Invicta and MKII - What do you think?

Trev · Apr 20, 2014

Respectfully, I've often heard this opinion and don't agree with it at all. It's the visible design elements that make Omega/Rolex/etc models unique. These traits are much more important than the name itself, and that's what many of these companies are blatantly ripping off and profiting from.

To me, defining a fake has nothing to do with which name is on the dial (Prolex? haha). The lowest of the low will copy the name too, but that's only a very minor component if we're considering what the public perceives to be a "Rolex" or "Submariner".

MKII/Precista/Prolex/etc are merely leaching off the success of others (to varying degrees), just with better manufacturing processes. I don't believe they're any more ethical than shady Chinese rep factories. Using the term "hommage" is simply a cop-out and clever marketing.

As you would imagine, I'm not a fan of the Seiko DJ's either 😀

Archer · Apr 20, 2014

We will have to agree to disagree on that one. I know some people take this rather extreme view, but for me a fake or counterfeit is something illegal, where these are clearly not.

Are these watches profiting on another design? Yes but that is quite different than being a clear fake. It has nothing to do with marketing but a legal stance.

I'm certainly not saying I love these watches or anything, but to call them fake or counterfeit is simply incorrect from a legal point of view.

Trev · Apr 20, 2014

You're correct Al, I'm referring to them as fakes from an ethical standpoint rather than legal. I should've clarified. Many of these businesses would be sued out of existence otherwise. It's only the right combination of design traits that make a model unique, many of which would be very hard to own any legal/IP exclusivity to on their own.

As far as I'm aware, there's been a handful of lawsuits, but only a few wins for the big watch companies (AP vs SWI, Panerai vs Naples, etc).

I'd be more than happy to accept a watch inspired by a legend, a true hommage. That's often how design evolves. Unfortunately, 90% of these feel like they're intended to masquerade as the originals while remaining distinct enough to barely skirt IP laws.

Appreciate hearing your opinion. 😀

gatorcpa · Apr 20, 2014

Trev
I'd be more than happy to accept a watch inspired by a legend, a true hommage. That's often how design evolves. Unfortunately, 90% of these feel like they're intended to masquerade as the originals while remaining distinct enough to barely skirt IP laws.

Not quite sure I understand this part of your comments. If Rolex was so upset, they should have sued Invicta, Seiko, Citizen and any other company using trademarked material. Omega sued Costco for selling legitimate Omega product obtained through channels they weren't happy about. They weren't totally successful, but that is another story for another day.

The larger Seiss watch companies have to accept some of the blame for the existence of these "homages", knock-offs or anything else you'd like to call them, as they probably could stop production if they really wanted to.

Then again, a $75 watch is a $75 watch and anyone who buys an Invicta expecting something more is sure to be disappointed.
gatorcpa

Privateday7 · Apr 20, 2014

gatorcpa
Not quite sure I understand this part of your comments. If Rolex was so upset, they should have sued Invicta, Seiko, Citizen and any other company using trademarked material. Omega sued Costco for selling legitimate Omega product obtained through channels they weren't happy about. They weren't totally successful, but that is another story for another day.

The larger Seiss watch companies have to accept some of the blame for the existence of these "homages", knock-offs or anything else you'd like to call them, as they probably could stop production if they really wanted to.

Then again, a $75 watch is a $75 watch and anyone who buys an Invicta expecting something more is sure to be disappointed.
gatorcpa

I agree with you the big Swiss watch brand has some blame IMO. Suing Costco is totally different game than the watch company suing hommage/ knock offs.

Take example Microsoft strategy in fighting pirated software in developing market. At first they actually just let the pirating happened. At later stage, they pursued big companies, PC manufacturers and PC assembly stores. They did not crackdown the pirate software stores !!! (or just a little bit)
Why? The hook up/ addiction.
Once people using microsoft, they rarely want to switch into Open source based softwares. You let them use pirated copies, especially for students and suddenly you have big crowd of customer base. Now you need to extract the margin as much as possible but not distracting potential future customer base. That's why they are lenient to Software stores but not to big company/ PC manufacturers/ stores.

Probably similar line of thinking happened here. Hommage buyers is a potential future switchers for the brands. (Come on if you bought Bulova or Seiko DJ hommage, wouldn't you want the real thing once you have enough money/ watch budget?).
Costco is different story because it competed for the same segment that buy the current Omega in AD and boutique, i.e people with enough watch budget and already have inclination for Omega model, but shop around for the best deal.

Trev · Apr 20, 2014

gatorcpa
Omega sued Costco for selling legitimate Omega product obtained through channels they weren't happy about. They weren't totally successful, but that is another story for another day.

Yes, but isn't that completely different sets of laws/contracts we're talking about? It doesn't have anything to do with IP. They want to control the market and distribution channels.

