# What is Ginault?



## jamsie (Mar 14, 2010)

What do we have here gentleman? It looks like a diver, it even looks an awful lot like the classic five digit legendary Submariner......Wait a minute, it's not Swiss Made, what's going on here?

Before I explain what John & Ginault have accomplished here, let's take a quick look at the specs of this watch:

C1 Superluminova
316L Stainless steel
Automatic caliber 7275
Sapphire 30.4mm dome crystal
ISO 6425 certified 300 meters

Doesn't sound all that extraordinary, yet when you look at the watch itself it is clear that Ginault had the Submariner in mind. What is special is just how well the entire package is executed here for the price.

Essentially Ginault pronounced GIN (as in the liquor) AULT, took what has made the five digit Submariner such a comfortable and useful watch to own and spiced it up with a Glidelock bracelet and clasp from what you would see on a six digit Submariner. I can say from owning a Rolex 116610LV that this bracelet is scary close and works flawlessly. The watch is 40mm and sits nice and flat on the wrist. The dial is a deep lacquered black and reflects the applied indices nicely. Time keeping has also been a strong point, as you can see here with the supplied documentation that I received along with the watch. Ginault also includes a two piece ZULU nylon strap with the kit if you want to mix it up a bit. Overall a nicely done watch that beats Kickstarter campaigns in the rump royally.

There has been some static over Ginault's hand built or made in the USA, regardless this watch has proven itself to me as not only a contender to other homage watches yet beating them hands down with the level of finish, fit and function here. We are in a new era with exciting offerings from companies like Ginault and Monta watches (https://montawatch.com); what I mean is we have moved on from boutique and Kickstarter "companies" where quality tends to be lacking, or a very generic unregulated movements are used.

Do I have any recommendations after my ownership of the Ginault Ocean Rover date???, sure do!

I would switch out the red seconds hand and in its place uses a rhodium plated hand and hopefully a ceramic bezel, going forward let's see some color! 
I think having a green dial, blue dial and possibly a white dial as offerings with coordinating ceramic bezel colors (black bezel for white of course as we must be purist here!) would allow for some personality and a step in the right direction for having a product that really stands out.

Finally, I think an addition to the clasp of the Ginault "flower" logo would be outstanding and could be incorporated for aesthetic and functional reasons, seeing ease of opening the clasp as well.

Please have a look at the pictures and if you have any interest in the brand, stop on over at their website here & be sure to look through the Blog section for more;
https://ginault.com/


----------



## Stelyos (Jun 23, 2015)

... do your homework, in my humble opinion they practiced by making replicas before swapping the name on the dial. 

Clone movement (maybe with a few parts swapped), clasp that's still under patent and case specs that match perfectly to the 5 digit Rolex


----------



## mplsabdullah (Jan 21, 2015)

I actually pictured your (Stelyos) avatar saying that^ and it scared me into not buying a Ginault. Your job here is done. Thank you.:-( 


:roll:


----------



## jamsie (Mar 14, 2010)

I am very aware of all points around Ginault and the product. I have clearly not invited your opinion here, or your quasi secretive reference to TC Subs...(just because it's public, I was not asking for your 1 cent's worth)...if you don't like what I have to say move on and buy an MKII watch which is clearly not a homage or parts sourced from China in anyway.... wake up).



Stelyos said:


> OMG!!! Guess what?!?!
> You're only the 30th or so dumbnut to have paid $1.3k for a replica that's breaking patents... do your homework, they practiced by making replicas before swapping the name on the dial.
> 
> Replica movement, clasp that's still under patent and case specs that match perfectly to the 5 digit Rolex
> ...


----------



## jamsie (Mar 14, 2010)

If you are referencing my picture while walking around Geneva here, OK I will give you that, your remark was kinda funny.



mplsabdullah said:


> I actually pictured your avatar saying that^ and it scared me into not buying a Ginault. Your job here is done. Thank you.:-(
> 
> :roll:


----------



## Alysandir (Jun 29, 2016)

Stelyos said:


> OMG!!! Guess what?!?!
> You're only the 30th or so dumbnut to have paid $1.3k for a replica that's breaking patents... do your homework, they practiced by making replicas before swapping the name on the dial.
> 
> Replica movement, clasp that's still under patent and case specs that match perfectly to the 5 digit Rolex
> ...


Methinks that the people buying this watch aren't too concerned about hurting Rolex' feelings.

Regards,
Alysandir


----------



## molarface (Oct 12, 2009)

> regardless this watch has proven itself to me as not only a contender to other homage watches yet beating them hands down with the level of finish, fit and function here.


I really didn't know that there was a battle among "homage" watches.

This could really damage viewership of World Wide Wrestling.


----------



## jamsie (Mar 14, 2010)

So boring is the name calling @Stelyos, less than comical remarks around another WIS's review @molarface for just a watch guys. If you don't have something to contribute in a constructive way, just move on and thank you very much.


----------



## X2-Elijah (Dec 25, 2009)

Constructive feedback:

It would be good if you added a clarification, wrt: did you get a discount from purchase price by promising to do a review? (If yes, you *really* should disclose that; if no, better make it clear to avoid confusion).


----------



## gangrel (Jun 25, 2015)

I read everything on the Ginault web site.

My conclusion? I'm reminded of a t shirt popular in high school. It starts "If you can't dazzle them with brains...." 

OP was gushing about what he thinks is wine. Others look and see grape kool-aid.


----------



## jamsie (Mar 14, 2010)

Say it again....

My point was for the money this is a solid watch PERIOD, I like what they are doing and believe it or not so do some other folks. If you have nothing fact based or constructive to say just move on & thank you.


----------



## jamsie (Mar 14, 2010)

gangrel said:


> I read everything on the Ginault web site.
> 
> My conclusion? I'm reminded of a t shirt popular in high school. It starts "If you can't dazzle them with brains...."
> 
> OP was gushing about what he thinks is wine. Others look and see grape kool-aid.


Unreal you still couldn't help yourself despite seeing how something non constructive was not invited, whatever.. I learned a long time ago a lot folks are just miserable and like to share, or think they are more knowledgeable or worldly than they actually are.

My point was for the money this is a solid watch PERIOD, I like what they are doing and believe it or not so do some other folks.


----------



## HayabusaRid3r1080 (Nov 2, 2013)

Nice watch, i'm considering buying one at the discounted price. Could careless what the internet thinks about it : )). 

I wonder what we would all be wearing if there were no watch forums?? I'd probably still have a timex atlantis an more money in my pocket! Ha 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk


----------



## troyr1 (Sep 16, 2016)

tynan.nida said:


> Nice watch, i'm considering buying one at the discounted price. Could careless what the internet thinks about it : )).
> 
> I wonder what we would all be wearing if there were no watch forums?? I'd probably still have a timex atlantis an more money in my pocket! Ha
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk


I have often heard this pondered. Oddly enough, I started collecting before the Internet. It was a fairly lonesome affair. All the watch magazines catered heavily towards flagship watches and it was often difficult to see what was available in a manufacturer's regular product line. It took a lot of window shopping and browsing. Turns out, I still collect the same way, with the Internet. Only now I know, I am not the only one.


----------



## jamsie (Mar 14, 2010)

tynan.nida said:


> Nice watch, i'm considering buying one at the discounted price. Could careless what the internet thinks about it : )).
> 
> I wonder what we would all be wearing if there were no watch forums?? I'd probably still have a timex atlantis an more money in my pocket! Ha
> 
> Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk


I wonder what we would all be wearing if there were no watch forums?? I'd probably still have a timex atlantis an more money in my pocket! Ha

I appreciate seeing some level of support and an open mind here, thank you.

Half the folks, or maybe all with the negative comments, they don't even own a Rolex to compare it against for the $$$....really?! Just go away..... We all get it's a homage watch or whatever. Not the point again, it is extremely well made, that is the point.


----------



## HayabusaRid3r1080 (Nov 2, 2013)

jamsie said:


> I wonder what we would all be wearing if there were no watch forums?? I'd probably still have a timex atlantis an more money in my pocket! Ha
> 
> I appreciate seeing some level of support and an open mind here, thank you.
> 
> Half the folks, or maybe all with the negative comments, they don't even own a Rolex to compare it against for the $$$....really?! Just go away..... We all get it's a homage watch or whatever. Not the point again, it is extremely well made, that is the point.


