[tony20009]

Only a few for me:

• Stauer
• Daniel Steiger

I can't stand either of them because they contract to have very inexpensive watches made with their name on it and then sell them at prices that seem like they should be good deals, but that are the farthest thing from a good deal that can be found in the whole of the watch marketplace. Even the so-called "fashion" watches aren't as bad insofar as they at least don't try to sell themselves using a value proposition argument.

Heck even the inexpensive Chinese fake makers have more integrity than do those two companies; they are at least watchmaking companies rather than pure marketing companies that sell watches among other things. As far as I know, Stauer and DS don't make a damn thing that has their name on it.

Example re: Stauer:
In 2013, Stauer had this watch offered on their website.



It's a lovely watch and it's made by a credible and good, American watch company, Towson Watch Company.

Stauer did not have their name on the dial. Stauer was charging $5K for the watch. At the same time, TWC was offering the watch for $3K. (It's $3.85K now) Stauer removed the watch from their website (TOWSON PRIDE II (BLACK) WRIST WATCH 21307 | Stauer.com) after I wrote a review of the watch and pointed out that it was available for $2K less from the maker.

All the best.

[1MOREMOD]

Originally Posted by DC-T

Mercedes-Benz.
Toyota.

They make watches?

[stevenopoly]

anything hublot. Its all trash.

[K19BMW]

Originally Posted by stevenopoly

anything hublot. Its all trash.

Agreed

[overcoil]

Hublot? Really? Hublot is nice with great customer service.
Is there a joke I'm missing?

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by stevenopoly

anything hublot. Its all trash.

Please describe the objective elements that make "all" Hublot watches trash.

Steven, your comment makes me think you've been reading too much Watch Snob and not actually going to see watches for yourself. I don't mind that you don't like Hublot watches. Anyone is free to not like whatever they want to. Trash, however, is not at all what they are. Try on just about anything from their Classic Fusion line and I think you'll be impressed. More than a few of the Big Bang models are quite nice as well.

Hublot's first watch



Hublot Big Bang




Hublot Big Bang and Classic Fusion Tourbillons




Hublot Classic Fusion Denim




Hublot Classic Fusion (just the basic version ~$3.8K) and the Hublot Classic Fusion Mandela in King Gold





Inside Hublot watches carry both in-house movements and 3rd party ones much as one will find from the likes of AP, Tudor, Breitling, Tag, the most collectible (and most expensive) Rolex Daytonas, non/pre-co-axial Omegas, and many others.

In 2005, the Big Bang won the Best Design award at the Grand Prix D'horlogerie in Geneva, Switzerland. Between the watch below and the ROO, on the basis of looks (I'm not that privy to what's inside the BB) I'll take the BB.



The build quality on Hublot watches is unsurpassed, being every bit the equal of its direct competitors.

• Their "quick release" strap feature makes changing the look of the watch a breeze; only thing easier to swap in and out is a grosgrain/NATO-style cloth band.
• Hublot developed a variety of unique alloys of gold that boost the properties consumers most want.
  • King Gold -- an alloy of gold, copper and platinum that makes "rosier" their rose gold and boosts it's scratch resistance. (Rolex also alloy platinum into their gold.)
  • Magic Gold -- an alloy of gold with a bit of ceramic in it so that it's actually so hard that only diamond can scratch it. (http://iwmagazine.com/2014/03/gold-s...n-watchmaking/)

• http://www.ablogtowatch.com/biver-me...h-manufacture/
• http://www.hautetime.com/hublot-tran...ufacture/3621/

Lastly, listen to Hublot's minute repeater.

Now listen to Patek's.

Hublot's has a much nicer tone. It doesn't sound "dingy" for lack of a better term.



All the best.

[1MOREMOD]

Who would wear that denim hublot? Rich cowboys and Jay leno?

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD

Who would wear that denim hublot? Rich cowboys and Jay leno?

I don't know and I'm pretty sure you don't really care who would. I would. Apparently Eddie Yim will. (http://www.hegram.com/eddieyim) I suppose other rich folks who see it for what it is -- a fun watch to wear because it's different from what most folks wear -- will enjoy wearing it.


In other Hublot news....
I just found out that Hublot have even made a retrograde chronogaph watch.





All the best.

[Blackhawks]

I think AP makes some of the ugliest watches on Earth. I wouldn't buy one if they were at Target for $20.

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by Blackhawks

I think AP makes some of the ugliest watches on Earth. I wouldn't buy one if they were at Target for $20.

I respect that.

Three of what I think are among the most attractive looking watches are from AP.

All the best.

[Blackhawks]

When AP is simple (as in the pics you provided)... it's almost too simple and there's nothing that is aesthetically desirable. When they go with their traditional look, it's overkill.

However, I never trash somebody's opinion and always respect it. If somebody loves them... have at it!

[K19BMW]

Originally Posted by tony20009

Please describe the objective elements that make "all" Hublot watches trash.

Steven, your comment makes me think you've been reading too much Watch Snob and not actually going to see watches for yourself. I don't mind that you don't like Hublot watches. Anyone is free to not like whatever they want to. Trash, however, is not at all what they are. Try on just about anything from their Classic Fusion line and I think you'll be impressed. More than a few of the Big Bang models are quite nice as well.

