This thread reminds me of the contentious debates we've had on this forum about fake watches etc....now we have asp9mm back my memories are warming like that vauxhall cavalier....
If I may offer an alternative opinion, while both viewpoints have merit, I think neither can be quite right.
The look a like watches are in themselves beautiful and I bet fun to wear. Hence I suspect nms75 enjoys wearing his stein as well as his rolie (plural of rolex, normally found on a rolexdex not in a simple box )
Beauty and value rarely command the same plinth but stare down at us from on high.
Then again TSA is right - it's very grating ( and embarrassing) to have to answer "no but" to that question....for me ( and possible nms75??) id prefer to answer
"no, steinhart, but I can understand you thinking it might be"
Recall when vesper asks bond about his watch on the train, and his (plug) answer...
" no, omega..."
As minijeff and silent spy point out what's under the hood, not what decals are painted on top, is what really matters with a watch...after all the worst question to be asked by anyone (especially a beautiful woman) is
"do you have the time?"
To which the reply better not be
" no my watch has stopped but it's a rolex "
A better answer would clearly be
" yes, if you a couple of hours and dont mind me keeping my watch on as I'm rather attached to it..."
Shows a total lack of creative imagination and endeavour on the part of the manufacturer and low-rent cheapness on the part of the owner.
So what about those of us who own multiple Rolex watches as well as a Steinhart? Despite spending thousands on Rolex watches am I considered "low-rent cheapness" simply because I have a Steinhart in my watch box?
NMS
Doesn't matter if you've got a couple of Bentleys to go with your multiple Rolies, nms75, but if you are wearing this Steinhart "creation" to fool either yourself or others that it's a Rolex then yes, it makes the wearer guilty of low rent cheapness; you're advocacy for this watch was based on its close resemblance to a Rolex at a knock-down price, rather than for any merits of its own.
I am not as wise and diplomatic as kew2ew, but here is my point of view on the topic:
We have been discussing fake watches up and down and I guess, that I am getting very emotional in a bad way when it comes to fake watches.
I am a regular member on The Rolex Forum and almost on a weelky basis a new member comes up with a fake Rolex, which has passed to him as original.
The other aspect, which disturbs me very much on fakes is the fact, that there is an entire mafia behind all this fake business with enormous margins and a lot of money going into projects, which I don't want to funds in.
Now do these 2 my main reasons against fake watches apply to Steinhart GMTs and Submariners? No!
That's the reason, why I can easier live with Steinhart watches than for example Alpha, which not only copy the entire range from Rolex, all major Brands are copied and labelled with Alpha. The structure behind Alpha seems to be unclear to me, too, I can only guess that similar people stand behind Alpha like with Rolex branded fakes e.g.
Do I find it very creative to copy-paste 1:1 traditional and well-proven watch desings? No?
Would I buy such a watch? No, but that's my personal decision. I accept, if others do.
I can live with such watches, but won't buy them for the stated reasons.
Do I feel, that people are "fooling themselfs" with a Steinhard? I don't think so but that's only me.
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Doesn't matter if you've got a couple of Bentleys to go with your multiple Rolies, nms75, but if you are wearing this Steinhart "creation" to fool either yourself or others that it's a Rolex then yes, it makes the wearer guilty of low rent cheapness; you're advocacy for this watch was based on its close resemblance to a Rolex at a knock-down price, rather than for any merits of its own.
As far as I recall, NMS not only praised the similar-ness but also the quality, in which the Steins have been made - not a surprise with a german-based company
President of the 'Misty Eyes Club'.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
As far as I recall, NMS not only praised the similar-ness but also the quality, in which the Steins have been made - not a surprise with a german-based company
Hear hear BT....
And I suspect comments such as these demonstrate just how wise and diplomatic you really are old friend.
There are plenty of nice watches out there and decent makers. While the less expensive makes will never be as desirable as an expensive make, I don't have a problem with someone who wears a £30 plasic thing. I have a problem with people kidding themselves that something is great because it looks just like something so much more expensive. I have never personally met someone who owns and Rolex, then buys something just like it and is pleased it looks identical.
Amazon #1 Bestselling Author. If you enjoy crime, espionage, action and fast-moving thrillers follow this link:
I intended to stay away from this thread, because I am not a watch expert. I'm just a watch collector. However, I do have some broad observations that may help.
The first observation has to do with money and I suppose class. People who are newly wealthy (nouveau riche) are all about status and status symbols. They're about trying to prove they belong to a certain class. Hence the need to purchase new flashy cars, expensive flashy watches etc. Old money does not operate that way. There is nothing to prove, they made their money ages ago. Quality is of course important, but that does not necessarily equate with expensive. You don't see most old monied people, they blend in. American old money would prefer to drive a Ford rather than a BMW.
