Fake Watches -- Does it really matter?

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by csu87

I have no issue with people buying fakes, until they start flaunting it like its the real thing. I personally dont buy fakes, but I do buy movement clones. There are some amazing movements that you can get for <$50 from some of these chinese manufacturers. No one ever asks me how much my watches cost or tell me they look like fakes, I just know that my $40 chinese movement clones tend to get more admiration than my $5k+ watches. I also think people seeing a younger guy wearing a watch that cost a decent amount just assume its a fake.

here is my latest watch that was $50 shipped. Ive never seen anything like it and neither have most people that comment on it. I had some guy at a watch shop (a customer) offer me over 1k to buy it off me. I had to tell him it was only $50. Would have felt bad ripping him off like that.

If you see him again, point him here -- http://www.stauer.com/category/10020...ll-watches/ALL -- and he'll find two somewhat similar looking watches for prices far lower than $1K.

Perhaps the guy wants a "notable" bridge movement watch. If so, point him to Corum. Bridge movements are a niche for Corum and they do a very fine job with it.

All the best.

[F30Andy]

Here in London we have a saying

"Fake it until you make it."

[ny325]

NYC has some really bad replicas on the street for sale. I would rather buy something nice, and affordable. Save, and then buy yourself a authentic timepiece. Don't cheat yourself.

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by ny325

NYC has some really bad replicas on the street for sale. I would rather buy something nice, and affordable. Save, and then buy yourself a authentic timepiece. Don't cheat yourself.

I fully understand and agree with the principle of what you wrote.

As a philosophical matter, I don't think one is "cheating oneself" if one buys a fake (or cheap) watch so long as one is clear that that's what one is doing and one maintains one's expectations accordingly.

All the best.

[nicknaz]

I don't think one is "cheating oneself" if one buys a fake (or cheap) watch so long as one is clear that that's what one is doing

What one is doing at that point is "Fronting"

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by nicknaz

+1

I'll proudly were a $100 seiko or casio in those times when I don't think it is appropriate to wear a datejust

What one is doing at that point is "Fronting"

I recently saw a 428 rebadged as M4. I guess that was as good of a replica as could be found ?

Red:
In what world do you live whereupon comes an inappropriate time to wear a Datejust? I'm going out on a limb here...I don't think most folks who plunk down ~$8K on a watch live in a world where such a time comes about.

Blue:
Wouldn't "frontin' " require that one tell other people (directly or by omission) that one's fake [whatever] is authentic? I can't speak to who might be "fronin' ' and who might not. My comment referred to the fact that of all the people one might attempt to fool, fooling oneself -- in part by holding unrealistic expectations -- is the most foolish act of all.

All the best.

[RedlinePSI]

Originally Posted by tony20009

Red:
In what world do you live whereupon comes an inappropriate time to wear a Datejust? I'm going out on a limb here...I don't think most folks who plunk down ~$8K on a watch live in a world where such a time comes about.

Blue:
Wouldn't "frontin' " require that one tell other people (directly or by omission) that one's fake [whatever] is authentic? I can't speak to who might be "fronin' ' and who might not. My comment referred to the fact that of all the people one might attempt to fool, fooling oneself -- in part by holding unrealistic expectations -- is the most foolish act of all.

All the best.

The way i see it, if you buy a fake watch with the name of a reputable brand on it, you are already "frontin'". Even if asked, and you are too honest to lie about it, you still tried to pull it off without a word spoken. If it didn't have the name on it, then it would be a different story. So this is a sliding scale of exactly how frontin' people be's. haha

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by RedlinePSI

The way i see it, if you buy a fake watch with the name of a reputable brand on it, you are already "frontin'". Even if asked, and you are too honest to lie about it, you still tried to pull it off without a word spoken. If it didn't have the name on it, then it would be a different story. So this is a sliding scale of exactly how frontin' people be's. haha

You're not the first person to say that, but frankly, I think a great many of you just don't get it. I think a lot of folks on here hear of or encounter folks who buy, say, fake Rolexes as alternatives to "real" Rolexes. And therein lies why I think so many folks struggle with the premise of my OP. For the vast majority of people who buy fake watches, it's not about how the thing compares to a real, say, Rolex. It's not even about how faithfully it resembles one visually. It's just a matter of wanting a mechanical watch that looks good, works, is easy to come by, and that is very inexpensive.

When one lives in the land wherein this is found, the PRC...

MixC Mall



Coco Park Mall


...one definitely can go into either mall and buy a Seiko or Citizen watch. One can also walk into Coco Park mall and buy authentic Vacheron Constantin and JLC watches. (I don't recall seeing a place that sells authentic Rolexes. LOL) But in doing so, one will pay the luxury tax that is assigned to them. That tax will make them cost somewhere between 20% and 60% more than you and I would pay for the exact same watch in U.S. Unfortunately, "not made in China by and for Chinese owned companies" is all it takes for an item to be subject to the luxury tax. (This is why even the iPhone is slapped with the luxury tax. Some foreign manufacturers may have negotiated special exemptions, but AFAIK no Swiss watch companies have.)

