Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Timex Is Making Watches in America Again

bloomberg.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 103 posts

Re: Timex Is Making Watches in America Again

#81

Post by draw_down »

logotype wrote: post #79

I’m a developer and a total watch nerd (mechanical watches). Partly what attracts me to watches is the micro-mechanics, but also how it’s a mix of artistry, craftmanship and old technology and know-how. I often post on Instagram, please have a look and hope you like the content: https://www.instagram.com/openworked/

I like the horologist that busts public figures (rappers, mostly) with fake Audemars/Rolex/etc. https://www.instagram.com/fakewatchbusta/?hl=en

Not so much because I care that people have fake watches, more because the posts point out the subpar quality of the fakes and how you can distinguish the real from the fake, often in quite a bit of detail.

Re: Timex Is Making Watches in America Again

#82

Post by bouncing »

irq11 wrote: post #76
bouncing wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Questions of cost and "why" apply broadly to the whole category of watches. Up until the late 70s, watches were tools to keep you from being late. Since then, you've been able to get a cheap, reliable watch for next to nothing. Quartz movement, combined with mechanization of production, ensured that. The whole industry had to adapt to making watches themselves sort of an aesthetic statement, not a practical tool to k…

”Up until the late 70s, watches were tools to keep you from being late.” That’s not true at all. There have always been a lot of reasons to wear a watch that have nothing to do with getting the time. Cheap movements expanded the market to the low-end, but didn’t really change the reasons that people buy watches. Fundamentally, watches are jewelry. That’s been true forever, but it also isn’t something that can be redu…

People pay handsomely for better mechanical movements, but that's still an aesthetic choice. The world's most accurate mechanical movement is just not going to be as accurate as a mid-range quartz movement. Paying a premium for something that's mechanical because it's mechanical is the epitome of an aesthetic choice. It's not at all like the Mac vs PC choice, which might have some aesthetics involved, but is still about support, ease of choice, brand reputation, and of course, technical details.

Maybe watches have always been somewhat aesthetic, and while they were made to be pretty in the 1920s, they really did exist as timepieces first and foremost. Now a mechanical watch's main function is the way it makes you feel.

Re: Timex Is Making Watches in America Again

#83

Post by handedness »

AmVess wrote: post #5

The question is why? It's a $20 movement in a poorly finished case. The most important part of the watch isn't made in the USA. It's a $50 product being sold for $500. Further, it completely misses the point of what made Timex famous to begin with; excellent quality at a low price. This is neither. For $500, they are going up against some vastly superior products. For example, this cannot hold a candle to any similar…

Watch manufacturers sometimes do things like this to limit demand when they aren't ready to scale production, but still want the buzz of launching. Launch a successor at a much lower retail and discontinue the original reference, which collectors may care enough about for its historical significance to keep the price of the original high on the used market.

I'm guessing their strategy of engaging non-watch companies to supply parts (and it shows) has something to do with the price and likely low production volumes it will receive.

But I agree–the hands look terrible even for a $50 watch, and those movements are certainly costing Timex less than $10 each. The only value here is the story, and nice (if underfinished) brass caseback insert. The rest of it is positively terrible at that retail price.

Re: Timex Is Making Watches in America Again

#84

Post by CydeWeys »

coldtea wrote: post #17
AmVess wrote: post #5

The question is why? It's a $20 movement in a poorly finished case. The most important part of the watch isn't made in the USA. It's a $50 product being sold for $500. Further, it completely misses the point of what made Timex famous to begin with; excellent quality at a low price. This is neither. For $500, they are going up against some vastly superior products. For example, this cannot hold a candle to any similar…

> The question is why? It's a $20 movement in a poorly finished case. The most important part of the watch isn't made in the USA. It's a $50 product being sold for $500. Most watches are like that. In the high end, it's $1000 product being sold for $30000. > Further, it completely misses the point of what made Timex famous to begin with; excellent quality at a low price. They already do well in that market. It's not…

Your typical $30k watch has way more than $1k of highly skilled hand labor that's gone into it. Agreed that the component prices don't add up to close to $30k, but throw in all the other overhead typical of manufacturing and selling luxury goods, including labor, advertising, servicing, maintaining physical stores, etc., and the profit margin on those watches is gonna less than, say, selling Internet ads.

Re: Timex Is Making Watches in America Again

#85

Post by CydeWeys »

anthonybsd wrote: post #18
AmVess wrote: post #5

The question is why? It's a $20 movement in a poorly finished case. The most important part of the watch isn't made in the USA. It's a $50 product being sold for $500. Further, it completely misses the point of what made Timex famous to begin with; excellent quality at a low price. This is neither. For $500, they are going up against some vastly superior products. For example, this cannot hold a candle to any similar…

Shinola is stuffing $100 movements into cases that are frankly completely oversized for them and selling them for $1000+. I guess Timex wants in on the action. Don't underestimate the power of marketing hype.

