Watch Freeks banner

1 - 20 of 22 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
227 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hands up, I own quite a few, and don't see an issue. For those who don't understand the difference between a homage and a fake, a homage doesn't bare the name of the original designer, therefore an individual can not attempt to sell a homage to a third party in the belief they are buying something that is not as described.

Some people may believe that copying a design is morally wrong. I would point out that in the real world this is the norm. Every pair of shoes, every shirt, or every dress, is based on a design of something else, unless of course you are spending a fortune. This is the way of the world, and watches shouldn't be considered differently. The real point of this thread is the hypocrisy amongst some watch enthusiasts. For example, if Parnis make a replica of another manufacturers watch, it's considered a crime, however when every other watch manufacturer make their own version of a Submariner or a Moon Watch, it's perfectly OK. Sometimes I just don't understand the snobbery of the watch collecting community ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,848 Posts
Hands up, I own quite a few, and don't see an issue. For those who don't understand the difference between a homage and a fake, a homage doesn't bare the name of the original designer, therefore an individual can not attempt to sell a homage to a third party in the belief they are buying something that is not as described.

Some people may believe that copying a design is morally wrong. I would point out that in the real world this is the norm. Every pair of shoes, every shirt, or every dress, is based on a design of something else, unless of course you are spending a fortune. This is the way of the world, and watches shouldn't be considered differently. The real point of this thread is the hypocrisy amongst some watch enthusiasts. For example, if Parnis make a replica of another manufacturers watch, it's considered a crime, however when every other watch manufacturer make their own version of a Submariner or a Moon Watch, it's perfectly OK. Sometimes I just don't understand the snobbery of the watch collecting community ?

Are you really going to drag this topic on and on until we all "confess" you are 100% correct? Please say no! We all acknowlwdge that we are entitled to our own view. Of course. Why do you continue to flog it? Enough already. You're saying that if I spend a fortune, only then I can buy a design that's not based on something else?!? Says who? There are many brands that are affordable that are NOT a fortune and are of different design. Expand your horizons. Two words that I find missunderstood, or at least grossly overused are: hate & snobbery. If I don't agree with you, I'm a snob? Get a grip - move on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
183 Posts
Friendship

Hands up, I own quite a few, and don't see an issue. For those who don't understand the difference between a homage and a fake, a homage doesn't bare the name of the original designer, therefore an individual can not attempt to sell a homage to a third party in the belief they are buying something that is not as described.

Some people may believe that copying a design is morally wrong. I would point out that in the real world this is the norm. Every pair of shoes, every shirt, or every dress, is based on a design of something else, unless of course you are spending a fortune. This is the way of the world, and watches shouldn't be considered differently. The real point of this thread is the hypocrisy amongst some watch enthusiasts. For example, if Parnis make a replica of another manufacturers watch, it's considered a crime, however when every other watch manufacturer make their own version of a Submariner or a Moon Watch, it's perfectly OK. Sometimes I just don't understand the snobbery of the watch collecting community ?
It usually depends on the relationship the manufacturer has with the collector community as to if they would meet with snobbery. In my humble opinion you buy what you want to buy and you should not feel like your purchase choice has to be accepted by a particular group. I once showed a fellow collector a couple of homages and he turned his nose up and stated he only buy the real thing but I saw for certain he was wearing a fake and not a good one. This comes to show you just do your thing and don't worry about the rest.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
227 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
It usually depends on the relationship the manufacturer has with the collector community as to if they would meet with snobbery. In my humble opinion you buy what you want to buy and you should not feel like your purchase choice has to be accepted by a particular group. I once showed a fellow collector a couple of homages and he turned his nose up and stated he only buy the real thing but I saw for certain he was wearing a fake and not a good one. This comes to show you just do your thing and don't worry about the rest.
Totally agree. I hate other watch enthusiasts deriding a person because they choose to wear a watch they don't like. Of course, taste is a personal thing, but personal attacks are unforgivable.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
227 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Are you really going to drag this topic on and on until we all "confess" you are 100% correct? Please say no! We all acknowlwdge that we are entitled to our own view. Of course. Why do you continue to flog it? Enough already. You're saying that if I spend a fortune, only then I can buy a design that's not based on something else?!? Says who? There are many brands that are affordable that are NOT a fortune and are of different design. Expand your horizons. Two words that I find missunderstood, or at least grossly overused are: hate & snobbery. If I don't agree with you, I'm a snob? Get a grip - move on.
It may interest you that I have far more watches that are not homages than are. The point behind the thread is many so called watch enthusiasts have inconsistent opinions. If a collector dislikes all watches that resemble another design, I can appreciate it. What annoys me is when an individual chooses to deride a certain brand that produces homage watches, but then ignores many others that do the same thing.

Example. On another forum a poster went out of his way to tell everyone how much he hated Parnis because of their insistence to copy the designs of other watch makers. Within a few days he was posting pictures of his new Bulova Moon Watch. That's watch snobbery !!
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
9,663 Posts
Totally get what you are saying here honestly Mrs. Wiggles.

You just want consistency at the end of the day. ..Right sir?! :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,848 Posts
It may interest you that I have far more watches that are not homages than are. The point behind the thread is many so called watch enthusiasts have inconsistent opinions. If a collector dislikes all watches that resemble another design, I can appreciate it. What annoys me is when an individual chooses to deride a certain brand that produces homage watches, but then ignores many others that do the same thing.

