Grand Seiko Opinions?

[incontrol]

A Grand Seiko will always be part of my collection! The fit, finish and attention to detail is second to none. Here is my SBGE021 LE, the green dial, lume and overall operation is amazing. The green dial changes from black to a vibrant green depending on lighting. Oh did I forget to say it is one of my favorite watches!

[madmax21]

Originally Posted by PJ S

I think you’re talking just about the lugs and bracelet, which I’ll give you that if you look at it fleetingly.
If there was one thing I wouldn’t mind GS being compared with TAG over, is their deployant, although it does mean an almost too thin strap.
I’ll give credit where it’s due – TAG Heuer sure can design a nice looking watch, but unfortunately their reliability doesn’t match with the looks and pricing.

I definitely do agree with you regarding the dependability of Tag Heuer.

[madmax21]

Originally Posted by incontrol

A Grand Seiko will always be part of my collection! The fit, finish and attention to detail is second to none. Here is my SBGE021 LE, the green dial, lume and overall operation is amazing. The green dial changes from black to a vibrant green depending on lighting. Oh did I forget to say it is one of my favorite watches!

Beautiful watch I'm looking into getting one in the near future my next watch will definitely be a GS

[Psmith]

Originally Posted by incontrol

A Grand Seiko will always be part of my collection! The fit, finish and attention to detail is second to none. Here is my SBGE021 LE, the green dial, lume and overall operation is amazing. The green dial changes from black to a vibrant green depending on lighting. Oh did I forget to say it is one of my favorite watches!

Beautiful

[daveathall]

[Foxman2k]

Some eye candy of my current grand Seikos

The HAQ is incredible. From setting it when daylight savings went into effect through yesterday, it lost 1 second.

The spring drives are equally as incredible - took my super spring drive 21 days to lose 1 second.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[incontrol]

Originally Posted by madmax21

Beautiful watch I'm looking into getting one in the near future my next watch will definitely be a GS

Originally Posted by Psmith

Beautiful

Thanks very much!

[madmax21]

Originally Posted by Tseg

... the corner street vendor in NYC selling them next to the Rolex... ?

in fairness we really don't know where any watch is made in terms of components. I've been told that a in percentage can be made elsewhere, and still call to watch a Swiss made watch I would think the same holds true for the Japanese watches

[Maxy]

Just checkout these micro close up shots of GS SBGA129 from this instagram(http://instagram.com/watchdxb/) - the special Snowflake. You would want to believe that's the closest possible dial creation for the term - light snowfall and its patterns. It looks real snow

[Tseg]

Many watch companies have interesting dial treatments, but Grand Seiko, in particular, have some exquisite texture. How is it done? Brushed on? Sprayed on? Chemical treatment to dial coating? Do all (nicer) watches start with a brass dial and then get added to? Any good videos on how textured dials are created?

[Foxman2k]

I believe the above is a two plate for the 8 steps needed

[fmc000]

Originally Posted by Maxy

Just checkout these micro close up shots of GS SBGA129 from this instagram(http://instagram.com/watchdxb/) - the special Snowflake. You would want to believe that's the closest possible dial creation for the term - light snowfall and its patterns. It looks real snow

Thos amazing pictures show also the absolute perfection of the hands and of the applied indexes.

[Psmith]

Another nice dial shot (SBGE015)...

[tom2517]

Originally Posted by daveathall

You are confusing a Marinemaster with a Grand Seiko, it i not, the equivalent Grand Seiko to a Rolex sub costs about the same. Simple as that.

I am not confused, you just don't understand what I am talking about.

Go back 10 years and look at the MSRP of Seiko Marinemaster SBDB001 ($5000 USD) and Rolex Sub's MSRP (~$4525), they are very close. So 10 years ago one could say they are at the same level.

But now Rolex Sub has doubled in price (~$8550) and yet SBDB001 is still the same price as it was 10 years ago ($5000), and because Sub has doubled in price, so SBDB001 is no longer in the same league?

