Originally Posted by T3F
I think that I came in a little too hot yesterday, and though I stand by everything I said, I do regret delving into any personal details of Austen. I only did so to illustrate why I thought AP's choice of him as an ambassador (I'm using this term loosely -- both AP itself and all articles on this mentioned him as collaborating on this, so he is a "de facto" ambassador if not an "official" one with that title like the golfers, for instance, are), but I reread my post and it definitely came off as salty towards him and as a bit of a personal attack when that wasn't my intent. He genuinely seems nice, I would do the exact same thing if AP chose me to collaborate on a U.S. edition (though that would be a horrible choice on their part), and I have absolutely no issue with him at all. My issue is entirely with AP here.
I do think that there's sort of two groups of people that participate in the AP forum here: the "old guard" that has a great relationship with AP and is treated wonderfully, and relative newcomers like me that really like AP's watches but have had a tough experience breaking into the brand and are becoming frustrated. Overall, this release really isn't a big deal at all -- AP released a new version of a watch and worked with one of its clients on the design. This watch alone will hardly affect anything. I think a lot of you that fall into the "old guard" category have this view, which is absolutely fair. Additionally, from everything I've heard, it sounds like AP does an absolutely phenomenal job of taking care of VIPs, and because of this, it's probably hard for those of you that have such a great experience with the brand to understand or believe that if you're outside of "the circle," you're basically ignored, and it's not as simple as being nice or buying watches to break into it. For the record, I have nothing against you guys and I'm not attacking you at all -- I hope that I can get my relationship sorted out with AP and join "the circle", and I probably will, even if it takes a few years.
For those of us that are frustrated with AP and are essentially not valued at all as customers, this was a frustrating release, as it's yet another watch that we have absolutely no chance of getting, and it seems like AP's taunting us. I've spent a solid chunk of change with them and can't even get them to return my calls for a steel or rose gold PC, which have been out for years and sell for under retail on the secondary market, let alone any of these new releases that are ultra-limited. It's annoying to me, and probably many others, that they chose to focus resources on developing this watch, which included the creation new tooling (the HODINKEE article said they would've had to in order to create this in full titanium), instead of simply expanding capacity on existing models and giving those of us that have been waiting forever an opportunity to buy something. They probably could've made 200 or so steel or gold PCs for the same effort that it took to manufacture 88 of these, and that likely would've ensured that everyone who currently wants one and has the money would get one. This frustration undoubtedly bled into my assessment of the watch and the collaboration, and again, while I do stand by everything I said, I know that I wouldn't have made such a big deal about it if I wasn't already annoyed with AP.
My point here is that the "truth" about this watch probably lies somewhere in between the two sides. I, and others on my side, overreacted in coming out with extreme vitriol. That being said, I still don't think this release was the greatest look for AP, and I hope that someone from AP is reading this post (I know you guys look at the forums) and at least sees and understands why some of us think that.
|