Why buy what you don’t like ? Maybe if you’re a flipper, but who has the energy for that?

Wow love the detail in this video

I love the chrono version. I have its predecessor, the Diagono in CH 35 G

I had both versions, white and black. The white, like you, was the one that was super interesting to me at first. But after wearing both it is actually the black that stands out and the white becomes sort of bland. You can't see the markers as well from afar and the black just is more bold. I will say when the minute hand is in line with an index marker it is almost impossible to see since the white tip is almost completely blended in with the marker with the rest of the hand being black matching the dial although glossy but in anything short of bright sunlight you can't see the difference. It should extend down farther on the hand so if it's over a marker it would look like a long marker or a thin white stripe could have been added extending out from the center. Anyway, I still have the black one and it's great. Thin, lightweight and distinctive. Lots of presence for something that actually wears smaller than its size would suggest. And at reasonable prices preowned.

WHAT A USEFUL VIDEO!!!!

Another worthless term I see a lot: "affordable watches." There are people in the world who look at Patek Philippe prices and call it affordable. The use of the term implies the commenter's own financial situation applies to everyone.

Faxtina is age faded lume out of the box. Not my thing but people like it as much as crappy aluminium bezels.

Microbrand = 20mm lug width 😂😂😂

Tool watch is fine for steel pieces. The fact it's expensive is irrelevant. It's as reasonable a description as many others. Field watch being a complete joke......... along with Pilots watch lol Compass bezel is by far the most ridiculous though lol.

Slipping under a cuff. Needing short lugs/female end links. Artificial scarcity Chronograph Compass bezel All BS!

Thanks for this luxury microlexicon. The tendency to turn useful language into lexical porridge is especially noticeable in domains that use the customer’s aspiration to sell products - particularly fashion, technology, and food. Couture, bespoke, and sustainable in fashion, AI, blockchain, cloud computing in IT, sport, luxury and performance in cars, or artisanal, organic and gourmet in food don’t mean anything to anyone anymore - or they mean whatever the reader or listener thinks they mean. Watches are particularly vulnerable to semantic shittification because they combine three things: functionality, artistry, and social and financial status. They’re machines that are statements of fashion and taste while signifying wealth. That mix of utility, aesthetics, and exclusivity is a perfect storm for the fuzzification of language. Horology used to mean the art and science of measuring time. Now it’s a squishy noise to mean prestigious or serious, or to hint that a basic and uninspiring watch is technically exceptionally sophisticated. Handcrafted used to mean that components were made or the watch was finished by hand, but now it’s applied to watches where only a tiny part of the process - assembly or brushing, perhaps - involves any manual labour. Precision is used to suggest high quality even for watches that aren’t accurate timepieces - "never mind what time it is, feel the precision". While there are still genuine heritage pieces, heritage now normally signals marketing-hyped nostalgia, not what it once meant, a watch with historical significance. A limited edition may truly mean your watch is one of a very few, but don’t be surprised if the run is less limited than the manufacturer wants you to imagine. Everything is iconic now, and the word seems to have become a hopeful synonym for wannabe popular. A masterpiece is all too often a branding term. Swiss Made used to be a synonym for quality (and to mean that at least 60% of the production cost was incurred in Switizerland). Now it just means that something about the manufacture or assembly of the watch happened in Switzerland. By definition, luxury isn’t affordable, but affordable luxury has invaded the language to indicate a watch that looks sparkly and doesn’t cost a kidney.

Homage is also being pushed by people who buy knock offs but dont want to admit they're buying knock offs

Great observation.

- IMHO, "in-house" has been de-skunked, "homage" might be next, if enough people care. - Tool watch, sport watch - yes, technology has left those terms behind. But we can tweak them so they retain the heritage of their original purpose, just like the watches: Something like ex-tool watch, or "historical sport watch". - Microbrand is a brand which is small, so several things stem from that: It 1) sells directly to consumers 2) has a small portfolio and 3) small stock (if any). Simple as that. If a small brand has a watch for everyone anytime (San Martin) or it has a boutique (Baltic) or even a dealer network (Formex), it's not a microbrand. - I somewhat agree on "fauxtina". On most watches, it's just paint or luminescent paint that has been tinted yellow or brown. But there are also watches that are artificially aged in all their outside surfaces. So...yeah, it's just "make it look worn and old", but the results vary. - Luxury: You presume there would be a single meaning to this word, while there are at least three. The problem is exactly this, it's heavily context-reliant, that's why people argue about it all the time. They don't speak the same language, to use a metaphor.

