Sometimes I Just Don't Get It - Like This New Aquatimer

It's hard to fathom (:-)) the negativity in this thread considering no one has seen them in the flesh. It may well change some minds. And often the best stuff takes time to grow on people. Much like real music. If that makes sense?

I quite agree. I guess partly it is dislike of the watch itself, partly it is dislike of the concept. To me, standing still is deterioration, only looking at the past brings nothing. An example is the Big Pilot Perpetual Calendar: to me an extremely beautiful watch, about the best perpetual calendar. Some may not like the concept, but most people just like the watch, and it is a huge success. Of course I do not know whether this Aquatimer will be a huge success, but it will fill a gap, as described by me earlier. Those that are afraid of the image of IWC on the long run: cute, but my prediction is that IWC will strive and be prosperous for a long time, despite the critics. If there is still something like not getting it here: move on, there are other problems that need a solution.

Kind regards,
Paul

Correct. And it is entirely possible that in time the current era of designs will be looked back on as classics that enhanced IWC's heritage and reputation for innovation etc. I am sure there have been plenty of past releases that were not immediately appreciated. Time will tell.

The reverse may also be true. It may very well be that some of the positivity be changed when they see it in the flesh.
BTW, my first impression of the Aquatimer Automatic is good and I am reserving my opinion on that one until I can see it up close and personal. It is a perpetual calendar, in gold, on a dive watch that I find preposterous. This is only my personal opinion. Others may differ, as it is their constitutional right, as it is mine to dislike it.

Perfectly put! +1!

True. But I guess one approach is positive, the other negative. Each to there own.

This is mainly driven by the first impression you get. The Spitfire Chrono and the Doppelchrono two years ago looked fantastic on the pictures, I even ordered the Spitfire Chrono. But when I saw it for real, it was a disappointment - and I know other forum members here who felt the same and also did not buy it in the end. This time, the Aquatimers look not appealing to me, but that might change within the next week, and it would not be the first time that would happen to me. So it is the starting point that decides.

Yes, I can see your point. Who really knows until you try it on your wrist for yourself, in your own time....

People buy Ferrari's. They are chockablock with racing derived technology. 99% of buyers will never race them. Does that make the car a redundant waste of time? Or do the owners enjoy the capabilities of the car on their own level? In their own time? And are happy to do so?

Or.... have I had one tooooo many whiskeys and am I getting carried away??

Probably. :-)

[b]Or.... have I had one tooooo many whiskeys and am I getting carried away??

Probably. :-)[/b]

I don't know how many whiskeys you had. :-) But I believe you are indeed gettting carried away. Your analogy is flawed.
Ferraris are beautiful machines driven at any speed, and even parked in one's garage. I believe it is fair to say that a Ferrari truck, regardless of its top speed or technical sohistication, is a preposterous idea, and that no one at Maranello would consider it.

I think some are making something far more of this discussion than it deserves. I have always felt that the purpose of this Forum is to discuss things related to our favorite brand and company. That can and should allow for both pro and con points of view. It's not a debate where one wins and one loses, it's just a discussion of varying points of view.

When I originally posted my thoughts, I certainly didn't expect everyone to agree with me. I shared my thoughts and hoped to get some interesting discussion going. Mission accomplished! :-)

Some like the watch, some don't.

One envisions a rich guy sitting on a yacht sipping Campari and Soda, another envisions a too rich rapper with a clock around his neck.

None of us are right or wrong, we just have different opinions. Why would we expect different? If we all liked the same things there would only be one flavor of ice cream, and we'd all be chasing the same woman.

Well, is this 49 mm marketing nonsens really worth to argue about it ?

Speaking of nonsence, the petit prince on the moon is really strange as well.

Has nobody at IWC read the book or at least ckecked google ?

The world is turning Disney and there's nothing we can do, Hebe ;-)

Gentlemen,

The Little Prince is NOT on a moon...he stands on a asteroid which is his home. Now some may view this as child abuse for his living conditions or exploiting him on a watch, but none the less, I love my LPP XVII.

Andy

...they have, it might be called a moonphase of course but is clearly referred to as " his planet" in the publication, nothing wrong with this as far as I can see: "Single moon, depicted in the form of the Little Prince standing on his planet" and "the likeable little boy with his mop of blonde hair and fluttering scarf, standing on his tiny planet."

Exactly. I enjoy discussions like this though. I think it's all good natured and there is no right or wrong at the end of the day. I just bought my lotto ticket. If I win, you know what I'm ordering. :-)

+1. It is a lot of fun having these discussions here, and I thank IWC and MF for allowing it here.

Although the watch is not my personal taste,I like that it is technical top notch and I think it's better for IWC to sometimes produce such high-end (perhaps controversial) pieces instead of cheaper watches which may dilute the IWC quality brand.

I agree. These spirited, opinionated, and good natured discussions are good fun. In the end we all agree to disagree.
I hope you win the lottery. :-)