Interesting article - like always! I fight the good fight for higher-end Credor and Grand Seikos every week. The audience is small but dedicated.
The variance in Credor's line-up over the last 25 years has been extraordinary, which lends itself perfectly to be written about regularly. There are only so many articles I could write about different Submariners, or Day-Dates!
lol I have the same problem, after a while (almost 30 years) you really struggle to not repeat yourself when writing about the Submariner ... again. I'd love to see more Credor in the US in particular.
I wish Dr. Montague had gone one additional step further in his research: switched drinks in the branded portion of his study, so that people who were told they were tasting Coke were really tasting Pepsi, and vice-versa. Ventral putamen versus medial prefrontal cortex: which one would rule in that test?
There are, of course, well-known informal "tests" of wine, where someone pours a cheap but decent wine into a Chateau Latour bottle and watches everyone--even connoisseurs--rave about the incredible experience of drinking such a magnificent varietal, suggesting that the cortex rules. Ditto informal tests where audiophiles listen to an audio system through what they are told is a run-of-the-mill brand of amplifier, then told that the next amp they will listen through (to the same music) is something from Audio Research or Krell or some other mega-pricey brand. But in reality nothing is switched, and upon listening through the supposedly high-end amp, lots of people marvel at the improved sound. These aren't rigorous studies, of course, but they sure are interesting....
It would be tough, maybe impossible, to blind-test a pair of watches. But branded? The profusion of fakes, some of which are remarkably close to the originals from which they are copied, suggests again the rule of the cortex. An acquaintance of mine once showed me his Rolex Datejust--took it off his wrist and let me look at it in detail. It had the requisite solidity and smoothness of a Rolex; the second hand moved the way mechanical watch hands move; he told me it kept great time; bottom line, I thought it was real. But he told me it was a fake, cost him about $200. At which point, so many questions are raised, about him and his morality; about me and my lack of discernment; and, yes, about why we pay five figures and maybe wait a year or two for the real thing when something so close can be made and sold for so little.
Take any old slob of a guy or a plain woman and tell people they are loaded. Watch how perceptions change! Nothing new here, and precisely why marketing works to associate all manner of product with aspirational people and settings.
I think Seiko itself provides a good example of the dynamic described by Montague, too (arguably it even is the Coke of the analog watch world—no shade against Seiko, which made my most-worn watches, nor Coke).
I agree that our brain does weird things when consuming brands.
I also agree that its essentially impossible to truly 'blind' test a watch.
My answer to the problem is to bell the cat and embrace the issue of branding for good or ill in every watch review. Stop pretending that a Rolex isnt a Rolex with all that means in our reviews and instead spend a decent about of time in every review on the single most important aspect of that watch - its brand and what that brand does - or might - mean to a potential buyer.
That's an interesting idea, and I agree it would mean a shift in how watches are reviewed. Something I've thought about a lot over the years is that with some consumer reviews, there are multiple objective, or at least semi objective, data points to cover in a review – car reviewers, for instance, can write about horsepower, torque, drag coefficients, and how handling characteristics are affected by engineering decisions, as part of a bigger picture that includes design as well. Pretty much the only thing that most watch reviewers write about is design; performance statistics such as they are, are reported out based on what brands say. I can't remember the last time I even put a watch on a timing machine for a review.
I recall reading about the Pepsi paradox a number of years ago, possibly the 2013 article written by Matthew Yglesias. One interesting point that Matthew brought up was that sweeter wines are invariably preferred in blind taste tests. The blind taste test lasts a few sips, while most people consume their sodas by the can. The sweet taste of Pepsi might be preferred when you're taking a few sips, while the less sweet Coke Classic wins out when you fill up the Big Gulp at 7-Eleven.
So it may be with watches and blind wrist tests. Zaratsu polishing makes a heck of an impression under the bright lights of a display case, but, over many years of ownership, the compact Rolex Daytona will accidentally bang into fewer door frames than the bulky Grand Seiko Tentagraph.
I'm reminded of the Jedi IQ distribution meme where both tails are labelled "Buy a Rolex". Japanese brands are making progress in terms of brand awareness, but they don't enjoy the advantage of being considered the pragmatic splurge.
Interesting article - like always! I fight the good fight for higher-end Credor and Grand Seikos every week. The audience is small but dedicated.
