Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleetlord
‘Doing just fine” is not the concern.
The concern is moving quite upscale as Seiko clearly is doing, but will that strategy work as they project it to? That is clearly different than doing just fine.
The same Joe Public thought Rolex “costs” were acceptable….it seems more and more do everyday, hence among the reasons why they are so incredibly popular.
|
The real concern in my opinion is that Seiko has started blurring the lines with what used to be Grand Seiko core DNA features. For example, they now have the Spring Drive movement and the zaratsu polishing on their more upscale model lines like the Prospex. So what is Grand Seiko then, what's their identity versus Seiko? Why would I pay several thousands more for a GS if what used to define it can be found on a Seiko as well? On the other hand, a brand like Rolex has been very disciplined and kept Tudor at arm's length from their movement technology, bracelet and clasp design, etc. So you know what you pay for when you buy a Tudor compared to a Rolex and the customer doesn't get confused and less tentative to pull the trigger depending on their budget.
I think Seiko needs to to draw clearer lines between their brands in terms of price ranges and offerings to their consumers because even as someone who is into watches, this looks like a complete mess to me right now.