Now there probably are shops somewhere in the country that sell Seagull, Memorigin, Longio, Peacock, et al (http://www.blouinartinfo.com/news/st...rands-to-know#) domestically made watches, but I haven't come across them in my random amblings around the city. I'm sure if I sought them out, I could find them. The thing is that just as I haven't come across those makers' products, and I know they must exist, I'd wager that the other 10+ million people in the city who don't know they exist aren't going out of their way to find them, much less have any idea that they are quite good watches.

In contrast, scores upon scores of thousands of people daily make their way to this place literally right outside of Customs....

Luohu Commercial City




....and in there one will have no trouble at all finding all manners of fake watches, handbags, jeans, etc. that'll cost not only a mere fraction of the authentic article(s), but also less than most other authentic goods.

It took me some time (six months to a year) to realize this is so, and when I did, I wondered why it might be that a fake [insert brand of your choice] mechanical watch would cost less even than would an authentic low price mechanical watch such as Parnis, Alpha, and some others. Based on what I've been told by a couple of the fellows who sell fake watches the shopping center above, Parnis, Alpha et al are nothing more than the fake Rolexes, Omegas, et al made with dials that say Parnis, Alpha and so on.

As each of them put it, "Guangzhou people make Parnis and Alpha for United States. Make Rolex for China. Same watch." I said, "Really? You're sure?" One of the sellers whom I asked proceeded to do a little pantomime to show me what he meant...basically he mimed and spoke in his best "Engl-arin/Mandar-glish".... "Guy in Guangzhou zhi zuo shoubiao. Zher li Rolex ; na li Parnis. [Pantomimes taking dial from one pile and putting it on the watch and then doing the same with a dial from the other pile.] Yi yang."

We complimented each other on our language skills, each knowing quite well that neither of us was any good at the other's language. LOL

I asked one of the sellers (one with better English...LOL) why the Parnis watches don't stay in China. The short of his answer is that Chinese people know the fake is a fake, but they also know it is less expensive, and they know it will work well, because, as he put it, "everybody have one." His answer was borne out when I asked a few of the Chinese folks on my projects the same questions.

Now interestingly enough, the very same folks who are quite content with their fake watches feel "special" because they use authentic iPhones. Go figure....I can explain that no more than I can why anyone else anywhere else would feel the same way, albeit perhaps with regard to different products.

Similarly, when I go to the occasionally cookouts to which my client "big wigs" invite me, invariably, brief conversations break out about consumer products -- cars, watches, clothes, etc. Everybody has their own point of view about "stuff." There's always at least one "higher up" person who is suggesting to a less "high up" person that he should get rid of his fake Rolex and buy a real one. Mind you, all the people there are loaded, it's just a matter of how loaded; the homes I've been to for these events range from what in U.S. we'd call big houses to mansions to palaces.

The thing that I sensed is different between those social conversations and some of the comments in this thread is that the "really rich" guys don't seem to think anything about the less "really rich" guys' wearing a fake "whatever," other than that the "poorer" buy should buy a "real" Rolex (or whatever). Now what's funny is that some months later, I may bump into the "poorer" guy and notice that he's gone out and bought himself a real [whatever]. Apparently Chinese are no less susceptible to the pang of social climbing than are Westerners. LOL

And therein is found what I think is going on when I see/hear folks going on about what's "bad" about other folks wearing/owning fake "whatever." I suspect that upon seeing someone wearing a fake version of the watch one paid X-thousands of dollars for and apparently getting exactly the same benefits/functionality, one has to feel at least a little bit foolish for having spent so much more.

In truth, were I not something of a curatorial watch collector, I don't know if I'd spend the kind of money I do on watches. However, as a curatorial collector, I don't have much choice. There's just no way a fake watch (or anything else) can fill an authentic one's "shoes" in terms of building a collection.

For example, the Louvre might have a fake Mona Lisa, but the fake one cannot represent DaVinci because DaVinci didn't paint the fake one. The thing is the Louvre has curatorial aims associated with the pieces it owns. It's quite difficult to create an anthology of a given type of art if one only has copies of it. The copies will do up to a point, but eventually, there just is no substitute for the authentic article.

I think it's the same with watches. But I think that the "point" up to which a copy watch will do, for most folks, is a point that's far enough down the road; that is, the fake is a good enough alternative to other watches, be they the authentic item being aped or something else. In light of that, and when one considers $30 versus $9000, it really isn't about whether the fake is a copy of something. It's just a matter that it's a $30 or less mechanical watch and it really just isn't that easy to buy a new mechanical watch for $30 or less.

All the best.

[RedlinePSI]

Interesting angle to the discussion.

By the way, if I spent 15, 20 minutes, or whatever looking at a painting, studying it. And then somebody came by and said "you know that is not the original, it's a reproduction or whatever". I'd be immensely pissed. I don't care if I cant even tell the difference with my human eyes from 15 feet away. I would consider that a complete waste of time and energy, because there is nothing to be treasured about studying a piece of art that is not authentic. I would have opened a book or went online if all i wanted to see was the general image of the piece.