Unfortunately a lot of my extended family has gotten into Shinola watches because of familial origins in Detroit. At least they're still significantly cheaper than Rolexes while still doing a passable job of telling time, even if their resale value suffers?

I used to have a fun 24 hour analog quartz watch that I stopped wearing after I got a ~$150 Garmin fitness watch. This thing always tells perfect time because it syncs off my phone (including time changes from traveling or DST), has a GPS tracker for runs and bike rides, can measure heart rate, and pairs via Bluetooth and reads me incoming text messages.

It's crazy how, at much cheaper price, you get so much more functionality with a smart watch. And it's even better at being a watch! It just doesn't look as nice.

Re: Timex Is Making Watches in America Again

#86

Post by glvn »

I don't understand this watch. It has a Ronda cal.6004.D movement which is a Swiss Quarts movement. Not that the Ronda movement is a bad movement, there are just so much better options out there for the same price. Why not go with an ETA? And if you're going to advertise that your watch has a "Swiss Movement", why go for a Quartz movement over an Automatic or Hand-Wind.

On top of all that, it's $500. Now $500 for a watch isn't that much in the watch world considering how many watches are $1-10K+, but compare this watch to a Seiko SARB. The SARB has 100m water resistance, a 50hr automatic movement, and comes in at >$100 cheaper.

Unless you're a Timex fanboy or collector, I really can't recommend this watch over other similar options.

Re: Timex Is Making Watches in America Again

#87

Post by [deleted] »

CydeWeys wrote: post #85
anthonybsd wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shinola is stuffing $100 movements into cases that are frankly completely oversized for them and selling them for $1000+. I guess Timex wants in on the action. Don't underestimate the power of marketing hype.

Unfortunately a lot of my extended family has gotten into Shinola watches because of familial origins in Detroit. At least they're still significantly cheaper than Rolexes while still doing a passable job of telling time, even if their resale value suffers? I used to have a fun 24 hour analog quartz watch that I stopped wearing after I got a ~$150 Garmin fitness watch. This thing always tells perfect time because it…

[deleted]

Re: Timex Is Making Watches in America Again

#88

Post by LarryDarrell »

adventured wrote: post #53
tonyedgecombe wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Globalism has brought down prices and made many things very cheap and affordable, but at what cost? That depends whether you consider an American job more valuable than a Chinese one. America has the wealth to provide a safety net, it's not the fault of globalism that it doesn't.

> America has the wealth to provide a safety net, it's not the fault of globalism that it doesn't. The US has an enormous safety net. What are you referring to? On total net social spending, the US ranks just below France at the very top in the OECD, with 30% of all economic output directed at that. For comparison, Sweden and the UK are at 24%. For strictly public-based social spending, the US is ranked with New Zeal…

You can scream that the US spends trillions on safety nets until you are blue in the face (Or until they line us up against the wall). In reality, unless you make less than $17500 or are older than 65, you don't really feel any of it. When Americans travel or talk to Europeans they learn that our health care, college, worker protections and consumer protections are absolute shit in comparison. This leads to wanting to change the system to work for us... Not focusing on how much we already spend. If anything, the fact that we spend so much on social programs per capita is great news, because a lot of the money is already there.

Re: Timex Is Making Watches in America Again

#89

Post by craigsmansion »

logfromblammo wrote: post #77
bouncing wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Questions of cost and "why" apply broadly to the whole category of watches. Up until the late 70s, watches were tools to keep you from being late. Since then, you've been able to get a cheap, reliable watch for next to nothing. Quartz movement, combined with mechanization of production, ensured that. The whole industry had to adapt to making watches themselves sort of an aesthetic statement, not a practical tool to k…

Who is supposed to be wearing these wristwatches? I can comprehend the use case for wrist-worn electronics devices that do more than just tell time, but we have mostly gone back to pocketwatches now--pocketwatches with a rounded-rectangular form factor that also function as telephones, cameras, notepads, maps, compasses, calculators, game consoles, and televisions. As adornments go, I also think that handing over $50…

Obsolete? Not by a long shot, even if by a narrow margin.

Wristwatches do tell the time, and a decent mechanical one will do so far far longer than any electronics device, even high end quartz wristwatches.

Re: Timex Is Making Watches in America Again

#90

Post by bouncing »

craigsmansion wrote: post #89
logfromblammo wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Who is supposed to be wearing these wristwatches? I can comprehend the use case for wrist-worn electronics devices that do more than just tell time, but we have mostly gone back to pocketwatches now--pocketwatches with a rounded-rectangular form factor that also function as telephones, cameras, notepads, maps, compasses, calculators, game consoles, and televisions. As adornments go, I also think that handing over $50…

Obsolete? Not by a long shot, even if by a narrow margin. Wristwatches do tell the time, and a decent mechanical one will do so far far longer than any electronics device, even high end quartz wristwatches.

What do you mean? Original quartz watches are still working, are they not? Do we have a good idea of how long they'll last?

Not having any moving parts would generally mean a quartz movement will be more durable.

Post reply on HN