It is apparent that a lot of thought and care has gone into the design and implementation from the Monsieur de Chanel, also that it can comfortably go up against lots of the alternatives available from the more established watchmakers at this degree. In case the posh houses, and Chanel J12 Watch 38mm in particular, continue to make watches of the caliber, the controversy of the legitimacy as watchmakers is probably to settle in their favor. Probably the most fascinating new high-end men’s watches of 2021 is becoming a new member of its collection residing in an platinum case by having an attractive grand feu tooth dial for 2021. The Monsieur de Chanel (“Chanel Monsieur” as I like to call it) is easily probably the most ambitious and attractive haute horology watches created only for guys out of Paris-based Chanel. They prefer to frighten watch collectors the concept, case, and motion were “dreamed in the earth up” and made especially for this specific watch collection. To put it differently, it is the most attempt Chanel has ever put into a specifically men’s watch collection for serious fans, but it’s a gorgeous creation.I spend a large amount of time talking about the artistic and technical aspects of this Chanel Monsieur watch when debuting it hands here last year during Baselworld 2021. Reference this article to read all about the movement and its complications. I will remind you that celebrated independent Swiss watchmaker Romain Gauthier (who also offers his own brand) is the person who’s accountable for actually creating the Calibre 1 mechanical motion parts within every Monsieur de Chanel watch – that's then assembled by Chanel. This is a superb thing for picky watch collectors that want to be certain that the engine in their differently fairly timepieces have a top quality and offer prestige value.
Welcome to Point/Counterpoint, an aBlogtoWatch column where a couple of our resident horological aficionados duke it out over a point of contention. Before, we debated over “Conservative or Personal Choice As First Nice Watch,” and now Ariel Adams and James Stacey spar over so-called “fashion house” watches.
Ariel Adams: I am of the opinion that watch lovers are unfairly prejudiced against watches whose brands are those of large fashion houses. Not too these are “fashion watches” per se, as that term often refers lower-priced watches that borrow design elements from more high-end watches. Rather, we are talking about high-quality unique designs from brands which happen to make clothing, fragrances, and accessories, often having a heavy focus on women. Think Ralph Lauren, Chanel, Bulgari, or Lv. What does it matter whose name is around the dial if the watch is otherwise attractive, of a high-quality, and possesses most of things a timepiece aficionado looks for? It’s not like most of these watches are ugly. Contrary, most of them succeed because they look pretty nice.
James Stacey: Call it separation of church assuring, or perhaps a blue-collar chip on my shoulder from the flashy nouveau riche lifestyle marketing on most fashion brands, but I want my watches produced by watch manufacturers. While I think many, or even most, watch brands lean way too hard on their ability to market their watches as things for rich people, I can’t help but see a watch from a fashion brand and be reminded of Juicy sweatpants, Calvin Klein underwear, and glossy Louis Vuitton belt buckles.
Many fashion brands make excellent and incredibly impressive watches, but I can’t work through the feeling that the watch is just another platform for the cache of the branding, a status symbol in addition to the actual watch. Sure, the standard big watch brands do that too, but they have built their branding on making watches, which, right or wrong, feels far more legitimate to me.
Ariel Adams: To be honest, I am sensitive to the concept that not everyone wants to be a walking billboard. There's two reasons why people like fashion house products and that is because they like the marketing picture of the brand and want to be a part of it, or that they know and understand the product so well they want to own it for its aesthetic and technical qualities. Far too often people make buying decisions for the former reason, and I can sympathize with those people who do not want to be mistaken for somebody who is merely a brand follower instead of someone who carefully chooses the right products. More on that in a moment.
I hear the statement a great deal; “I want to buy watches from companies that only make watches.” This biased remark appears to imply that simply because a company has been making a watch for a long time that they automatically have a monopoly on what constitutes a good watch. I would reason that any company can make a good watch if they try and work with the right suppliers and concepts. Moreover, consider our modern technical age where innovation and improvements come from unlikely sources. Before long, Apple and Google will be making automobiles. Will the argument of “I simply want to buy cars from firms that make cars” fly for consumers? Look at the Fords and Cadillacs of the world and how arguably little they have contributed to modern advancements in cars next to other companies.
Tesla is a good example, being birthed from scratch as a nascent company among a stable of existing behemoths who used the same arguments to claim that people should only buy cars from companies that made cars. I get that watch information mill all about preserving tradition, but who translates the traditional values we seek into modern products shouldn’t matter. Going back to watches, the perception of a product should be solely based on the qualities from the product. I understand having ideological differences with one brand or another, but barring subjective prejudice to purchasing product from a particular company, who cares who else is “wearing the brand” when the product itself is good?
At no more the day, we don’t want a bad watch from a fashion house or perhaps an established watch maker. The name of the brand simply doesn’t matter. We simply take mental shortcuts to trust a brand when we as consumers are sometimes too lazy to make the effort to research the product itself. I believe many watch consumers simply “trust” established names more so than they have analyzed and rejected the very best watch offerings of fashion houses. Many of us are entitled to a little bias and prejudice occasionally as it’s utterly unavoidable, but because sophisticated and educated consumers of complicated products likes watches, we owe it to ourselves to be more open-minded from the outset.
James Stacey: Putting aside my complete and utter apathy toward a car made by Google or Apple, most importantly Tesla is a car company, certainly young and innovative, but still a car company. I love young and innovative watch brands like Halios or Autodromo, they operate without the marketing force and brand cache of the established players, and I think there is an enthusiastic legitimacy to their product. While I think in a vacuum the thought of a product should be solely in line with the qualities of that product, that's not at all the reality of how marketing works or even the way that humans interact with products. Studies show that wine tastes better if it's from a more expensive bottle, coffee is more enjoyable if you've been lead to believe it to be higher quality coffee, and Coke is preferable to RC.