So I agree with you that watches have a very similar aspect as this. They are not really for telling time, although I think they do still come in handy, even if i have 2 cell phones in my bag. They are to be looked at, appreciated, and enjoyed as an accessory. How much deep appreciation and enjoyment is there from looking at a fake watch, or a fake DaVinci?

[C5driver]

Originally Posted by tony20009

For the vast majority of people who buy fake watches, it's not about how the thing compares to a real, say, Rolex. It's not even about how faithfully it resembles one visually. It's just a matter of wanting a mechanical watch that looks good, works, is easy to come by, and that is very inexpensive.

It would be an assumption to make this statement.

However, it might be safer to assume that the average person wouldn't know the difference between a quartz and an automatic movement. Therefore, the average person who buys a fake Rolex is buying the name and not because he/she is seeking a mechanical watch.

Keep in mind the market for fake watches is not the $800 replicas, but the $50 Chinatown shop or the Times Square cart guy.

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by C5driver

It would be an assumption to make this statement.

However, it might be safer to assume that the average person wouldn't know the difference between a quartz and an automatic movement. Therefore, the average person who buys a fake Rolex is buying the name and not because he/she is seeking a mechanical watch.

Keep in mind the market for fake watches is not the $800 replicas, but the $50 Chinatown shop or the Times Square cart guy.

Red:
Yes, it is an assumption. And, no, I haven't conducted a statistically valid study to test its verity.

I just went on what it seems I've observed and how I think about any product. Doing that, I can say that it's possible that I thought I bought, say, authentic Ray Bans, or something else at a "good price," but if they aren't, I don't care because as long as are met my expectations for their performance, I'm content. If I were to someday learn I indeed bought a fake pair of sunglasses, I'd be annoyed from an integrity standpoint, perhaps from a monetary standpoint, but not from a Ray Ban vs. fake Ray Ban sunglasses performance standpoint.

The point is that brand names function as a sort of shorthand for what we, myself included, as consumers can expect in terms of product performance; however, they aren't what most of us, most of the time, deem as being important about the products we buy. And folks hung up on/purchase for the emotional and social aspects of branding are most certainly among the people who care.

Of course, I know there are people who care about the brand name on the product(s) they buy. As a curatorial watch collector, I do care that my Rolex is a real one; it must be a real one in order to fill its intended role in my collection. Beyond that one reason, I really don't care whether my or your (seems to be) Rolex is authentic.

Blue:
I really doubt that is so. I strongly believe the market for fake watches exists primarily in the PRC where literally billions of people buy not only fake watches, but fake, copies, of all kinds of stuff. I'd be shocked to find that the quantity of folks who buy fake watches in every U.S. city combined comes close even to the quantity of folks in one large PRC city who buy fake watches. Some estimates place the value of the counterfeit goods market in China at ~$20B or ~20% of the Chinese domestic market. In a market having at least five billion consumers, that just dwarfs whatever be the number of fake goods consumers in U.S., such as in Times Square or Chinatwon New York, and similar locales in other major U.S. cities. (http://www.bpastudies.org/bpastudies/article/view/15/35)

Other:
Many folks in this thread have written about folks "fronting." There's no question that there are folks who are doing that by buying fakes, but they are hardly the only kinds of fake watch (or fake anything else) consumers.
-- http://www.chinaeconomicreview.com/f...e-brands-china
-- http://www.open.edu/openlearn/societ...terfeit-brands
-- http://marketingtochina.com/40-of-ch...-kept-silence/

I could be wrong, but I really think that most posters in this thread have only presented their thoughts from the emotional and social/product status angle. I think that because I have yet to see even one person address the matter in terms of economic principles. To the best of my recollection, not one person has even mentioned the ideas of economic substitution and elasticity of demand, for example.

I think in terms of economic and business principles, I think the counterfeit goods market -- buyers and sellers and products -- matters. In terms of emotional, social and product functionality, I don't think whether an item is fake or not matters at all. It may matter to individuals who buy or don't buy those goods, but as I think about the persons who own them, the fakeness of their "whatever" isn't what crosses my mind. That doesn't cross my mind because, in the main, I think individuals, and people collectively, are more complex than what can be gleaned or inferred (correctly or not) about them on the basis of the goods they buy.

All the best.

[C5driver]

Originally Posted by tony20009

I really don't care whether my or your (seems to be) Rolex is authentic.

Agreed, and your reasoning is sound. I'm just saying the average buyer of a fake watch would not be...uhhh...processing the social implications vs. mechanical advantages of a fake Rolex

Originally Posted by tony20009

I strongly believe the market for fake watches exists primarily in the PRC where literally billions of people buy not only fake watches, but fake, copies, of all kinds of stuff. I'd be shocked to find that the quantity of folks who buy fake watches in every U.S. city combined comes close even to the quantity of folks in one large PRC city who buy fake watches. Some estimates place the value of the counterfeit goods market in China at ~$20B or ~20% of the Chinese domestic market. In a market having at least five billion consumers, that just dwarfs whatever be the number of fake goods consumers in U.S., such as in Times Square or Chinatwon New York, and similar locales in other major U.S. cities.