The second observation has to do with being secure with ones self. Someone touched on this in another thread when they invoked the term "Confidence". Being secure I think, in this discussion, is more to the point. Perhaps its because I've travelled the world extensively and done a lot of things, but I could not give a damn what other people think of what I buy. If you try to impress other people, you will never be happy. Being secure with one's self means not giving a rat's a$$ about what other people think of you, and particularly your purchases. Don't try to impress other people, impress your self. You'll be far happier and much more secure.
My 2 pence.
DG
So, what sharp little eyes you've got...wait till you get to my teeth.
"People sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." Richard Grenier after George Orwell, Washington Times 1993.
Comments
If I may offer an alternative opinion, while both viewpoints have merit, I think neither can be quite right.
The look a like watches are in themselves beautiful and I bet fun to wear. Hence I suspect nms75 enjoys wearing his stein as well as his rolie (plural of rolex, normally found on a rolexdex not in a simple box )
Beauty and value rarely command the same plinth but stare down at us from on high.
Then again TSA is right - it's very grating ( and embarrassing) to have to answer "no but" to that question....for me ( and possible nms75??) id prefer to answer
"no, steinhart, but I can understand you thinking it might be"
Recall when vesper asks bond about his watch on the train, and his (plug) answer...
" no, omega..."
As minijeff and silent spy point out what's under the hood, not what decals are painted on top, is what really matters with a watch...after all the worst question to be asked by anyone (especially a beautiful woman) is
"do you have the time?"
To which the reply better not be
" no my watch has stopped but it's a rolex "
A better answer would clearly be
" yes, if you a couple of hours and dont mind me keeping my watch on as I'm rather attached to it..."
Tempus fugit.
Doesn't matter if you've got a couple of Bentleys to go with your multiple Rolies, nms75, but if you are wearing this Steinhart "creation" to fool either yourself or others that it's a Rolex then yes, it makes the wearer guilty of low rent cheapness; you're advocacy for this watch was based on its close resemblance to a Rolex at a knock-down price, rather than for any merits of its own.
We have been discussing fake watches up and down and I guess, that I am getting very emotional in a bad way when it comes to fake watches.
I am a regular member on The Rolex Forum and almost on a weelky basis a new member comes up with a fake Rolex, which has passed to him as original.
The other aspect, which disturbs me very much on fakes is the fact, that there is an entire mafia behind all this fake business with enormous margins and a lot of money going into projects, which I don't want to funds in.
Now do these 2 my main reasons against fake watches apply to Steinhart GMTs and Submariners? No!
That's the reason, why I can easier live with Steinhart watches than for example Alpha, which not only copy the entire range from Rolex, all major Brands are copied and labelled with Alpha. The structure behind Alpha seems to be unclear to me, too, I can only guess that similar people stand behind Alpha like with Rolex branded fakes e.g.
Do I find it very creative to copy-paste 1:1 traditional and well-proven watch desings? No?
Would I buy such a watch? No, but that's my personal decision. I accept, if others do.
I can live with such watches, but won't buy them for the stated reasons.
Do I feel, that people are "fooling themselfs" with a Steinhard? I don't think so but that's only me.
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
As far as I recall, NMS not only praised the similar-ness but also the quality, in which the Steins have been made - not a surprise with a german-based company
Dalton - the weak and weepy Bond!
Hear hear BT....
And I suspect comments such as these demonstrate just how wise and diplomatic you really are old friend.
http://apbateman.com
The first observation has to do with money and I suppose class. People who are newly wealthy (nouveau riche) are all about status and status symbols. They're about trying to prove they belong to a certain class. Hence the need to purchase new flashy cars, expensive flashy watches etc. Old money does not operate that way. There is nothing to prove, they made their money ages ago. Quality is of course important, but that does not necessarily equate with expensive. You don't see most old monied people, they blend in. American old money would prefer to drive a Ford rather than a BMW.
The second observation has to do with being secure with ones self. Someone touched on this in another thread when they invoked the term "Confidence". Being secure I think, in this discussion, is more to the point. Perhaps its because I've travelled the world extensively and done a lot of things, but I could not give a damn what other people think of what I buy. If you try to impress other people, you will never be happy. Being secure with one's self means not giving a rat's a$$ about what other people think of you, and particularly your purchases. Don't try to impress other people, impress your self. You'll be far happier and much more secure.
My 2 pence.
DG
"People sleep peacefully in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf." Richard Grenier after George Orwell, Washington Times 1993.