And She didnt torn up her shirt... Class indeed ❤❤ 😂😂😂 Jenni Elle's next video: Here is the current situation of "Iced out watches" Nico Leonard: *stops ticking*
I once made the mistake of leaving a Hublot in the passenger seat. I was gone only a few minutes and a criminal smashed my car window and left two more.
I thought I was the only one who went through such unpleasant experience . The iPod was stolen but I found these Hublots and Franck Müllers disposed in my car. I never told my wife or anyone about this humilation - it was so awkward
@@resuscitationpicture I’ve heard that in some of the worst parts of south London criminals have been known to hold their victims at knife point to force an Hublot onto their wrist. I can’t even imagine the trauma and humiliation that would cause. -That’s why these crimes often go unreported.
@@rev.andyh.1082 How can humans develop such brutality? At WEMPE they have specially trained therapists to overcome such trauma. They will tell you these guys had a toxic childhood as they were forced to wear undersized velvet suits for church - on every single Sunday.
When I was in the market for a new luxury watch a couple of years ago, I got really bad service from Rolex. At hublot, I got treated like a valued customer and I really liked the big bang and ended up buying one. No intentions to sell it and I am very happy with it, regardless of what others think, as I bought it for me.
had a similar experience just recently, i think the rolex guys are a little exhausted of ppl who cant afford the watches coming into the shop, and not actually having any watches to sell. breitling guy was great though, super experienced, clearly a watch enthusiast, super nice.
I think one of the major reasons why Hublot is really hated universally is the price point of their watches. They are toe to toe with some of the top watch makers out there, having only a fraction of their legacy or innovation. It is mostly like buying a decent dish, at at a michelin star price.
@@horusfalco8837 Definately not Sir. They are also overpriced AF. Though I would admit, RM's do somewhat justify their price point by creating that genre of overpriced highly engineered watches.
Sharing the parts is like sharing individual gears, screws & stones - perfectly fine. However sharing the whole engine would have caused questions. The movement of the watch is the key point of engineering innovation. If the company “outsource” that part, they basically just sell the design and finishing. Which might be totally fine for many people - there is market for Brabus after all.
On point #2, if heritage is necessary, we're essentially saying new luxury watch brands are doomed before they start. I don't think that's fair. As long as a brand can embrace that it is new and modern I think we should be willing to give it a shot. The brands that are worse to me are those that are sold to a conglomerate who then revives old model names and tries to steal heritage from another group of people who used the name decades ago.
Yep, it's the same as saying a person cannot become president simply because they are common people and not from a family line of career politicians. Heritage matters but to neuter competition just because the lack of it kinda sucks imo
Heritage should be necessary if your watch costs the same as a used car. Nobody has an issue with most modern luxury brands because they don't charge $10-15k for a watch. Take a look at Christopher Ward. They're innovative, good looking, and offer excellent value for money. Hublot is more expensive than C. Ward and have gaudy ugly designs.
If you REALLY like some of the big, tacky Hublot designs, just buy a quartz Invicta, swap out the movement for a high quality mechanical, and keep the change.
@@itsthejdquest If someone gifted me a Richard Mille I wouldn't even bother to take it out of the box and just sell it. I'd rather use that money to buy a couple reversos or something actually wearable.
The "quartz crrisis" is largely a later Swiss marketing myth to sell "mechanical has soul"(and bigger margins). It was actually the Swiss who had invested heavily in quartz in the 1960's and saw it as the future. Seiko got the first quartz to market, just, but it was little more than a prototype, made in tiny numbers and cost the same as a family car. A couple of months later the Swiss Beta21 hit the shops(along with the Longines UltraQuartz) in numbers. They were expensive too and seen as cutting edge luxury. In the early 1970's the top of the range watches with the highest prices from Swiss brands like Omega, Rolex, AP, Patek, Longines et al were quartz. What caught out the Swiss were _digitals_ invented in the US, improved and made cheaper in Japan. Digital watches were the trend of the late 70's into the 80's. The Swiss were way behind in tech and too expensive. AP and Patek had almost nada to do with the survival of luxury mechanical watches. They were always pretty niche and AP took years to sell their first run of Royal Oaks. The RO and Nautilus were even niche until fairly recently. Go back to watch forums even ten years ago and almost nobody was talking about them. 1970's watches in general were "unfashionable". Both are very much of the moment. One of the big things that saved the Swiss mechanical industry was Swatch and a cheap colourful plastic and quartz fashion watch that sold in huge numbers in the 1980's and gave Swatch a load of cash to refloat their brands and the "mechanical as luxury " marketing.
THIS is your channel, sir. Short informative pieces with the prefix… ‘did you know,’ is much needed in this space and I feel would be lapped up in favour of bunny ears, sunglasses and scripted scandals. I’d subscribe immediately! 🙏😣
@@mr_watchaddict3146 That's very kind of you Mr W. However sadly and unlike Jenni, I've a great face for radio and again unlike Jenni what I know of the current scene could be written on a postage stamp, in big letters, in crayon. 😁 I sub to this channel to get a handle on what's current(and I'm a fellow IttyBittyWristComittee member). It's actually one of the handful of 'Tube watch channels I do watch. Others are either too breathlessly pretentious, or dealers pimping their wares, or middle aged men shouting at each other for some odd reason, or all of the above. 😁
It's a matter of how much effort was put in to make a product. a printed poster from Ikea will never fetch the money that an artist painted. An iphone picture is ALWAYS more clearer than a painted portrait, but anyone can take a picture with a phone. It takes skill and time to paint a picture. An FP Journe Quartz watch can fetch for a lot of money because even though it's quartz, a lot of time and effort was put in to make it. It's a piece of art. A quartz movement from Seiko had 0 minutes of hand making, and can be produced 50k times in 1 day.
@@DonLee1980 There's something to that alright. The very early quartz were more "handmade" than most mechanicals of the time. In some even the circuitry was hand soldered. Though the Grand Seiko quartz today blows the FPJ out of the water on a few points. Still, brands like Rolex and Omega produce watches in their millions on an industrial scale using industrial methods. These are not Old Masters, or hand made by magical Swiss elves in sylvan glades. There's a lot less handmade involved today in a Speedmaster or Submariner than there was in 1970, yet they're significantly more expensive allowing for wages/inflation etc. Brands like Longines, Seiko and Tissot are about the price now as they were back then. Their broad ranges of types and prices are more like back in the day too(Rolex ranges were always pretty narrow. From the 50's on basically an Explorer with different bezels and handsets, in the 60's a chrono that they couldn't give away originally and hard to sell gold dress watches. Even today there are no waiting lists for Cellini) Another thing that changed was back then the brands were all independents, the majority competing for the same customers in jeweller's windows(Patek and the like were very niche). So if you were looking for say a divers watch, the Omega, Rolex, Longines, Doxa, Blancpain etc were lined up together, so unless there were extra features involved, they were all in and around the same prices. If an average good quality divers watch was 200 dollars/pounds then some might be 240, others might be 170. The spread was much narrower and the huge price differences by brand marketing and Swatch/LMVH conglomerate positioning weren't in play like today.