True. Never thought about the local market!

[Z K]

Originally Posted by C5driver

Keep in mind the market for fake watches is not the $800 replicas, but the $50 Chinatown shop or the Times Square cart guy.

That really depends on the buyer and what the watch is. I mentioned earlier in the thread that very high quality fake watches exist.

The ones that ape the authentic watches so closely that even an AD can't tell the difference without opening the case. Of course that level of replication costs money so they are quite a bit more expensive than the $50 watches you'll find on street corners.

There is definitely a market for $800 fake watches - it depends who you talk to and what exactly the watch is. Some movement complications costs a lot to replicate so the resulting replica costs a lot. Most of these buyers are watch enthusiasts who like to collect faithful reproductions of their favorite watches. Some own the originals as well.

Here's a recent article from Singapore talking about the replica watch trade and Singapore's crack down on it:
http://www.straitstimes.com/singapor...p-sales-online
Here is a related article on high end fakes:
http://www.straitstimes.com/singapor...-on-7-replicas

[C5driver]

Originally Posted by Z K

That really depends on the buyer and what the watch is. I mentioned earlier in the thread that very high quality fake watches exist.

There are, and I agree.

When I said "the market", I was referring to the percentage of buyers and specifically, the ones who look for the $50 watches, be it in Times Square, or as Tony pointed out, the PRC.

Originally Posted by Z K

Some movement complications costs a lot to replicate so the resulting replica costs a lot. Most of these buyers are watch enthusiasts who like to collect faithful reproductions of their favorite watches. Some own the originals as well.

I'm not judging those who buy fakes/replicas. Their money, their watch.

[Z K]

Originally Posted by C5driver

There are, and I agree.

When I said "the market", I was referring to the percentage of buyers and specifically, the ones who look for the $50 watches, be it in Times Square, or as Tony pointed out, the PRC.

I'm not judging those who buy fakes/replicas. Their money, their watch.

The cheap fakes are crap. Usually quartz or some low beat automatic movement. The people who buy those are just looking for something cheap to show off.

I guess knowing something about the authentic watches and owning them, those people have a higher standard when looking for fakes. As Tony mentioned, in Asia people generally don't care if you have a fake or not. As long as it isn't a glaringly obvious fake, people rarely care. Friends openly talk about their fake watches, which merchants have the good ones and compare fake to real models. Lots of people will own a few real ones or upgrade to a real one later because of peer pressure or the desire to own the real article.

It is totally dependent on the circles you are in though. A female friend of mine is a lawyer. She has a law degree in China and the USA and so she works a lot of international cases. Generally she wears a lot of brand name items.. Gucci, Chanel, Prada, LV etc. It's all authentic and costs quite a bit. But as she says it, it is the price of doing business. She has to see clients and well off Chinese clients like to work with people who look like they are doing well. It is a sign of power and people have respect for others who look like they are doing well. The thinking is if they are doing well, then working with them, they will do well together from a financial standpoint. I think this thinking is why the pursuit of luxury products is very important to a lot of Chinese customers. The image of success it provides opens doors to those looking to network and increase their business opportunities. I can see people who can't afford the authentic items try to do the same by obtaining the fake ones.

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by Z K

The cheap fakes are crap. Usually quartz or some low beat automatic movement. The people who buy those are just looking for something cheap to show off.

I guess knowing something about the authentic watches and owning them, those people have a higher standard when looking for fakes. As Tony mentioned, in Asia people generally don't care if you have a fake or not. As long as it isn't a glaringly obvious fake, people rarely care. Friends openly talk about their fake watches, which merchants have the good ones and compare fake to real models. Lots of people will own a few real ones or upgrade to a real one later because of peer pressure or the desire to own the real article.

It is totally dependent on the circles you are in though. A female friend of mine is a lawyer. She has a law degree in China and the USA and so she works a lot of international cases. Generally she wears a lot of brand name items.. Gucci, Chanel, Prada, LV etc. It's all authentic and costs quite a bit. But as she says it, it is the price of doing business.

She has to see clients and well off Chinese clients like to work with people who look like they are doing well. It is a sign of power and people have respect for others who look like they are doing well. The thinking is if they are doing well, then working with them, they will do well together from a financial standpoint.

I think this thinking is why the pursuit of luxury products is very important to a lot of Chinese customers. The image of success it provides opens doors to those looking to network and increase their business opportunities. I can see people who can't afford the authentic items try to do the same by obtaining the fake ones.

Crappy watches are crap. Inexpensive fakes can be crappy, but they don't have to be, and quite a lot of them are not.

For example, since you cited beat rate as a measure, the fakes I've bought as "door prizes" and "stocking stuffers" all have 21K or 28K beat rates. I haven't paid more than $30 for any of them, and more often, I pay about $15 each these days. Back in 2008, I was paying about $25 each for them, but I didn't know the seller then. The pricing has gotten better as the years have gone by.

What is cheap is the way they are delivered. They come in a plastic bag/wrapper that's not unlike a cigarette pack's clear plastic wrapper. No instructions, no warranty card, no nothing. Just the watch.