I think if they could wipe these guys out, they would. I'm sure Invicta and friends are quite familiar with how much they can "borrow' without being dragged in to court over it 😀

So, what do I consider an example of a true "hommage"?
Blanc Pain Fifty Fathoms -> Submariner. I see Rolex as paying tribute (and even borrowing+modifying elements that worked well on a diver), without blatantly copying the design as a whole.

It's pieces like this that I believe are no better than Chinese Datejust knock-offs. Why these are accepted as being "ok" by some collectors, I have no idea. The companies aren't giving them away for free.

Archer · Apr 21, 2014

Trev
You're correct Al, I'm referring to them as fakes from an ethical standpoint rather than legal. I should've clarified.

Appreciate hearing your opinion. 😀

I understand where you are coming from. But looking for ethics in the corporate world of the watch business is like looking for a needle in a haystack.

I only use the "homage" term because it's commonly used, and quite frankly I can't think of another term that means "a copy, but not really a fake" - at least not a concise term. I am certainly not defending them, but if we are going to take these companies to task, we should be looking at others too for their "ethical" behavior. Even the "victims" of these homage watches...I'm not suggesting 2 wrongs make a right, but I see this as just another example of the way this industry works.

Are the big brands ethical? Do we give the big brands a pass because they are big brands and have a long history?

I'll use "big green" as the example, because they are truly the bully of the watch world in many respects...

Is it ethical for them to tell you what you can and can't do to your watch, a watch that you legally purchased?

Is it ethical for them to call your watch a "counterfeit" just because it has an aftermarket bezel on it, that is studded with diamonds?

Is it ethical for them to require that bezel to be replaced, at your expense, if they service the watch?

Is it ethical for them to take your diamond studded bezel and not give it back - are they stealing your property?

Is it ethical that they don't give you the old parts back when they service your watch, again stealing your property?

Is it ethical for them to force unwanted product on dealers, and then threaten to (and in some cases actually doing this) taking away their dealership if they discount to move those watches that were forced on them?

Is it ethical for Rolex USA to not allow a US resident to legally import a Rolex they bought in another country (unless they hand carry it into the US)?

Is it ethical for them to force watchmakers to buy tens of thousands of dollars of equipment, and jump through hoops to get a parts account, then terminate it for no good reason, other than their greed?

Sometimes I think the oil industry is more ethical than the watch industry is...so I guess putting it into the perspective I see every day, it's not something I get really upset about in the big picture.

If these companies are not making an outright fake, and their business is not making "homage" one day and "fake" the next in their plant in China, if they make a quality product at a fair price, and they market it even remotely truthfully, then I really don't get too excited about it.

Cheers, Al

ulackfocus · Apr 21, 2014

Trev

Richemont sued Marina Militare out of existence. Good thing IMO, as the guy who owned the brand had a long history of questionable to sleezy behavior, including setting up a stand in front of his school's textbook store selling used textbooks.

gatorcpa · Apr 21, 2014

U ulackfocus
Good thing IMO, as the guy who owned the brand had a long history of questionable to sleezy behavior, including setting up a stand in front of his school's textbook store selling used textbooks.

I would have no problem with that, so long as he had permission from the school to do it. Where I went to college, it was a cottage industry to buy and sell used textbooks. There were legitimate bookstores right across the street from campus that did it. In fact, IIRC, sometimes the school bookstore sold used books at a discount as well. Bought them right from the students. Used to piss me off when the professor changed the textbook the next semester. Killed the market.

This is no different than selling a used watch, IMO. Now if he were selling digital copies or Xeroxes of textbooks, that would be a big problem.

Al raises a lot of great points. I have no love lost for these big conglomerates that treat consumers like crap simply because they can. Remember, if it were up to GM, Ford and Chrysler, there would be no independent mechanics and all dealerships would be owned by them. Most states enacted laws prohibiting company ownership of auto dealers in the early 1900's and force them to sell parts to mechanics that pass certification tests. These laws don't exist in the watch industry, probably because restrictions on parts sales didn't exist back when there was a watchmaker at every jeweler.

If it were up to Rolex, selling used watches (and parts) would be illegal and we'd all go to jail. Remember that.

Screw 'em. If they want to sue the "homage" makers, let them, and have the courts figure out what is legal and what is ethical. Not my job.

That's not saying that I would purchase one, but I wouldn't restrict them either.
gatorcpa

blackwatch · Apr 21, 2014

gatorcpa
I would have no problem with that, so long as he had permission from the school to do it. Where I went to college, it was a cottage industry to buy and sell used textbooks. There were legitimate bookstores right across the street from campus that did it. In fact, IIRC, sometimes the school bookstore sold used books at a discount as well. Bought them right from the students. Used to piss me off when the professor changed the textbook the next semester. Killed the market.