I don't know if you can say that nobody was talking about Patek's and RO's ten years ago. They were still very much talked about in the online watch community (Hodinkee - when it was smaller, aBlogtoWatch, SJX, and etc). It' just more along the lines that the watch market has blown up since then. To say something was niche then when the entire market then was slightly more niche is a tad disingenuous.
I am a big fan of Hublot. I don’t give a f*ck what people say or think. I buy watches that I like. I recently acquired a Big Bang Integral Blue Ceramic 42mm. Love everything about it! I had a Spirit of Big Bang Ceramic Blue a few years ago. The honeymoon phase never wore off on that one. And it was my most complimented watch ever.
Most people hate them because they go with what they’re told. Most people are sheep and when you look at these people they’re always dull and boring looking. Who would take fashion advice from Nico. He looks like a fat squirrel! Everyone loves Rolex yet everyone I know has a Rolex and 99% of these people are chavs!
Love it when you are always so objective and funny at the same time! Too much judgements and too little kindness on internet. Thanks Jenni, for being a glimmer of hope and justice in this cruel internet world! Best wishes from Singapore!
I shopped for a watch without looking at price or brand, and got a Hublot Classic Fusion Ceramic Blue Chronograph 42mm. I come home, google about Hublot, and see all negative search results at the top as if there's an organized hate campaign against Hublot. WTF! These Watches look better than others. End of story. I'm not looking at how super accurate these watches are in telling time. I have my iphone for that. This is a fine piece of beautiful jewelry.
I know a guy with a €26000 Hublot and I told him that his watch was nice and he replied that mine was nice as well (a €250 Dan Henry). If he reacts like this, that’s the only thing that counts because it shows that he just likes watches.
I was looking for a watch with no preconceptions. I saw the Hublot Big Bang in blue and gold and fell in love. My wife bought it for me and I adore it. Fantastic service from Hublot including free service when I stupidly dropped the watch and caused it to stop working. Thoroughly recommend Hublot if it speaks to your taste.
The issue is that brands like Tissot and Longines who also work off ETA based movements, impeccable finish and use similar exotic materials but come in at a significantly cheaper price. Hublot isn't good value for money and that the biggest issue. This is reflected in their used prices. Visceral hate for the brand is a hype machine for sure but honestly, in the "you get what you pay for" stakes Hublot falls flat on its face.
@@Sarvari_Gergo a hublot has a movement that's worth 5% of the entire price, an omega (apart from the moonwatch series) has a on their simplest method a movement that's worth at least 20% of the entire price (speaking of manufacturing cots)
@@kritnicol8546 The Spirit and Big Bangs don't use ETA. Spirits have a skeletonized El Primero 400 (skeletonized and finished by Hublot as HUB4700) for the chronographs. The tourbillon and other versions like the Meca-10 use in house movements too. The Big Bang uses a Unico 2 movement. Inhouse made flyback chrono. Only the entry level Classic Fusion watches use ETA based movements (finished by Hublot). Your statement shows how much you've been drinking the Nikoolaid.
Great video, Jen. Very interesting take on Hublot. I never heard of them until Nico, but I checked them out. At first, their watches reminded me of Invicta, especially the more way out designs. But I expected them to be a few hundred dollars, and was thoroughly shocked by their prices. So it's easy to think of Hublot as Invicta for people with more money than sense. The styles don't appeal to me either, but there are people who buy these, much like people who buy Richard Mille, Patek Phillipe, A. Lange & Sohne, and even the more flamboyant Invicta watches. They want a timepiece that's also a statement piece. I get it. But I also can't help thinking that people who own Hublot are actually enjoying the hate, as if they're an elite group who share something that others don't understand or could never attain. That feeling of exclusivity is the root of luxury.
Yup, I own an Hublot and I love to see the "watch enthusiasts" who dress like farmers whine about movements and shit, while my Hublot fits perfectly with my a little bit more fashionable outfits
@@liv0003 Yep. He was making a general statement about people who buy luxury watches and the distinction isn't about the brand but about people who want and are willing to pay large amounts of money for exclusivity. Which I believe he's saying, isn't him (or her).
If it wasn't for COVID, I never would have found Nico and learned that Hublot is worse than trash. Now all I need is a Jacob & Co Astronomia Tarantoola watch.
I am a watch collector including Patek, Lange, Audemars Piguet and FP Journe -- and I like Hublot, within reason. For me, most Hublots are similar in aesthetics to my Royal Oak Offshore so I don't need "another" piece in that category. When my wife wanted a timepiece however, she liked the "masculine" feel to the 38mm Classic Fusion and we both agreed it was a good one for her. It is certainly a luxury timepiece with a style that spoke to her and a very very good build quality, so, why not? Most people don't even look at our wrists anyway!
Bravo !!! Excellent analysis. A few years back I met a finance guy working at Rolex and he told me that if people knew the manufacturing cost of a Rolex compared to retail….they would feel being robbed. You can dislike hublot because of taste issues…..but if you do it for Nico’s motives, I believe you should walk away from many many top brands….because you’re paying a lot of money for an industrialized product that’s simply is overpriced ? Food for thoughts..
Few years back , I’ve met a guy who’s uncle’s best friend has a friend who owned an electronics shop and one of his employees had a brother who was dating this girl who’s cousin was a finance guy working at Rolex and he said that Rolex watches are worth every penny… What’s the point of your comment? Is it to jump on the hate bandwagon and trash talk Rolex or tell us something that a primary school child already knows?
@@omarion07 the point is that Rolex is overpriced, and Hublot is just doing what Rolex has been doing. When you buy those watches, you pay for the brand advertisment, not the watch
Ive delved deep into the hobby last year and all of yall couldve told me hublot has misaligned screws on the bezel. Thats why i buy seikos; the misalignment, imperfections, and decent reliability for the price match my mood on Monday mornings at work 😂
I consider myself a watch enthusiast. I have a 5 piece collection, and one of those is a Hublot Big Bang Unico Chrono. It is my party watch. I have two watches that are more expensive, and I wear those more oftenly. And I understand, Hublot is not the peak of horology, and it is overpriced, but trust me, over the years, around 100 watches have passed through my watch box, but Hublot stayed. It is my “fuck you” watch. And everyone needs a “fuck you” watch.