I wouldn't buy a Sub C homage. But a watch based on one that has long since been out of production and that is [nearly] impossible for any normal person to attain?? I don't see the issue.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk


----------



## gangrel (Jun 25, 2015)

jamsie said:


> Unreal you still couldn't help yourself despite seeing how something non constructive was not invited, whatever.. I learned a long time ago a lot folks are just miserable and like to share, or think they are more knowledgeable or worldly than they actually are.
> 
> My point was for the money this is a solid watch PERIOD, I like what they are doing and believe it or not so do some other folks.


And you turn a point about the watch/company into ad hominem attacks, when others look at what they're doing and see something quite different. When you post here, you invite contrarian opinion, not just sycophantic adoration. Learn to deal with it.


----------



## hidden by leaves (Mar 6, 2010)

Blah blah Ginault blah blah homage/replica blah blah (nothing new to see here)... 

So why'd you sell it?


----------



## CMSgt Bo (Feb 12, 2006)

Stelyos said:


> OMG!!! Guess what?!?!
> You're only the 30th or so dumbnut to have paid $1.3k for a replica that's breaking patents... do your homework, *they practiced by making replicas before swapping the name on the dial*.


Is this an opinion? If it's not please cite your proof or retract your accusation.


----------



## SomeAssemblyRequired (Jan 19, 2015)

jamsie said:


> ...I appreciate seeing some level of support and an open mind here, thank you...


Which may be expecting a lot from WIS when it's little more than a plug for a homage. Maybe a lot of WIS can't afford a Sub, but cajoling same into admiring a homage? Good luck.


----------



## jamsie (Mar 14, 2010)

hidden by leaves said:


> Blah blah Ginault blah blah homage/replica blah blah (nothing new to see here)...
> 
> So why'd you sell it?


_Guess America's Hat missed the MEMO too..._

_Say it again...._

_My point was for the money this is a solid watch PERIOD, I like what they are doing and believe it or not so do some other folks. If you have nothing fact based or constructive to say just move on & thank you._

With exception to another flipper I know over in Sweden, I am notorious for going through around 20 watches a year...I wanted to see what all the mayhem was about and then made an educated opinion after that.


----------



## fna2005 (Oct 27, 2008)

No offense but I think that is way too expensive for a homage watch. I would rather buy an Oris Aquis or preowned SMP for that amount of $. But that's just my personal opinion and won't matter to Ginault fans.


----------



## hidden by leaves (Mar 6, 2010)

jamsie said:


> Guess America's Hat missed the MEMO too...
> 
> Say it again....
> 
> My point was for the money this is a solid watch PERIOD, I like what they are doing and believe it or not so do some other folks. If you have nothing fact based or constructive to say just move on & thank you.


You're about as good at answering a straight question as Ginault is... have fun with your pot stirring.


----------



## jamsie (Mar 14, 2010)

hidden by leaves said:


> You're about as good at answering a straight question as Ginault is... have fun with your pot stirring.


Not fun when it happens to you is it EH? Your answer is further up..


----------



## jamsie (Mar 14, 2010)

fna2005 said:


> No offense but I think that is way too expensive for a homage watch. I would rather buy an Oris Aquis or preowned SMP for that amount of $. But that's just my personal opinion and won't matter to Ginault fans.


I can agree with that, it is by no means a $200-$500 watch nor is it built like one. It is far better built than my 2015 Tag Heuer Aquaracer and keeps better time. That is why in the end I felt it worthwhile to say you know what, yeah there is some real value here....


----------



## hidden by leaves (Mar 6, 2010)

jamsie said:


> Not fun when it happens to you is it EH? Your answer is further up..


Actually "further up" was an insult to my country of origin and a complete non-answer until you edited it. Class act you are.


----------



## Cigarbob (Jul 19, 2015)

Is the clasp a copy of the Rolex Glideclasp?

If so, aren't they infringing on Rolex's copyright?


----------



## jamsie (Mar 14, 2010)

Cigarbob said:


> Is the clasp a copy of the Rolex Glideclasp?
> 
> If so, aren't they infringing on Rolex's copyright?


That's is a valid question and concern, it is not labeled with the crown or similar markings on the inside of the clasp as with my 116610 so I think that may be gray area...maybe not?


----------



## Paul_S (Feb 14, 2017)

You can get a lot of great dive watches for $1300, especially on the pre-owned and the grey markets. So why buy an homage that only makes you think of the watch you'd really rather own every time you look at it?

But no one ever said humans were rational.


----------



## mplsabdullah (Jan 21, 2015)

jamsie said:


> If you are referencing my picture while walking around Geneva here, OK I will give you that, your remark was kinda funny.


I was actually referring to the post from Stelyos. Pictured that thing in his avatar screaming about the watch, lol. Fixed my post to clarify.

I really want to check one out eventually. I like the first version however I like to have a date on my watches and the versions with dates have thinner hands which I am not really a fan of. Very curious to see what else they bring out.


----------



## jamsie (Mar 14, 2010)

Paul_S said:


> You can get a lot of great dive watches for $1300, especially on the pre-owned and the grey markets. So why buy an homage that only makes you think of the watch you'd really rather own every time you look at it?
> 
> But no one ever said humans were rational.


I hear that, & that was always my target for a watch I could wear and not be concerned about wearing it everywhere..

The Ginault was a nice way to see I could have a great travel watch that had a lot of the same features I love about my 116610. I chewed up a Rolex clasp hanging off a boat step when we took a charter out snorkeling so I would have been better off with a Ginault than a Rolex (though I would still feel bad)..or you just chalk up the small scars and scratches as memories.


----------



## Cigarbob (Jul 19, 2015)

jamsie said:


> That's is a valid question and concern, it is not labeled with the crown or similar markings as with my 116610 so I think that may be gray area...maybe not?


Thanks for the thoughtful reply.

I'm not a patent attorney, but Rolex has the right to have their patented intellectual property protected.

I don't think that it would have to have Rolex markings to infringe on the patent.


----------



## molarface (Oct 12, 2009)

Please show me on the WUS FAQs where it says "No one is allowed to post any thing but positive, happy, thumbs up comments about anything jamsie posts". I must have missed your special status.

You have done more damage to the brand than good. A simple, "Hey, just got this in and I like it a lot!" post would have generated few negative posts if any at all.

If you like the watch fine. if you like what they are doing, fine. But we have just as much right to post that we don't.

I like manure AND I like what it's doing to my lawn. But if it's just a load of BS to you, that's OK.


----------



## jamsie (Mar 14, 2010)

molarface said:


> Please show me on the WUS FAQs where it says "No one is allowed to post any thing but positive, happy, thumbs up comments about anything jamsie posts". I must have missed your special status.
> 
> You have done more damage to the brand than good. A simple, "Hey, just got this in and I like it a lot!" post would not have generated a few negative post if any at all.
> 
> ...


Not your place either to tell me how to express the way I like a watch and what to write, WHO ARE YOU? I did a short review of something I found interesting and some value in, almost immediately I had folks name calling and so on despite doing nothing to them, and you saw my post where I asked if you have nothing nice to say move on...wasn't making you accept it or wear it, yet YOU couldn't help yourself and had to chime in negatively. What's your excuse?


----------



## doggbiter (Oct 31, 2010)

If you didn't want to engage in debate, you shouldn't have posted in an internet watch forum. Next time, just purchase some ad space.


----------



## jamsie (Mar 14, 2010)

doggbiter said:


> If you didn't want to engage in debate, you shouldn't have posted in an internet watch forum. Next time, just purchase some ad space.


Really is that so? (shame because you and I have chatted in the past and got along, remember that?)

So we should all expect to have biased criticism leveled at anyone who has anything positive to say about this watch? That appears to be the consensus I see here and foolish me to think it had passed and was just a watch that was well made.

Anyone else care to take a swing?


----------



## eblackmo (Dec 27, 2014)

Oh seriously? This crappy watch again? Why does it keep coming up? It's a sub clone put out by a company who make some very dubious claims about it's provenance. Overcharge and seem to have a load of shills. 

Lets not forget about their proprietary lume which ginault claims is made from magical glowing sand. Can you say gimmick? Or BS?


----------



## csu87 (Feb 5, 2016)

Cant tell if OP is too thin skinned or some of these other guys crying about the watchmaker *POTENTIALLY* being a rep maker, with no actual proof of that comment.

Either way, some of you guys cant handle internetting very well.

OP, nice looking watch, but way overpriced imo. If this is in fact made by the alleged rep maker, his reps are half the price of this watch, that probably uses the same parts and pieces, just rebranded. They are great quality and function very well, but it makes no sense to me why we should have to pay a premium because hes going legit.


