Seikos. But wht about the Ananta n Credor line? Shouldnt these be given recognition in the upper tiers as well?


----------



## marchone (Dec 20, 2007)

Yes. As well as Campagnola, etc. If done properly the list will be eight miles high.


----------



## ljb187 (Nov 6, 2009)

CitizenM said:


> I've been inspired to rank colors by tier.
> 
> *Tier 1:
> *Red
> ...


I'm really color blind, perhaps we could use different fonts instead? I don't want to put Union Glashutte in the wrong tier.


----------



## LCheapo (Jul 14, 2010)

eliz said:


> 1 question.. Ive seen many people seperating the GS line from the 'rest' of the Seikos. But wht about the Ananta n Credor line? Shouldnt these be given recognition in the upper tiers as well?


Well, you could sort everything by group - brand - line (Richemont - Montblanc - Meisterstück, or Swatch - Blancpain - Fifty Fathoms or Epson - Seiko - Grand Seiko). That would put everybody on the same footing.

Regarding the colors: clearly "Level I is red; II, yellow; III, white; IV, green; and V, blue."


----------



## CitizenM (Dec 9, 2009)

if you want to separate GS from Seiko, you need to create lines for Premier, Arctura, Brightz, Ananta, Credor, Galante, Mechanical (yes, it's a particular line), Velatura, Pulsar and Coutura.

GS just gets special privileges in lists like this because we have a really good lobby.


----------



## marchone (Dec 20, 2007)

CitizenM said:


> GS just gets special privileges in lists like this because we have a really good lobby.


I love it.


----------



## James_ (Sep 5, 2011)

Magrette?

They have watches that would come under at least 2 categories.


----------



## pcmxa (Sep 4, 2011)

Well it really depends if we are going to use the additive primaries (Red, Blue, Green) or the subtractive primaries (Cyan, Yellow, Magenta). I am going to advocate for the additive primaries since this will be primarily viewed on a computer screen and those use the additive primaries.


----------



## James_ (Sep 5, 2011)

You can say that again.


----------



## LCheapo (Jul 14, 2010)

Actually, at least for the more run-of-the-mill brands this list is not so different from a summary of 'Watchtime Buyer's Guide', which is available updated once a year. So, while it would be quite a bit of work to condense everything into a table, and add brands that are not covered there, I don't see what the big deal with the principle behind such a list is, and why people are going on and on about the impossibility of the undertaking, apples and oranges, color rankings, and what not. 

This being the public forum, the moderators are probably pretty busy, but maybe some of the more puerile stuff doesn't need to be preserved for eternity, and could be cleared out, so that the OP has a chance to sift through the rest and extract some info? I think it would be nice to have a short summary of what's out there and what price ranges the different brands cover.


----------



## Medphred (May 29, 2011)

OP: Are you prices list price or average selling price? ASP is better as it takes into account discounting and as I'm sure you know some brands (Invicta) discount heavily while others (Rolex) discount very little if at all. So a brand can be in an artificially high tier but in reality their ASP is at a lower tier. A common marketing tactic used to make brands appear higher end.

Also, some brand countries are wrong (eg Hamilton and Bulova are not usa)

Finally, where do you cut off brands? As others have said there are many micros that could be added. Do you cut off at a certain production number per year or what was your rationale for inclusion/exclusion?


----------



## Tien (Jun 13, 2012)

Can't believe some members are still feeling thick-skinned about this. It's a stupid list. It won't change your life one way or the other.

- I've added a new ultra luxury category as suggested. I'm not at all sure about which brands to include but I made an attempt. Happy to revise.
- I've added a bunch of brands suggested. Not all of them, but I will add more later.
- I changed the relative position per suggestion, in particular JLC that doesn't have enough <10,000 to justify the original position. Hamilton I didn't move up since it was there originally and then moved down per another member's suggestion.
- I've not added any watch lines. That's a new ball game. I totally see your point, especially for brands with a large price range such as seiko, but I don't have the time for that now. Maybe later. To be consistent, I removed Grand Seiko

Mephred:

- Loosely based on listed price. Totally agree that selling price is better for the reasons stated, it's just that it takes a so much more research to make such an adjustment.
- The countries listed refer to where the original company was founded.
- I'm not cutting off any brands. It's just that I basically took the Pictet report and more or less randomly added brands, it's more like a work in progress than anything definitive.