If Seiko had the brand power of Rolex and could raise the price of SBDB001 every year like Rolex, the Marinemaster SBDB001 would be as expensive as Rolex Sub is today.

Heck, if Rolex keeps raising prices, in 10 more years the Sub will be a 17k USD watch and Seiko will have to come up with another brand because the GS diver ($5700) will no longer be in the same league.

Hopefully by that time you won't be saying "you are confusing a GS diver with 'Great Grand Seiko', it is not, the equivalent 'Great Grand Seiko super duper diver' to a Rolex sub cost about the same, simple as that".

FYI The new version of SBDB001 is SBDB011, and the MSRP is now actually $4500 USD, 500 dollar less, how about that. The same watch is now cheaper than it was 10 years ago, hence my point of Seiko just doesn't have the pricing power of Rolex. 10 years ago SBDB001 competes against Rolex Sub, now it competes with Tudor........

[powerfunk]

Originally Posted by tom2517

Go back 10 years and look at the MSRP of Seiko Marinemaster SBDB001 and Rolex Sub's MSRP, they are very close. So 10 years ago one could say they are at the same level.

But now Rolex Sub has doubled in price...If Seiko had the brand power of Rolex and could raise the price of SBDB001 every year like Rolex, the "Marinemaster SBDB001" would be close to as expensive as Rolex Sub is today.

The value of the yen has dropped 1/4 vs. CHF in the past decade. But anyway, the MM300 *is* pretty much on the level of a Sub. Outstanding fit and finish. The GS, probably a level above.

Literally nobody has the brand power of Rolex; to me it's a straw man argument to question why other watch companies don't behave like them. Rolex has also experienced a unique explosion in popularity in the past decade that resulted in doubled prices. There hasn't been a price increase in two and a half years in the US, so even Rolex isn't raising prices "every year."

Both companies charge what they can. Rolex is more popular so they charge more. That doesn't mean Seiko is doing anything wrong; they don't have to be more popular than Rolex to be successful. Regardless, I'd be surprised if Rolex prices double vs. Seiko again anytime soon.

[daveathall]

Originally Posted by tom2517

I am not confused, you just don't understand what I am talking about.

Tom, you are trying to compare a Marinemaster with a Grand Seiko, it is not and it is not priced as such. The whole thread is about the Grand Seiko.

Originally Posted by tom2517

Hopefully by that time you won't be saying "you are confusing a GS diver with 'Great Grand Seiko', it is not, the equivalent 'Great Grand Seiko super duper diver' to a Rolex sub cost about the same, simple as that".

I am not confusing anything, look on a Grand Seiko Diver, it says "Grand Seiko" (would you believe that) and is about the same price as a Rolex Sub.

Look on a Seiko Marinemaster, it does not say and has never said Grand Seiko.

Why have you even bothered to quote prices from a watch that is not in this topic?

Where did you get the "Great Grand Seiko" name from, perhaps you are making things up.

I suggest you compare like for like, a Grand Seiko to a Rolex Sub and not the non related watch (MM) you quoted.

[tom2517]

Originally Posted by powerfunk

The value of the yen has dropped 1/3 vs. CHF in the past decade. But anyway, the MM300 *is* pretty much on the level of a Sub. Outstanding fit and finish. The GS, probably a level above.

Literally nobody has the brand power of Rolex; to me it's a straw man argument to question why other watch companies don't behave like them. Rolex has also experienced a unique explosion in popularity in the past decade that resulted in doubled prices. There hasn't been a price increase in two and a half years in the US, so even Rolex isn't raising prices "every year."

Both companies charge what they can. Rolex is more popular so they charge more. That doesn't mean Seiko is doing anything wrong; they don't have to be more popular than Rolex to be successful. Regardless, I'd be surprised if Rolex prices double vs. Seiko again anytime soon.

Don't really care about currencies because the yen also fluctuated agains the USD in the past decade, but Seiko never changed the price of SBDB001. Swiss just likes to use currency as one of the excuses to keep raising prices, but did they ever reduce price if the currency went the other way? Never.

