Originally Posted by tribe125
You really don't like CW, do you?
Likes: 1,317
You really don't like CW, do you?
Once in awhile you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.
I’ve always found them a bit nebulous in terms of identity. There’s nothing I can latch onto. I do appreciate the levity of this one, though.
Derivative, obviously, but these look good to me.
Those numerals might be almost too prominent (it’s a 42mm watch) but discretion is hardly the point with a watch like this.
Certainly, I agree. It’s not so much a lack of history, but the lack of identity they suffered through changing logos every 3 months for a few years. I still have this hesitation about them for some reason.
Read my latest IWL blog entry! An Ode To Rule Breaking
That kind of confirmed the impression I had, but before that there was also a high turnover of models without much in the way of family resemblance. A bit scattergun. Some notable and much-admired brands have been like that at times, but it may be more evident in a brand that is establishing itself. It wasn’t an issue for some, though - Nomos, Ming, Farer, Baltic, etc.
Other than Nomos, the brands you mention are 10+ years younger than CW. The market for micros or smaller independent brands was remarkably different in 2005 vs 2015+. If CW was launched today I'd be more critical of a logo or branding change, but for me it's forgivable given what they've been able to accomplish in 20 years. Other than Nomos, I'd put CW above the other brands mentioned.
You nailed it. I totally agree. Plus the new logo is horrible.
Cheers,
Richard
Cheers,
Richard
Cheers,
Richard
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