Hublot's first watch



Hublot Big Bang




Hublot Big Bang and Classic Fusion Tourbillons




Hublot Classic Fusion Denim




Hublot Classic Fusion (just the basic version ~$3.8K) and the Hublot Classic Fusion Mandela in King Gold





Inside Hublot watches carry both in-house movements and 3rd party ones much as one will find from the likes of AP, Tudor, Breitling, Tag, the most collectible (and most expensive) Rolex Daytonas, non/pre-co-axial Omegas, and many others.

In 2005, the Big Bang won the Best Design award at the Grand Prix D'horlogerie in Geneva, Switzerland. Between the watch below and the ROO, on the basis of looks (I'm not that privy to what's inside the BB) I'll take the BB.



The build quality on Hublot watches is unsurpassed, being every bit the equal of its direct competitors.

• Their "quick release" strap feature makes changing the look of the watch a breeze; only thing easier to swap in and out is a grosgrain/NATO-style cloth band.
• Hublot developed a variety of unique alloys of gold that boost the properties consumers most want.
  • King Gold -- an alloy of gold, copper and platinum that makes "rosier" their rose gold and boosts it's scratch resistance. (Rolex also alloy platinum into their gold.)
  • Magic Gold -- an alloy of gold with a bit of ceramic in it so that it's actually so hard that only diamond can scratch it. (http://iwmagazine.com/2014/03/gold-s...n-watchmaking/)

• http://www.ablogtowatch.com/biver-me...h-manufacture/
• http://www.hautetime.com/hublot-tran...ufacture/3621/

Lastly, listen to Hublot's minute repeater.

Now listen to Patek's.

Hublot's has a much nicer tone. It doesn't sound "dingy" for lack of a better term.



All the best.

I can't answer for Steven but for me, Hublot just seems like it's an expensive knockoff of AD ROO. I'm not to familiar with the new inhouse movements they are now using (so maybe my opinion will change) but their Big Bang line (which is by far their most well known line) just seemed like gaudy AD Royal Oak Offshore copies with an ETA movement and an incredibly high price tag.

I mean I'm sure their cases are nice but for the money they charge for their watches you need more then just a nice case. But like I said, I was unfamiliar with their new movements so I will have to give them another review once I learn more.

[mookie45]

Hublot makes some pretty nice watches, and I would definitely not mind owning one.

On the other side of the spectrum, I have no idea how the Hublot design team was allowed to even let these pieces go any further than a pencil sketch joke!

Hublot Pop Art - $30k watches for an overly flamboyant failure in my book:

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by K19BMW

I can't answer for Steven but for me, Hublot just seems like it's an expensive knockoff of AD ROO. I'm not to familiar with the new inhouse movements they are now using (so maybe my opinion will change) but their Big Bang line (which is by far their most well known line) just seemed like gaudy AD Royal Oak Offshore copies with an ETA movement and an incredibly high price tag.

...

Well, I can't say I see no similarities, but enough to call it a "knock off," no.







I see the Hublot BB as "like" an ROO in the same way I see the Chrysler 300 as "like a Bentley." It looks like one until you put it next to one.





In each case, I think the similarity is found as follows:

• they are both watches with bezel screws
• they are both cars with four doors and squarish-grilles

As for which one is cheaper it's not obvious to me just by looking at it which one is -- which vehicle of pair of cars or which watch of the pair of watches.


All the best.

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by mookie45

Hublot makes some pretty nice watches, and I would definitely not mind owning one.

On the other side of the spectrum, I have no idea how the Hublot design team was allowed to even let these pieces go any further than a pencil sketch joke!

Hublot Pop Art - $30k watches for an overly flamboyant failure in my book:

That Hublot can, as many watchmakers do and have, have "blonde" moments is true.

All the best.

[mookie45]

Originally Posted by tony20009

That Hublot can, as many watchmakers do and have, have "blonde" moments is true.

All the best.

LOL, agreed!

[SenorFunkyPants]

Any new watch with Rolex on the face.

[finaloption]

Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants

Any new watch with Rolex on the face.

reasons being?

[SenorFunkyPants]

ISTM that a Rolex dealer could could advertise them thusly:
Got loads of money to blow on a watch?
looking for a watch that says "I've got loads of money"?
Then you have come to the right place.
"Rolex, no other watch says ostentatious better.

[iamwingman]

STM that a Rolex dealer could could advertise them thusly:
Got loads of money to blow on a watch?
looking for a watch that says "I've got loads of money"?
Then you have come to the right place.
"Rolex, no other watch says ostentatious better.[/QUOTE]

So you don't like Rolexes?

[SenorFunkyPants]

Originally Posted by iamwingman

So you don't like Rolexes?

Only in the sense that it epitomizes everything I hate about the designer market...where the name sells the object not the intrinsic value of the object itself.

[iamwingman]

Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants

Only in the sense that it epitomizes everything I hate about the designer market...where the name sells the object not the intrinsic value of the object itself.

I think Rolexes, as well as other 'luxury' brands are intended to serve a dual purpose of style as well as utility. To use your standard, anything other than a $25.00 timex could be considered ostentatious. A different degree perhaps, but ostentatious all the same. A very very very subjective term I believe. One man's Patek is another man's Timex. Just like cars and houses and wives.