The Breitling Watch Source Forums

Hey Folks,

You may wonder why I'm posting this here, but bear with me, what I'm getting at has not much to do with either Rolex or Panerai... It's more of a general phenomenon.

I'm sure you have heard this before and it can't quite be denied: "it is everywhere, Rolex's best selling watch, the Sub".

Everybody and their mum indeed seem to have one and if they didn't, they'd have a GMT. In that, the Rolex "divers" are a bit like iPhones, yes, they aren't cheap but no, that doesn't make them rare.

Now at this point, I'd like to disclaim that I'm very much in love with my GMT, it's fungibility nonwithstanding. So this is in no way meant to diminish its magnificence or any rolex's for that matter.

However, one can't deny that the rollies have acquired this somewhat tacky obviousness. They are seen as status symbol first, watch second, and Rolex, always happy to up the bling, isn't quite helping either...

This phenomenon seems to be why an increasing number of, seemingly witty folks are seeking to dissociate themselves from the darkly-suited monotony of the world's boardrooms by going the "anti-route", thereby largely contributing to Panerai's commercial success.

The darn things (disclaimer II: I like my Pam just as much as my GMT...) are literally popping up all over the place, to the point where you get to wonder how Panerai is keeping up with the demand... or so, you may hear them speak/write up in the major watch Forums.

And they do have a point... But is it a good one?

The phenomenon does bear the question: doesn't that sort of make the Pam more of a status symbol than a Rollie could ever be?

And you can replace Rolex and Panerai by BMW and AUDI or the Prius or whatever mainstream prestige brand you can think of... I just chose the above because that seems to be a particularly vigorous debate in the watch world these days.

The fact is that we seem to have become snobs even about being snobs...

What ever happened to owning the watch that speaks to one in that magical and unique way... What ever happened to that paternal/maternal (see how politically correct I can be when I try, mighty proud of that ) love one feels every time one opens the watch box?

Have we really become that cheap?

Are we post-snobs?

_________________
Cheers from Switzerland,

Fred

I guess I have become a snob of sorts. At first, I never thought I would ever have a collection of expensive watches. I actually started with Breitlings then moved towards Omega. I never even considered Rolex because of what you have stated. Panerai just didn't do it for me and I thought they were ugly. Now, I own two PAMs and am looking at getting a SubC. For me, I started out not appreciating Rolex. Now I want one. I can also see a GMTIIc in my future as well. Not because it is a status symbol, but because I now have a great appreciation for Rolex. Actually, if you research the brand you'll find out that Rolex actually sent watches to Allied POWs in Germany during WWII and did not collect for them until after the war. Pretty cool.

R/

I'm going to predict that you get a less heated response here than you did on TRF.

FWIW, the Sub's popularity doesn't bother me at all, nor did Panerai's when I owned one. I think people tend to exaggerate how many of these things you actually see in the wild. I certainly don't see watches like this every day, even though I work right in the centre of the city (ok, it's not Wall Street, but I am surrounded by bankers and lawyers).

I have no idea what this means.

Hehe,

Yeah, the reason I crossposted is that I expected to get a more colored response on TRF, while finding the more neutral approach here equally as interesting.

But in all honesty I had not seen the massive extent of the TRF reaction coming. It's great though, it sort of goes to make an interesting point of its own

_________________
Cheers from Switzerland,

Fred

I cant see a PAM being much a status/snob symbol simply because the average person has no clue what a Panerai is.

_________________
-RJ

Not if you accept Otto's point, which I whole heartedly endorse. Consider your audience, whether TRF, here, or if you posted on Paneristi. Beyond us watch weirdos, the rest of the 95+% haven't a clue nor do they pay the slightest attention.

_________________
SHARKMAN

I agree only to the extent that a Rolex would be a status symbol, but it's the only one I can think of that the average person would know. But to me the reason a Panerai is not a status symbol is because it's not a high end watch.

_________________
Current:
Chronospace Silver, Black Ocean Racer
Navi World Silver, Aero Classic
Chronomatic 1461 Bronze, Bronze DP-1
SA White, Diamonds, Pro 2 Diamonds
SA Black, Bentley Rubber
Navi 1461 LE, Black DP-1
Chronomat GMT Silver, Pilot

_________________
Scott

AP Royal Oak 15400, silver
Zenith Chronomaster El Primero Classic Cars
Vintage gold Corum
Rolex DJ 36 TT, oyster dial, oyster/smooth
Baume & Mercier Riviera 200m, silver dial/aquamarine bezel
Breitling Superocean 57, rose/stainless

Well the whole socio-economic stuff is not really my thing, so I will simply say that to the vast majority of buyers a watch is a status symbol. There is no way that anyone needs an expensive Swiss watch on their wrist (or any watch at all these days) so people buy the name for the status that it conveys. For many people that is a desire to be one of the 'in crowd' and so not surprising that Rolex is so popular - it's the Swiss watch brand known by people who don't know what a Swiss watch brandis, and is associated with luxury to separate it from Omega and Tag among the people who have heard of 2 or 3 brands.