----------



## troyr1 (Sep 16, 2016)

jamsie said:


> Really is that so? (shame because you and I have chatted in the past and got along, remember that?)
> 
> So we should all expect to have biased criticism leveled at anyone who has anything positive to say about this watch? That appears to be the consensus I see here and foolish me to think it had passed and was just a watch that was well made.
> 
> Anyone else care to take a swing?


I don't want to take a swing and I could care less about this watch or the argument. But, I am amused by the premise that just because you got along with someone previously, now you have to agree. Odd. I get along with lots of people I disagree with. I find the joys of this hobby tends to keep me buoyed beyond the respective differences. I do think that the controversy involved with this brand and their method of promotion are fairly obvious. Thus, I am quite certain you knew what kind response this post would garner. Perhaps you like the discord? Anyways, the watch looks cool, not my thing. I hope you have a less conflict filled day ahead of you and I hope you continue to collect in good health. Around every corner lies an opinion, don't be too surprised if you aren't in agreement with them all.


----------



## X2-Elijah (Dec 25, 2009)

eblackmo said:


> Why does it coming up.


In most cases, because Ginault sells their watch at a ~50% discount... IF the buyer posts a nice review on a public forum after receiving the watch. So, every time someone buys the watch at it's real price-from-vendor, without a 2x markup, we get to have this debate all over again... Sigh.

*shrug* Some buyers are at least honest enough to disclose that discount deal thing at the start of the review. Some, it seems, aren't.

Sidenote: maybe there should be a subforum/section where all paid-for reviews get redirected into? :roll:


----------



## MarkieB (Feb 25, 2017)

Talking of copyright, isn't the Ginault Rose logo a copy of the rose Tudor decorates its crowns with?


----------



## csu87 (Feb 5, 2016)

MarkieB said:


> Talking of copyright, isn't the Ginault Rose logo a copy of the rose Tudor decorates its crowns with?


Looks like its different enough to not be infringing on any copyright


----------



## StufflerMike (Mar 23, 2010)

Happy to take a pass on Ginault.


----------



## MarkieB (Feb 25, 2017)

Maybe, but still copying and pretending


----------



## William Ayin (Apr 1, 2015)

yuck!


----------



## yongsoo1982 (Jun 5, 2014)

What is Ginault? Some digging yields this information:
1) It's a company founded by a former (current?) replica watch maker. Just Google "Charles Ginault"
2) For an "American" company, the English used on the website reads pretty foreign.
3) the Ginault trademark isn't even a year old and is registered by someone with a Chinese name purporting to be a "General Partner" of the company.

So what is Ginault? My guess is that's it's a company started by a replica watch maker with Chinese funds trading attempting to trade on American sentiments.
Sources:
USPTO Trademark Registration:USPTO TSDR Case Viewer
Nevada Corporation Filing: http://nvsos.gov/sosentit.....ch/CorpDetails.aspx?lx8nvq=uD%2fbwhUAOkZpF2morY6MRA%3d%3d&nt7=0
Google Results: https://www.google.com/search?q=CHARLES+GINAULT&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8
Ginault website itself (from the Q&A here: https://ginault.com/prototype-180260gsln-vs-180165c1ln-media-qa/) - the writing reads like something you find on a Chinese website albeit with better spelling and grammar checks. It's just the tone and word choices that sound odd. Phrases like: "These Swiss movement suppliers became very high postured with their terms and conditions and became selective with whom they supply the movements to"; "Funny thing is now 5 years later the table has turned again with the decline in watch sales in the past years." (for those on WUS who may not see this, it should be the table*s have* turned); and then this doozy where they seem to have just missed cleaning the language up a bit: "It is like a general contractor can build his own house because he has all the know hows. Aside from the raw material he had to pay for, what else would cost him? His own time. So in short, for us to come up with our own 2824 clone cost a lot of time but not money in the strictest sense."

edit: the NV Business Entity website doesn't seem to allow for direct corporation links. So here's the main site:http://nvsos.gov/sos/
Just enter in: "Ginault"
/


----------



## Jephen (Feb 14, 2014)

eblackmo said:


> Oh seriously? This crappy watch again? Why does it keep coming up? It's a sub clone put out by a company who make some very dubious claims about it's provenance. Overcharge and seem to have a load of shills.
> 
> Lets not forget about their proprietary lume which ginault claims is made from magical glowing sand. Can you say gimmick? Or BS?


It's like those LACOWORLD posts in the meme thread. Give it time, it'll eventually go away and stop bothering us.


----------



## michaelp7 (Jan 4, 2017)

Spicey discussion so far!

I bought one. Saw some reviews and was interested to see what it was like. I don't play in Rolex territory (most of the time). My fun with watches is to play around the $500 mark - some great watches to be had at this point and less risk if you go wrong. Which I have done. 

I paid $570 for this watch a few months back. I got a discount in exchange for a review. I wouldn't have bought it otherwise. I'll leave others to comment about replica, homage, copyright, BS branding etc. I just compared it to other watches I owned at the price I paid. It stacks up so far. Good looking IMO obviously given its "inspiration".

Knowing what I know now would I buy it again - At $300 - $400 defo. $500 - $600 probably not. $1k + no chuffing way! I'd buy an Oris - period.

But that's my opinion - I enjoy watches in my own way, as do we all - some will agree, others will not, most won't care - part of the joy of the forum. 

Happy watch collecting everyone!


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Smokeshopp (Dec 9, 2016)

I don't support patent infringement. You couldn't pay me to wear that watch. I'll take the real thing, which, consequently, is out for delivery on the UPS truck right now.


----------



## Stelyos (Jun 23, 2015)

Curious...

SOLD! Ginault 180165C1LN Ocean Rover date automatic watch

https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink?ur...hare_tid=4180858&share_fid=13788&share_type=t

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## doggbiter (Oct 31, 2010)

jamsie said:


> Really is that so? (shame because you and I have chatted in the past and got along, remember that?)
> 
> So we should all expect to have biased criticism leveled at anyone who has anything positive to say about this watch? That appears to be the consensus I see here and foolish me to think it had passed and was just a watch that was well made.
> 
> Anyone else care to take a swing?


Sorry you feel personally attacked, but no one here is oblivious to the fact that you received a substantial discount on the watch for posting this review. And when someone is, in essence, "paid" for a review it brings into question their objectivity. And once the rabble was roused, you came off as defensive and argumentative, suggesting commenters had no right to post negative comments.

Homages are a polarizing topic here. This particular brand's marketing techniques are especially polarizing here. I'm glad you like your watch. It shows in your review. But there's a fine line between defending your opinion and coming off sounding like a shill. I'm sure you feel you are doing the former, but to some, you risk appearing as the latter.

If it matters, I still think of us as friends though.


----------



## gangrel (Jun 25, 2015)

What is Ginault?

This is Ginault.

https://www.wristwatchreview.com/20...-on-the-wrist-and-whats-really-going-on-here/

The final point from the review is, it's a pretty good watch. With big honkin' caveats that will utterly drive away some, and be acceptable to others.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

There is a nicely written article on the controversy surrounding Ginault here,

https://www.wristwatchreview.com/20...-on-the-wrist-and-whats-really-going-on-here/


----------



## run23 (Jul 12, 2009)

Smokeshopp said:


> I don't support patent infringement. You couldn't pay me to wear that watch. I'll take the real thing, which, consequently, is out for delivery on the UPS truck right now.


Lots of pro bono patent lawyers for Rolex on these forums. They should count themselves lucky to be getting all of this legal advice and IP enforcement for free.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

jamsie said:


> That's is a valid question and concern, it is not labeled with the crown or similar markings on the inside of the clasp as with my 116610 so I think that may be gray area...maybe not?


Patents are for functional elements, and the Glidelock clasp had a patent request submitted in 2006, and issued in 2008.

Edit: Sorry, wrong patent, it was filed earlier.

https://www.google.com/patents/EP1908366A1


----------



## molarface (Oct 12, 2009)

run23 said:


> Lots of pro bono patent lawyers for Rolex on these forums. They should count themselves lucky to be getting all of this legal advice and IP enforcement for free.


well, at least they ain't getting a kickback for buying a Rolex and postin a review. Not that anyone would do sometthing like that.


----------



## Stelyos (Jun 23, 2015)

mleok said:


> Patents are for functional elements, and the Glidelock clasp had a patent request submitted in 2006, and issued in 2008.
> 
> Edit: Sorry, wrong patent, it was filed earlier.
> 
> https://www.google.com/patents/EP1908366A1


Patents are enforceable as long as the manufacturer continues to make the part.
And the original dates are 20 years if the manufacturer didn't make the part

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Smokeshopp (Dec 9, 2016)

molarface said:


> well, at least they ain't getting a kickback for buying a Rolex and postin a review. Not that anyone would do sometthing like that.