Red:
I wonder how much that feeling is constrained to Asia?

Blue:
I can't speak to the legal profession or to how such things apply to women. I can speak to how they apply to me and my management consulting clients. I am pretty sure that it's important for me to look well put together and well groomed. I am hard pressed to assert that whether I carry/use expensive personal effects is a factor in my clients' minds. I am certain that given the firm in which I'm a principal and the billing rates they pay, I'm sure they are well aware that I'm plenty successful, both personally and professionally. If they had any doubts some decade or more ago, the results I've delivered have long since shown they need not have any.

Therein lies a crux of things. In a professional situation, I don't know how or that a watch can possibly make any difference at all. One either has a string of professional accomplishments or one does not. Those accomplishments, or the lack thereof, will speak for themselves no matter what watch -- fake or not -- one wears. I think that when two principals from two companies are conducting business, one's fake watch doesn't even come up on the radar of things either considers.

In a social setting (non business), again, one either is or isn't known to the other folks in that setting. One's deeds will speak volumes more than will one's watch, fake or not. I'm sure most folks care to some extent what their cohorts think of them, but one is known to those people. What is a watch going to do either way? Among the random strangers who enter and exist one's life, however briefly/quickly, does one really even give so much as the time of day's worth of concern to what those strangers, people whom one doesn't actually know before or after the interaction, think? I find it hard to think one would, but I suppose there are people who do. Tsk, tsk, tsk is all I have to say about them.

Other:
Not to pick on you, per se, but only because yours is the first post I came by here -- http://www.e90post.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1154407 -- that does what I fully expected lots of folks will do, I've quoted you.

Originally Posted by Z K

...

No matter the price, I like something that looks clean. Easy to read and more simple vs complex/gaudy. I don't like odd proportions and sub dials.

But looking to branch out. Maybe something dressier but still sporty. IWC seems pretty appealing to me - I like that they tend to be more classical styles but still modern looking.

If one's expectations are clean looks, good legibility and simplicity, I think one really needs to have a "heart to heart" with oneself before spending a lot of money on a watch, and before deriding fake watches and/or consumers of them.

• Why even buy a mechanical watch? That'd the fist question I'd ask myself because the noted expectations don't militate at all for, much less require, a mechanical watch.
• What's the point of spending $500+, to say nothing of IWC-money, on a watch when If all one expects are the noted traits? Those characteristics just don't cost that much and there are plenty of nice looking watches that have those traits.

Now you tell me given what folks are writing as their expectations in the above referenced thread, what about them suggests that there is any rational reason (aside from the legal one) for buying an expensive authentic watch, or an authentic inexpensive mechanical watch over an inexpensive fake mechanical watch? Does it look to you like most members care at all about features that are uniquely available only in pricey watches? It sure doesn't look like that to me.

All the best.

[Z K]

Originally Posted by tony20009

Crappy watches are crap. Inexpensive fakes can be crappy, but they don't have to be, and quite a lot of them are not.

For example, since you cited beat rate as a measure, the fakes I've bought as "door prizes" and "stocking stuffers" all have 21K or 28K beat rates. I haven't paid more than $30 for any of them, and more often, I pay about $15 each these days. Back in 2008, I was paying about $25 each for them, but I didn't know the seller then. The pricing has gotten better as the years have gone by.

What is cheap is the way they are delivered. They come in a plastic bag/wrapper that's not unlike a cigarette pack's clear plastic wrapper. No instructions, no warranty card, no nothing. Just the watch.

I think we talked about it earlier.

When I say crap, I mean they don't look as close to the real article as it can. Like a watch with a bright blue face that may have never came with that particular color for that model - an instant give away that it is fake. Polished links where the real one has brushed. Stainless steel links brushed the wrong direction... Also little QC details such as the placement of indices on the dial. Lume quality and authentic details like the nearly invisible laser etched crown on Rolex crystals, authentic double AR coating on the sapphire glass for Omega and other models, 120 clicks on the bezel for submariner models with the correct click sound and feel, authentic detailing and working Glidelock clasp on the new ceramic Rolex models and other such details. All of which are available on a high end replica.

And also movements.. you can get a high quality fake with a nice authentic ETA or Sellita movement inside. These obviously cost more and are arguably better movements than the standard Seagull movements. Also, Seagull has different movement grades - some cost more than others. A good Seagull 28K beat movement is in excess of $50 already.

Red:
I wonder how much that feeling is constrained to Asia?

I think the majority of people in most places do not care. Most can't even tell what kind of watch you have or care other than "it looks good".

Blue:
I can't speak to the legal profession or to how such things apply to women. I can speak to how they apply to me and my management consulting clients. I am pretty sure that it's important for me to look well put together and well groomed. I am hard pressed to assert that whether I carry/use expensive personal effects is a factor in my clients' minds. I am certain that given the firm in which I'm a principal and the billing rates they pay, I'm sure they are well aware that I'm plenty successful, both personally and professionally. If they had any doubts some decade or more ago, the results I've delivered have long since shown they need not have any.

