I don't have an issue with the price, low volumes inevitably make it necessary, nobody would go into an endeavour like this to lose a bucket-load of money.
Otherwise, this watch calls into question the ethics of some participants in this game. The owners of UG were not willing to participate and nonetheless ML went ahead and created a copy, let's not call it an "homage", that's marketing b*s, it's a straight rip-off. I'm disappointed (but not surprised) the watch sites like Hodinkee gush about an unauthorised rip-off. It's all about the money and relationships. I'll scratch your back, you scratch mine. ML even copied the UG logo, only a slight change to add 2 small legs to the bottom of the U so they can call it an M while ensuring it still appears as a U on the dial and buckle. Does this mean next time ML create an "homage" to another brand's watch, they'll change their logo again, or is this now their logo for the future? Will their, say, future Rolex "homage" have a logo that makes it look like a UG watch or will they morph their logo into an M that appears to be a crown on the dial?
What was the relevance of their marketing showing a '60s F1 race car? They would have been closer to the mark if their vintage Uni-racer had an image like this:
View attachment 1087972
Perhaps I'm cynical, but the moral compass of some stakeholders in this industry is increasingly directionless.
Click to expand...