Tim_M
1274
A great feat of research and well documented, but perhaps a bit too much exasperation expressed
Sep 09, 2023,15:36 PM
This is great stuff from a historical perspective. Perezscope articles on the histories of old watches are the gold standard for vintage collectors and authors writing on the topic. I know I'll update my YouTube videos with full credit to include the correct launch year of 1955 when offering background color for modern Fifty Fathoms models that I review.
That said, the indignant huff that seems to underpin the whole article bubbles to the surface (puns intended!) at the end, and I think it's feigned rage. Watch marketing isn't life and death stuff, and the sand is constantly shifting beneath origin claims of the FF, Cartier Pasha, Breitling Navitimer, various Panerai lineages, and many others. The link between any historical hyperbole and the luxury products you buy today is absolutely zero, and getting hot under the collar over origin claims is like scoffing at the unlikely images of fighter pilots, pro divers, and extreme athletes that populate the advertisements of ALL sports watches -- it's just as dishonest. I understand the joy of discovery, but we're talking toys for boys, and the stakes are low unless you're bidding on some early piece at auction.
As an amateur historian of modern watches and a marketer, I've always focused on facts and specifications of the individual machine, because those don't change. It's MUCH easier to describe measured and tested features of a watch than to rely on second (third?) hand accounts of things that happened 60-70 years ago in foreign countries. It's different perhaps for vintage collectors. Curated history and market pricing of any given model are always in flux, and anybody who puts too much stock in them can wind up falling through thin ice.
Best,
Tim