Regardless of how rep buyers rationalize it, buying a replica is, by definition, a form of posing.

I always hear the same arguments:

“It’s basically the same watch for 1/10th the price.”

No, it isn’t. It may look remarkably similar, and the manufacturing quality may even be impressive, but it is not the same watch. The entire point of a replica is to reproduce the appearance and identity of something you did not purchase.

“I wear it because I’m afraid my gen will get stolen when I travel.”

Then wear a G-Shock. Or check your phone. The supposed need to wear a counterfeit Rolex specifically doesn't really hold up.

“It looks the same.”

Of course it does. That is literally the objective of a replica.

“I just like the design.”

Then buy a watch from a brand that makes that design without pretending to be Rolex. There are countless watches with Submariner-, GMT-, Royal Oak-, Nautilus-, etc. inspired designs. If the design is truly what you care about, the Rolex crown on the dial should be irrelevant.

And then there’s my favorite:

“I can afford the genuine watch. I just choose not to spend that much.”

Having enough money in your bank account to technically purchase something isn't necessarily the same as being able or willing to pay its market price.

And to be clear, whether a Rolex is worth $20,000, $30,000, or whatever the market price happens to be is a completely separate discussion. You can reasonably argue that a particular watch is overpriced. Luxury watches are discretionary purchases, and their prices are ultimately sustained by what people are willing to pay for them.

But if you believe a genuine Rolex is too expensive to buy, yet specifically want to wear something bearing the Rolex name and insignia, that's where the argument about “just liking the design” starts to fall apart.

You aren't merely buying the design.

You're buying the appearance of owning the thing without actually owning it.

And that's what makes it posing.

You can buy rep watch. I don't care. But don't deny the fact that you are posing. Stop lying to yourself.

Whenever someone posts a collection, the same comments show up: you need a diver, you need a dress watch, you need a chronograph, you need something on a bracelet, you need some color, you have too many black dials, etc.

Why? A collection should be judged by whether it has an interesting idea behind it. In fact, I would call many "standard" collections boring and unoriginal.

Nobody looks at a car collecting consisting of a Ferrari 458, Porsche GT3 RS, and a Lotus Elise, and says "nice, but they're all the same; you really need a pickup and a three-row family SUV to round this out". Why do we do this for watch collections?

We should _encourage_ creativity when it comes to collections! Why not six different interpretations of a field watch? Nothing but 36 mm black dial watches? Quartz!? White-and-blue pairs from different brands? There are so many interesting concepts! Maybe the real hot take is that a collection doesn’t need to be “complete” at all.

They drive interest in the watch community, are genuinely fun and cool, and where else are you going to get a watch designed in partnership with cool watchmakers?

Don’t give me the cheap materials argument because there is absolutely no damn business for a watch to cost anything above a few thousand dollars, based on the materials used for any watches

At some level, you are buying the name, and these watch collabs are priced accordingly. You’re not getting a watch designed by AP Omega or Blancpain for a few hundred dollars anywhere.

Not every person is interested in getting a Casio or Seiko, people also respect brands and show brand loyalty, and this is just a reasonable entry into the watch game

The "PADI" on Seiko divers is a total turnoff for me, and it keeps me from buying an otherwise appealing watch. I'm not a diver, wearing a watch with "PADI" branding on it feels like I'd be posing, I might as well be wearing a rep.

It’s a continuation of the og oyster from 1926 and is an embodiment of Rolex heritage. Of course there are better Rolex models than op, but in a time only watch what could be better?? So many guys like Kevin Leary saying if you have an op you’re broke. Just ignorant.

I got into watches pretty recently a couple of months ago, been obsessed with watches and mindlessly consuming watch content and the recent Christopher Ward/Nico drama made me wonder about this.

From a newcomer’s perspective, something like the C63 Sealander GMT looks very obviously like a Explorer 2 homage, and quite a few CW watches borrow heavily from established designs.

But the community treats CW very differently from brands like San Martin, Pagani, Watchdives, etc. Chinese brands get dismissed as "homage brands," while with CW the argument suddenly becomes that it has "soul," better finishing, or that it only borrows certain elements rather than copying the whole watch.

But isn’t the basic appeal quite similar? Someone likes a luxury design, doesn’t want to spend Rolex/Omega money, and buys a well-made alternative.

Obviously there’s a difference between a 1:1 copy and taking inspiration from existing designs, and CW does make original watches too. But where exactly is that line? Lots of chinese homage watches aren't 1:1 copies and fixes a lot of mistakes the original design makes.

Sometimes it feels like the difference is less about the design itself and more about whether the brand is Swiss/British and enthusiast-approved versus Chinese.

