[bigfatpauli]

Originally Posted by _speedmaster_

What drew you away is what drew me in. If you call having a sense of humor and poking fun of stuffy, rigid, old guard watch companies “arrogant”, then I guess I’m arrogant as well.

Also, the point of the i-watch case was to poke fun at the notion that smart watches will be the death of traditional watchmaking. But, I see you missed the point, so call it what you will.

I find this company to be a breath of fresh air. I laugh at stodgy, traditional elitists who permeat this hobby, trying to make it something more than it is. I hope this company, and it’s management never change.

I don't know you, so I can't comment on your demeanor, but I sure you are very aware of who and what you are.

So the point of copying, quite literally, the most sold watch was meant to be satire? I suppose then I could argue, in the same vein, that Parnis’ version of the Submariner is meant to poke fun at the 'overpriced' Rolex iteration by offering the same looks for 1/10 the price.

Both the Moser and Parnis, are copying iconic designs, right? Both the Moser and Parnis, like or not, are knock offs. The both shamelessly stole their designs. Both, arguably, feel they have a valid message. So do you support Parnis like you do Moser?

You can spin anything, that doesn't make it correct, clever or of value.

To your (and their) point about the Swiss watch industry being stodgy and stagnant. Maybe some feel that way. Maybe it is true. People will vote with their wallets and many of the watches parodied in the Swiss Icon watch are unobtainable for most customers: people still love, want and wait for them so how stagnant is it?

Further to that, let’s look at real disruptors in the business: Urwerk, MB&F, HYT, Harry Winston and their Opus projects, and so on. These are real disruptors that look at the industry and really, genuinely re-thought the wrist watch from a totally new perspective. These companies are doing today what the parodied Icons did when they were new. They are breaking the norm and blazing new trails.

Blatantly copying a design that you feel is stale is the OPPOSITE of making a change. It is just piggy backing on the hard work and success of others. In fact, I cannot think of a less creative approach. I can appreciate mimicry as flattery, however.

If Moser did one thing that really offered change, I would applaud them. If they made a single iconic watch - Just one – They would have my ear. All I see, however, is them making fun of designs that are bigger than all of Moser, never mind the brands behind the designs or worse yet the visionary’s that broke new ground. If Moser had ability to design something a fraction as iconic as a Royal Oak, we wouldn’t be having this discussion. But they don’t. They instead try and pick on, or bully, the people that built the industry that only, because of them, exists today. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you…

That’s bloody arrogant.

They have not earned their place to make fun of the people and brands that built this industry, and doing so is mean-spirited and low class. I don’t condone that.

Originally Posted by AlyRba

I think you may have misinterpreted the marketing campaign in the wrong way. They take dig at various aspects of Swiss watch industry that they feel are wrong (only 50-60% of the components have to be produced in Switzerland for the Swiss label, Patek positioning their watches for the next generation etc.). At no point I feel that their marketing is snobbish, rather I feel it fresh and a different take on the watch collecting hobby.

I shared my experience earlier. I recently received an Endeavor Center Seconds that had a screw missing. I am not sure where did the screw fell off, when the watch was stored at the AD or during shipping. Anyways, Moser offered to send the replacement screw, complementary watch screwdriver, and few straps. I told the AD it was unacceptable for a new watch. He was able to get in touch with directly the CEO, Edouard Meylan, who agreed to replace the watch with a brand new one. The watch is on its way from Switzerland to the AD as we speak.

On the other hand, I also have a Patek 5711 white dial which was bought last year after a 1 year+ wait at the AD. The watch has never been worn. After noticing an abnormal sound with the rotor, I sent it to Patek service agency in New York. I was told that the watch had less-than-desired oil in movement and a service will be performed. The watch was returned to me last week with scratches on the bezel and caseback. Now, I will begin my long fight with Patek to have the right thing done in this case, have the watch replaced. I will let you how it goes.

I am sharing these 2 above examples to tell you about Moser's stellar customer service. I am not so optimistic about Patek doing the right thing in this regards.

I can't comment on Moser’s customer service, but if it is stellar, that is definitely a feather in their cap and cannot be said of all brands. Good on them.

I'm not sure if I miss-interpreted their marketing message with their 'Swiss Icon' watch, however... I’m quite certain I understand exactly what their marketing message was, moreover, that I understand that there wasn’t a message but it was all a thinly-veiled ploy for free marketing. And a damn good one, I might add. Let me explain.

Here’s what happened:

They *made* the one watch (the Swiss Icon), were going to auction it off, and then donate the funds to the Fondation pour la Culture Horlogère Suisse, to "support apprenticeships in the watchmaking professions and to safeguard expertise in the related watchmaking arts and crafts." A noble cause indeed. After they announced it, and received all the marketing PR that they did, they pulled the plug. Not because they were under legal pressure from, you know, almost all the major Swiss watch brands for IP theft (according to them) but because, “the message was unfortunately sometimes misunderstood.” Do you really believe that AP, Rolex, GP, Patek, Paneri, Hublot, etc. “misunderstood” Moser? Do you think there was no threat of swift legal action from a slew of companies with deep pockets? Do you believe that Patek laughs at the Nautilus? Do you honestly believe that because this was “misunderstood” they scrapped the whole project?

Let's examine that for a minute:

I said *made*. As far as I can tell, they never actually spent the money making the watch, there are just the few press photos of a rendering of the watch. Something like that could be whipped up in an afternoon. Building a whole new caliber takes substantial funds and time. Did they build a new caliber JUST for this, only to just toss it out? We don’t know because no one has seen one, but IF they did invest millions (which is what it takes to build a new tourbillion movement from scratch, and this would have been a new movement) one would suspect we would see it surface in another case, but we haven’t. We also know it takes months, if not years to design and build something like this from the start so they didn’t plan to announce it THEN start working on it. It would have had to have been already in the works for a long time.

Do really you believe that Moser invested millions of dollars, and years of time designing a new caliber, case, dial, etc. and didn’t consider the legal ramifications?

Neither do I.

Did they think that it would cause waves on social media and go viral?

Let’s consider the two possibilities and determine for yourself what you think is more likely. Honestly, try to be objective.

Moser spends millions of dollars and years designing a unique watch only to cancel it in the 11th hour because it was ‘misunderstood’.
-OR-
Moser makes a photo of a watch sure to ruffle a lot of feathers and cause a stir on social media and get people talking about the brand, building awareness of their product for pennies.

I will also remind you that Moser is a for profit business. Also consider how much effort and money some of the top companies on Earth spend trying to make organic viral media.

Again, you decide for yourself what is more likely from a small, young company who says it wants to be a rule breaker.

But even still, say it is the latter. I actually can respect that. That is really clever marketing and does in fact break the mold of the ‘stale Swiss watch industry.’ So maybe in a grand twist of fate, they really did nail their message.

But there is one more thing to consider…

They promised to donate money to the Fondation pour la Culture Horlogère Suisse. Then they didn’t do that.

Had they canceled this but still donated a sum that they felt the watch would have raised, I could almost appreciate. But instead they used a charity’s name for their own marketing and personal benefit and that’s not honorable: even by business standards. That’s what I don’t respect about Moser. That’s what makes me call the management arrogant.

"There's no such thing as bad publicity" - P.T. Barnum

But that’s me and IMHO, YMMV, and so on….