Forbes - Moonwatch is Overrated

The comparison to Rolex is bit insulting to Seiko though 😁

The only thing I don’t like about Rolex is the wankers that buy the brand, not the watch and the fact that they as a company goes out of its way to promote this.
Not to mention the artificial rarity, the restriction on supply to cause demand, making people go on waiting lists.

Now I realise that this is an envious position for any company be be in and is marketing gold, but I for one aren’t buying into it……. No I’ll leave that to the tosses, posers, pimps, attention seekers, investors and over cashed up deadshits with no real class or good taste.

The article is obvious clickbait, but whatever points it tries to make about the moonwatch are contradicted if not totally taken back by the last paragraph where the author writes: "The reality is that it's a great watch with an even more impressive history, it also simply looks fantastic on wrist." Well, so much for the author's earlier criticisms about bland design, 42mm case size, "lack of workmanship," and adherence to its own history. I would have had more respect for the article if it was just critical and didn't feel obligated to conclude with obsequious praise.

There's a legitimate difference of opinion as to whether the moonwatch is overrated when compared against other models in the Speedmaster line, like the Speedmaster 57 that came out last year. But this skin-deep article doesn't even try to engage on the topic, it just whines about the media machine behind the watch, a machine he's clearly contributing to by writing yet another superficial and dumb article.

Interesting article, obviously written by a Rolex fanboy, overlooks a couple of obvious truths,
1: Omega actually wants you to wear their watches, not wait for years in line for one.
2. The Speedmaster has gone higher than a Rolex has ever gone deep.
3. The Speedmaster has actually saved lives (Apollo 13!)

The old "It’s a Rolex" just can't compete with "The First Watch Worn On The Moon"