I highly doubt Rolex can double this quickly again but was just making a point since Dave just doesn't seem to get it. He seems to use the current price point as the guide to what level the watches are at.

You are right, many do think MM300 is on the level of the Sub, though it doesn't run as accurately as the Sub and doesn't have sapphire crystal.

[daveathall]

Originally Posted by tom2517

Don't really care about currencies because the yen also fluctuated agains the USD in the past decade, but Seiko never changed the price of SBDB001. Swiss just likes to use currency as one of the excuses to keep raising prices, but did they ever reduce price if the currency went the other way? Never.

I highly doubt Rolex can double this quickly again but was just making a point since Dave just doesn't seem to get it. He seems to use the current price point as the guide to what level the watches are at.

You are right, many do think MM300 is on the level of the Sub, though it doesn't run as accurately as the Sub and doesn't have sapphire crystal.

Tom, I do get it, but you are not comparing like for like watches. I personally think that the MM 300 is superb but not in the same league as the Rolex sub, I agree with the reasons you quoted.

[tom2517]

Originally Posted by daveathall

Yes you are, very. You are trying to compare a Marinemaster with a Grand Seiko, it is not and it is not priced as such. The whole thread is about the Grand Seiko, do you deny that?




I am not confusing anything, look on a Grand Seiko Diver, it says "Grand Seiko" (would you believe that) and is about the same price as a Rolex Sub.

Look on a Seiko Marinemaster, it does not say and has never said Grand Seiko.

Why have you even bothered to quote prices from a watch that is not in this topic?

Where did you get the "Great Grand Seiko" name from, perhaps you are making things up.

I suggest you compare like for like, a Grand Seiko to a Rolex Sub and not the non related watch you quoted.

Look, of course there is no great grand seiko, you don't get the joke do you?

Do you even know what SBDB001 is? It was actually priced higher than the Sub in 2005. It has a titanium case with Spring Drive and rated 600M.

I know this is a thread on GS, but I was making a point that the Sub used to be at the price point of Marinemaster SBDB001, so I was comparing "like for like".

But you kept on insisting only GS can compare to the Sub because they cost similar, well that's because the Sub has doubled in price.

What if in a few more years Rolex raised the price of the Sub to over 10k? What then?

[tom2517]

Originally Posted by daveathall

Tom, I do get it, but you are not comparing like for like watches. I personally think that the MM 300 is superb but not in the same league as the Rolex sub, I agree with the reasons you quoted.

Dave, I know GS diver and Marinesmaster are different, and yes nowadays GS diver competes with the Sub.

But in 2005 there's no GS diver, there's only SBDB001 with sapphire crystal, titanium case, spring drive, and 600M rated depth, and it listed at $5000 USD and competes with the Rolex Sub.

So they were competing against each other, they were at the same price level at one point, but because Rolex's ability to raise prices, the Sub rose above the SBDB001 price bracket.

Seiko doesn't have Rolex's brand power, it can't raise prices without changing something. If Seiko had the power, it could have just raised SBDB001's price to match the Sub, but Seiko can't, no one would buy a $6000+ Marinemaster. So that's why there's a GS diver, with its more refined case, finish, bracelet and etc., and a higher price.

I was not wrong comparing SBDB001 against the Sub, for a time they were the same price level, they were like for like.

By the way, MM300 is not SBDB001, MM300 is SBDX001, they are far apart, SBDB001 is double the price of MM300. I am now thinking maybe the whole time you thought I was talking about MM300 (SBDX001)....and hence your strong reaction about me comparing MM300 with the Sub.

[Tseg]

Originally Posted by tom2517

Dave, I know GS diver and Marinesmaster are different, and yes nowadays GS diver competes with the Sub.

But in 2005 there's no GS diver, there's only SBDB001 with sapphire crystal, titanium case, spring drive, and 600M rated depth, and it listed at $5000 USD and competes with the Rolex Sub.

