Monday, December 6, 2010

“It's only arrogance if you're wrong”

Luxury means exclusivity! We could call it bourgeoisie or maybe also arrogance. However, somebody might wonder if nowadays it is still possible to stay this arrogant. It is a fact that traditional ways to reach people, or at least younger generations, have radically changed. They have changed enough to force every brand to follow the social platform phenomenon. But luxury brands did not, at least not with the same effort, keeping their conservatism as if it was their main asset.

Can luxury brands really afford to resist to this fashion? Aren’t they going to lose their appeal on new generations of customers?

What do you think? Are they wrong?

16 comments:

  1. It is all a matter of priorities. I'd say for 75% of westerners, if they want to own one of these masterpieces, they can. They may have to settle for a vacation close by or for a cheaper car or for less restaurant dining. But they can afford a nice watch, if they really want to.
    In that sense, I do not consider it a sign of arrogance to own such a watch but more a question of taste and priorities.
    It might be a good idea to use social media to connect people that share the passion for nice, quality objects. I am sure there are a lot of others that somehow would like to own a nice watch but do not consider it adequate. Showing them, that there are others thinking this way, will encourage them…

    ReplyDelete
  2. by the way...
    I am missing Jaeger Le Coultre. I really believe they make some of the finest timepieces around.

    ReplyDelete
  3. You are right, but we had to choose the first 8 watch luxury brands included in the list of interbrand's most valuable brands (2009) :)

    ReplyDelete
  4. Ok, maybe they are afraid of losing their upper-class exclusivity image if they interact too much with everyone (which would be the case if they use social media) but i think it could also be a great opportunity for them, making people notice their brands. maybe nowadays social media are mostly used by a bunch of young people, but in the future some of them will be the target of the brands.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yep that's it: a bunch of young people ;) but as you said they will be the target... The thing is that maybe they (i mean the overall industry) should wait a little bit to reach them, otherwise the risk is that such product could become just an another "caprice", like the new mobile phone...nothing about legend, history or tradition.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Luxury watches market...I see...never got it completely...I mean, we all kinda frustrated from the time passing by aren't we? Still, we find luxurious, to have a small magnifying lens in order to better show you the date??? So I actually don't see how could they ever be afraid of loosing anything, since it seems they've lost their intellect a lot of time ago...;)
    Oh, and by the way, luxury does not mean exclusivity, it is the word we use instead of "useless product that will gain social consensus and status" :)

    ReplyDelete
  7. Swiss Watch MasterpieceDecember 6, 2010 at 7:45 PM

    Dear Gabriele Scanziani

    Luxury watches are not just an accessories or as you say "small magnifying lens" they are a complicated mechanical instrument that not only shows time such mechanism as perpetual calendar, tourbillon or at least a power reserve mechanism. None of this functions are programmed electronically. Mechanical movements use an escapement mechanism to control and limit the unwinding and winding parts of a spring, converting what would otherwise be a simple unwinding into a controlled and periodic energy release. That is a basic explanation of why merely half the world is fascinated by luxury timepieces for over 150 years now. However, we appreciate your opinion and value your input into the discussion it shows the other prospective of the watch industry.

    Best Wishes

    ReplyDelete
  8. Very right SWM!!!

    ReplyDelete
  9. very true - humans are never immaterial. Status symbols like a nice flat, a gorgeous car or even a overpriced watch are our daily occurrence. In some way useless like a pet elephant, but to be honest - I like it!

    ReplyDelete
  10. It can't do any harm to use social media platforms as a form of advertisement. But I personally would never follow any of these brands on FB or Twitter anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I must disagrre with the previous posting; in my opinion one common error that any brand can do if/when they decide to join any social media and/or make a homepage is that it loses peoples interest if the homepage, blog, FB or similar isn't kept up to date and generates newsletters, competitions and so on. In todays fast moving world you only have seconds to catch peoples attention and a poorly constructed or ill maintained homepage will soon be abandoned and never opened again.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Okay guys staying on topic, I would like to say that in the case of luxury watch brands, as those which you have listed, that spend millions on marketing research and PR, I'm pretty sure they know what they are doing, who their target audience is and how to reach them. However, for the sake of discussion, lets say that maybe I have the tools or the arrogance to voice an opinion on whether or not, what they are doing is "right." And I say....... of course they are right. Exclusivity is such an important part of who they are and their overall appeal, that they cant use social mediums that appeal to the masses, or rather they can do whatever they want, but whether or not this would help them reach their target audience, is another question entirely. To buy one of these watches the first thing you need is money and a lot of it. Imagining that you have a certain amount of money, you then estimate a figure you are willing to spend and then you choose a watch. I'm pretty sure that Patek Philippe doesn't really care if you know about their existence, if you can barely afford a Swatch. There is a reason that Ferrari or Lamborghini does not make a family car, or something that you can afford on a minimum wage, because you can bet that if they start to do so, the sale of their luxury sport models will suffer. Nor do they advertise in OK or teen vogue magazine, sure a lot of people read it but I'm pretty sure teenage girls are not the audience they are aiming at. Most people that spend time on blogs are not their target audience. Talking about "mechanisms" or "small magnifying lens" does not pertain to why people buy expensive watches. In fact somebody might inadvertently dissuade them from a purchase by pretty much calling them idiots as Gabriele did. A watch is first and foremost a status symbol exactly like an expensive car or an expensive residence, except you wear it on your wrist. So even if you're not in the mood to invite strangers back to your apartment, or for a ride in your Rolls Royce you can still make a pretty loud statement. Secondly, its a symbol of style. Somebody chooses a Rolex with diamond bezels, others a Blancpain Grand Complications, both say that you are rich but in different ways and to different people. Ill leave you with that and the fact that Patek Philippe should not be in the same category of exclusivity as Tag Heuer, just like Ferrari shouldn't be in the same list with Ford.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Okay guys staying on topic, I would like to say that in the case of luxury watch brands, as those, which you have listed, that spend millions on marketing research and PR, I'm pretty sure they know what they are doing, who their target audience is and how to reach them. However, for the sake of discussion, lets say that maybe I have the tools or the arrogance to voice an opinion on whether or not, what they are doing is "right." And I say....... of course they are right. Exclusivity is such an important part of who they are and their overall appeal, that they cant use social mediums that appeal to the masses, or rather they can do whatever they want, but whether or not this would help them reach their target audience, is another question entirely. To buy one of these watches the first thing you need is money and a lot of it. Imagining that you have a certain amount of money, you then estimate a figure you are willing to spend and then you choose a watch. I'm pretty sure that Patek Philippe doesn't really care if you know about their existence, if you can barely afford a Swatch.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Who cares about status symbols anyway?

    ReplyDelete
  15. I think that having a Rolex is like having a nice dress, it is not for everyone and you must know how to wear it

    ReplyDelete
  16. How do you wear a Rolex properly then?

    ReplyDelete