I mean they advertise alot in football games and then there are rappers like Jay-Z who mention them in their rap songs so there not completely out of the influencers realm
@@EthanRom That's the right thing to do. People and organisations that believe in their product and care for the opinions of others would strive to do that. Nico put himself in the trash category.
I like the design of Hublot and the size. I have pretty big wrists (21cm) and prefer to wear Watches with 43-46mm and many many of the watches that speak to me are just to small for my preferences. There is of course some Breitling and Panerai but Hublot gives that "unusual" feel. But I agree with you - I too don't really understand the "copycat" tag. The Tissot PRX, the ML Aikon and even the VC Overseas have more in common with the Oak than to classic fusion in my opinion but earn much less hate.
The reason for Hubolt is that it combined all those factors in 1 brand. Some brands have 1 or 2 of those problems, but Hubolt manage to combined them all in one.
The problem with Hublot is that because they started in the 80s they don't have 'heritage' pieces, but also in the 80s no one cared about 'heritage' pieces... it's just that as time moved on all the other brands dumped their 'modern' 80s designs and picked up their 60s designs, Hublot couldn't do that. Most watch 'enthusiasts' basically don't like anything that looks remotely modern, so what should Hublot do? Make something that looks old? They would get even more grief for that. As for price, well how come the Royal Oak gets a free pass on that? Price is a product of what people are willing to pay, and people are obviously willing to pay.
Good point. I also think the 'heritage argument' is spurious in any case. The idea that a new company (life Nomos) can't be 'luxury' because they lack history, while long established brands that have changed ownership so often that they are little more than a badge, somehow can, is ridiculous.
I could listen to Jenni saying Hublot a hundred times. I was interested in purchasing a Hublot until I saw this, very objective. Just purchased a JLC Polaris, H Moser Rose Gold Pioneer and Blancpain Fifty Fathoms to add to my collection based on her recommendations. Thanks Jenni!
I don’t hate Hublot either. But, they don’t speak to me, as well. They get way more hate than they deserve. A luxury watch being hated because it’s overpriced? That’s hilarious! The same person that says that is plopping down 4-5 times retail for a panda Daytona.
Daytonas are indeed ridiculously overpriced on the secondary market, although not for long it seems. But at retail price Rolex certainly offers better value, and it’s kind of silly that some Hublot models with a very basic ETA or Sellita movements have higher RRPs than Rolex.
@@Youthuba sure, my point was that at retail Rolex is actually kind of reasonably priced unlike Hublot. The only problem is the limited supply of Rolex watches and that is indeed their fault and probably intentional.
@@Youthuba it’s true it’s not Rolex fault.. it’s my grandma’s fault cus she created the waiting list and the she makes it a wishlist.. and I’m so sure she’s gonna make it in your dreams list
Those explanations might be the silliest excuses I ever heard to hate a brand. I just love how people with an accent get to see what class is. You buy what you like. Human beings have been flexing since the beginning of time.
Not just Hublot, I'd put Rolex in the same category - status symbols for the insecure flexers...granted some Rolex owners are genuine enthusiasts who value the brand, but in general they are purchased by folks who just want the name recognition.
Rolex has so much genuine heritage and quality and so many other things that Hublot doesn’t have though. I’m definitely not arguing that insecure flexers don’t buy Rolexes as meaningless status symbols because they obviously do, you’re obv right about that. That’s true for pretty much anything expensive. But I def wouldn’t put Rolex and Hublot in the same overall category just because of that. There’s too much that differentiates them
Lol what an ignorant comment. People buy stuff to show off. Duh. You think a person buying a Patek or AP is just to keep to himself? It’s humble bragging. Still a status symbol. You want to be down to earth then just get a seiko
I love Hublot. They are in 80 the watches that start me in the world of watches. I would probably not buy their latest models but the the time for me they were very innovative
Now this is why I like your channel so much. I fell in love with watches just a few years ago. And the first thing I did, as so many others do is to watch reviews and tier lists etc. Everyone hates on Hublot but never ask the question why. For me personally, as I learned is the design, eta and price tag on Hublot that gets me off. But I’m also biased because I’ve been indoctrinated from the start that it is a shit brand. I want more people to answer the question why when reviewing or listing a watch. Why is it good? Why is it not? The industry is so messed up. Everyone is like, buy a Patek, AP, Rolex etc. I mean, a Patek costs more than I earn in a year prior to taxes. It would take me four years to buy something like that and then I can’t buy anything else besides food and paying rent. Kids these days are nuked by the Flex industry. If you can’t afford a Rolex, you’re trashy. Rant over. But I love your content. Really really do.
Owned one that had rubber band, gold case and an emerald green dial. It was a very simple design without a lot of bells and whistles. I got it over 20 years ago and it actually worked pretty well. It was not a bad looking watch. I eventually traded it when I got my first Patek. Don’t really miss it but don’t have any bad feelings about it either. The newer ones I have seen have really gone up in price and look pretty ostentatious. If they ever had a sweet spot, I might have purchased mine during that period.
My boss's boss knew I was a 'watch guy' and excitedly popped into my office to show me his new Hublot that bought. It was some RM looking thing which he 'humble bragged' he only paid 21k for when it was a 30k retail. I had to sit there for 20min as he showed me every detail. The whole time I'm sitting there wearing a Vostok Amphibia with a sailboat on the dial.
And to be clear, ETA movements are fantastic movements. But if you're using someone else's movement, then you're not putting any money into movement R&D ... so then what are you charging $12k or whatever for?
I was gonna say this. Like, I don’t ever see myself wearing Richard Mille, even if I could afford to part with the money. But to call out their lack of heritage overlooks the fact that they make some incredibly complex and impressive watches.
@@wingeren Exactly! ETA movements per se are excellent (all my watches have ETAs or Sellitas, and are even modified), but they didn't cost me a fortune
You hit the nail on the head, Jenni: Hublot’s design language does not speak to me. And if I’m going to spend that much money, it will be on a Bremont.
My main reason for hating Hublot is the value proposition and their claims of using "in house" movements when they were just decorated ETA/Sellita movements.
What watch vloggers and collectors don’t seem to understand is that, not everybody cares about in-house production and brand heritage, a lot of people just like the look and feel of a watch, and buy it exactly for this reason. The watch market largely rests on these people, which is why brands like Hublot that are often called out) are still doing great.
happy to say that i sub on your channel and nico for quite sometime now. on the topic at hand, the power of influencer is really felt by brands in this digital age. at the end of the day, its about personal choice, but thanks to internet we are more educated before making choices. nice vid Jen, keep it up!