Amen to that.


----------



## run23 (Jul 12, 2009)

I'm not planning on buying a Ginault or any other homage, but some theoretical patent claim certainly wouldn't stop me from doing so if I wanted one. Rolex's battle to fight, not mine. Similarly, if I wanted a Samsung I'd buy a Samsung notwithstanding Apple's patent claims. 

Now, using the logo or name is a totally different situation and the average person should know that isn't right. 

Anyway, Ginault seems to know how to make a quality product and it would be interesting if they did some original designs. Although originality doesn't appear to sell as well. I'm not criticizing as my last few watch purchases have been a Sub, a Seamaster, a Speedmaster, a vintage Deville, some old bauhaus designs, and probably a 36mm Explorer in the near future, so I definitely lean into the 'classic and conservative' camp when it comes to what I spend my money on.


----------



## omeglycine (Jan 21, 2011)

Jephen said:


> It's like those LACOWORLD posts in the meme thread. Give it time, it'll eventually go away and stop bothering us.


----------



## yongsoo1982 (Jun 5, 2014)

Stelyos said:


> Curious...
> 
> SOLD! Ginault 180165C1LN Ocean Rover date automatic watch
> 
> ...


sounds like a watch meme waiting to happen..
["Defends how great homage watch is . . . sells it on the side"]


----------



## LCandela (Feb 13, 2017)

yongsoo1982 said:


> sounds like a watch meme waiting to happen..
> ["Defends how great homage watch is . . . sells it on the side"]


This inspires me.


----------



## jamsie (Mar 14, 2010)

Mine was a review just like any other watch review I've posted on WUS. I don't have stock in the company, I don't own the company, nor do my friends. 

Funny how I don't see my reviews for Breitling, Omega, IWC, VDB or even a Seiko Astron having incurred whiplash like this, nor when I sold them in some cases the next day or within a week??? I pick up new watches to check them out, and move them on...very few have been a keeper for me, and all of you should know how that story rolls.

Everyone who had a negative comment to post hasn't even had the Ginault watch in hand, same deal with trolls who blast a brand they either cannot afford, or don't care to own. 
I can say with 100% certainty I have never blasted anyone's review on here just because I felt the watch looked stupid, the company who made it was stupid, dishonest or whatever, I move on and look at something I'm interested in. So not thin skinned, rather pissed that everyone thinks they can tell you what to say or what to think of something...

If Omega, Breitling, TAG, Seiko, or Monta had a watch they were trying to push and offered a discount to those who picked it up and wrote a review, I wonder how many glowing reviews we would see on here? So since I receive discounts when purchasing a Breitling does that mean I'm getting paid when I write a review? Are you serious? 

My review was genuine and I felt it better to offer some thoughts in closing with how the brand could step away from a pure 16610LN homage...guess all the folks here missed that one because they were too busy watching their Swiss elves making ALL the parts on their genuine 100% Swiss ONLY watches. Wait I just heard a Unicorn fart...we are truly living in magical times.


----------



## Stoshman (Jun 26, 2015)

A French car that runs on Beefeater's?


----------



## BigSeikoFan (Feb 15, 2010)

jamsie said:


> So we should all expect to have biased criticism leveled at anyone who has anything positive to say about this watch? That appears to be the consensus I see here and foolish me to think it had passed and was just a watch that was well made.
> 
> Anyone else care to take a swing?


Ok, since you asked nicely...

Never heard of the brand (or I never noticed) but your "review" smacks of pure hucksterism. Shill much?


----------



## BigSeikoFan (Feb 15, 2010)

jamsie said:


> If Omega, Breitling, TAG, Seiko, or Monta had a watch they were trying to push and offered a discount to those who picked it up and wrote a review, I wonder how many glowing reviews we would see on here? So *since I receive discounts when purchasing a Breitling does that mean I'm getting paid when I write a review?* Are you serious?


Well, _if _you got the discount with the understanding and expectation that you _would_ write a review, then yeah, that review would be suspect as well.

See the distinction now?


----------



## eblackmo (Dec 27, 2014)

If you are receiving an incentive (discount) directly from the manufacturer in exchange for writing a review of the watch then that taints the review. It makes it questionable. If you receive a discount with no agreement with the manufacturer to write them a review. Or provide them with any other service in exchange for a discount. Especially if it's a third party like a retailer e.g. an AD. Then no it is not the same as ginaults somewhat cynical and unscrupulous tactics.

Just to be clear:

1) Receiving a financial incentive to write a good review of the ocean rover. 
2) Not receiving a financial incentive to write a good review of a watch.

It's binary in nature.

At what point do you stop trying to shill your POS watch that no one wants to buy?


----------



## run23 (Jul 12, 2009)

I don't know -- I think Ginault's marketing if fine and not unethical or unscrupulous at all. Reviewers on WUS aren't journalists, just watch enthusiasts writing little reviews about a watch. Everyone knows the reviewers are getting a discount and can discount (no pun intended) the review as appropriate. And just because you get a discount doesn't mean you are necessarily going to write a glowing reviewing --You still spent $600 on the watch, and it's just a discount to an arbitrary and seemingly high regular price. 

A ton of so called 'restaurant reviews' are given after free meals (by people who are claiming they are actual journalists), and camera companies will do the same thing. Many companies will give away free products for reviews, so I'm not sure why there is so much anger over what Ginault does. It just seems kind of weird and misplaced to me.

And who cares if someone sells the watch after giving a good review. How many of us have loved a watch and sold it a week later, right after they posted on WUS about how much they loved the watch and that it may be a keeper (I certainly have).

I have no plans to buy this watch or any other 'homage' -- I just think people need to lighten up a little.


----------



## gangrel (Jun 25, 2015)

run23 said:


> I don't know -- I think Ginault's marketing if fine and not unethical or unscrupulous at all. Reviewers on WUS aren't journalists, just watch enthusiasts writing little reviews about a watch. Everyone knows the reviewers are getting a discount and can discount (no pun intended) the review as appropriate. And just because you get a discount doesn't mean you are necessarily going to write a glowing reviewing --You still spent $600 on the watch, and it's just a discount to an arbitrary and seemingly high regular price.


I didn't know it was Ginault policy to give the watch for half price if the buyer would write a review. I know it happens with products, but not that it was the case *here*. When that review is "OMG this watch is awesome!"...I reject it. As many here have.

Now couple this with a company with a highly suspect track record, and one clear, VERY shady practice...they're using Chronometer in a manner I definitely consider unethical. What's the overall picture of the company? Slime. Not a company I will do business with. There's a rule in used/vintage: buy the seller, then buy the watch. Holds with new watches...just not often that one feels the need to invoke it.


----------



## eblackmo (Dec 27, 2014)

run23 said:


> I don't know -- I think Ginault's marketing if fine and not unethical or unscrupulous at all. Reviewers on WUS aren't journalists, just watch enthusiasts writing little reviews about a watch. Everyone knows the reviewers are getting a discount and can discount (no pun intended) the review as appropriate. And just because you get a discount doesn't mean you are necessarily going to write a glowing reviewing --You still spent $600 on the watch, and it's just a discount to an arbitrary and seemingly high regular price.
> 
> A ton of so called 'restaurant reviews' are given after free meals (by people who are claiming they are actual journalists), and camera companies will do the same thing. Many companies will give away free products for reviews, so I'm not sure why there is so much anger over what Ginault does. It just seems kind of weird and misplaced to me.
> 
> ...


You are entitled to your opinion. In my opinion ginualt are using unethical and highly questionable marketing practices. Not that I really care I would never buy one of their POS watches. I just like to point it out. I hate the thought of too many people drinking the ginault koolaid and then there is the really obvious and poorly executed shilling. I think they should go back to the drawing board.

Also if other companies engage in similar dodgy behaviour. That doesn't somehow make it ethical.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

Amazon recently clamped down on reviews based on free or discounted items, except through the Amazon Vine program that they administer.


----------



## CMSgt Bo (Feb 12, 2006)

eblackmo said:


> Just to be clear:
> 
> 1) Receiving a financial incentive to write a good review of the ocean rover.
> 2) Not receiving a financial incentive to write a good review of a watch.
> ...


Just to be clear, there was never a stipulation that the reviews had to be positive...some were not.

And secondly the OP's watch sold in less then 8 hours on our Sales Corner...so obviously somebody wanted to buy it pretty badly.

