
AndrewD's comprehensive analysis of the 'Association Game' provides a fascinating look into how luxury watch brands are perceived by collectors. By surveying PuristS members, AndrewD uncovers which specific watches and lines are most strongly linked to various manufacturers, offering valuable insights into brand recognition and the power of iconic designs within the horological community.
Hi All
Thanks to the 22 PuristS who contributed their lists in the post below. The aim was to see which watches or watch lines we associated with each company. There will be many influences on our answers ranging from advertising, discussions on purists and other watch sites (do you think there is such as thing as horological peer pressure?), favourite watches (perhaps that we own) and iconic pieces like the Speedmaster and Royal Oak.
The Table below ranks the 5 most common responses for each brand and provides the percentage of people who voted for that selection. I have also included the proportion of respondents who failed to provide a response for that company in the “No” column.
I will make a few observations and you can add your own comments.
The “classics’ like the Speedy, Reverso, RO are well represented. If we combine RO and ROO then 19 of the 22 who voted for Audemars Piguet chose this line. Obviously iconic, but perhaps a problem for AP if tastes should shift.
Some brands seem to have issues with recognition, particularly of individual watches. The companies that had the highest rate of “No response” were Jaquet Droz (43%) and Harry Winston (21%).
While the Resonance was the most popular choice amongst the Journe pieces, it was the ‘first generation’ tourbillon with remontoir that figured prominently in that group rather than the Dead Seconds.
The only watch where the case shape was singled out was the Roth elipsocurvex.
Richard Mille had the widest ‘spread’ of nominations with RM001, 004, 005, 009, 010, 012 and 016 all receiving one vote each.
Breguet seem to have a lot of undifferentiated tourbillions, but the La Tradition is an important watch in their range.
There were a few interesting individual responses to some of the brands such as “high tech” for RM, “tradition” for Patek, “bling” and “diamond rings” for Harry Winston, “recognised world wide” for Rolex, “old company” for VC and “interesting dials” for Jaquet Droz. Obviously from the non-Paneristi among us, but many found the OP watches to be much the same: “any one will do”.
And I should thank GEO for including the Cartier Santos (Dumont) in his list.
So what impressions do you take from these results?
Andrew

Richard Mille RM001 Tourbillon
The RM001 represents Richard Mille's inaugural tourbillon reference, produced from 2001 to 2005. This reference establishes the foundational characteristics of the RM 001 series within the brand's collection, featuring the manual-winding RM001 caliber in a compact tonneau-shaped case.
The 38mm titanium case houses the manual-winding RM001 movement, protected by sapphire crystal and rated to 50 meters water resistance. The skeletonized dial construction reveals the movement architecture, while the manual caliber delivers a 70-hour power reserve. The watch is completed with a rubber strap.
This reference appeals to collectors seeking Richard Mille's early production pieces, particularly those focused on the brand's tourbillon complications. The combination of titanium construction, compact 38mm sizing, and skeletonized presentation positions the RM001 as an entry point into Richard Mille's technical watchmaking approach during the brand's formative production years.
. . . would tend to confirm their "limitless limited edition" approach to marketing ;-). The unexpected result was the high level of ambivalence for J D, which I would find troubling if I were responsible for their marketing. The other notable results are the overwhelming votes in favor of the Fifty Fathoms for BP, the Reverso for JLC, and especially the Happy Diamonds for Chopard, which is an extraordinary result considering the paucity of interest in women's watches on this forum. What intrigu
Hi Art, The spread of the 22 votes on GO were as follows: Panograph (4 votes), Senator Sixties (4) Senator Navigator (3), Senator (not further specified, 3), Senator Messein (2), Panomatic (1), Panomatic Lunar (1), PanoRetrograph (1), PanoInverse (1) and two with no responses. Are you at all surprised at the strong vote of confidence in the Senator series? Andrew
. . . generic Senator lines to be separate entities, Andrew, which makes the tight grouping all the more remarkable. That the discontinued Panograph received a substantial number of votes is also worthy of comment. I expected the PML to receive the lion's share of the votes, but it received only a solitary mention . . . intrigued, Art
... that "typical" for GO. Maybe this also reflects the strong emphasis GO put on the Senator lines during the last few years, while the time before was dominated by the Pano models. Regards, Marcus
This thread is active on the Horological Meandering forum with 12 replies. Share your knowledge with fellow collectors.
Join the Discussion →