Greg:
Why don’t I throw out another Round Table discussion: Can a watch brand be truly “underrated”?
On our favorite forum last week two different posts alluded to Longines being an “underrated” brand. My head just about exploded. Longines has been one of the Ur-Swiss fine watch makers for nearly 150 years. Important people wore them (Amelia Earhart, Charles Lindbergh, Albert Einstein, Squidward Tentacles, to name a few). They are still a top ten selling Swiss brand and are part of one of the most successful watch conglomerates. How can they be underrated?
A little deeper reflection reminded me that I have in the past referred to Mido as being underrated. Mido has all of the advantages and nearly the history that Longines has. Was I wrong?
I think so. I don’t think that any of the brands under the umbrella of the big guys gets to be the plucky underdog. So, no Swatch, Richemont, LVMH, Seiko, or Citizen brand can claim it.
Being underrated may be more about our perception than the reality of the brand. We didn’t realize that we would like this or that. Upon the revelation that Longines or Mido make a watch that we really like we then proselytize the brand. Look what I discovered? We underrated the brand. We have met the enemy and it is us.
Erik:
Hey All,
Recently, I’ve been thinking about words like “underrated” and “affordable” in a very different way. An underrated watch is gonna be something that we don’t get spammed with. Whether it be from talking heads or enthusiasts. It’s been a while since I’ve picked up a watch, but I pulled the trigger on something a bit ago and it completely changed how I look at watches when I finally put it on. I’d never seen anyone blog about it or make a video, so would that be underrated? Probably not. I’m sure thousands of people love it. That being said, I’m down for a round table.
Chris:
I’ve waxed lyrical on this many times and it is all about perception. Take Mido, and it’s not a brand I see much of in the UK, but I know is advertised and targets other markets across the globe. I agree, it’s under the Swatch umbrella, so it has substantial backing from a higher power, but if it’s not on my radar can I call it underrated?
No. Ignorance is not a substitute for “critique” (and many people should taken that on board).
Undervalued?
No. Ignorance is not a substitute for “value”.
So, what is it then? It’s an unknown quantity. That’s when you need to research more.
Mido has a rich history, although, as with most “brands” after 1970, gets a little bit confusing and is not necessarily the same Mido now as before… BUT, it is a nice selling point. So, if Mido release a nice watch, and I don’t see it, and people bang on about it, I would not be surprised from that regard, but more if I actually saw it for sale on the UK high street.
I’ve seen people call Tudor and Cartier underrated and I would definitely have something to say about that (crack a book).
If a watch ticks, tells time relatively accurately, and the complications work, then the watch is doing its job. That is a low benchmark to clear, and if all watches in the market do that, then it’s hard to judge them unless it’s by the standards they claim. The rest is purely down to value – and that is subjective, and thus difficult to quantify.
I don’t think we necessarily have all the sales data to truly say if a watch is underrated though, do we?
Kaysia:
Just a quick disclaimer… we’re at the end of a very tough week, I am in a foul mood today and my thoughts on this may be reflected by my general emotional state at the moment…
…but I have to say, I find people claiming their beloved watch/brand is ‘underrated’ as complete arrogance.
So, you love a watch other people don’t buy, or love, as much as you?
Saying it’s ‘underrated’ is like saying everyone else is wrong and doesn’t know what they are talking about!
You like an unpopular watch! Get over it!
A watch’s general reputation in the watch community is what it is. It can’t be under or over rated.
As Greg mentioned, just because YOU felt a certain way about it and have now changed your mind, isn’t the same as the whole community being wrong. Better to name your post “I underrated Longines” or “I think Longines is better than Rolex”.
And how people can say Cartier is underrated… god knows what they are basing that on.
And we need to not confuse ‘underrated’ with ‘less advertised’. As Chris mentioned, ignorance isn’t an excuse to call something underrated.
If the entirety of the watch world is all subjective anyway, like everyone keeps saying…
“You like what you like.”
“We all have different tastes and value different things.”
“No one can judge the watch on your wrist except you.”
… then how can ANY watch be rated AT ALL anyway???
5/5* reviews all around!
Greg:
Another point, who is doing the rating anyway? For Longines, Mido, and Tissot, it is the Swatch Group. They don’t let Tissot play above their “level” as determined by the corporate structure. It gets the plastic pieces in the Powermatic 80, the others don’t. They aren’t allowed to compete with sister brands. In a way this is just like the old Swiss tier system that kept Oris trying to develop a durable pin pallet escapement movement because they weren’t allowed to make fully jeweled movements. There is a structure to the watch industry. It is invisible to many enthusiasts. If you don’t know what Richemont controls you might really believe that someday, plucky little Montblanc will make a watch that rivals an IWC. Except we know that that will not be allowed.
Lastly, perhaps this “underrated” problem stems from the easy content “rankings” that YouTubers do from time to time. Is this or that “high horology” or just near to it? Where is Casio or Hublot ranked? Is this “entry level luxury”? By now we should all know that is empty content. The conglomerates divide themselves into tiers. A person with a microphone and camera who goes to occasional trade shows is not any better a guide than someone who buys the watch. There is no special tier for ugly little calculator watches.