I have to remind members that we are talking about watches, not life and death. It would be wise to turn down the emotions and leave out the snark and personal attacks. It would also be wise to leave out defamatory comments. You can state your opinions but you can't state them as fact without proof, if you do we're going to have a problem.

Thank you


----------



## Crate410 (Jun 14, 2011)

So wait. I point out a hamilton or the like are essentially fakes and I get blasted. Homage!!!

This guy writes a review of a watch that he (says) genuinely likes that is a "homage" and everyone jumps down his throat about it being a fake?

Alot of double standards. If its a manufacturer we like that makes the fakes we are ok with it. If not then NO ONE is allowed to say they like them.

Many chill pills are needed I think. Its a review of a crappy watch. Its not a crime to like crappy watches (Nomos) nor is it a crime to rave about your love for crappy watches (My love for Tags).

He says its good its his opinion. Some misguided soul wants to buy it let him buy it. 

OP, i appreciate (see! Nicely) your appreciation of this well made fake watch! Go you!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Cobia (Nov 24, 2013)

jamsie said:


> Really is that so? (shame because you and I have chatted in the past and got along, remember that?)
> 
> So we should all expect to have biased criticism leveled at anyone who has anything positive to say about this watch? That appears to be the consensus I see here and foolish me to think it had passed and was just a watch that was well made.
> 
> Anyone else care to take a swing?


Hi mate, maybe youve taken the replies a bit too personally? There was only one guy who really had a personal go at you and i agree that wasnt cool.

When we write a thread here we cant give out guidelines on how you want people to respond, it just doesnt work like that in the real world.

Its a passionate forum especially around homages, theres always going positive and negative replies, not every reply needs to be 'constructive'. People just like to express their views and when you write a piece on a forum like youve done here the topic is up for debate.

For the record i liked your enthusiastic review even though it sounded a bit paid for (no offence), and i like the watch too.

cheers


----------



## cuthbert (Dec 6, 2009)

Bah! For this money you can get a Oris 65 and for less a Seiko Shogun...and imo it's not ethical to offer discount in exchange of free good press.


----------



## u2bdet (Mar 5, 2011)

WOW lotta hurt feelings on this one if its criticized maybe their logo should be a ....._Snowflake _...


----------



## BigSeikoFan (Feb 15, 2010)

Who knew these guys would look good compared to Ginault??









_"Thanks for taking one for the team, bro!"_


----------



## Time In (Aug 7, 2016)

yongsoo1982 said:


> sounds like a watch meme waiting to happen..
> ["Defends how great homage watch is . . . sells it on the side"]


.......sorry Obama,,,the pic fit....  00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000


----------



## EnderW (Mar 16, 2015)

Well... to be honest... 
Ginault marketing is kind of like that of Stauer (Hand Built in US, Made in USA, Gold Sand searched for from Alaska to Argentina, Master watchmakers, Precision Chronometer, Kinetic Continuous, giant of horology comparable to Rolex). 
Ginault design\look is like that of Parnis.

_"What do we have here gentleman? It looks like a diver, it even looks an awful lot like the classic five digit legendary Submariner......Wait a minute, it's not Swiss Made, what's going on here?"
_*I think we have an illegitimate child of Stauer marketing dept and Parnis design dept.*

And while quality may be quite good, lets not forget that Parnis delivers 95% of Ginault's look and functionality at 10% of the price.

PS. OP, I also live on the East coast. Please don't beat me up, as it looks like you take these quite personally


----------



## jamsie (Mar 14, 2010)

EnderW said:


> Well... to be honest...
> Ginault marketing is kind of like that of Stauer (Hand Built in US, Made in USA, Gold Sand searched for from Alaska to Argentina, Master watchmakers, Precision Chronometer, Kinetic Continuous, giant of horology comparable to Rolex).
> Ginault design\look is like that of Parnis.
> 
> ...


Not gonna beat you up & you and I had a lively chat over the Omega Speedmaster Moon watch, I know where you stand am alright as Sunshine with that. I'm not telling anyone in my review to dismiss your ethics or beliefs, rather I said I liked the watch and was impressed with the level of fit & finish...I stand by that.


----------



## StufflerMike (Mar 23, 2010)

jamsie said:


> Nothing positive to say again?...sounds like Hillary Nation and bunch of crying liberals here who find the need to shove their way of thinking down my throat and others. Go away the review was not meant for you, rather someone who was considering picking this watch up and I would be more than happy to share the positives and negatives with them...


I do think what he said was positive. "Ginault Snowflake" sounds nice. If you can't stand an echo don't ask for it. What goes around, comes around. Mind your tone/attitude please.


----------



## jamsie (Mar 14, 2010)

stuffler said:


> I do think what he said was positive. "Ginault Snowflake" sounds nice. If you can't stand an echo don't ask for it. What goes around, comes around. Mind your tone/attitude please.


All due respect Mike, and as a MOD here I do respect you...snowflake is not a positive reference, being based in the UK/DE you should know how that term was referenced in the wake of Brexit as in the US how it was used during our election.


----------



## troyr1 (Sep 16, 2016)

I like a couple of important adult reminders from this thread. 

1. Vim and vigor often accompany opinions, expect and celebrate. 

2. Personal attacks are still not cool. 

3. Thoughtful and nuanced discussions include supporting references for suppositions, especially inflammatory ones. 

4. Watches are not important. Not in and of themselves. In my life, their importance is imbued by me. 

5. I don't have have to agree with any of you, but I would like to get along. I used to collect back when there was no one else to talk to about it. What a much better time this is. 

Have a great day everyone. I hope to see you all again.


----------



## yongsoo1982 (Jun 5, 2014)

whoa, this thread took a turn with some of the recent posts. why does it have to get political guys? I imagine this thread is on its way to Locksville.

FWIW OP, I don't really have issues with homages or people liking them or writing reviews on them. People are going to like what they like, and haters are going to hate--as the saying goes. Aside from the usual disparaging remarks regarding homages, I think what set off many was the tone of the review and the omission that such review may have been part of a discount to obtain the watch. I applaud your passion for the watch and company but please understand that not having that statement regarding the discount may lead some to second guess the authenticity of your review and passion. Couple this with the fact that you were trying to sell the watch at the same time, also calls into question the authenticity of your statements. I'm not accusing you of this but just wanted to point out that it can appear that way. As someone mentioned early on, it's probably a best practice to state whether you did or did not receive some sort of consideration for your review.

Re: Chinese watches/companies/manufacture, I have no problems buying/owning them. Hell, I have a SeaGull listed in my sig. I'd also have no problem with Ginault if they were upfront about who they are and what they're about (which I suspect is a former/current replica watch maker partnering with a Chinese firm), including their pricing and marketing strategies. Instead, they publish a Q&A that purports to be transparent but upon reading it, one finds that they have dodged many of the questions and their responses raise further suspicions. Given my impression of the company, it's not one that I would do business with at this time.

Your thread title posed a question and seemingly invited response. You acknowledged in your review that there was some controversy surrounding the company. and you're posting in f2 about an homage; I'm surprised that you're surprised you got some negative responses.

Anywho, based on what I've read about the watch itself, I'm sure that whoever you sold it to will receive a well finished timepiece and be perfectly happy with it despite all of our opinions here on the internet.


----------



## StufflerMike (Mar 23, 2010)

jamsie said:


> All due respect Mike, and as a MOD here I do respect you...snowflake is not a positive reference, being based in the UK/DE you should know how that term was referenced in the wake of Brexit as in the US how it was used during our election.


Laterally thoughts. No ? Same valid for Tudor Snowflake or just for Ginault ? 
Most of us would think that a snowflake is just that - a snowflake, a single ice crystal or an aggregation of ice crystals.


----------



## CMSgt Bo (Feb 12, 2006)

I just removed a few posts due to political comments and physical threats. I you choose to continue down this path we will have no choice but to close this thread.

Your choice.


----------



## JustMe74 (Jan 11, 2017)

Thanks for the review; I think it's well established that this watch is of high quality and certainly a terrific value at the discounted price.


I really want to like it, but here are my concerns:


1). The writing on the dial; it's silly, but I could get over that.

2). The general shadiness of the company and who is behind it. In my opinion, "Charles Ginault" and "John McMurtry" (as well as "Thomas Caddell") are all sock puppets. Who is really behind the company? 

3). The is no evidence that any of the claims by the company that this watch is "Hand Built in America" are actually true. It seems just as likely that the majority of the watch is built in China. The company could easily clear this up, but so far they have not.


Ginault could do a lot to ease the concerns that have been raised on this forum, but so far they have chosen not to, for whatever reason.