----------



## omega1234 (May 17, 2012)

Tien said:


> Can't believe some members are still feeling thick-skinned about this. It's a stupid list. It won't change your life one way or the other.
> 
> - I've added a new ultra luxury category as suggested. I'm not at all sure about which brands to include but I made an attempt. Happy to revise.
> - I've added a bunch of brands suggested. Not all of them, but I will add more later.
> ...


Top level was a good addition, but you forget R.W. Smith, Lange & Heyne, and I'm sure some more.


----------



## Jack Anoff (Sep 30, 2012)

The anger in this thread is ridiculous/humorous.... It's just a meaningless list! Congrats op on getting this many responses for a silly list


----------



## Atoning Unifex (Aug 21, 2012)

Jack Anoff said:


> The anger in this thread is ridiculous/humorous.... It's just a meaningless list! Congrats op on getting this many responses for a silly list


You have a lot of beauties in your signature.
Any photos? That would be a real delight to see.
Apologies if you have already posted.
Cheers


----------



## Jack Anoff (Sep 30, 2012)

Atoning Unifex said:


> You have a lot of beauties in your signature.
> Any photos? That would be a real delight to see.
> Apologies if you have already posted.
> Cheers


I'm still trying to figure out how to upload the horrible pics I've taken of my watches... Pretty bad with computer tech


----------



## Atoning Unifex (Aug 21, 2012)

Jack Anoff said:


> I'm still trying to figure out how to upload the horrible pics I've taken of my watches... Pretty bad with computer tech


Join the club!


----------



## xvfasttrip (Nov 13, 2008)

I think this list gives some idea about the brands out there. I haven't even heard about 5+ brands on the list. It is quite useful for newbie with, perhaps, just a few error here and there. If you keep in mind that there would be error in brand's tier positioning within 1-2 tiers then this list is generally useful. 

Please keep updating it; as we all know any brand would sometimes adjust their position here and there ex. grand seiko.


----------



## scottjc (May 14, 2010)

Happy to see Festina on the list, albeit in 'Basic'.

In my opinion some of their designs raise the bar that has been set for them but, given the 'affordable' ranges they produce, this is probably the right category for them.


----------



## HomeMadeLookingBoutiqueSh (Jan 12, 2012)

Posting in this thread, demanding to know why others are posting in this thread.

Getting fired up, demanding to know why others are getting fired up.



gagnello said:


> I'm sorry but this is just a lame subject. Why is this getting so much traction?? The OP put together a list based on price. Great! Who cares? Why does something like this strike such a nerve with everyone? Buy a watch for what you like and pay for it what you think you can comfortably afford. No reason to get fired up about a stupid list.


Probably too much work, but for the brands that represent multiple categories one could copy their names under each, with percentages in parenthesis or something. Interesting list, thanks for trying.


----------



## watchma (Jul 11, 2012)

CitizenM said:


> I've been inspired to rank colors by tier.
> 
> *Tier 1:
> *Red
> ...


Dagnammit , you forgot Indigo!!


----------



## deimis (Sep 8, 2010)

Interesting list, I personally did not know about several brands like Mido, Glycine, and Certina that are in my price range. So for that I'm happy I looked.


----------



## Kittysafe (Nov 28, 2011)

A little confused by this:

*Mid-level luxury (Swiss) approx $4,500 - $10,000:

Omega

*I bought an Omega Seamaster 300M Ceramic Bezel Automatic for $2800 which retails for $3500.


----------



## Janne (Apr 16, 2007)

Brand new, the listed price?


----------



## Snoopy_dude (Nov 21, 2012)

Kittysafe said:


> A little confused by this:
> 
> *Mid-level luxury (Swiss) approx $4,500 - $10,000:
> 
> ...