The variance in Credor's line-up over the last 25 years has been extraordinary, which lends itself perfectly to be written about regularly. There are only so many articles I could write about different Submariners, or Day-Dates!
lol I have the same problem, after a while (almost 30 years) you really struggle to not repeat yourself when writing about the Submariner ... again. I'd love to see more Credor in the US in particular.
I guess you could blindfold people and slap an apple watch on their wrist vs datejust or something
I wish Dr. Montague had gone one additional step further in his research: switched drinks in the branded portion of his study, so that people who were told they were tasting Coke were really tasting Pepsi, and vice-versa. Ventral putamen versus medial prefrontal cortex: which one would rule in that test?
There are, of course, well-known informal "tests" of wine, where someone pours a cheap but decent wine into a Chateau Latour bottle and watches everyone--even connoisseurs--rave about the incredible experience of drinking such a magnificent varietal, suggesting that the cortex rules. Ditto informal tests where audiophiles listen to an audio system through what they are told is a run-of-the-mill brand of amplifier, then told that the next amp they will listen through (to the same music) is something from Audio Research or Krell or some other mega-pricey brand. But in reality nothing is switched, and upon listening through the supposedly high-end amp, lots of people marvel at the improved sound. These aren't rigorous studies, of course, but they sure are interesting....
It would be tough, maybe impossible, to blind-test a pair of watches. But branded? The profusion of fakes, some of which are remarkably close to the originals from which they are copied, suggests again the rule of the cortex. An acquaintance of mine once showed me his Rolex Datejust--took it off his wrist and let me look at it in detail. It had the requisite solidity and smoothness of a Rolex; the second hand moved the way mechanical watch hands move; he told me it kept great time; bottom line, I thought it was real. But he told me it was a fake, cost him about $200. At which point, so many questions are raised, about him and his morality; about me and my lack of discernment; and, yes, about why we pay five figures and maybe wait a year or two for the real thing when something so close can be made and sold for so little.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sour_Grapes_(2016_film)
Speaking of wine... This documentary about how someone infiltrated the world of fine wines and duped many "experts", is a must-see.
Looks like a terrific piece--thanks for the recco!
Take any old slob of a guy or a plain woman and tell people they are loaded. Watch how perceptions change! Nothing new here, and precisely why marketing works to associate all manner of product with aspirational people and settings.
I think Seiko itself provides a good example of the dynamic described by Montague, too (arguably it even is the Coke of the analog watch world—no shade against Seiko, which made my most-worn watches, nor Coke).
I agree that our brain does weird things when consuming brands.
I also agree that its essentially impossible to truly 'blind' test a watch.
My answer to the problem is to bell the cat and embrace the issue of branding for good or ill in every watch review. Stop pretending that a Rolex isnt a Rolex with all that means in our reviews and instead spend a decent about of time in every review on the single most important aspect of that watch - its brand and what that brand does - or might - mean to a potential buyer.
That's an interesting idea, and I agree it would mean a shift in how watches are reviewed. Something I've thought about a lot over the years is that with some consumer reviews, there are multiple objective, or at least semi objective, data points to cover in a review – car reviewers, for instance, can write about horsepower, torque, drag coefficients, and how handling characteristics are affected by engineering decisions, as part of a bigger picture that includes design as well. Pretty much the only thing that most watch reviewers write about is design; performance statistics such as they are, are reported out based on what brands say. I can't remember the last time I even put a watch on a timing machine for a review.
I recall reading about the Pepsi paradox a number of years ago, possibly the 2013 article written by Matthew Yglesias. One interesting point that Matthew brought up was that sweeter wines are invariably preferred in blind taste tests. The blind taste test lasts a few sips, while most people consume their sodas by the can. The sweet taste of Pepsi might be preferred when you're taking a few sips, while the less sweet Coke Classic wins out when you fill up the Big Gulp at 7-Eleven.
So it may be with watches and blind wrist tests. Zaratsu polishing makes a heck of an impression under the bright lights of a display case, but, over many years of ownership, the compact Rolex Daytona will accidentally bang into fewer door frames than the bulky Grand Seiko Tentagraph.
I'm reminded of the Jedi IQ distribution meme where both tails are labelled "Buy a Rolex". Japanese brands are making progress in terms of brand awareness, but they don't enjoy the advantage of being considered the pragmatic splurge.