----------



## BigSeikoFan (Feb 15, 2010)

stuffler said:


> Most of us would think that a snowflake is just that - a snowflake, a single ice crystal or an aggregation of ice crystals.


Mike, in the US, snowflake definitely has a negative connotation. I think it means an overly-protected and overly-sensitive person who could not possibly bear any criticism that would permanently damage their fragile psyche. Google related terms: "trigger warning" "safe places" "micro-aggressions"

And if you were just kidding, never mind.

[URL="http://<a href="http://s749.photobucket.com/user/bryant97/media/776.jpg.gif.html" target="_blank" rel="nofollow">







[/URL]


----------



## StufflerMike (Mar 23, 2010)

Oh well, I know about "Generation Snowflake" but would never associate with a watch as almost nobody did with regards to the Tudor Snowflake. Why should we associate Ginault with a negative connotation. Just because member jamsie sees pink elephants everywhere with his exaggerated adoration for a watch I'd just call a knock-off.


----------



## molarface (Oct 12, 2009)

stuffler said:


> Oh well, I know about "Generation Snowflake" but would never associate with a watch as almost nobody did with regards to the Tudor Snowflake. Why should we associate Ginault with a negative connotation. Just because member jamsie sees pink elephants everywhere with his exaggerated adoration for a watch I'd just call a knock-off.


Goodness mike - you have just jumped from the frying pan into the oven!

I think the forum should make a "Safe Forum" where "certain people" can go without the fear of confrontation, facts, or other 'non-positive' discourse.

Maybe you guys could spring for a pony for them to pet. (But a non-threatening pony, nothing with hair full of allergens or those nasty hooves)


----------



## majikat (Jun 12, 2011)

jamsie said:


> All due respect Mike, and as a MOD here I do respect you...snowflake is not a positive reference, being based in the UK/DE you should know how that term was referenced in the wake of Brexit as in the US how it was used during our election.


Do you mean it's kinda like the meaning of the word " Gay " in 1930's Musicals as opposed to 21st Century "Gay "  


yongsoo1982 said:


> whoa, this thread took a turn with some of the recent posts. why does it have to get political guys? I imagine this thread is on its way to Locksville.
> 
> FWIW OP, I don't really have issues with homages or people liking them or writing reviews on them. People are going to like what they like, and haters are going to hate--as the saying goes. Aside from the usual disparaging remarks regarding homages, I think what set off many was the tone of the review and the omission that such review may have been part of a discount to obtain the watch. I applaud your passion for the watch and company but please understand that not having that statement regarding the discount may lead some to second guess the authenticity of your review and passion. Couple this with the fact that you were trying to sell the watch at the same time, also calls into question the authenticity of your statements. I'm not accusing you of this but just wanted to point out that it can appear that way. As someone mentioned early on, it's probably a best practice to state whether you did or did not receive some sort of consideration for your review.
> 
> ...


Sent from my SM-N920I using Tapatalk


----------



## U5512 (Feb 25, 2006)

"Hand Built in America" on the dial and "Made in USA" on the case back. Didn't the FCC go after Shinola for false claim of Made in USA?


----------



## yongsoo1982 (Jun 5, 2014)

majikat said:


> Do you mean it's kinda like the meaning of the word " Gay " in 1930's Musicals as opposed to 21st Century "Gay "Sent from my SM-N920I using Tapatalk


not sure why I'm quoted here. Errant text?


----------



## ari.seoul (Jan 27, 2011)

coming in thinking it was a question ...

hey, if the OP likes the watch, that's cool (it is a nice looking watch) - and likes it enough to write a positive review, that's making a great contribution to the board ...

but there is a but ...
1. monetary incentive to write a review ... which is basically advertising (good or bad, doesn't matter, it's advertising)
2. then sold it 

so, my apology OP, I can't even take the review with a grain of salt - to me, that was just pure advertising for the brand and for your own sale

I have nothing against you liking/buying/wearing/selling the watch, but the review is nothing but advertising


----------



## MarkieB (Feb 25, 2017)

I don't agree with being paid (in some form or other) to write a review. However I have never read a review from someone who has purchased a new watch (at whatever price) and said it's crap......everyone knows all new watches are fantastic, after all a WIS wouldn't buy rubbish would they?


----------



## vkalia (Oct 26, 2014)

jamsie said:


> Not your place either to tell me how to express the way I like a watch and what to write, WHO ARE YOU? I did a short review of something I found interesting and some value in, almost immediately I had folks name calling and so on despite doing nothing to them, and you saw my post where I asked if you have nothing nice to say move on...wasn't making you accept it or wear it, yet YOU couldn't help yourself and had to chime in negatively. What's your excuse?


You cannot really be for real, are you?

Ginault is just another Sub copy. You like it? Good for you, here's a cookie. You want us all to like it? Good luck with that. You sound like a shill to me, and not a very good one at that.


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

Let's just say it this way, if you were going to flip a watch, would you actually say that it was crap and not worth half the price you paid? This is what is referred to as a conflict of interest.


----------



## EnderW (Mar 16, 2015)

So to summarize.... doesn't appear like anyone is questioning claims about Ginault build quality and technical specs.
The concerns are about:

1) "homage" nature of the watch - controversial subject on F2 as original design is viewed by many as key part of overall watch value\experience

2) questionable marketing by Ginault - gold sand, made in USA, Q&A that doesn't answer anything, etc, basically raises a question as whether it is a business I'd want to give money to (in my case - no, I would not give them my $ and don't view them as someone I'd do any business with)

3) presentation of original post in context of discounted watches (for review) and a flip by OP - this can be a valid concern (I don't care about these points much. Even discount for review is somewhat tolerable for new business trying to get their name out)

4) perception of "sensitivity" by OP when there are detractors.... This one is to be expected. It is an internet forum and people won't all agree w you. But more importantly - this is F2. You have to appreciate the nature of each forum\subforum. On F71, the Ginault lovefest thread is 46+ pages long. Any detractors have long since been chased away by the village-people with pitchforks and torches. There is a "consensus" - Ginault is awesome and if you disagree.... But F71 will also have people gushing about $5 cereal box discovery or the latest Gshock homage by Skmei. F2 is a different beast altogether - different standards, different level of conversation, and no "safe-space" provided. If people on F2 have a different opinion - it will be voiced.

So again... what is Ginault... a "homage"\knockoff\copy\whatever of Rolex Submariner, available from a brand with questionable marketing practices, often at 55% off in exchange for review, that happens to have good build quality.


----------



## vkalia (Oct 26, 2014)

run23 said:


> Lots of pro bono patent lawyers for Rolex on these forums. They should count themselves lucky to be getting all of this legal advice and IP enforcement for free.


I think you missed his point. He was talking about HIS personal sense of ethics, not patent law.

And on a different note - the OP managed to shill AND sell his watch at the same time? That's impressive.


----------



## jamsie (Mar 14, 2010)

vkalia said:


> I think you missed his point. He was talking about HIS personal sense of ethics, not patent law.
> 
> And on a different note - the OP managed to shill AND sell his watch at the same time? That's impressive.


I think you missed the point a tad and are off target, speaking of myself. You and I chatted as well in the past, around a beautiful AP Royal Oak and another watch you picked up I think at the same time. I genuinely hope you are enjoying your watches, beautiful pieces.

I find its habitual of the forum here for those who have had very little real world experience with a multitude of watches to be the first in line to have something negative to say or thread crap. It's a systemic issue that happens all the time on WUS. Many times it just gets worse, to the point that you have mods who ride their own pink elephants slamming folks, I wish I could have thanked you instead for your selfless time you give to the forum, though I will never stand for someone putting me down just because they felt like it Mike with a flip remark.

I still believe most of us are here with a shared passion and would get along far better face to face over a couple of beers and talking watches, while saving our better halves from having to listen to how we just picked up the best watch ever.

For the record, the Ginault was already sold before I went on to write a review of it, it was my thoughts on the watch after letting it go. I myself would have liked to see the changes I suggested. It's not my job or position to defend Ginault, they have some real hard questions to answer before folks here have any measure of real faith in them as a brand.

In the end I don't care, though I do care a LOT about how people are treated. Reminds me of the time I was driving down the highway here and a guy in a truck drives by me and gives me the finger (still to this day no idea why), so I flipped him back...he was beyond raged that I had the gall to return his gesture. Don't name call and attack what folks have to say all the time if you don't expect the favor returned.