I love the design of hublots. The materials good and it feels premium, looks great, and works. Other than the price I don’t see any real problem or reason to hate it. The people buying it make mad cash anyway
if you're interested in 'Trash", consider a Patek 5085 model...then send it to the Henry Stern Watch Agency in NYC (Patek's service center) to correct all of the issues that these watches shipped with. My 5085 looked like it was stamped by a blacksmith, and had so many defects that the service writer filled a page with complaints. Then they put the case in a vise, dented it, scratched the dial, scratched the movement, stripped 2 bracelet screws. So the AD then sent it to Geneve, and they left all of the defects except the bracelet screw, and returned a dented and badly flawed watch. Patek's official response :"Perhaps you are the not the kind of person who should buy a Patek"! Which is why I always dislike lists like the quoted blogger (Nico) puts forth. Much is based on hype and personal supposition, rather than experience.
@@Yorosero You'd be surprised, even companies like Rolex are very bad with service. For first time buyers, you will get treated like shit at most Rolex boutiques.
@@Yorosero I was shocked as well. They used to have a fellow named David Jarrett who ran the HSWA back then and he was an arrogant bastard. (in my opinion) It was only when I posted the pics of the watch on TimeZone, still in the shrink-wrap, with the dents in the case, that he finally admitted that it matched their case-holder vice. Prior to that, he blamed my AD and 100 other things. The dealer accepted a return on the watch and it was only 14 years later that I decided to buy another Patek. I went with a 5712, and now I shudder to realize it needs to have its period service....and I have to send it to NYC....
@@itspapaj4732 You are telling the truth. I had a REF6263 Rolex that I owned since I was a kid and had it serviced a few times at Rolex. The last time (I think it was 1990), they scratched the dial and cracked the bezel. I called to complain and they claimed that I did the damage. I asked them how I could scratch the dial and the guy lost his mind. After he yelled at me for a few minutes, he hung up on me. 10 min later the "VP of Service" called me back to apologize, and sent a shipping label. This time they serviced it like they were mad at it, and ground on of the pushers almost flat and gouged the lug. So, I put the watch away for a decade before deciding to have it restored. Now, I think I'll send to LA Watchworks and have them add back all of the lost metal. In recent times, Rolex also destroyed my brother's 6263 by cracking the bezel, and they have disclaimers galore on their paperwork. You are powerless and 'just a number' to them.
„First of all it’s Rolex“ These days everybody wants a f***ing Rolex is because they want to make money/ stay in their safe! As you would buy the best and newest car you let it stay in the garage… Go an buy some toilet paper just for the reason that your neighbor can’t have it. So dump! I hope the Rolex bubble will burst!
You're spot on. The entire hobby from a price to performance standpoint don't make sense anyway. Folks should just collect what they want and enjoy, and let that be the end of it.
Your 5 reasons are enough for me, and it seems, most. Top reason is their pricing gives me the impression that they’re laughing at their ill-informed customers from their hollowed-out volcano whilst counting their dirty cash. Great vid as always Jenni. I still love you way more than is appropriate.😉
Jenni, I can't speak for most watch enthusiasts, but there is a tier of untouchables. These are watches you would love to own but dare not let anyone know you own them lest you be thought of a snob. But when you have the bling, it's a different story. As for watches, the most endearing to me are the ones I wear the most.
I think it is a combination of factors, it is one of the few brands that match a lot of the points you made... And, for the normal watch enthusiast, who are not in for the status, sometimes it is painful to see how something you have a genuine interest in is co-opted by capitalism to sell overpriced stuff, and yes, it happens to other brands too, but we tend to justify it with history, heritage, or the complexity and challenge of an in-house movement, but if a brand is doing the full status symbol thing and lacks something like that, it hits us in a painful spot, where we can see that the brands that we love are doing it too, even if we justify it... Anyway, i'm happy with my Seiko 5 for now !
The same thing is for most non precious metal watches selling over $10k. A royal oak is no way worth 30-50k, a Richard mille for 10x that. It is all about what your customer base is willing to pay, not about making a fair profit.
@@casualsuede Mmmm, I was thinking the same thing. OP was really close to that, just not quite stitching together that it's the same logic, the difference is that people accept it in one case and not the other, simply because in one case the believe the status is deserved. Personally, I think that status is still a trap with the brands that people respect. The only difference is how you personally feel about it. You still buy it for the name. You wouldn't pay nearly that for another name. And it's funny, once you understand these things, you start to see how it's like that in many industries, with fans surrounding them in internet communities, propping up an inflated value for the products. And yes, people are willing to pay... but yes... companies selling the products do take advantage of that. And the paths that money moves across don't really benefit consumers at all. You get your status piece, they get lots of cash to keep up in a top-level bubble of investing games. And this all tells them that what they're doing is the right way to go... essentially justifying the exorbitant pricing seen on these legacy brands. It's ruined my taste for a lot of fancy things out there. I really couldn't care less if I ever own an AP or a Rolex because I understand that a large chunk of the value is fake. Take away the status from the actual physical watch, and the value drops immensely. In a world with quite a lot of poverty in it, this imaginary value strikes me as something a bit grotesque. I would feel bad even wearing a Rolex in many places. They are all sort of 'tainted' by this mindset that status is valuable. It's something we as buyers don't really benefit from, yet continually not only make excuses for, but support.
Sorry for just now getting around to seeing this one, but I really love and respect that you took such a stance on such a controversial topic on the internet today! Well worded, and such a great video!
The issue is how much they charge for their watches based on the 'quality' you get for that money. If they were half the price, I doubt the hate would be as strong. Just my opinion, but if people like them and own them, that's fantastic, to each their own. The great thing about this hobby is there is something for everyone.
i mean, do you get 80 000$ of quality in an AP RO ? I know ressell value yada yada yada, but do you, really ? Even the cost of production, if you'd think it cost AP a thousand in materials it would be an overestimation by a lot, Tag heuer sells a 2000$ watch with a quartz movement, there is nh35 watches that costs over a thousand, and people likes them.
#4 doesn't bother me at all. I, for one, don't mind a common movement. It always seems like such a tragedy that there are extremely valuable timepieces that cannot be serviced because spare parts for them don't exist.
