Watch journalism and bloggers have been discussed controversial also in this forum.
I do not want to comment on this but leave it up to you, to form an opinion.

Please first head to Fratellowatches and read their article about some "Microbrand". Remember who the author is.
https://www.fratellowatches.com/chronograph-bruggler/

Then have a look at this german online shop:
https://translate.google.com/transl....de/index.php/de/ueber-uns&edit-text=&act=url

Make sure to have a look at the imprint as well (it's the author of the article at Fratello).

Try what happens if you drop a comment below the article @Fratello.

 

The blurring of advertising and journalism is a common occurrence but Fratello is usually transparent when they are writing promotional articles.

At the end of the day it is important for the lines not to be blurred, I once saw a news report on the national news of Norway about how young people without mobile phones felt isolated and less included than those who did not have a mobile....concluded a report by Telenor, who at the time were the biggest company selling mobile phone contracts.

When it comes to buying watches, I think most people buy what they want and are not influenced by blogs or Fratello watches. Where they are useful , is introducing readers to watches they might not have been aware of without such exposure.

 

How it can be done at the complete other end of the spectrum... in this case by an unpaid volunteer

.

 

The word "bespoke" was the dead giveaway with that Fratello article. I've never seen that word used... except for every current men's watch or clothing ad.

It's gotten to a point where it actually makes me lose interest- as if they're completely out of ideas in the advertising meeting, until somebody goes "Hey, we can call it "bespoke"! Sounds "old timey" and makes them think we made it just for them..."

Don't bespoke. Be original.

[/rant]

 

Puzzled by this statement - Omega produced a very desirable LE (to some) that sold out in hours based on a weekly column by Fratello...

Hodinkee has (from what I gather) a rather large influence on the vintage market and with their own LE's...

I agree with the OP that the particular article being written by a distributor is a little off to say the least, but since this is so common in the industry I always take what's written on these sites with a grain of salt.

 

I think that the speedytuesday design was what interested a lot of people, not the fact that it came from Fratello. One could argue that without the input from Fratello there would be no speedytuesday so in that respect it is hard to argue that they don t have influence.
If by exposing certain models to the watch collecting community, which leads to people being interested in that model, then they are exerting influence, again it is hard to refute that point.
I just think that if some one read an article about a particular watch and they did t like it, they wouldn t buy it because Fratello or Hodinkee says it's cool, then again that might not be true for everyone, just me

 

I'm not inferring that people will buy watches that they don't like, just that the influence of these blogs is certainly there, even if people don't necessarily notice it. You appear to be seeing it as an immediate reaction to go out an buy a watch based on a blog. I see it more as Pavlov's dogs - conditioned over time to salivate when the dinner bell rings...

It's the same effect that happens naturally on forums, but on these blogs (like in the article referenced above) it's not necessarily "natural" in that it appears to be a planned use of an article to generate interest and eventually sales.

 

That just reads like a bad "sponsored" article, riddled with grammatical errors and lacking in anything substantive on the watches they're talking about. For me it's more embarrassing that they decided to post this up at all, I'm already used to the fact that 99% of these watch blogs have heavy industry ties and veiled marketing in all their articles.

 

I agree with Archer and for the most part I take what these sites say with a grain of salt, and a lot on the side of being an Ad. I mostly look at the pictures and if I am interested enough then I research and hit the forums for opinions on questions I have.

 

Oh boy. So here's my comment:

I have seen someone left a comment below the article, which I guess is the same as the TS here? I needed some time to sort it out, so I contacted the guy who wrote the article for us. His name is Boris and has a business in vintage watches. This article is not paid-for, articles that are advertorials are clearly marked as such.

I sometimes do accept guest publications, and so I did with Boris his article on this Brüggler watch. His native tongue isn't English (nor is mine), so my apologies if there are any grammar and spelling issues.

Anyway, I checked with Boris what is going on. He told me he was a dealer for this brand a while ago, but he basically stopped all his dealerships and selling of new watches. This watch was bought by him, with his own money, and no further transaction was involved for this article. I told him that his article is being questioned and he decided to remove the Brüggler references on his website (entirely), as it was inactive anyway.

Regarding the influence of blogs. Not everyone is influenced by what we - or other websites - publish, thank God. However, I do get my fair share of emails from people who bought a watch because they read about it. This also is - for me - a good indication that we should NEVER sell any reviews/editorial pieces to brands. I don't want to write all positively about a brand because they paid for it. If that will be the case in order to make money, I will stop Fratello Watches period. So all editorial pieces, including watch reviews are ours and certainly not paid-for. I know that other blogs and websites do this, and are quite frank about it (included it in their 'media kit' for brands). We don't.

