View Single Post
      03-07-2014, 05:32 PM   #4
Diligentia Vis Celeritas
DVC's Avatar

Drives: 335i
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Northern NJ

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Originally Posted by tony20009 View Post
Every so often I find folks having conniptions over or poking fun at folks who wear fake watches. I don't really care if someone wears a fake watch; that's their business. I don't care if they knowingly represent a fake watch they are wearing (not selling) as an authentic one; that's their insecurity issue not mine. If someone willfully shares with me that their watch is fake, I usually just tell them it looks nice and maybe I'll ask them if it keeps good time. I do have a sympathy for folks who get scammed into buying a fake they believe to be authentic. But that's an entirely different matter.

The short is that someone else's fake watch has no real, direct impact on my ability to enjoy my own authentic ones. Yes, yes, I'm aware of the impact fakes have on the costs "authentic" makers incur to defend their trademarks, but if IMO, such assertions of increased cost often are bogus, or if not bogus, red herrings. Those very same authentic makers have plenty of internal inefficiencies they could address to more than make up for the trademark defense costs. Moreover, they spend more resources battling makers of watches that are "similar" rather than clearly fake.

For example, AP recently sued (and won) the maker of a watch that is clearly not an AP RO fake. The "offending" watch was a $300 or so watch that had a similar screw pattern and bezel shape, but the watch is labeled with that other maker's name/logo on the dial. This is what RO did despite the fact that as far as I know, they've not brought suit against one company making watches that are clearly fake ROs and have the AP name/logo on the dial. When I learn things like that, I can't help but wonder how much the issue of "fakes" really matters to the makers. I mean after all, nobody buying a $25 fake AP, or even a $500 one, is even likely to be considering buying a $15K+ authentic one, so there's no reasonable way to make a case for a direct loss of sales revenue due to fakes.

I have had folks who were at my home for social gatherings ask me if some of my art is real, but I've never had inquiries about my watches. Even so, watches, art, furniture, whatever, I don't take well to folks coming into my home and asking me questions of that nature, and I made it very clear to those individuals that with those questions they'd worn out their welcome. This is about how the conversation went.
They: Is that real?
Me: Do you think it's real?
They: Um, yes, it looks real to me.
Me: Would you know the difference if I told you it isn't real?
They: No.
Me: Then how would I know the difference? And why do you care? (before they could answer) You'll pardon me now, won't you?
They: Yes, of course.
Me: Thank you so much. I need to go see if the grass is still growing. Enjoy the rest of your stay.
I didn't see the offending parties leave my home, but I know I didn't see them mingling and chatting with other guests for long after that conversation. (To their credit, the cads at least had the integrity not to make such inquiries behind my back. That would have been worse IMO and upon learning of it, I'd have taken stronger action (not physical) than just letting them know they'd worn out their welcome.)

It doesn't have a damn thing to do with my self image, the items in question or anything else tangible. It has to do with the fact that it's just rude, it's crass; and it's plebeian to ask that sort of thing. It's none of their business; they either like the decor or they don't. I'm just fine either way in that sense; I'm not asking anyone to like my stuff as it's there for my enjoyment not theirs. It's the same with watches. One either likes the look/style a person exhibits or one doesn't.

So what is your view on the matter of fake watches?

All the best.
Enjoyed reading your thoughts on the subject, Tony. I'm with you for the most part... I couldn't care less when someone wears a replica. My take on it is that they like the look of the watch, but can't (or choose not to) afford it. I don't find that offensive at all.
For me though, choosing a watch is about so much more than just the superficial look, and the perceived cache of the brand. I'm interested in the maker, the movement, the company's history - not to mention the complications and technology that are incorporated. But I completely understand and accept that to many others, this level of interest and intrigue are not a factor at all.

As for being asked if I own a fake (be it a watch, or anything else), I could see being offended under some circumstances... like if I detect an attitude, or a patronizing or condescending tone, for example. But short of that, not everyone is a watch or art aficionado. I'd probably just chalk it up to their lack of understanding or appreciation of such extravagances, and trying to connect the dots in their head to make sense of it (as opposed to an insinuation of some sort of inadequacy on my part); this by itself wouldn't upset me, as everyone has their own priorities.
Ahead of the curve for specF30

Last edited by DVC; 03-07-2014 at 06:41 PM.. Reason: n
Wolf 3351070.50