People: Hublot is so overpriced * Proceed to pay much more than retail to get a Moonswatch * On a more serious note: I do think that Hublot is overpriced and their design certainly does not speak to me... But still, I understand that it appeals to a certain demographic of people so yeah. And I truly believe that the best watch one can wear is the one they are wearing right now...
i own a Classic Fusion Hublot cos of its design & dial. End of the day - buy what you like, buy what you can afford. This Hublot issues will not end. Let's look at other"flaws" in other brands: a. IWC Pilot Le Petit prince - uses ETA and price is not cheap b. Richard Mille - any heritage involved? c. Gerrard P. - full of heritage and long history of watch making & not getting the respect - why? d. Omega - as Jenni mentioned - copy cat Rolex
Thank you, while they certainly deserve criticism, i always found this crazy hate more of a community watch snobism than anything else. And btw the analogy about the bentley is kind of wrong because Bentley while not having Ford engines have Volkswagen engines lol.
Over the past year I have been window shopping every time I passed a high end timepiece store. They have all the top brands with their wings and crowns. And since this was window shopping my budget was unlimited so time and again I would just select the watch that called to me. And it was Hublot. Never heard of it. ZERO other than one small cardboard ad for it on a resort bus. I decided I would have a Hublot. So for fun yesterday for the first time Ever I did a video search and found a video of why they are the most hated brand. It is funny to me that the one watch I wanted was the most hated. And I still want it and will have one eventually. I know the story of Rolex and Breitling etc and their pedigree.... and I wonder if that is also why I didn't choose them with my unlimited budget. Hublot is understated and high tech looking to me. I am going to have one anyway even if I have to sit through a series of "TOLD YA SO" RUclips videos.
When all is said and done.. Its is if the only real crime Hublot has committed is existing without a snooty pedigree. Given that the people smearing Hublot claim that Hublot watches are pure status symbols it seems like projection, for these watch snobs to gang up on Hublot for not having pedigree. Its is more about jealousy than any real defect or inferior problem.
I agree with almost everything in this video... except the idea that Hublot has been unlucky. Hublot has done an excellent job of targeting a certain demographic...Its reputation as a status symbol (devoid of substance) has been hard earned by spending untold millions on marketing itself as a "wealth lifestyle" brand.
I wasn’t sure how I felt until I tried on the Classic Fusion a few weeks ago. It’s not a bad watch. I had 11 pieces already, this one was worth adding. Not for flexing but for personal preference. It’s simple yet fun
My good friend owns Hublot, Richard Mille and Jacob n Co watches. I tell him all the time I don’t like those things they are too gawdy and this and that. We went on a short trip together and he wore a Hublot Big Bang that was encrusted with diamonds! I teased him for owning such a thing. I was also mesmerized by it. My eyes were glued to his wrist the whole damn week.
I actually respect some of Hublot’s most recent innovations. They do a lot of interesting work with materials, too. I don’t like the designs, but to each their own.
I agree Hublot is overpriced and not that innovative, but they are far from the worse watch brand. Check out the absolute garbage that Stauer puts out - and the quality is by far the worse - I was given 2 as presents and in both cases each watch fell apart in less than 6 months.
I had a full ceramic Spirit of Big Bang and I loved it. But as I got older (42 now) with my eyesight failing me I can't read the dates nor the time on their skeletonized watches with me anymore so I sold it. The design of the watch wasn't as great as I thought they were when I bought it at 35 so I think Hublot is a watch the appeals to the younger crowd.
Totally love this clip. Broke down the Hublot situation very nicely and easily understandable. Your opinions are fantastic and truly objective. And this is why your contents are so loved! Kudos!
Every one of those points could be applied to some other brands (I won't name my own suggestions!), as you mention at the end of the video. You only have to dip into the average comment section to see why so many in the watch community hate Hublot - it's a lot to do with snobbishness towards the people perceived to buy them, as shown by the derisive comments of "footballer/rapper watches".
Hublots eta movements don’t cost $100. They are finishing them and there is a cost to that including the materials they want in the movement. What is the cost of an in house movement vs an outsourced one? I guarantee you in either case it’s an immaterial cost relative to the price of a luxury watch.
When you mentioned each point separately, I began to think that maybe there was indeed some hidden reason behind the dislike for the brand. But the thing is, Hublot has all those things. Perhaps Omega copies designs, but they have a history and movements that set them apart from any other watch; maybe Richard Mille has less history than Hublot, but the movement of each watch is a masterpiece of engineering; Rolex and Patek have become symbols of status, but they have a history that backs them up, and the craftsmanship behind each of their watches prevents that symbol from being empty. Tag Heuer may use ETA movements, but their prices are not as high as those of Hublot, and ultimately, with the price, I believe it's all these aforementioned reasons that make the price so absurd compared to other brands. Having said that, this is the first video of yours I've seen, and I really liked it. Great job.
I own the Hublot Spirit of Big Bang and LOVE IT! El Primero Movement, beautifully finished with cutting edge materials - titanium, ceramic, rubber and MOST importantly - gets “watch connoisseurs” into a knot!! I LOVE my Hublot as part of my collection - living alongside my Rolex, AP ROO, Panerai, IWC, Omega, etc. The fact that so many people mindlessly hate it (many without ever handling a Hublot themselves) - actually makes that watch even more fun to wear and own!
The problem is when you add the total combination of 1+2+3+4+5 together... thats the problem with hublot. I have the big bang chrono which I like the look of. But its also an uncomfortable watch with a sharp clasp which digs into wrist my so I do not wear it often... 6th problem.
The thing that I really like about Hublot's designs is that they aren't afraid to make the clockwork the star. I like it when brands don't hide the amazing engineering behind a silly dial. The moment itself becomes an integrated part of the visual appeal, and not only visible through a hidden portal through the case back. If I made Hublot money, I'd definitely get one.
for real. I've spent days looking for a new watch and out of the "haute couture" watch brands, funnily only Hublot are ones where I've said "man, I wish I could afford that". everything else is just, well, ugly.
@@theboots39 that’s just you bruv. I think dials are a whole world of their own. It’s very narrow to think that exposed movements are beautiful and dials are boring. Some dial finishes are so gorgeous, they become the sole reason why the watch should be bought.
@@lakshbhambhani8565 You're missing the point. Dials can be beautiful, sure. My point is that the mechanism can be beautiful too. Most watches take this incredible feat of engineering and craftsmanship and hide it. Can the dial they use to hide it be beautiful? Sure. But Hublot is one of the few companies that focuses on making the movements themselves the stars. Anybody can put a Rolex dial on a cheap quartz movement. That's why there are so many cheap fakes, "homages" and imposters. It's much harder to fake a watch that has nothing to hide.