Therein lies a crux of things. In a professional situation, I don't know how or that a watch can possibly make any difference at all. One either has a string of professional accomplishments or one does not. Those accomplishments, or the lack thereof, will speak for themselves no matter what watch -- fake or not -- one wears. I think that when two principals from two companies are conducting business, one's fake watch doesn't even come up on the radar of things either considers.

In a social setting (non business), again, one either is or isn't known to the other folks in that setting. One's deeds will speak volumes more than will one's watch, fake or not. I'm sure most folks care to some extent what their cohorts think of them, but one is known to those people. What is a watch going to do either way? Among the random strangers who enter and exist one's life, however briefly/quickly, does one really even give so much as the time of day's worth of concern to what those strangers, people whom one doesn't actually know before or after the interaction, think? I find it hard to think one would, but I suppose there are people who do. Tsk, tsk, tsk is all I have to say about them.

All the best.

I don't think it makes a difference if you are already a professional in a certain area. People acknowledge that and know your credentials.

But for those who are looking to move up, the name brand items puts them into a better standing. It sounds materialistic, and it is, but in a country where everyone is looking to move up and out do each other, they try to stand out in any way possible. Someone better dressed will get the nod over someone who isn't - especially for women. It's pretty sexist in China and men have more power than women in the work force. A more attractive individual will get picked over someone else given they both have the same credentials.

[Z K]

Originally Posted by tony20009

If one's expectations are clean looks, good legibility and simplicity, I think one really needs to have a "heart to heart" with oneself before spending a lot of money on a watch, and before deriding fake watches and/or consumers of them.

• Why even buy a mechanical watch? That'd the fist question I'd ask myself because the noted expectations don't militate at all for, much less require, a mechanical watch.
• What's the point of spending $500+, to say nothing of IWC-money, on a watch when If all one expects are the noted traits? Those characteristics just don't cost that much and there are plenty of nice looking watches that have those traits.

Now you tell me given what folks are writing as their expectations in the above referenced thread, what about them suggests that there is any rational reason (aside from the legal one) for buying an expensive authentic watch, or an authentic inexpensive mechanical watch over an inexpensive fake mechanical watch? Does it look to you like most members care at all about features that are uniquely available only in pricey watches? It sure doesn't look like that to me.

All the best.

There are attributes that make the authentic item more appealing besides the legal ones. Things such as attention to details and styling.

For example, a lot of people copy the Submariner - both homage watches and replicas. But having the real one is just different. The homages will not have the exact styling or little details. The replica may have the same details but the QC is not as good and the finishing is rough. There are some concerns such as if you can possibly resell the watch in the future if you are in a rough patch or decide to "upgrade" or change your style.

Also, there is just a "je ne sais quoi" factor to owning the real thing. No matter how good the replica gets or a homage apes the original, if the real deal is what your heart desires - only the real one will do. It becomes a emotional decision at that point.

That is how I feel about sports cars as well. They are terrible investments but, for me, it is a emotional purchase more than a practical one. When I do take it out on the track and open it up to the limit, I enjoy my time. That does mean I can have a great time in a Miata as well as the M3 on the track. But I enjoy the M3 as a able all around car. I can blast it around the track one day and take it out to a nice dinner on the town the same night. Then go grocery shopping in it the next day. The luxury features and "image" of the car are secondary to the performance for me. That is why, for me, a watch can not provide me the enjoyment my car can. A higher performance car can provide me a better time behind the wheel, a higher end watch can't tell time better.

[RedlinePSI]

ok lets please stop for a second and get back to basics. I've had a few drinks here, haha but I just realized...what is seriously the point of this whole thread? Is there any question that selling/buying a counterfeit item is wrong? It doesn't matter how good a fake is made, if it's that good, slap your own name on it and be legit! The point is hijacking the name of another company is wrong. Anybody who literally "buys" in to that crap is part of the problem. If you buy a fake watch, you are instantaneously a fake ass poser. There is no argument.

I work at Nike. How is this at all different from some bogus ass operation copying a sneaker design and trying to sell it on Canal street? It's no different, and anybody that buys these fake products is part of the problem. It doesn't matter if you make 20K a year and have to buy fake Jordans, or if you make 300K a year in China and decide to buy a fake Patek. You are a fake ass mofo, just trying to project a false image!

People that cant afford the real shit, who care that much about their appearance to others, buy the knockoff goods to pretend they are on a level they are not. Somebody tell me that this is incorrect! Back to watches, there are plenty of low cost pieces that are designed quite nicely. If you bought a fake Rolex, just admit that you are a bullshitter already and close this thread!

Again, this has nothing to do with the quality of said fake watch. The point is that they try to pass the pieces off as the product of another company. So that means it's alllll bullshit! It's wrong, it does not matter if it's the same exact quality or not. It's wrong, and it says something about the people buying them!

[tony20009]

TY for warning us about the state of your being under the influence of a mind altering substance. I'll keep that in mind as I reply.

Originally Posted by RedlinePSI

ok lets please stop for a second and get back to basics. I've had a few drinks here, haha but I just realized...