Chris:
True…
So, I might change tact a little here in terms of ire…
I think I am guilty of using the term when it comes to some vintage watches, but they are of a certain style, price, calibre, etc… I’m obviously not referring to things like a Rolex, or maybe a Tudor, but time does allow for a little bit of reflection in terms of overall impact, or legacy.
Case in point: 1968 Lip Himalaya:
This is winging its way to me at present (hopefully everything will be hunky-dory, but let’s see). I sent a quick message to Greg and Kaysia, usual fare, we do this all the time, and Greg’s response is as follows:
“That’s an “underrated” classic. Lip doesn’t make a watch that good for another 40 years.”
And… he’s right. (Editor’s note: Yes, I am, and usually so. It is a burden that I bear with grace and humility.)
It is an underrated classic.
“Underrated, wtf!?” I hear you all cry… bear with me.
Hands-up who remembers the Lip Himalaya?
Whilst most people who think of the boom of climbing achievements, and the wristwatches associated with them, of the 1950s and 1960s most will probably say the Explorer and Everest, and maybe if you are lucky the Smiths De Luxe that Hilary supposedly wore instead. However, the first of the “Eight-Thousanders” scaled was Annapurna on the 3rd of June 1950 by Maurice Herzog and Louis Lachenel. Herzog wore a prototype watch made especially for the expedition by Fred Lip, which was to eventually become the Lip Himalaya. If any of this is sounding new to you, then I’m kind of proving my point – the Lip Himalaya is a watch with some provenance and is probably long-forgotten in the watch-buying zeitgeist. For a watch that can trace its lineage up the slopes of one of the tallest mountains in the world, it’s sad to think that no one in particular talks about it in reverence.
Could we call said watch underrated? Possibly.
Sure, you can buy a modern Himalaya from Lip now, but are they of the same stock? No, it’s like the Marlin from Timex now…
There are probably a few other watches we could place in this “underrated” category, but it has to be carefully judged with some element of context. I’d argue for the Lip Himalaya because it never appears on lists of important watches in history and is overshadowed by others who scaled similar heights later, albeit more notable mountains. It’s the first watch up a mountain greater than 8000m, and the watches born of said prototype deserve some love.
I’d definitely put this forward as underrated over, say, a Cartier…
Erik:
I know that I’ll mirror some points that have already been made, but I honestly think that the word “underrated” just needs to be removed from watch enthusiast vocabulary. I don’t really think that anything is underrated. Because we keep hearing about the same watches over and over and over. How can something be underrated if we’re all aware of it? The only people that could benefit from looking at a list of “underrated” watches would be newcomers.
If someone new to the hobby is actively seeking out watches that have a positive consensus, they could find a hundred different lists that contain the same 5 to 10 watches. They benefit. We don’t. We already know what’s good. We’ve tried everything. We’ve made all of the watch collecting mistakes and more. Now it’s their turn to make those same mistakes and come to their own conclusions. If these newcomers actually reach out to enthusiasts with any time under their belts, they’re gonna learn real fast that we all pretty much agree on the underrated category. At that point, they won’t be underrated to them either; they’ll just be more watches to try.
I’ve finally reached the point in my watch collecting journey that I neither need nor want suggestions. I don’t need someone to tell me that something is underrated. I need them to tell me that I could’ve missed something and I should give it a shot. That’s the kind of advice that a seasoned collector should welcome.
I’ll bring up a recent watch purchase as an example. I picked up a Seiko 5 SNK559J1. It’s the first watch I’ve added to my collection in a very long time. But do I need to get online and start talking about how awesome the Seiko 5 line is? No, I don’t. I will say that it was a watch that I never considered before I had a desire for a white sector dial. But my point is that particular watch fits a need. Is it underrated? Hell no. Because some people won’t like that the end links are built into the case. Most people won’t like that you can’t really customize it for that reason. Not easily anyway. But I love it, and I wonder where it’s been over the last four years.
I just think that the word “underrated” needs to be replaced with “recommended”. That way, the suggestion will seem to be coming from a place of individual preference, and not become a box that everyone needs to tick.
(Editor: Feeling underrated?)
Kaysia:
Part of me is with Erik on this, and thinks we just need to stop using the term ‘underrated’.
It implies that people are judging a watch incorrectly, which, as I’ve said, just can’t be the case if we’re all allowed our own opinions.
But…
…despite me saying previously that ignorance is no excuse…
…. maybe if people are making a judgement on a watch or brand without having all the information at hand… Maybe we can say they are underrating them?
Perhaps it makes more sense to refer to a brand as underrated, rather than an individual watch, since it’s pretty easy to know everything there is to know about a watch with a quick glance at a specs sheet… but brands can have hidden history.
For example… In the case of the Lip that Chris has on the way, my response when he showed me the picture was “I’ve heard of Lip!”
My knowledge of the brand purely comes from their funky designs in the 70’s. I honestly had no idea they went up mountains, so can we say that my ignorance of the brand caused me to underrate them?
Maybe…
The Escapement Room 