Yeah, and what a scam that whole textbook thing used to be. The worst was when my brother was at GA Tech in the 70's... one of his professors wrote the textbook for the class, made sure you were required to have it, and sold it for something over $300 as I recall. I had a class for which there was no textbook, but we had to copy pages out of certain books that the instructor had put on hold in the reserved reading room at the library. You had to make the copies in there at a dime each... and this was a total of several hundred pages. http://www.ihmc.us/groups/kford/ for the 0 people out there who are curious.

I always wondered why they needed to select a new calculus book every few years. Calculus hasn't changed in something like 300 years.

omega1337 · Apr 21, 2014

Archer
I understand where you are coming from. But looking for ethics in the corporate world of the watch business is like looking for a needle in a haystack.

I only use the "homage" term because it's commonly used, and quite frankly I can't think of another term that means "a copy, but not really a fake" - at least not a concise term. I am certainly not defending them, but if we are going to take these companies to task, we should be looking at others too for their "ethical" behavior. Even the "victims" of these homage watches...I'm not suggesting 2 wrongs make a right, but I see this as just another example of the way this industry works.

Are the big brands ethical? Do we give the big brands a pass because they are big brands and have a long history?

I'll use "big green" as the example, because they are truly the bully of the watch world in many respects...

Is it ethical for them to tell you what you can and can't do to your watch, a watch that you legally purchased?

Is it ethical for them to call your watch a "counterfeit" just because it has an aftermarket bezel on it, that is studded with diamonds?

Is it ethical for them to require that bezel to be replaced, at your expense, if they service the watch?

Is it ethical for them to take your diamond studded bezel and not give it back - are they stealing your property?

Is it ethical that they don't give you the old parts back when they service your watch, again stealing your property?

Is it ethical for them to force unwanted product on dealers, and then threaten to (and in some cases actually doing this) taking away their dealership if they discount to move those watches that were forced on them?

Is it ethical for Rolex USA to not allow a US resident to legally import a Rolex they bought in another country (unless they hand carry it into the US)?

Is it ethical for them to force watchmakers to buy tens of thousands of dollars of equipment, and jump through hoops to get a parts account, then terminate it for no good reason, other than their greed?

Sometimes I think the oil industry is more ethical than the watch industry is...so I guess putting it into the perspective I see every day, it's not something I get really upset about in the big picture.

If these companies are not making an outright fake, and their business is not making "homage" one day and "fake" the next in their plant in China, if they make a quality product at a fair price, and they market it even remotely truthfully, then I really don't get too excited about it.

Cheers, Al

The luxury business is a funny thing. Companies have found out that after a certain level of recognition they can do whatever they want to you, and treat you however they want. They call it maintaining the integrity of their image, by being strict.

An example is women's purses. LV is obviously a big name. Well LV is very strict on purchases. If they see any pattern they will deny you, their claim is that people who buy following a certain pattern are reselling or trying to use them to create replicas. I had a friend who was ban for a certain amount of time, because she bought three of the same purse over Christmas as gifts. Well that cost her from buying from LV for awhile. She was pissed because they declined her while she was out shopping with friends, and the sales lady even said she was banned out loud in front of her friends. That's customer service for you.

gatorcpa · Apr 21, 2014

omega1337
She was pissed because they declined her while she was out shopping with friends, and the sales lady even said she was banned out loud in front of her friends. That's customer service for you.

The saleswoman that originally sold your friend the three purses should have been fired. But not for the reason you are thinking.

She should have known there was a problem with one person buying multiple purses and politely made the suggestion that your friend either have them shipped to her friends or issued her personalized gift certificates that the recipients could have redeemed for the merchandise. This way, store records would show that the bags actually belonged to different people, although your friend would have paid the bill for all.

I fully understand the marketing decision of not allowing multiple purchases of the same limited edition luxury item. If I were LV, I would want the greatest possible dispersal of these items into the market, without everyone being able to have it. It's called "exclusivity", and also helps to keep resale value high on collectible items.

Bringing this discussion back to watches, I think any Rolex agent would have its franchise pulled if it were determined that one person was buying more than one Daytona. They are that limited. I've been told that most dealers don't get more than a couple of these to sell per year.

Hope this helps,
gatorcpa

Invicta and MKII - What do you think?

Trev

Archer

Trev

gatorcpa

Privateday7

Trev

Archer

ulackfocus

gatorcpa

blackwatch

omega1337

gatorcpa

Similar threads

What do you think, is this a genuine safe queen?

What do you think

What do you think about this Rolex 6694?

A Constellation ref 168018. What do you think about it?

What Omega model and movement do you think is in this? Thanks in advance

Do you think the writings are original? Can you help me?