Oh, my. So what follows is a "barstool epiphany" of sorts....Okay, I'll keep that in mind.

Originally Posted by RedlinePSI

What is seriously the point of this whole thread?

I think the point is effectively identified in the OP. Have you read the first post of this thread?

Originally Posted by RedlinePSI

Is there any question that selling/buying a counterfeit item is wrong?

....The point is hijacking the name of another company is wrong. Anybody who literally "buys" in to that crap is part of the problem.

The legal and moral/ethical dimensions are also addressed in the OP.

Originally Posted by RedlinePSI

If you buy a fake watch, you are instantaneously a fake ass poser. There is no argument....People that cant afford the real shit, who care that much about their appearance to others, buy the knockoff goods to pretend they are on a level they are not. Somebody tell me that this is incorrect! .... If you bought a fake Rolex, just admit that you are a bullshitter already...

You are certainly free to feel that way, but we've already shown, (1) "wannabes" are not the only people who buy fakes and (2) the "wannabe" driver for buying fakes isn't inextricably linked with the other reasons for doing so. (See the reference links provided in the "Other" section of this post: http://www.e90post.com/forums/showpo...&postcount=606)

Originally Posted by RedlinePSI

I work at Nike. How is this at all different from some bogus ass operation copying a sneaker design and trying to sell it on Canal street? It's no different, and anybody that buys these fake products is part of the problem. It doesn't matter if you make 20K a year and have to buy fake Jordans, or if you make 300K a year in China and decide to buy a fake Patek. You are a fake ass mofo, just trying to project a false image!

I agree; it's not different.

Red:
Can you please describe the false image a person earning $300K/year and working in the PRC or U.S. might be attempting to project by wearing a fake Patek?

Without going into every possible vagary of life situations in which such persons may find themselves, it's safe to say that an individual earning $300K/year earns more than enough to buy an authentic Patek Philippe watch. So buying and wearing a fake Patek Philippe watch isn't going to aid them in projecting an image they are otherwise incapable of projecting.

[You were doing pretty well, aside from seeming not having read the first post of this thread, until you confounded the only real argument against fakes -- the legal one -- with the "wannabe" ideas. I think the cocktails are now kicking in.]

Originally Posted by RedlinePSI

...Back to watches, there are plenty of low cost pieces that are designed quite nicely....[But,] this has nothing to do with the quality of said fake watch. The point is that they try to pass the pieces off as the product of another company. So that means it's alllll bullshit! It's wrong, it does not matter if it's the same exact quality or not. It's wrong, and it says something about the people buying them!

Since you gave fair warning at the outset of your post, I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that when you wrote the text in red you were referring to trademark infringement.

Without a doubt the booze has kicked in. This is now the second time in this post in which you allude to there being a connection between the illegality of buying fake watches and the immorality of doing so -- ...What else is to to be when one conjoins a legal matter with the phrase "it's wrong," for "wrong" implies the moral dimension whereas "illegal" constrains the statement to the legal aspects? Neither time did you attempt to develop the point. I suspect that were you not drinking, you'd have posted not a knee-jerk reaction, but instead spent a few minutes actually thinking about the question

I happen to think that making and buying fake watches are illegal acts, but I don't think there's any immorality associated with doing so. There are plenty of illegal acts that lack an immoral dimension in their commission:

• Under age drinking
• Exceeding the speed limit
• Aiding legally enslaved people in escaping their bonds
• Overlooking a poor person's theft or chicanery in obtaining a minor item

Morally breaking the law can be seen differently according to ones moral standards. In order for a society to function, there are rules that we must follow. Many people have the idea that if something is against the law it is wrong. Something might be wrong and something might be against the law, but just because something is wrong doesn't make it against the law, and just because something is against the law doesn't make it wrong.

I'm going to stop there because the relationship between illegality and immorality is not a new one. There are a plenty of WWW resources that discuss it quite effectively and comprehensively. Here is one writer's thinking on the matter: http://www.garlikov.com/philosophy/moralityandlaw.htm .

If you read it in a sober state, I think you'll find that the "it's wrong" tack and the "it's illegal" tack cannot be aligned well with regard to making/buying fake watches. Why not? Because unlike illegal acts like murder or grand theft, and so on, the corporations whose rights and privileges are infringed upon by the production and sale of fake watches don't, as would be so for murder or grand theft, uniformly and consistently even bother to press charges against the perpetrators.

Conclusion:
So getting back to your first question, the point is that all the griping about folks wearing/buying fake watches is baseless and nothing more that people complaining because they sought to buy "something" (other than just a watch) and they paid "whatever" to do so; however, there are people running around who seemingly -- to strangers at least -- get that very same "something" even though they paid far, far less. The point is that if anyone should complain about fake watches it should be folks who are members of three groups:

• Owners of the trademarks that have been usurped.
• Owners of fakes who were duped into buying fakes.
• Owners of fakes who knowingly bought fakes and who have found the performance of the fake watch does not meet their expectations.

Everyone else really doesn't have anything to complain about. Accordingly, it doesn't matter that someone other than they wear/own/buy a fake watch.