Example. On another forum a poster went out of his way to tell everyone how much he hated Parnis because of their insistence to copy the designs of other watch makers. Within a few days he was posting pictures of his new Bulova Moon Watch. That's watch snobbery !!

Why do you take this so personally? It's just watches. One can change their mind as often as they wish. It really gets to you - relax!

You throw around the word snob & hate with much carelessness.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
570 Posts
Example. On another forum a poster went out of his way to tell everyone how much he hated Parnis because of their insistence to copy the designs of other watch makers. Within a few days he was posting pictures of his new Bulova Moon Watch. That's watch snobbery !!
The Bulova Moon Watch was a remake of their own watch, It was no "Homage" or "fake" or anything in between???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
227 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
The Bulova Moon Watch was a remake of their own watch, It was no "Homage" or "fake" or anything in between???
So the fact it looks just like the Omega Moon Watch is a coincidence, and it isn't a homage. That's so funny it's made my day :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,296 Posts
So the fact it looks just like the Omega Moon Watch is a coincidence, and it isn't a homage. That's so funny it's made my day :D
You are obviously not aware that Bulova has been to the moon too... Dude, you really should know what you're talking about before you go spouting off at the mouth. You're looking pretty amateur right around now... :crazy:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,305 Posts
 
  • Like
Reactions: Roarry

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,593 Posts
Homages of watches that have had their patents run out are perfectly legal.

Do the purists detest them because they think the design is a ripoff, or do they feel perhaps (in a lot of cases) they got ripped off on the exorbitant price they paid for the "real deal" when the homage is about 95% up to speed of the original, but at a fraction of the price, are they really pissed off at themselves??

I have a Rolex 16610 I bought in 1996 for $1,800 brand new in Hong Kong from a friend's cousin's AD there. Thought that was a rip off price back then, but dropped the hammer anyways. That watch is now a safe queen for my oldest boy when I croak.

To be really, really truthful with you my 16610 isn't close to the fit, finish and quality of a Monta Ocean King, and really not even a Squale or a Steinhart homage.

No AR (still Rolexes glaring flaw) cheesy hollow link bracelet and crumby clasp, the movement is OK, but I have had better accuracy out of Seikos. The only thing that makes that watch is the Rolex and Crown on the dial, and to me, that's just Kool-Aid.

Hell, I have a fake Rolex Smurf that can't be detected a fake from the real deal unless you open up the case and look at the movement. The fit, the finish, the bracelet, and ceramic bezel and glide-lock bracelets are eons ahead of my 16610, if you handed a non-WIS both of those watches and have them pick the fake, they would pick the real one over the counterfeit one as the fake every day of the week.

I really don't care for the Rolex Sub look, Subs bore me to death, and the fake I also own almost never gets worn although it is a high-quality piece with an ETA 2836 movement, can't get rid of it because I would never sell anyone a fake. I only briefly owned other sub homages, a Tag that used Mercedes's hands, a Steinhart, a Tiseel. All of them are gone now!

The Chinese clone makers are on the verge of coming out with watches that even the Rolex watchmakers back in Switzerland couldn't detect as fakes without tracking the serial numbers.

They are hawking these watches for well under $1K and the real deal is going for over ten times the price, sometimes 20 times the price when you consider just watches using non-precious metals.

When I saw the other article here on how they are now even cloning Omega Seamaster 300 Master Chronometers, I starting to think a Grand Seiko Spring Drive may be the way to go for my next High End watch, let's see them try to clone that puppy!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
570 Posts
So the fact it looks just like the Omega Moon Watch is a coincidence, and it isn't a homage. That's so funny it's made my day :D
If I'm being completely honest I'd say it wasn't a coincidence at all that they looked alike because they both came from the same place! They both do have white hands/markers against a black background...

And so does my avatar...



I can't Imagine how both Omega and Bulova both came up with that idea at the same time, It must have been a stroke of genius hit twice?

Do I need to go on about the standard sub-dial layout that neither were the first to use???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
227 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
If I'm being completely honest I'd say it wasn't a coincidence at all that they looked alike because they both came from the same place! They both do have white hands/markers against a black background...

And so does my avatar...



I can't Imagine how both Omega and Bulova both came up with that idea at the same time, It must have been a stroke of genius hit twice?

Do I need to go on about the standard sub-dial layout that neither were the first to use???
So the watch I am wearing to day isn't a homage to the Rolex Daytona
because it looks nothing like it :rolleyes:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,075 Posts
The "homage" topic is always a fire starter, whenever i see it I hardly if ever contribute, just grab some popcorn and enjoy the show...Carry on gents!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Abdullah

·
Registered
Joined
·
570 Posts
So the watch I am wearing to day isn't a homage to the Rolex Daytona
because it looks nothing like it :rolleyes:
Are you really wearing it?


Anyways, the point I was trying to make is neither one of these two watches is a copy of the other, but they do look similar, and neither was the first with that look...


Rolex was making these from 1955 to 1961...


And all of them are diff from each other, I believe diff enough that they aren't "homage", But that's just me, Your mileage may vary...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,848 Posts
Yes it's gorgeous, so gorgeous Rolex make their own version. The limited edition blue one costs more than an average three bed house.

HaHa, that's funny! You know that you have it backwards. I don't know where you live, but here, you can't buy any house for that amount of $$$.
 
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top