[oldmancoyote]

Originally Posted by marvin100

[snip]

Honestly, most of your posts condoning fake watches are better arguments in favor of legal homage watches. If someone wants a Rolex Sub, it's very, very easy to find the same styling without the Rolex brand. If someone buys a fake instead, it's pretty clear the brand name is what they want, not the look. The look has been widely imitated.

[snip]

I beg to disagree: there is a perfectly viable other motivation: they don't care about the brand or otherwise. They like that cheapish watch, they buy it.

That's not an argument "in favour of" fakes, but you are ascribing motivations to people that they don't necessarily have. A watch is not a status symbol for everybody.

Originally Posted by tony20009

[snip]
Fifty pus years of living has similarly shown me that one cannot generalize in the same way about people and what motivates them.
[snip]

Surely not so rotten as that, Tony? Not all of them?

Originally Posted by 1MOREMOD

Winner most words per post goes to?

This post: http://www.xbimmers.com/forums/showp...7&postcount=61 excluding quotes and replies.

[bing240sx]

Bilzerian has spoken

[TSM330i]

Originally Posted by tony20009

Well, companies are different from people. Companies do everything they do because they feel that in the long or short run, it's beneficial to the motivation for everything they do and that is the profit motive. Companies don't care about much at all that doesn't compromise their ability to generate revenue and profits. Companies may talk about and lobby for things on the basis of morality, legality, etc., but the fact is that one could walk all over their legal and moral rights if doing so were in the end more profitable to the company.

Individuals would not countenance such a thing, regardless of the monetary impact. How often, for example, have you felt wrong and pursued redress saying, "it's not about the money; it's the principle." The only principles a company has are those that favor its economic interests.

So, when I wrote the passage you quoted above, I did so with the awareness I have of what catalyzes corporate behavior. Having a CPA, now an MBA and 30+ years of management consulting experience, I'm in a position to speak to what motivates companies to do what they do. Fifty pus years of living has similarly shown me that one cannot generalize in the same way about people and what motivates them.

I ask you to look at all manners of human behavior -- criminal behavior is probably the easiest to consider -- and ask yourself if you've been exposed to substantively the same sets of factors as another individual and yet chosen a different course of action. As a fairly straigntforward illustration I point to very, very wealthy people who have been caught shoplifting. (http://www.therichest.com/rich-list/...t-shoplifting/) I don't care what reason those people gave for why the stole the merchandise, the fact is that millions of other people crave the same outcome yet obtain it differently.

I offer Swatch Group/ETA's decision to cease making ETA movements available to non-Swatch Group companies. Sure, N. Hayek said that one reason for doing that was to help catalyze the watch industry and the value of watches to adopt once again the great and long honored traditions associated with the watchmaking craft. I believe that was a reason why he made that decision, but I doubt at all that was the main reason.

Long story short: it's in Swatch's economic interest not to make ETA movements available to every "Tom, Dick and Harry" company that pops up wanting to buy them and put them inside their own watch case. The reason for that is that with watches and their ability to perform, the motor matters more than the case. The case/dial drives why one wants "this one" and not "that one." The motor is why one feels comfortable that one or the other watch will serve one well and operate without trouble. As some folks have noticed, the prices for ETA-inside watches has skyrocketed in recent years, as has the price of ETA-clone-inside (Sellita, Soporod, Sea-gull, et alI) watches.

And that's the thing about corporate behavior...no company is going to directly say "we're doing this because it's more profitable for us." They are going to call upon their marketing departments to "spin" the story to make it more palatable to the people who must bear the cost of the companies' actions and preferences.

Are there folks who buy fake watches so they can pass them off, innocuously or nefariously, as the real thing? Of course there are. But to generalize that that's why most folks do so is unfair to individuals who don't have a shady motivation. I don't want to be fair to another man. I don't care about being fair to corporations because at the end of the day, I know that a company will choose what's in its shareholders' best interest before it chooses what's fair to me or people in general. Look at BMW...they had to be shamed into issuing a recall for their HPFP issues.

All the best.

PS
I appreciate that you were thinking as you read my post. Thoughtful comments always make for better discussions, so I'm glad you shared your thoughts. I look forward to seeing other posts from you on B-post.

I appreciate your thoughts on companies wanting to make profits and make more money, but I really feel that you're stating the obvious.

I don't know if ANY company that's not out to make money. Simply put, if a company doesn't make money, they're out of business.

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by TSM330i

I appreciate your thoughts on companies wanting to make profits and make more money, but I really feel that you're stating the obvious.