For me, I wouldn't want to write all positively about a certain watch (of which I know it has flaws or would be something I would never advise someone to spend his or her money on) and later found out some of our readers spend money on that thing. That wouldn't feel good to me.

RJ

 

What am I missing here? The author is shown as Fratello.

 

Robert-Jan said that "sometimes do accept guest publications, and so I did with Boris his article on this Brüggler watch". The first paragraph introduces Boris.

"One of our long time readers and friends, Boris Pjanic, told us about his Brüggler chronograph. A new brand from Zürich, specialized in creating bespoke chronograph watches. Even though Boris considers himself to be a vintage watch guy, he was intrigued by the story of owners Katarina and Michael (Brüggler) when he first met them in London, almost two years ago.

In this article, Boris Pjanic explains why he decided to buy a bespoke Brüggler chronograph."

Then it posts the article from Boris.

 

It has been written by Boris, as can be read in the article itself. We don’t ‘create’ new users in our system for an occasional contributor but instead use ‘Fratello’ and state who wrote it in the article itself.

Anyway, this doesn’t change anything I stated above From what I noticed, is that Mr Spotlight seems to have create an account here just for this occasion. What I also noticed, is that he has some ‘beef’ with the author (Boris) on a Swiss watch forum I am only aware of since 30 minutes ago (I have found some incoming hits from there). So well, I don’t know exactly what Mr Spotlight’s intentions are. I also wrote him an email with explanation but no reply yet.

Best,
RJ

 

My apologies Robert-Jan, no offense meant regarding the grammar and spelling mistakes, it just irks me when any publication does it. English isn't my native tongue either, but I do try to keep those types of errors out of any professional correspondence and presentations. I think that coupled with a review that didn't feel like it had much substance to it threw me off. I generally enjoy the content you guys put out and wish you continued success.

 

I think the watch blogs are fan sites. As a journalist for 25 years covering motorcycles and cars, there is a huge difference between having a legitimate publication with Editors, fact checkers, Copy Editors and even a legal department that (in the good old days) maintained a firewall between Editorial and Advertising. Writers were hired based on their abilities, background, track record and actual knowledge on the subject they were writing about before they would ever have anything in print. But thanks to the interwebs, anybody can stick anything on a blog website or Youtube channel, and most of the the watch writers wouldn't negotiate a college English class without great difficulty and think kissing the ass of the OEMs is what makes you legitimate. The watch situation has been especially interesting in that watches that in their day were never highly regarded and now are legendary, thanks to endless hype on blogs and forums by people who don't know any better.

Bottom line is there is no rarer bird than actual watch journalism. There are collectors and hobbyists, and industry supported websites are there to boost sales. Note for example how many Tech Crunch spawns have claimed the Swiss watch industry is doomed, and claim they know better how to run the watch business because, you know, they have a watch blog or Youtube channel. The auto industry has more problems than the Swiss watch industry these days. Here's a good life lesson that is (or use to be) the backbone of journalism: Always consider the source. Same goes to the new breed of watch companies who have zero experience in watchmaking, industrial design, running a business or (a favorite of mine) sell a dive watch of their own design when they've never been diving in their life. Too much success is based on marketing and nothing else (especially watch "journalism.") Beware.

 

Thanks. A wise lesson for me as well to keep more control over the content that is being submitted as a guest publication.

 

Your points, whilst 100% valid don’t take into account the current breed of watch “journalist”, writing for expensive print publications, who regurgitate whatever the watch brands ask them too.

I’ve watched with interest, this week, as print journos have been flown from around the world to Jackson Hole, for a Montblanc event, after which they’ll no doubt gush endlessly about Richemonts latest creation... but that’s no conflict of interest, that’s not a paid for article... hmm.

Having spent quite a lot of time with the guys from Fratello, and talked about this subject in some depth, it’s a tough balance to strike - but I’m left feeling they do a pretty good job of reporting, adding opinion, and yet not kissing anyone’s arse (unless they actually like the product!).

 

And even if you like the product, usually too much of is quite quickly getting obvious...

 

Pro level emoji usage.

 

Just to discuss the watch for a moment - I have no idea what the price is, but it can be configured to be as pleasing or as eye-watering as you want. While I get the backlash from using the term "Bespoke" - it truly does describe what they do here - every aspect of the watch can be customized by the buyer (for better or worse) and it is made to order. I guess while the original article does read too much like advertising, even if it isn't, the watch itself seems to be worthy of some merit compared to all the other Kickstarter crap I see.