----------



## Everett464 (Nov 27, 2015)

EnderW said:


> 4) perception of "sensitivity" by OP when there are detractors.... This one is to be expected. It is an internet forum and people won't all agree w you. But more importantly - this is F2. You have to appreciate the nature of each forum\subforum. On F71, the Ginault lovefest thread is 46+ pages long. Any detractors have long since been chased away by the village-people with pitchforks and torches. There is a "consensus" - Ginault is awesome and if you disagree.... But F71 will also have people gushing about $5 cereal box discovery or the latest Gshock homage by Skmei. F2 is a different beast altogether - different standards, different level of conversation, and no "safe-space" provided. If people on F2 have a different opinion - it will be voiced.


Have you read through that "love fest?" It reads a lot like this one. F71 folks have the same basic camps with regards to the homage debate, although admittedly, it seems the pro-homage camp is bigger over there. I think the biggest difference between the two forums is that F71 is dedicated to discussion of inexpensive watches, and a lot of the conversations stem from the desire to have a top-tier experience for less money. Naturally, There is a band of gray area where folks, more or less, agree to disagree.

I'm an F71 guy, but I think this particular watch/brand embodies all the nastiest bits of a nasty industry segment. I wouldn't buy one for Parnis prices (nor would I buy a Parnis).


----------



## EnderW (Mar 16, 2015)

Everett464 said:


> Have you read through that "love fest?" It reads a lot like this one. F71 folks have the same basic camps with regards to the homage debate, although admittedly, it seems the pro-homage camp is bigger over there. I think the biggest difference between the two forums is that F71 is dedicated to discussion of inexpensive watches, and a lot of the conversations stem from the desire to have a top-tier experience for less money. Naturally, There is a band of gray area where folks, more or less, agree to disagree.
> 
> I'm an F71 guy, but I think this particular watch/brand embodies all the nastiest bits of a nasty industry segment. I wouldn't buy one for Parnis prices (nor would I buy a Parnis).


I have read it. I even posted on it early on. Early pages had some controversy, but by page 7-8 all detractors were chased out. Thread is now 45 pages long, with last 25 or so being uniform in nature with Ginault hailed as king of all watches (ok, of all homages)
https://www.watchuseek.com/f71/ginault-prototype-180260gsln-vs-180165c1ln-%96-media-q-4056745.html

Also, not sure if I agree re: F71 vs F2 being purely price differentiated. 
Tolerance of homages is much higher on F71. And overall expectation of "universal lovefest" is higher on F71.

But it's not all about the price. Post a nice JDM Seiko or even interesting micro (Chr Ward for ex) and F2 dwellers will cheer you on or ignore if uninterested. Heck, bulk of my collection is considered affordable (< $500). The controversies on F2 are usually centered on "homages", or questionable business practices (invicta), or marketing (Shinola) regardless of the price. Hublot does not get much love anywhere...

PS. I obviously can't speak for entire subforum. Ton of different perspectives here. But anecdotally... these are my observations.


----------



## Everett464 (Nov 27, 2015)

EnderW said:


> I have read it. I even posted on it early on. Early pages had some controversy, but by page 7-8 all detractors were chased out. Thread is now 45 pages long, with last 25 or so being uniform in nature with Ginault hailed as king of all watches (ok, of all homages)
> https://www.watchuseek.com/f71/ginault-prototype-180260gsln-vs-180165c1ln-%96-media-q-4056745.html
> 
> Also, not sure if I agree re: F71 vs F2 being purely price differentiated.
> ...


I went back and looked, and you're right - the last few pages are less contentious - but the first 25 or so pages are the same as here. There does appear to be quite a few folks that are really genuinely enamored by the "quality" of the watch.

And for the differences in the forums - I think you nailed it - I just think that price drives F71's more liberal stance. I mean - the alibaba thread is one of the most active.


----------



## RNHC (Feb 13, 2010)

Funny how Ginault threads percolated up the forum list, starting in Dive Watch (f74) forum then moving up a couple of forums into Affordable Watch (f71) forum. Now the threads rose up all the way into Public (f2) forum. I guess hot air does rise. 

It's always the same old hurray Ginault Ocean Rover story that devolves into Ginault Ocean Rover "fanboys" confusing skepticism/criticism of the brand, Ginault, as insult against the product, Ocean Rover, and calling all the critics as "haters." Gets a bit repetitive after a while.


----------



## Dooberfloober (Feb 19, 2017)

this is the worst thread


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## cuthbert (Dec 6, 2009)

Everett464 said:


> I went back and looked, and you're right - the last few pages are less contentious - but the first 25 or so pages are the same as here. There does appear to be quite a few folks that are really genuinely enamored by the "quality" of the watch.
> 
> And for the differences in the forums - I think you nailed it - I just think that price drives F71's more liberal stance. I mean - the alibaba thread is one of the most active.


I think the problem is not the "homage" dispute, there is a company, MkII, that just makes homages and nobody speaks against them, but it's because they homage watches that are very old and hard to find.

In this case I think the source of the dispute is the use of questionable advertisement and discounts for good publicity.


----------



## vkalia (Oct 26, 2014)

jamsie said:


> In the end I don't care, though I do care a LOT about how people are treated. Reminds me of the time I was driving down the highway here and a guy in a truck drives by me and gives me the finger (still to this day no idea why), so I flipped him back...he was beyond raged that I had the gall to return his gesture. *Don't name call and attack what folks have to say all the time if you don't expect the favor returned*.


I get that and accept that. It seemed to me that you went far beyond that in your initial posts - to the point of being dismissive of everyone who was less than enamored with the positive review. That was pointlessly antagonistic - you construed an criticism of the watch into an attack on yourself.


----------



## vkalia (Oct 26, 2014)

cuthbert said:


> In this case I think the source of the dispute is the use of questionable advertisement and discounts for good publicity.


To touch upon an earlier topic - while this sort of practice may be common in other industries (eg, restaurant reviews), and even on watch blog sites it is not - and should not - be acceptable in a watch forum. We are not professionals who are making money doing this: we are a community of fellow members who, among other things, look to each other for real world opinions, unbiased by financial gains.

Paid-for reviews have no place here.


----------



## Crate410 (Jun 14, 2011)

Dooberfloober said:


> this is the worst thread
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Its the best thread! Damn entertaining.

The funny thing is if everyone who posted on this thread met in real life, we would probably have an ok meet.

I learned that in my car forums.

Online: Blaaaaaahgh!!!! Nitrous fake way to make power! You stupid!

In real life: oh that is a good nitrous setup! You smart!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## base2 (Feb 9, 2017)

What is Ginault? Idk, but there are plenty of small brands I can choose from that don't warrant this kind of controversy. Yeesh. Discount for reviews? Talk about marketing backfire.


----------



## MrCairo (May 21, 2015)

Hey OP, unlike it seems many others, we haven't chatted in the past.

I wanted to say something witty and/or edgy but others have said it better (and funnier). I think what bothered most is that unlike other Ginault reviewers, you never mentioned the discount (an agreement you made with Ginault, your obligation was to post a review). Also, why on F2? lol.

(Maybe you actually wanted the heated reactions? Kinda like Ginault's "Q&A" tactics?)

Anyway, just letting you know for the future, there is a review section on WUS Reviews


----------



## cuthbert (Dec 6, 2009)

vkalia said:


> To touch upon an earlier topic - *while this sort of practice may be common in other industries (eg, restaurant reviews), and even on watch blog sites* it is not - and should not - be acceptable in a watch forum. We are not professionals who are making money doing this: we are a community of fellow members who, among other things, look to each other for real world opinions, unbiased by financial gains.
> 
> Paid-for reviews have no place here.


That's the reason why I don't trust restaurants' reviews, especially in the US. Regarding certain watch websites that I won't name it appears they are just making PR and not honest reviews. I agree at least WUS should remain neutral field for honest opinions, I do reviews and I always try to describe what I like and what I don't in a purchase.


----------



## MediumRB (May 7, 2015)

Whatever happened to Steinhart?


----------



## jupiter6 (Jan 8, 2015)

cuthbert said:


> That's the reason why I don't trust restaurants' reviews, especially in the US. Regarding certain watch websites that I won't name it appears they are just making PR and not honest reviews. I agree at least WUS should remain neutral field for honest opinions, I do reviews and I always try to describe what I like and what I don't in a purchase.


All the big watch blogs do it. I really don't understand why people take their word as gospel and mindlessly parrot their third rate sentence construction. I teach 8 year olds who can write better than they can. What is "brand cache", as one blog discussion repeatedly asserted in an attempt to sound eloquent? They are good for pictures, but their reviews are no better than the op's review. The real problem is they are taken so seriously.

Rant over.

As.for Steinhart, good point. Are we witnessing the birth of a new forum villain?