So they were competing against each other, they were at the same price level at one point, but because Rolex's ability to raise prices, the Sub rose above the SBDB001 price bracket.

Seiko doesn't have Rolex's brand power, it can't raise prices without changing something. If Seiko had the power, it could have just raised SBDB001's price to match the Sub, but Seiko can't, no one would buy a $6000+ Marinemaster. So that's why there's a GS diver, with its more refined case, finish, bracelet and etc., and a higher price.

I was not wrong comparing SBDB001 against the Sub, for a time they were the same price level, they were like for like.

By the way, MM300 is not SBDB001, MM300 is SBDX001, they are far apart, SBDB001 is double the price of MM300. I am now thinking maybe the whole time you thought I was talking about MM300 (SBDX001)....and hence your strong reaction about me comparing MM300 with the Sub.

Times change as well as product positioning. I would think today a Seiko MM has the quality of Tudor Pelagos and a GS SBGA0031 Diver has the quality of a Rolex Sub.

With that said, I would hope GS prices below Rolex for the mere fact they do not have a $100M+ annual advertising budget to support... and they know they have only had global reach for a handful of years so have to build the brand up slowly and methodically as only an Asian brand can.

It is usually difficult for watch brands of 2 different price strata to truly compete against each other... if the customer had the $$ they would typically trade up to the higher cost brand if truly debating between the 2 watches usually due to a perceived quality difference, yet there is a certain Rolex customer segment that debates between the brands and will choose Grand Seiko on merit alone (+ the other design intangibles). I chose a GS GMT hi-beat SBGJ001 over a Rolex Explorer II Polar... not because of price but because for me the quality was very comparable and the GS GMT look better fit my need than the Rolex. There are good looking $500 watches... when looked at from 2 feet away, but there is a minimum level of fit and finish I require of my "next up watches" and Grand Seiko and Rolex are at the bottom of that consideration set. This is how I know they compete against each other.

BTW, in 2005 Rolex was selling the 16610 Sub, with aluminum bezel, old style bracelet/clasp, etc... So comparing the last generation Rolex pricing to the modern day Sub is also not apples to apples.

[PJ S]

Another factor in the eternally contested Rolex/GS debate, is that GS are entirely hand assembled, and combined with the figures for Credor, Galante, and the Prospex models made at the same Studios, they output around 15K pieces annually.
And with most of what’s made being sold in the JDM, there’s not an awful lot left for the few export markets that can official order Grand Seikos.
Even then, when I spoke with Seiko UK, it was revealed that not all models are on the export list, including those with a different coloured dial – so the trade price differed too.
Bit of a weird set-up, but that’s how it is, apparently.

Now compare that to Rolex’s 850K+ annual production, which pales to insignificance with the number of watches the 3 main Japanese brands produce each year.
As I’ve probably said before (elsewhere), there’s more than one way to skin a cat. Or put another way, many small drop make a full bucket.

Grand Seiko will never really compete directly with Rolex, as the typical buyer for each brand is very different. Forget about us lot on forums like this – we’re not the target market.

[Tseg]

Originally Posted by PJ S

Another factor in the eternally contested Rolex/GS debate, is that GS are entirely hand assembled, and combined with the figures for Credor, Galante, and the Prospex models made at the same Studios, they output around 15K pieces annually.
And with most of what’s made being sold in the JDM, there’s not an awful lot left for the few export markets that can official order Grand Seikos.
Even then, when I spoke with Seiko UK, it was revealed that not all models are on the export list, including those with a different coloured dial – so the trade price differed too.
Bit of a weird set-up, but that’s how it is, apparently.

Now compare that to Rolex’s 850K+ annual production, which pales to insignificance with the number of watches the 3 main Japanese brands produce each year.
As I’ve probably said before (elsewhere), there’s more than one way to skin a cat. Or put another way, many small drop make a full bucket.