Words are used to generate sales. The latest fad is pushed. Affordable, Limited Swiss Made

Fautina to me means fake wear. Real patina comes from actual use or aging of the item. In watches, the worst fautina is fake aged lume. Looks fake and dumb to me.

I own a bremont and love it got one at a discount though , as for bremont versus cristopher ward I just don't understand it there watch are even similar in my eyes with bremont I only wanted the mb2 with ward igs the belcanto both amazing watches

My watches are all "in-house." Because I wear them in my house.

Rolex imo, are where they are today because they mastered 'exclusive marketing'. It was by advertising at events such as polo, wimbledon finals etc. and nowhere else. 'this is what the true upper-class buy' was their message. The rest is predictably history.

95 per cent of watch YTers are glorified QVC salesmen and saleswomen, aka grifters. Influencers are just salespeople. There are notable exceptions, though - and their integrity stands out like a sore thumb in a sea of grift.

Bravo! I highly recommend this episode for both new and experienced watch enthusiasts and collectors. Many of us overlook the marketing jargon brands and commentators use daily. Gaining a clear understanding of these commonly used terms is essential for avoiding costly mistakes, in my opinion.

Tierlists are just another manifestation of 'Running out of things to talk about' I guess you can fall back on Ali Express sales or releases but really it's a sign of desperation when you need to pump out one vlog per day to keep your stats up.

I couldn’t agree more. The ubiquitous nonsensical word salad propelled by marketing and by “content creators” is one of the annoying aspects around this hobby. I would add words like “heritage” and “quality”.

This has been a great video to watch. I personally love the classic “Rolex created”

This has been a great video to watch. I personally love the classic “Rolex created”

I prefer the term "copy" because it is more descriptive of the watch. A "copy" can pay homage, while still being a close copy, like the INEOS Grenadier or Iron Heart Jeans. Whether it is paying homage or not, we don't know unless we can peer into the mind of the designer.

Agreed. I think watches are aspirational for many people. Many would love to have a Patek. But 99.9% will never have one. I do believe he was not talking about us poor people but rather the watch media who often have holier than thou opinions.

It's high end Seiko, I don't get what the fuss is all about, it's not Grand Seiko(obviously) but it's close in fit and finish. I could not cared less about movement being this or that, I have mobil phone to tell me the time, btw I just ordered one ;)

As a scientist by training, and an insufferable pedant, the misuse of the word accuracy when we mean precision is particularly triggering for me, but I am shouted down by the watch community at large whenever I mention it. I am reminded of something an old mentor once told me: "Cite common usage and reveal yourself to be a common idiot."

Again, another thought provoking and excuse the term, interesting, video/topic!

GADA, there is no Go Anywhere Do Anything watch. Some have argued the Submariner, ok, go to London or San Francisco with it and see what happens.

Great podcast, you are spot on! How about "prestige" in regard to watch brands and watches? I guess it would make one more "empty signifier".

Saying "colourway" instead of "colour" seems to be infectious.

Another example of semantic drift: "grail watch" Especially when people say "my current/next grail" or "one of my grails"

Love this video! But I broadly disagree. All of these definitions have blurry and sometimes changing boundaries, and are used in marketing in misleading or unclear ways, but that doesn't mean they don't mean anything at all. We can understand these terms by their accepted usage, i.e. they still work under Wittgenstein's view of "meaning as use". For all of these terms, I think there would be 80/20 agreement from the watch community on how we would classify most watches or brands against these terms

To be fair, in your best brands of 2024 video, you referenced, "tool", "luxury" and "fautina".

If you moved your PMcC logo out of the bottom right corner of the thumbnail, then the video duration overlay wouldn't cover it up.

"Unique". Seems to be used by watch reviewers to mean unusual or special rather than its actual meaning. (Unless it has "piece" in front of it) "Homage" might or might not have changed meaning slightly but it has definitely changed pronunciation - it does not rhyme with French cheese but more like homidge. A phrase used by all watch reviewers that should be consigned to room 101 is "on wrist". It's just "on".

if you want a watch buy one , if not dont, and buy what you like

Good points Pete. Just one where I slightly disagree; a ‘tool watch’ has drifted alright, but to meaning a watch worn by a tool, as in the son of a toolmaker is a total tool. 😎. Sorry, a bit of a UK-centric joke. 😂 I suppose the flip side to ‘luxury’ becoming meaningless is ‘great value’, which is seemingly applied to any price if the reviewer was literally given the cash to buy it. If commenters say it’s massively over-priced the reviewer usually responds that it’s just inflation (as if that has any meaning anymore!).