Talk:The Swatch Group/Archive 1

Untitled
Wear it Right I cannot find any mention of this advertising campaign anywhere on google. Can someone give me some evidence of this before I remove it from the page. Also I believe that Swatch stands for both second watch and Swiss watch. --Cockers 11:03, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

'Blancpain' is a high-range brand, and 'Rado' is middle-range. Also, some brands are missing, as Hamilton, Union Glashütte and F. Piguet. Is it ok if I modify this? --Igorschutz 15:44, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)
 * Yeah, "middle-range", "low-range" and all are quite subjective notions. On the page of the Swatch group, everything is up one level, and the "really beautiful" watches (Breguet...) are labeled "prestige range"; I did it this way because I didn't want to sound too much like Swatch advertising, and also because I tend to like the "Haute horlogerie". Now, if people find the scale I did too disturbing, or think one particular brand should be moved, that's all right. And of course it's OK to add missing information, it's even highly recommanded and regarded ! ;) Thanks and happy editing ! Rama 20:25, 20 Jan 2005 (UTC)

I removed this text :

" produced as a luxury item, by the manufacturer of the Swiss Army knife. It is constructed from quality material and uses intricate machinery, and as such it is usually quite expensive.  Swatches (as they have been promoted) are typically categorized alongside other luxury watches and exquisite jewelry."

It suggest Swatches are expensive luxury Swiss watches. Swatches are plastic watches. Despite been well nicely designed, they're more a fashion objet than a luxury objet.

And they were never designed by the manufacturer of the [[Swiss Army knife].

I have some serious refences about Swatch I will expand later.

I believe that, traditionally, Swatch wristwatches had only analog readouts. The failed decimalised "Internet time" which tried to divide the day into 1000 "Swatch beats" was, I believe, their first try with a watch with a digital display. Is this so? --User:Juuitchan

I believe swatch was swiss industry response to electronic watches. They were originally electronic analog watches designed with cost efficiency in mind but without sacrifiyng reliabilty. 62.212.103.37 22:04 Sep 10, 2002 (UTC)

This whole page needs some serious work. Swatch shops have not closed, the series of quotes that make up the last paragraph have not been attributed.

There's a lot of history and much to add to this section, needs serious work.

I really think someone should include some criticism to this article. For example: -swatches are usually to be regarded as discardable items (they can be hard to fix because post-sale assistance is somewhat poor); -swatch makes styling more important than reliability; -swatches can be expensive for the materials used to make them (I own a beautiful Orion watch with a 17-jewelled, auto-winding, skeleton movement that was not expensive).

Brands, again
I see someone has re-arranged the brands again. I just checked the Swatch web site, which was the original source for segregating the brands into "prestige" etc, and Swatch no longer makes that distinction. I suggest we give a simple alphabetized list. Rees11 (talk) 21:46, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * I agree with the above user.H.al-shawaf (talk) 22:17, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Logo swatchgroup.gif
Image:Logo swatchgroup.gif is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 12:53, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Adjusted some info
i have divided the featured manufacturers acording to the swatch group denomination into prestige ,high range,middle range and basic range

there is also endura which is listed under private label www.endura.ch and jewelry company DYB

Please sign your message next time. I disagree with your rearrangement. You have equated Rado and Longines, as a new division. There is no NPOV definition of prestige but if you look at prices, a brand like Rado is as expensive as one such as Omega and, far more expensive than Longines... --Zoso Jade 14:42, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
 * I have moved Omega down to the high-end range as the prices and availability of Omega watches is most comparable to Rado of all the brands there, and I'll leave the distinctly cheaper Longines brand in, regardless. If you have any further info that might cause the classifications to change, please explicitly state them...  A quick seach on some British jewellwers' sites showed Rado watch prices in the range of about £800 to £6,000.  Omega's were fond ranging from £950 to £6,500.  The cross-over is clearly more than significant, especially when compared with Longines (£300 to £2,500).

TO ZOSO JADE:

Clearly, you have no idea of prestige watch making - it's not just about the price. It's about the history, the following and class. By your reckoning, if tomorrow, I made a watch and called it Zoso, with lots of incrusted diamonds in it, and priced it at £10,000, then clearly that would be a prestige brand? Like me, you know that's bull.

And I suppose that ("following" and "class") is NPOV? If you read my comments I did not say price = Prestige - I said for the purposes of a NPoV this is the only plausible definition. Everything you said is not relevant to that point. Prestige should not come into play for this article.--Zoso Jade (talk) 15:56, 21 March 2011 (UTC)