With the new co-axial 8500 movement and the price increase, my newly bought Omega AT8500 retails for $5500 and the model is entry level. Excluding quartz watches, $4500 - $10000 range sounds about right with the seamaster 300M chrono series retail for around $4000 just under $4500 and everything else starts at/above $4500.


----------



## Kittysafe (Nov 28, 2011)

Snoopy_dude said:


> With the new co-axial 8500 movement and the price increase, my newly bought Omega AT8500 retails for $5500 and the model is entry level. Excluding quartz watches, $4500 - $10000 range sounds about right with the seamaster 300M chrono series retail for around $4000 just under $4500 and everything else starts at/above $4500.


Wow! I guess I bought mine at the right time then.


----------



## Snoopy_dude (Nov 21, 2012)

Haha Kitty I wish bought my AT8500 a bit earlier as the price increased again July this year. But even with the price increase, I feel the quality of AT8500 is worth every penny of $5500 MSRP. The good news for me though Omega is planning on more price increase as the time goes in its effort to gain back lost prestige and to compete with higher end market, but this would be a topic for a different thread

Cheers


----------



## Kittysafe (Nov 28, 2011)

I bought my Omega SMP 300/ceramic/black/skeletal from a forum member here, it was 2 months old, all warranties and box intact, no scratches, perfect specimen... for $2800... with fees, shipping, customs tax... came to just under 3k. After 3 months I'm very pleased with the watch.


----------



## Snoopy_dude (Nov 21, 2012)

Congrats! $2800 well spent! Enjoy the watch. 

Cheers


----------



## TK-421 (Mar 11, 2010)

panerai is not italian. it is swiss. they have moved all manufacturing out of firenze to switzerland. anonimo has filled its void using some of the same machinery and people that once made panerai.

cuervo y sobrinos is cuban in name only.

also, i would move frederique constant up one level. they are a manufacture. they are surely equal to revue thommen.



Tien said:


> Here comes the revised list as promised in this thread (I've been held up by work): https://www.watchuseek.com/f2/ranking-watch-brands-754520-7.html
> 
> Given the number, length and heavy moderating of the replies in the above thread, I think it's quite obvious that the list was a bit difficult to cope with for the thick-skinned.
> 
> ...


----------



## shnjb (May 12, 2009)

This is a very interesting thread.

However, I do question the methodology.
Is this representing the mean or median of the MSRPs?

There are several factors which make this seemingly simple task rather difficult.
1. MSRP is hardly the real price that these watches sell for.
2. Resale value varies wildly
3. Watch prices are not normally distributed within a brand and they have long tails
4. Some brands are exclusive as they limit production or even sale to certain aristocrats/auctions
5. It is not trivial to get even the MSRP for all watch models for any given brand.


----------



## shnjb (May 12, 2009)

necro thread revived!


----------



## geoffbot (Mar 12, 2011)

shnjb said:


> necro thread revived!


Why?!


----------



## Kittysafe (Nov 28, 2011)

geoffbot said:


> Why?!


He posted a long reply, noticed how old the thread was and replied a second time to make the silly remark... probably should have edited his first reply so as not to double post though.


----------



## ShaggyDog (Feb 13, 2012)

Who brought this **** up again?


----------



## Kittysafe (Nov 28, 2011)

ShaggyDog said:


> Who brought this **** up again?


Apparently, you did... oops, now I did... Argh! We're doomed!


----------



## pcanezo (Jan 18, 2012)

Meh, I still don't see Grand Seiko up there.


----------



## AmbSteve (Jan 28, 2013)

Argh, you guys do realize that the TC stated this listing has nothing to do with horology, but he listed these according to price. Blargh...


----------



## shnjb (May 12, 2009)

Bump?


----------



## geoffbot (Mar 12, 2011)

shnjb said:


> Bump?


Why?!


----------



## hpowders (Apr 20, 2013)

So where's Grand Seiko?


----------



## Ray MacDonald (Apr 30, 2005)




----------