@@theboots39 fakes and imposters don't offer the same quality of finish and craftsmanship, dial or no dial. I was handed a fake seamaster once, it took me under a second to point out a bajilion reasons why it was fake. My friend was wearing a Reverso the other day, maroon dial. No you can't copy it. AP Royal Oak dial, there's a whole process to it, not easy to copy. So, no, dials don't make it easy to fake a product. On the other hand, first copy fakes also have ETA / Selita movements. It's not that hard to showcase a movement, even for fakes. Hublot is not doing anything ginormously great by showing off the movement. In contrast, some watchmakers invent absolutely radical movements like Richard Mille, Ulysse Nardin, Jacob and Co. Some watchmakers make gorgeous movements like A. Lange & Sohne. What they build is *worth* showing off, and they do show it off! They also charge a bomb for it. If you're into skeletal movements, there's a bunch out there. In comparison to Hublot, I remember seeing an equally well finished skeletal movement from Tag Heuer at less than half the price. But of course, you don't get the rich dude feel from Tag, the way you get from Hublot. That's where the enthusiast community starts the hate. For them, it's not about the flex as much as it's about the craft. And that's why Hublot stops shining out.
Fun fact: A Ford motor though not used for a Bentley, was indeed used for an Aston Martin Vulcan. The engine block of the Aston Martin Vulcan was based off of the Duratec 3.0L V6.
I have a Hublot Tourbillion Sapphire spirit of big bang and don't care what others think. Nor regret the purchase. If you want heritage, then why everyone has iphones and not Nokia's. If people complain about resale, then.... they really couldn't afford it could they? I buy what I would like, not what others would like. I love the look, I love the simplicity elegant movement it has and I love to watch the mechanical movement working.
I love her honesty (almost never uttered in the industry) that almost all expensive watches are vastly overpriced. People are buying status thru inflated prices.
18:49 I just picked up two classic fusion ultra thin king gold 45mm, one is wit a polished white dial and tan band , the other is with a polished black dial and black aligator band. Both have the manual winding about 2.9mm thick in house movements, they are both stunning watches, especially the black one. Both show very high accuracy on the time grapher. Jenny is spot on that Hublot got the short end of the stick with social media, and yes, all the watch companies take notes from each other, look at Omega and their speedmaster line, the only that went for a space walk (Ed White 321) or went to the moon. Inthink the classic fusion line 45mm is stunning period.
![Megan Thee Stallion - Neva Play (feat. RM) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/TpYTyAaTRts/mqdefault.jpg)
Jenniiiii, just seeing this! Class ❤️ ! Hope to see you guys soon💪
The OG of Hublot haters 😎
And She didnt torn up her shirt... Class indeed ❤❤ 😂😂😂
Jenni Elle's next video: Here is the current situation of "Iced out watches"
Nico Leonard: *stops ticking*
THE LEGEND! THE PIONEER!!!
FVCK UBLOOO!!!
she wore 2 watches in the video btw :D
Nico if you could only choose between a non factory iced out anything and a hublot of your choice, which'd be your poison ;)
I once made the mistake of leaving a Hublot in the passenger seat. I was gone only a few minutes and a criminal smashed my car window and left two more.
Excellent LMAO 😂
😂
I thought I was the only one who went through such unpleasant experience . The iPod was stolen but I found these Hublots and Franck Müllers disposed in my car. I never told my wife or anyone about this humilation - it was so awkward
@@resuscitationpicture I’ve heard that in some of the worst parts of south London criminals have been known to hold their victims at knife point to force an Hublot onto their wrist.
I can’t even imagine the trauma and humiliation that would cause. -That’s why these crimes often go unreported.
@@rev.andyh.1082 How can humans develop such brutality? At WEMPE they have specially trained therapists to overcome such trauma. They will tell you these guys had a toxic childhood as they were forced to wear undersized velvet suits for church - on every single Sunday.
When I was in the market for a new luxury watch a couple of years ago, I got really bad service from Rolex. At hublot, I got treated like a valued customer and I really liked the big bang and ended up buying one. No intentions to sell it and I am very happy with it, regardless of what others think, as I bought it for me.
Service really makes a difference, and at the end of the day, it’s your wrist - not everyone else.
Buy what u like. its what makes you happy in the end.
I agree with you
had a similar experience just recently, i think the rolex guys are a little exhausted of ppl who cant afford the watches coming into the shop, and not actually having any watches to sell. breitling guy was great though, super experienced, clearly a watch enthusiast, super nice.
L
I think one of the major reasons why Hublot is really hated universally is the price point of their watches. They are toe to toe with some of the top watch makers out there, having only a fraction of their legacy or innovation. It is mostly like buying a decent dish, at at a michelin star price.
Agreed but then why is RM so loved? Yes they might do many things even better than Hublot but does it justify the even more ridiculous price?
@@horusfalco8837 Definately not Sir. They are also overpriced AF. Though I would admit, RM's do somewhat justify their price point by creating that genre of overpriced highly engineered watches.
If innovation and price is a criteria, Rolex should really be dying any year now.
Was Nico in Harry Potter series? Looks like the Ratman.
@Fonetiker you should research more
the funny part is that Bentley shares a lot of parts with VW/Audi, and Rolls Royce with BMW
well, rolls royce IS owned by BMW
Sharing the parts is like sharing individual gears, screws & stones - perfectly fine.
However sharing the whole engine would have caused questions.
The movement of the watch is the key point of engineering innovation. If the company “outsource” that part, they basically just sell the design and finishing. Which might be totally fine for many people - there is market for Brabus after all.
I share a lot of elements with a Bentley too, like carbon, oxygen, nitrogen….
Audi/BMW are luxury premium car manufacturers and their shared parts and for the sake of quality and reliability.
Are you comparing ford to Audi and bmw though? 😂
On point #2, if heritage is necessary, we're essentially saying new luxury watch brands are doomed before they start. I don't think that's fair. As long as a brand can embrace that it is new and modern I think we should be willing to give it a shot. The brands that are worse to me are those that are sold to a conglomerate who then revives old model names and tries to steal heritage from another group of people who used the name decades ago.
Yep, it's the same as saying a person cannot become president simply because they are common people and not from a family line of career politicians. Heritage matters but to neuter competition just because the lack of it kinda sucks imo
Heritage should be necessary if your watch costs the same as a used car. Nobody has an issue with most modern luxury brands because they don't charge $10-15k for a watch. Take a look at Christopher Ward. They're innovative, good looking, and offer excellent value for money. Hublot is more expensive than C. Ward and have gaudy ugly designs.
If you REALLY like some of the big, tacky Hublot designs, just buy a quartz Invicta, swap out the movement for a high quality mechanical, and keep the change.
@@notgray88 Richard Mille has entered the chat.