----------



## cuthbert (Dec 6, 2009)

jupiter6 said:


> All the big watch blogs do it. I really don't understand why people take their word as gospel and mindlessly parrot their third rate sentence construction. I teach 8 year olds who can write better than they can. What is "brand cache", as one blog discussion repeatedly asserted in an attempt to sound eloquent? They are good for pictures, but their reviews are no better than the op's review. The real problem is they are taken so seriously.
> 
> Rant over.
> 
> As.for Steinhart, good point. Are we witnessing the birth of a new forum villain?


I assume they are easy to find with a search engine, for instance I was considering the new Zodiac chronograph and I just find infos on two blogs, nothing else, even here on WUS the model is not discussed.

Again some of these websites are propagating rumors and incorrect information, like Sellitas being different movements than ETAs from a design point of view.


----------



## CMSgt Bo (Feb 12, 2006)

MrCairo said:


> Anyway, just letting you know for the future, there is a review section on WUS Reviews


Great point Cairo, this one's moving.


----------



## jamsie (Mar 14, 2010)

CMSgt Bo said:


> Great point Cairo, this one's moving.


Not so much boss, and I do appreciate all your help as another LONG time member..you have been nothing but stellar in the past and continue to be.

At the end of the day there is NO ENFORCMENT from Ginault if you applied a PROMO code to purchase the watch. I also had previously posted a similar review on another watch forum to meet that "obligation" that everyone here is so worried about. I won a Squale watch in the past from ABlogtowatch and also wrote about that watch on WUS, was I paid to do that in some way and being a shill for Squale or ABlogtowatch? I don't think so&#8230;

What I posted on WUS here was identical to my posts on Breitling (which I post in the Breitling forum and Public forum). I was unaware of a specific Ginault area or I would have posted it there to be constructive as there were things I would like to see the watch develop into because the craftsmanship is there, all tolerances were perfect on the watch.

What happened here is folks many who have only been here a year or two craped all over this thread, period. You can say something constructive, "like I wouldn't pick this one up as I have too many issues with the "Made in USA" claim"...fair enough...first post alluded to a REP maker being behind this product and calling folks names 1st POST "You're only the 30th or so dumbnut to have paid $1.3k for a replica that's breaking patents..." That was and is my point of issue here.


----------



## Stelyos (Jun 23, 2015)

CMSgt Bo said:


> Great point Cairo, this one's moving.


Is there a reason why you're selectively deleting my post? Specifically the most recent one?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## Stelyos (Jun 23, 2015)

jamsie said:


> calling folks names 1st POST "You're only the 30th or so dumbnut to have paid $1.3k for a replica that's breaking patents..." That was and is my point of issue here.


I think I made my point earlier but a mod deleted the post...We post OPINIONS and NO ONE can misinterpret anything as nothing more than OPINIONS; having said that many other posts also provided links for you and any one else interested to do your due diligence. What's even worse is your physical threat against members but the mod also deleted that post... and worse than that is singling me out after not only in this thread but many others people have provided info for other members to research.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## hwa (Feb 18, 2013)

A point of Ocean Rover history for those new to the Ginault game: unlike WUS rules, which (albeit selectively enforced) don't allow posts to be changed so that history may be preserved, Ginault's website dramatically was edited in the jetwash of numerous posts in a number of "review" threads on both F74 and F71 that were highly critical of Ginault's exaggerated, false, misleading, and/or fantastical claims. If mods make me, I'll happily footnote each of those claims, but the "false" part is the genesis of this post: they claim to be Made in the USA, they admitted already that it's not, even if it MAY be assembled in the USA, yet they continue to ship watches with the Made in USA case back despite earlier stating that they were going to produce new ones.

This thread is but the latest of the paid-for advertising--doesn't matter if the watch was sold before the review was posted, the watch was bought at better than 50% discount in exchange for a review, and that's as good as bought, regardless of whether the review was positive or negative. Interestingly, the range of opinion here is pretty much the same as it was on F74 and F71. F74, however, is not a Sub-heavy forum, despite it being a dive forum and despite the Sub's obvious place in the pantheon of dive watches. Probably because at 40mm, it's too small to attract much of a following among modern dive watch fans. On F71, where much traffic relates to the Sub and Sub homages in particular--go BSHT!--there's a similar range of heated opinions going both ways. In BSHT, we've mostly ignored the Ginault because it's divisive and we're not looking for battles in that spot. If the Ginault keeps getting shoved in our faces, we'll see how that one goes.

So, here we are, and where exactly is that? Ginault got caught with its hand in the cookie jar, making utterly false claims that it was "Made in USA," which it most definitely was/is NOT. Argue about the value of the law all you want; under the law as it exists, it's a false claim. Why do I point this out, today? Because Ginault's defense to that problem was to admit the error and promise to send new case backs omitting that claim. Ginault stated that the Made in USA case backs were leftovers from its first release from several years ago, the aptly named "BM1". For an "American Made" watch, it's pretty funny that Ginault chose for its 1:1 copy with the cloned ETA engine the well-known acronym for "Bowel Movement," augmented with the #1, for its first release! LMAO! But I digress. 

My point for chiming in here, now, is that OP's pics show--unless I'm mistaken--that Ginault released another version of the Ocean Rover AFTER all this provenance brouhaha blew up, STILL USING THE MADE IN USA case back. What the bloody hell? I know Ginault is a sponsor here on WUS, but my goodness it's mind-numbing that the mods come after those of us who would point out Ginault's wrongdoing--it ain't wrong to make an homage, even a great quality homage, it's wrong knowingly to continue to flout the law--but seem to have no beef with Ginault's continuing to flout a law that it already acknowledges it broke. Now, apologies to Ginault if they sent OP's 16610 copy (the cyclops dilutes the claim that it's other than a 1:1 copy, no?) BEFORE recognizing that they don't qualify to use the "Made in USA" tag line, but that whole thing blew up before any announced release of OP's cyclops version, so I'm thinking Ginault, like Rhett Butler, frankly doesn't give a damn.

And that, in a nutshell, is why I sold my copy after writing my review over on F71. If all you care about is the quality of the watch, and you think a watch with an ETA2824 clone is worth $1300 because ... regulated, go ahead and buy it. Just know that you're buying from a company that generates more questions than answers.


----------



## hanshananigan (Apr 8, 2012)

mleok said:


> Amazon recently clamped down on reviews based on free or discounted items, except through the Amazon Vine program that they administer.


Yes, I'm surprised there is [edit] not a [/edit] no-shill rule on WUS. Or at least a rule that posts must state that reviews associated with discounts must be identified as such by the poster.


----------



## CMSgt Bo (Feb 12, 2006)

Stelyos said:


> Is there a reason why you're selectively deleting my post? Specifically the most recent one?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro


Yes, but Mod actions are not a topic for conversation in open forum.


----------



## donnytron (Feb 12, 2017)

On the patent point, are people sure that there's infringement? (I ask this as a genuine question.) I have read elsewhere (sorry, no link) that the Rolex clask is in the public domain. I can say for sure that patent law is complicated and there's always a gray area that people try to exploit, so it can be nuanced about what is stolen and what's not (or what is legally not stolen but still kinda is).

If there is more objective info on the patent infringement I'd be curious to see it.



Stelyos said:


> ... do your homework, in my humble opinion they practiced by making replicas before swapping the name on the dial.
> 
> Clone movement (maybe with a few parts swapped), clasp that's still under patent and case specs that match perfectly to the 5 digit Rolex


----------



## mleok (Feb 16, 2010)

donnytron said:


> On the patent point, are people sure that there's infringement? (I ask this as a genuine question.) I have read elsewhere (sorry, no link) that the Rolex clask is in the public domain. I can say for sure that patent law is complicated and there's always a gray area that people try to exploit, so it can be nuanced about what is stolen and what's not (or what is legally not stolen but still kinda is).
> 
> If there is more objective info on the patent infringement I'd be curious to see it.


The Glidelock clasp is covered by two patents, one from 2006 and another from 2008. The patent protection period is 20 years, so it is not yet in the public domain.


----------



## GarbanzoNegro (Nov 3, 2017)

mleok said:


> The Glidelock clasp is covered by two patents, one from 2006 and another from 2008. The patent protection period is 20 years, so it is not yet in the public domain.


Wow! I did not think about this patent infringement issue when I bought the watch. This changes completely my point of view about this watch/brand/company.

I work in an industry where our products are copied, patents are infringed and other companies sell their counterfeit products with our brand. We even have a legal department dedicated to fight against those products/companies, mainly from Asia.

Best regards,


----------