However, in recent years the trend has been towards bigger watches and Rolex clearly doesn't fill that niche for many. The buyer who wants to have a status symbol befitting of the trends is being told that Panerai has become very popular in recent years, and the look fits today's trends perfectly so no surprise that they are buying them.

Is that post snobbery - I have no idea.

As for the comment about Panerai not being high end, even considering the source that is an absurd comment - and I can hardly be accused of being a PAM fan boy.

I'm not going to get into this one too much, other than to say that in my experience, Rolex is still the default "go to" brand for anyone who has money and wants an "expensive" watch, but doesn't know 9or doesn't want to know) much about watches.

Now that's certainly NOT to say that every Rolex buyer falls into that camp - far from it, as evidenced by many many owners here - but Rolex is still the brand most recognisable and well-known high-end watch brand in the world, so in that regard Panerai (and anyone else for that matter) don't get a look in.

As an example, I work in Finance and I've seen quite a few Rolexes on people's wrists, compared to only one, maybe two, Panerais in the last 15 years or so.


That comment's a real head-scratcher for me as well. If having developed several in-house movements, and being proficient in the use of interesting case materials - ceramic, bronze, composite and tantalum, as well as the more usual titanium, gold and steel constitutes "not high end", then there's a huge number of other watch companies who should just hang up their loupes and go home!

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator

I agree with this. The average person thinks Rolex is one of the top few expensive brands in the world when in reality where does its average price rank? Definitely not top 5, is it barely top 10?




My definition of high end only includes a few such as AP, Patek Phillipe, Hublot, Vacheron Constatin and others in that price range. To me Panerai (and definitely Breitling) is not high end, and thus not a status symbol. I have a watch that has titanium, carbon fiber and other nicer materials and I think it is a high end watch, but the brand as a whole is not. This goes for Breitling too, just because they have some pieces over $10k, or even a few really expensive pieces made with gold doesn't make it a high end brand. And this is my personal opionion, if we are back to talking about the average person who spents $1,000 on a watch and thinks that is a lot then maybe everything above the $1,000 is high end.

_________________
Current:
Chronospace Silver, Black Ocean Racer
Navi World Silver, Aero Classic
Chronomatic 1461 Bronze, Bronze DP-1
SA White, Diamonds, Pro 2 Diamonds
SA Black, Bentley Rubber
Navi 1461 LE, Black DP-1
Chronomat GMT Silver, Pilot

I'd totally agree that Breitling isn't necessarily "high-end" per se, but I think they could be if they ditched a lot of the low-end stuff. But then I class Panerai as much higher-end that Breitling on account of the points I made, and especially their range of in-house movements. That said, I know trying to rank watches is very subjective and therefore entirely pointless, but to me their range of in-house calibres is reason enough to count Panerai as high-end : not a Patek, but certainly high-end.

Interesting you count Hublot in your list of high-end manufacturers. For me Hublot are a triumph of style over substance - ETA's and Sellitas under the skin. A fancy case on it's one doesn't make a manufacturer high-end IMO. But that's just my opinion......

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator

I'll reiterate my question, since I still don't really understand this statement. Exactly how is it a Pam currently is a status symbol in a way a Rolex could never be? In terms of brand recognition by the masses, I think Rolex still wins. In terms of overall quality, Rolex probably still wins, or at least is on a par with Panerai; I don't see how Panerai can be said to be exceeding Rolex in this department. And there are certainly other, higher-end watches than either Panerai or Rolex, for the true watch connoisseur. If you just mean that Panerai is the go-to brand for current brand snobs who are looking for status on their wrist, I'm still not sure Panerai beats Rolex, but even if it does, this kind of status is so ephemeral, it could change in a heartbeat. So, bottom line, your statement really doesn't make sense to me. Perhaps you can explain it further.

Well it is quite simple but maybe the sense was swallowed by the formulation a bit. It is a status in that it says (can say) "well folks, I could have afforded a Rolex but really I have more originality than that, everybody has one and I'm not everyone, I don't need to show you my wealth that plainly, even though, believe me, I have it and it bought me this big humongous watch" (please note the negative connotation... Love my Pam though).

In that kind of wonky way, it says something a Rolex can't... Look at this Rolex, I have that because I'm not one of these Rolex people... Doesn't work.

_________________
Cheers from Switzerland,

Fred