I don't know if ANY company that's not out to make money. Simply put, if a company doesn't make money, they're out of business.

It is obvious, yet folks ignore what is most obvious. That post was in response to the following comment.

Originally Posted by marvin100

...

But this is rather interesting, as you've repeatedly objected in this thread to people presuming others' motives in owning fakes. Yet here you are, presuming to know the motives of companies!

...

It seemed to me that a discussion of the obvious was necessary since one aspect of what are obvious differences between an individual and a corporation must have been overlooked by the writer. It's pretty clear what motivates corporations whereas what motivates individuals is anything but crystalline.

All the best.

[MiddleAgedAl]

Interesting thread about people's motivations, and how others may judge them on those.

Another situation not mentioned actually applies to me; accidentally/unknowingly purchasing a fake.

Let me explain, it's not what you probably think !

I'm no watch expert, I can't identify models or brands based on appearance. Much like art, I do know what I like, or what I think "looks nice to me".
If you like it too, great, and if not, well I can live with that. I dont judge others based on their watch, so I dont lose sleep over someone judging me on mine.

I was at a car show and saw a vendor selling an assortment of nice looking watches. Keeping in mind my ignorance, I thought at the time, these look more expensive than they are. I saw one that caught my eye, and had a BMW roundel logo on it. I'm a car guy, I like my car, I own other stuff with BMW on it, I thought hey, this is interesting.

I picked up the watch, examined it, and without really know what to look for, it seemed a reasonably good quality watch with some heft to it, and a nice genuine leather strap, and neat chronograph functions.

Vendor told me it had a japanese quartz movement; very reliable, no need to be serviced, just replace the battery every few years.
Looks nice to me, low maintenance, good price (<100), SOLD!

So, I'm wearing the watch, not trying to pass it off as anything but a nice looking (IMHO) watch I found with the logo of my favorite car on it.

One day a guy says to me, "Nice Navitimer". I'm like, Huh, WTF are you talking about. I honestly had no idea he was referring to the watch at first, as I'd not heard that name before. He pointed at the watch, and then he paused, and said wait a minute. Below the 12, there was a roundel instead of the winged logo he was expecting.

He explained how it looked almost identical to a much more expensive watch, but you couldnt really call it a replica or counterfeit because the logo was "wrong".

I googled and realized for the first time it was VERY close in appearance to a Breitling Navitimer, except for the obvious logo.
I also discovered how expensive a real one is. I've damaged watches before, but since they were cheap, I didnt care. My wealth would have to be much higher than it is now for me to be comfortable wearing the real thing, knowing I could cause many thousands in damage in the blink of an eye, so I'd never buy a real one.

Had I known it was a quasi-replica, would that have changed my buying decision ? Nope, watch still looks nice, still works great, and since it has the "wrong" logo, nobody can accuse me of trying to deceive others with a fake.

[TSM330i]

Originally Posted by tony20009

It is obvious, yet folks ignore what is most obvious. That post was in response to the following comment.



It seemed to me that a discussion of the obvious was necessary since one aspect of what are obvious differences between an individual and a corporation must have been overlooked by the writer. It's pretty clear what motivates corporations whereas what motivates individuals is anything but crystalline.

All the best.

Ah, got it. Pretty

[DocMick]

tony20009, i surmise from his recent posts, is CPA who I would imagine quite possibly prefers a colonoscopy without anesthesia over paying thousands to ten thousands on a watch... i can understand that

however i have a problem with verbose wordy long winded accountants...

my own CPA is a man of few words

[oldmancoyote]

Given he says he's got some pretty expensive watches, I think you are wrong.

[1MOREMOD]

Originally Posted by oldmancoyote

Given he says he's got some pretty expensive watches, I think you are wrong.

+1.

[Mik3ymomo]

Just to add to the conversation...
I bought a SS Rolex Sub with date about 12 years ago. I wore it everyday. It's probably the most copied design by both fakes and authentic watch makers. I was asked frequently if it was fake. It didn't bother me. It was real and after wearing it everyday for so long I decided to sell it and buy something else.

I sold it for slightly more than I paid for it. It didn't take any effort either. A jewelry shop across town bought it from me.

There is an obvious disparity of value between real and fake. You would ask yourself if that real watch was really worth the $$...

In my case it turned out to be an investment and I had free use of it for 10 years. Although admittedly it was not my intention.