All the best.

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by Z K

I think we talked about it earlier.

When I say crap, I mean they don't look as close to the real article as it can.

Now that you've reminded me of it, I recall that is what you said earlier. Sorry, I forgot.

Originally Posted by Z K

...

I think the majority of people in most places do not care. Most can't even tell what kind of watch you have or care other than "it looks good".

I don't think it makes a difference if you are already a professional in a certain area. People acknowledge that and know your credentials.

But for those who are looking to move up, the name brand items puts them into a better standing. It sounds materialistic, and it is, but in a country where everyone is looking to move up and out do each other, they try to stand out in any way possible. Someone better dressed will get the nod over someone who isn't - especially for women. It's pretty sexist in China and men have more power than women in the work force. A more attractive individual will get picked over someone else given they both have the same credentials.

I find it more disconcerting that there are people who judge -- accord higher or lower standing -- on the basis of things like watches than that there are people who expect that to happen as a consequence of their displaying a "posh" or posh-seeming personal effect. I'm not sure which fo them is the bigger fool and which is the bigger boor.

Originally Posted by Z K

There are attributes that make the authentic item more appealing besides the legal ones. Things such as attention to details and styling.

For example, a lot of people copy the Submariner - both homage watches and replicas. But having the real one is just different. The homages will not have the exact styling or little details. The replica may have the same details but the QC is not as good and the finishing is rough. There are some concerns such as if you can possibly resell the watch in the future if you are in a rough patch or decide to "upgrade" or change your style.

Also, there is just a "je ne sais quoi" factor to owning the real thing. No matter how good the replica gets or a homage apes the original, if the real deal is what your heart desires - only the real one will do. It becomes a emotional decision at that point.

That is how I feel about sports cars as well. They are terrible investments but, for me, it is a emotional purchase more than a practical one. When I do take it out on the track and open it up to the limit, I enjoy my time. That does mean I can have a great time in a Miata as well as the M3 on the track. But I enjoy the M3 as a able all around car. I can blast it around the track one day and take it out to a nice dinner on the town the same night. Then go grocery shopping in it the next day. The luxury features and "image" of the car are secondary to the performance for me.That is why, for me, a watch can not provide me the enjoyment my car can. A higher performance car can provide me a better time behind the wheel, a higher end watch can't tell time better.

Red:
Did you really want to open that door?

There's without question a decent enough argument for one's perhaps not being in as dire straits had one bought the fake Rolex; notwithstanding the fact that resellable or not, one is going to be economically worse off having bought most Rolexes if only because rarely can one reliably sell a used one for as much as one paid for it. (Let's just assume that in the hypothetical person/situation you broached the consumer didn't buy the pricey watch in Month 1 and then before, say, Month 36 find "money too tight to mention." Seems to me that if financial disaster -- to the point one must sell off a watch of all things -- comes about that quick, either an exceptional event occurred or they really couldn't afford the thing to begin with.)

Blue:
Agreed.

Green:
That is exactly one of the key reasons I say that whether someone else's fake "whatever" is irrelevant to everyone except that person. I know from square one that there is no way a fake watch can match in all tangible dimensions the traits found in my authentic one. The fake may and probably will keep time well enough, even if it isn't as well as my fake. The fake may provide substantively the same aesthetics, perhaps identical aesthetics, and that doesn't bother me at all. In fact, I think it a compliment that the person who owns the fake variant likes the aesthetics as much as I do.

That said, as an owner of the real thing, I know that at some point, my authentic "whatever" will outperform their fake. That's all I need to know and that's all that matters. If I have an authentic BMW and "you" have an authentic Mazda, do you think that it matters to me that "you" don't have a BMW? Should it matter to me? If not, why should the fact that "you" instead have a fake BMW matter to me? Moreover, the fake Rolex someone bought last month has zero impact on the authentic one I bought and have worn for the past 20+ years. The truth is I don't care, and don't have a reason to care, what kind of car "you" have any more than I care, or have good reason for caring, about what kind of (authentic, fake, or what make of either) watch "you" have.

All the best.

[tony20009]

FWIW, when it comes to fake watches (and particularly the "very good" fakes that Z K has been on about) and their roughly comparable (low price) authentic alternatives, people need to realize that in many cases, makers play one's expectations, particularly one's emotional expectations, against one's good sense. (http://www.theatlantic.com/health/ar...om-bad/247240/)

Want to see it in action? Skip to 2:35 in this video:

While the wine example is different in the particulars, the overarching principles are not one bit different, and watch companies are not one bit less deft at applying them. In fact there are no large companies that aren't very adept at applying them. Indeed, in some cases, merely increasing the price of an otherwise unaltered product is enough to revise consumers' views toward the product. (http://dorieclark.podomatic.com/entr...09_27_49-08_00)

It's certainly not hard to say or believe that one's $8K watch won't disappoint them in routine situations. What's considerably harder to accurately (not credibly, or seemingly so) say is that an inexpensive watch -- fake or not -- is going to disappoint its owner in routine situations.


All the best.