@@itsthejdquest If someone gifted me a Richard Mille I wouldn't even bother to take it out of the box and just sell it. I'd rather use that money to buy a couple reversos or something actually wearable.
The "quartz crrisis" is largely a later Swiss marketing myth to sell "mechanical has soul"(and bigger margins). It was actually the Swiss who had invested heavily in quartz in the 1960's and saw it as the future. Seiko got the first quartz to market, just, but it was little more than a prototype, made in tiny numbers and cost the same as a family car. A couple of months later the Swiss Beta21 hit the shops(along with the Longines UltraQuartz) in numbers. They were expensive too and seen as cutting edge luxury. In the early 1970's the top of the range watches with the highest prices from Swiss brands like Omega, Rolex, AP, Patek, Longines et al were quartz.
What caught out the Swiss were _digitals_ invented in the US, improved and made cheaper in Japan. Digital watches were the trend of the late 70's into the 80's. The Swiss were way behind in tech and too expensive.
AP and Patek had almost nada to do with the survival of luxury mechanical watches. They were always pretty niche and AP took years to sell their first run of Royal Oaks. The RO and Nautilus were even niche until fairly recently. Go back to watch forums even ten years ago and almost nobody was talking about them. 1970's watches in general were "unfashionable". Both are very much of the moment.
One of the big things that saved the Swiss mechanical industry was Swatch and a cheap colourful plastic and quartz fashion watch that sold in huge numbers in the 1980's and gave Swatch a load of cash to refloat their brands and the "mechanical as luxury " marketing.
THIS is your channel, sir. Short informative pieces with the prefix… ‘did you know,’ is much needed in this space and I feel would be lapped up in favour of bunny ears, sunglasses and scripted scandals. I’d subscribe immediately! 🙏😣
@@mr_watchaddict3146 That's very kind of you Mr W. However sadly and unlike Jenni, I've a great face for radio and again unlike Jenni what I know of the current scene could be written on a postage stamp, in big letters, in crayon. 😁 I sub to this channel to get a handle on what's current(and I'm a fellow IttyBittyWristComittee member). It's actually one of the handful of 'Tube watch channels I do watch. Others are either too breathlessly pretentious, or dealers pimping their wares, or middle aged men shouting at each other for some odd reason, or all of the above. 😁
It's a matter of how much effort was put in to make a product. a printed poster from Ikea will never fetch the money that an artist painted. An iphone picture is ALWAYS more clearer than a painted portrait, but anyone can take a picture with a phone. It takes skill and time to paint a picture. An FP Journe Quartz watch can fetch for a lot of money because even though it's quartz, a lot of time and effort was put in to make it. It's a piece of art. A quartz movement from Seiko had 0 minutes of hand making, and can be produced 50k times in 1 day.
@@DonLee1980 There's something to that alright. The very early quartz were more "handmade" than most mechanicals of the time. In some even the circuitry was hand soldered. Though the Grand Seiko quartz today blows the FPJ out of the water on a few points.
Still, brands like Rolex and Omega produce watches in their millions on an industrial scale using industrial methods. These are not Old Masters, or hand made by magical Swiss elves in sylvan glades. There's a lot less handmade involved today in a Speedmaster or Submariner than there was in 1970, yet they're significantly more expensive allowing for wages/inflation etc. Brands like Longines, Seiko and Tissot are about the price now as they were back then. Their broad ranges of types and prices are more like back in the day too(Rolex ranges were always pretty narrow. From the 50's on basically an Explorer with different bezels and handsets, in the 60's a chrono that they couldn't give away originally and hard to sell gold dress watches. Even today there are no waiting lists for Cellini)
Another thing that changed was back then the brands were all independents, the majority competing for the same customers in jeweller's windows(Patek and the like were very niche). So if you were looking for say a divers watch, the Omega, Rolex, Longines, Doxa, Blancpain etc were lined up together, so unless there were extra features involved, they were all in and around the same prices. If an average good quality divers watch was 200 dollars/pounds then some might be 240, others might be 170. The spread was much narrower and the huge price differences by brand marketing and Swatch/LMVH conglomerate positioning weren't in play like today.
I don't know if you can say that nobody was talking about Patek's and RO's ten years ago. They were still very much talked about in the online watch community (Hodinkee - when it was smaller, aBlogtoWatch, SJX, and etc). It' just more along the lines that the watch market has blown up since then. To say something was niche then when the entire market then was slightly more niche is a tad disingenuous.
You’re so fair and responsible, I appreciate your objectivity
I have to say the argument that they don't offer value for money coming from people selling royal oak jumbos for 150 grand is a bit funny
I am a big fan of Hublot. I don’t give a f*ck what people say or think. I buy watches that I like.
I recently acquired a Big Bang Integral Blue Ceramic 42mm. Love everything about it! I had a Spirit of Big Bang Ceramic Blue a few years ago. The honeymoon phase never wore off on that one. And it was my most complimented watch ever.
Most people hate them because they go with what they’re told. Most people are sheep and when you look at these people they’re always dull and boring looking. Who would take fashion advice from Nico. He looks like a fat squirrel! Everyone loves Rolex yet everyone I know has a Rolex and 99% of these people are chavs!
Don’t let others judge your watch collecting decisions. 🍻
@@ondreiii Facts.
Then you are genuine enthusiast who enjoys this fun hobby
Good on you! I also love Hublot. I own Ap, Pateks, Rolexes and Cartier. I buy what looks good to me
"hublot is overpriced"
people who said it clearly have not heard of richard mille
😂😂
or rolex
@@arctic_skies or Omega, Breitling, GS, JLC, PP, AP and 95% of luxury watch brands out there!
True. I was just lazy to writte down everything. Basicly everything above 1k is crap.
@@arctic_skies Why don't you make a watch of Rolex quality below $1000?
What's funny is that the same 5 points can be used to describe why RM is so hype. Lol
Love it when you are always so objective and funny at the same time! Too much judgements and too little kindness on internet. Thanks Jenni, for being a glimmer of hope and justice in this cruel internet world! Best wishes from Singapore!
I shopped for a watch without looking at price or brand, and got a Hublot Classic Fusion Ceramic Blue Chronograph 42mm. I come home, google about Hublot, and see all negative search results at the top as if there's an organized hate campaign against Hublot. WTF! These Watches look better than others. End of story. I'm not looking at how super accurate these watches are in telling time. I have my iphone for that. This is a fine piece of beautiful jewelry.
agree with you
The customer is always right in matters of taste
I know a guy with a €26000 Hublot and I told him that his watch was nice and he replied that mine was nice as well (a €250 Dan Henry). If he reacts like this, that’s the only thing that counts because it shows that he just likes watches.