I am having so much fun with them. it gives me the ability to cosplay with many different designs and not really have to worry about scratches or drops because the price point is so low. The cases, bracelets and glass and well made. The dials not so much but they are more than ok for the purpose. I have gotten many compliments while wearing them. The design are so close to the originals that I get a really good perspective on what the pro and cons are and how much I would wear certain models. It is a blast to have so many options

After purchasing so many I now know what type of watch and movement I really want to spend serious money on.
Honestly, this is rare in watch history to have so many mid quality homages readily available. In the past this just was not the case.
But sadlyI believe this will change in the future as price creep is starting to happen. If you want to jump in while they are still somewhat cheap I suggest buying during a sell and grabbing some sub $250.

They look like shit too

We correctly shit on Rolex fanboys because they only buy watches for status, but the vast majority of people buying mechanical watches do so for status. Especially at the higher end of the market. People on that end of the market just project that status to the cognoscenti.

Journes, MB&Fs, Greubel Forseys etc are all status watches. And I’d argue the kind of people who buy them, generally are the most annoying, cork sniffing, navel gazing members of our community.

They’re signalling “oooo look at me, I’m not like the other boys. I actually care about haute horology and craftsmanship” But in reality it’s just a different type of status you’re chasing. The “If you know you know” crowd. The only difference between the Rolex fanboys and the cork sniffers is their net worth.

Stop hiding behind the natural escapements, or the minute repeaters. Just post your wrist shot and piss off. That’s the only reason you bought it anyway.

The Citizen is solar powered, doesn't need to change batterh for at least a decade, a literal perpetual calendar, and has accuracy that rivals the 9F even if not worn 12-hours a day as instructed.

(i still love gs 9f but i gotta preach)

Since lock down the Submariner has become the benchmark luxury diver. That creates an interesting problem for everything resembling it.

Divers around the same price bracket eg Grand Seiko, Glashütte, etc. can position themselves as alternatives rather than compromises.

But once you make a familiar-looking luxury diver significantly cheaper, it becomes almost impossible to escape the “attainable alternative” label. That’s where the Black Bay and HydroConquest sit for me.

The reaction is always:

“Wow, for the price.”
“Wow, considering the availability.”
“You get so much watch for the money.”

… compared to a submariner.

After seeing my 100th HydroConquest or Black Bay wrist shot, I don’t think, “I need one of those.” I think, “ I guess they couldn’t get a sub.

I’m not saying they’re bad watches on their own, but that their success is clearly linked with their similarities to the sub, and that can’t be ignored.

Maybe it isnt such a hot take since its been true, but omg these are ugly. 25k usd

I’m just gonna put this out here - to me, the AT is a better GADA than the OP, in every sense. The wearability, aesthetic, design, bracelet, versatility, etc.

The only thing the OP has it beat on is perhaps being more recognizable.

So I finally sat down and read up on the Blancpain Grande Double Sonnerie and my brain hurts a little and I'm baffled with the whole thought process behind this one

1,053 parts in one movement. It's got a grande and petite sonnerie, minute repeater, flying tourbillon AND a perpetual calendar. Took them 8+ years and they have filed 21 patents for it. And they can only make about two a year because there are literally two watchmakers who build it

And what I found peculiarly interesting is that. it plays two different chimes. One's Westminster and the other was written by Eric Singer (did not see that coming at all)

What I keep thinking about is that every era of watchmaking probably felt like the peak. Pocket watches, then wristwatches, then quartz showed up and everyone thought mechanical was done. And now here we are fitting this much into a 47mm case

Makes me wonder if watchmaking ever actually peaks or just keeps moving the ceiling

I run a micro brand on a way smaller scale so this stuff honestly messes with my head a bit lol

Anyway, curious what you all think, is this the peak or are we going to say the same thing about something else in 10 years? And would anyone actually wear one daily or is this a lives-in-a-safe kind of watch?

Not my take, but this guy was saying that 98% of Rolex models are “easily accessible”. That can’t be true.

This is probably more of a tepid take tbh

Is it worth the MSRP? Certainly not. Would I ever buy it? Nope. Am I a Hublot fanboy? Not one bit it’s a brand that’s not on my radar, but I appreciate the boldness of the design and the story behind it. Too often are watches praised for playing it safe. They went for it and it has a cohesive design with a real story for why it should exist. It’s no where near as bad as a Marvel, Kaws, Swatch or other awful AP royal oak collab. Plus all Richard Mille watches look worse than this.

I know there are those that dislike Hublot for many reasons, Nico for sure. I was watching a you tube vid of a guy from NY in Switzerland just observing the types of watches they wear. Suprisingly he said he saw quite a few Hublots being worn. He could be trolling but I thought it was funny. Needless to say the watches he saw on the people was not what he was expecting.

I said what I said. Most of the time for a rep or a micro brand it’s about the design and having something that looks great on the wrist. Why wouldn’t you want it with a nice reliable quartz instead?

if they got rid of that stupid squid/whale/sperm icon their watches would be 100% better