Grand Seiko will never really compete directly with Rolex, as the typical buyer for each brand is very different. Forget about us lot on forums like this – we’re not the target market.

Another interesting fact about Grand Seiko... when it is said hand-made, it means each watch is assembled in it's entirety by 1 watchmaker. If that watch comes back for warranty work it is sent directly to the exact watchmaker that built it originally for repair. There's something cool about that.

On another forum there was some data assembled from multiple internet sources about Grand Seiko volume/scale. Since it's international launch in 2010 to Baselworld in 2014 sales had tripled, per a Seiko executive. I can only assume by now they have quadrupled or more. The Spring Drive and Quartz GS are assembled in one facility, the automatic movement watches in another. The latest estimates are automatic watch annual production is approaching 20K-30K units and quartz/spring drive GS is approaching 40K-60K units.

[Highland Ranger]

I just posted a thread about this yesterday and bought the hi beat gmt today.

Brand perception or no, GS is high value for the dollar and I wouldnt be surprised if we are paying a lot more for them over the coming years.

[Foxman2k]

I finally have this beauty coming in tomorrow. Rated basically the same as Patek - +4 / -2!

[Highland Ranger]

the dials are amazing - enjoy

[tom2517]

Originally Posted by Tseg

Times change as well as product positioning. I would think today a Seiko MM has the quality of Tudor Pelagos and a GS SBGA0031 Diver has the quality of a Rolex Sub.

With that said, I would hope GS prices below Rolex for the mere fact they do not have a $100M+ annual advertising budget to support... and they know they have only had global reach for a handful of years so have to build the brand up slowly and methodically as only an Asian brand can.

It is usually difficult for watch brands of 2 different price strata to truly compete against each other... if the customer had the $$ they would typically trade up to the higher cost brand if truly debating between the 2 watches usually due to a perceived quality difference, yet there is a certain Rolex customer segment that debates between the brands and will choose Grand Seiko on merit alone (+ the other design intangibles). I chose a GS GMT hi-beat SBGJ001 over a Rolex Explorer II Polar... not because of price but because for me the quality was very comparable and the GS GMT look better fit my need than the Rolex. There are good looking $500 watches... when looked at from 2 feet away, but there is a minimum level of fit and finish I require of my "next up watches" and Grand Seiko and Rolex are at the bottom of that consideration set. This is how I know they compete against each other.

BTW, in 2005 Rolex was selling the 16610 Sub, with aluminum bezel, old style bracelet/clasp, etc... So comparing the last generation Rolex pricing to the modern day Sub is also not apples to apples.

Exactly, time changes as does product positioning, but they were at one point competing against each other, that was my point. Now the Sub is up there while the SBDB001 competes with Tudor.

But Dave insisted on I should have never compared the SBDB001 against the Sub, he doesn't seemed to know they "were" the same level before.

But now looking back I am pretty sure he thought I was comparing the MM300 agains the Sub. I don't think he knows what the SBDB001 is.

[Oliver37]

I would like to meet your AD! I'd even fly to Seoul to do it.

Originally Posted by dera

I recently walked out from an AD with a 116333 Wimbledon, and sold it for 15% profit a few weeks later. I made 15% even though I bought it BNIB and sold it as a second hand watch. And the buyer got it around 15% cheaper than the ones for sale on TRF today.

If you buy right, you will never lose money on any new Rolex.
Buying right is the problem.

[daveathall]

Originally Posted by tom2517

But now looking back I am pretty sure he thought I was comparing the MM300 agains the Sub. I don't think he knows what the SBDB001 is.

No Tom, you are wrong on that point, I did know what you were comparing, I do know what an SBDB001 is, it was that I just disagree with your logic (and still do). When I mentioned the MM 300 it was in response and agreement to your previous post in the thread about it, that is all.

I still disagree with you but have decided to agree to disagree.

[Psmith]

Originally Posted by Foxman2k

I finally have this beauty coming in tomorrow. Rated basically the same as Patek - +4 / -2!

Congrats - a beauty indeed!