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by Mik3ymomo

Just to add to the conversation...
I bought a SS Rolex Sub with date about 12 years ago. I wore it everyday. It's probably the most copied design by both fakes and authentic watch makers. I was asked frequently if it was fake. It didn't bother me. It was real and after wearing it everyday for so long I decided to sell it and buy something else.

I sold it for slightly more than I paid for it. It didn't take any effort either. A jewelry shop across town bought it from me.

There is an obvious disparity of value between real and fake. You would ask yourself if that real watch was really worth the $$...

In my case it turned out to be an investment and I had free use of it for 10 years. Although admittedly it was not my intention.

The Rolex Sub is definitely one of the unusual watches with which one can do that. Part of why one can is the vast price increases (see graph found at http://www.ablogtowatch.com/rolex-pr...ling-analysis/) that have occurred for a watch that has remained substantively unchanged since 1988 or 2001, depending on which model one bought (http://www.bernardwatch.com/Rolex-Mo...s-and-Calibers). Rolex have made incremental changes since then, but nothing so much as to alter the movement identifier. Most of what Rolex have changed has to do with the case, dial and crystal, and a good bit of that has been to add subtle authenticity verification features. Arguably, the biggest change was the move from acrylic to sapphire crystals.

All the best.

[tony20009]

[deleted duplicate posting]

[RedlinePSI]

Is this thread still going on? haha

Here's the bottom line. Fake people buy fake goods. Good day all.

[anglocanadian]

My view is that if a person is so materialistic to judge me by my watch they deserve to be fooled.
That said i would never lie that they were the real thing if asked,all my friends know I have replica watches.
Putting in this in a automotive perspective who would say no to a 2.7 RS or GT40 replica ?
Bottom line is it is only classed as a fake if described as the real thing.

[P1]

Fake watches are for fake people.
Fake watches are for posers.
Fake watches are for wannabes.

Have a great evening!

[anglocanadian]

[briancosta]

It's fine to wear these replicas until you meet someone who can tell that they're fake. How embarrassing would that be? I'd rather not take the risk if I were you. Just buy a lesser brand watch. Authenticity counts.

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by briancosta

It's fine to wear these replicas until you meet someone who can tell that they're fake. How embarrassing would that be? I'd rather not take the risk if I were you. Just buy a lesser brand watch. Authenticity counts.

Say what? Embarrassed? Over what? I, frankly, would have a hard time determining who's more pathetic: the person who allows someone to shame them for wearing a fake watch, or the person who attempts to shame someone for doing so.

I can say only that were I either party, it wouldn't be embarrassing at all. I'm not going to give someone grief because they are wearing a fake. I'm not going to be embarrassed because I don't consider a watch -- fake or real -- as a source of pride or shame.

I have raised three great kids and provided them with the skills and resources they need to lead whatever kind of life they want. I'm kind and generous to my fellow man. I have almost 30 years of professional success. I am a published writer and researcher. I've been a very good university instructor. I've been a very good university student.

I don't care what some snot nosed SOB says to me or thinks about my watch -- fake or not -- I am not going to be close to embarrassed. I might be angered if I think they are actively or smugly trying to belittle me or otherwise insult me. I would be angry over their rudeness toward me. Depending on what they say to me, they may be the one of us who gets embarrassed after I get through letting them know they ain't cooler than the other side of a pillow.

All the best.

[AlpineV8]

It perpetuates fraud. I would rather not have something if I couldn't afford it or whatever and be genuine than have something fake.

If you're willing to contribute to the illegal fake industry for a measly watch then what else might you be willing to do?

Keep your man card in check. Real men don't wear fakes.

Do you drive a fake M?

[AlpineV8]

Originally Posted by briancosta

It's fine to wear these replicas until you meet someone who can tell that they're fake. How embarrassing would that be? I'd rather not take the risk if I were you. Just buy a lesser brand watch. Authenticity counts.

Indeed.

[1MOREMOD]

Originally Posted by AlpineV8

It perpetuates fraud. I would rather not have something if I couldn't afford it or whatever and be genuine than have something fake.

If you're willing to contribute to the illegal fake industry for a measly watch then what else might you be willing to do?

Keep your man card in check. Real men don't wear fakes.

Do you drive a fake M?

Whatever I can for a fat stack of cash, make me an offer. Low moral standards get you further until it doesn't.

[anglocanadian]

A little off topic but I have a 2003 BMW F650 Dakar Motorcycle which has an Austrian built Rotax engine.
All the current 650's have a Rotax engine built in China !
I personally would not pay the premium price of a BMW if it were built in china,
but if it were discounted 50% ?
Anyone know where Rolex parts are sourced nowadays ?