Lol Dan Henry junk
@@shpickey what a nice enthusiast you are.
Both watches are shitters. Watches are about excellence, not clout.
@@lachlanbrown409 excellence is always relative.
@@lachlanbrown409 so you’re about clout
I was looking for a watch with no preconceptions. I saw the Hublot Big Bang in blue and gold and fell in love. My wife bought it for me and I adore it. Fantastic service from Hublot including free service when I stupidly dropped the watch and caused it to stop working. Thoroughly recommend Hublot if it speaks to your taste.
if you drop a watch that costs 12k and it stop working, maybe it isn't so weel made afterall?
The issue is that brands like Tissot and Longines who also work off ETA based movements, impeccable finish and use similar exotic materials but come in at a significantly cheaper price. Hublot isn't good value for money and that the biggest issue. This is reflected in their used prices. Visceral hate for the brand is a hype machine for sure but honestly, in the "you get what you pay for" stakes Hublot falls flat on its face.
Every swiss watch brand is overpriced. People can decide what they want to buy for their money...
@@Sarvari_Gergo Compared to what? Your illegal Chinese counterfeit?
@@pistonburner6448 And made by slave workers in communist-run slave shops.
@@Sarvari_Gergo a hublot has a movement that's worth 5% of the entire price, an omega (apart from the moonwatch series) has a on their simplest method a movement that's worth at least 20% of the entire price (speaking of manufacturing cots)
@@kritnicol8546 The Spirit and Big Bangs don't use ETA. Spirits have a skeletonized El Primero 400 (skeletonized and finished by Hublot as HUB4700) for the chronographs. The tourbillon and other versions like the Meca-10 use in house movements too.
The Big Bang uses a Unico 2 movement. Inhouse made flyback chrono.
Only the entry level Classic Fusion watches use ETA based movements (finished by Hublot).
Your statement shows how much you've been drinking the Nikoolaid.
If hublot were in the 2-3 k price category , will they still be hated or nah ?
yes. It's not just the movement, it's also the people who buy them
Great video, Jen. Very interesting take on Hublot. I never heard of them until Nico, but I checked them out. At first, their watches reminded me of Invicta, especially the more way out designs. But I expected them to be a few hundred dollars, and was thoroughly shocked by their prices. So it's easy to think of Hublot as Invicta for people with more money than sense. The styles don't appeal to me either, but there are people who buy these, much like people who buy Richard Mille, Patek Phillipe, A. Lange & Sohne, and even the more flamboyant Invicta watches. They want a timepiece that's also a statement piece. I get it. But I also can't help thinking that people who own Hublot are actually enjoying the hate, as if they're an elite group who share something that others don't understand or could never attain. That feeling of exclusivity is the root of luxury.
Yup, I own an Hublot and I love to see the "watch enthusiasts" who dress like farmers whine about movements and shit, while my Hublot fits perfectly with my a little bit more fashionable outfits
I wouldn't compare A.Lange & Sohne with Hublot. A.Lange & Sohne produces very beautiful and classy watches, the same cannot be said for Hublot🤣
@@liv0003 I don't think the OP made any comparisons mate.
@@seanlingham5254 Oh.. maybe I misunderstood his comment. Sorry
@@liv0003 Yep. He was making a general statement about people who buy luxury watches and the distinction isn't about the brand but about people who want and are willing to pay large amounts of money for exclusivity. Which I believe he's saying, isn't him (or her).
Dearest Jenni,
This is an excellent analysis. Keep up the good work.
If it wasn't for COVID, I never would have found Nico and learned that Hublot is worse than trash. Now all I need is a Jacob & Co Astronomia Tarantoola watch.
jacob co just as trash as hublot.
Jacob & Co is the ultimate trash
Tarantooola indeed!
the only thing worse than hublo is jacob and co
@@tortapuker2942 Nico would strongly disagree. Prices and pieces do tend to be over the top though.
I am a watch collector including Patek, Lange, Audemars Piguet and FP Journe -- and I like Hublot, within reason. For me, most Hublots are similar in aesthetics to my Royal Oak Offshore so I don't need "another" piece in that category. When my wife wanted a timepiece however, she liked the "masculine" feel to the 38mm Classic Fusion and we both agreed it was a good one for her. It is certainly a luxury timepiece with a style that spoke to her and a very very good build quality, so, why not? Most people don't even look at our wrists anyway!
there are a lot of much better timepieces... You must know that hahaha
Bravo !!! Excellent analysis. A few years back I met a finance guy working at Rolex and he told me that if people knew the manufacturing cost of a Rolex compared to retail….they would feel being robbed. You can dislike hublot because of taste issues…..but if you do it for Nico’s motives, I believe you should walk away from many many top brands….because you’re paying a lot of money for an industrialized product that’s simply is overpriced ? Food for thoughts..
You'll have the Rolex fans boys and girls hunting you down. Biggest laugh is Rolex is a charity so they don't pay tax on any profits.
Few years back , I’ve met a guy who’s uncle’s best friend has a friend who owned an electronics shop and one of his employees had a brother who was dating this girl who’s cousin was a finance guy working at Rolex and he said that Rolex watches are worth every penny… What’s the point of your comment? Is it to jump on the hate bandwagon and trash talk Rolex or tell us something that a primary school child already knows?
@@omarion07 Oh summer child, if you think rolex actually costs anything close to what you are paying. Enjoy being robbed.
@@omarion07 the point is that Rolex is overpriced, and Hublot is just doing what Rolex has been doing. When you buy those watches, you pay for the brand advertisment, not the watch
Ive delved deep into the hobby last year and all of yall couldve told me hublot has misaligned screws on the bezel. Thats why i buy seikos; the misalignment, imperfections, and decent reliability for the price match my mood on Monday mornings at work 😂
I consider myself a watch enthusiast. I have a 5 piece collection, and one of those is a Hublot Big Bang Unico Chrono. It is my party watch. I have two watches that are more expensive, and I wear those more oftenly. And I understand, Hublot is not the peak of horology, and it is overpriced, but trust me, over the years, around 100 watches have passed through my watch box, but Hublot stayed. It is my “fuck you” watch. And everyone needs a “fuck you” watch.
What other watches you got right now in your 5 piece collection?
@@jackdaniels8030 Wimbledon Two tone DJ, Blancpain villeret ultra plate 6651 1127 55B, and two pieces I am not comfortable revealing.
My fuck you watch is a mavado love it even though I know a lot don't that's what got me interested in watches
@@albertvalenzuela9700 let me guess - 800 series all gold?
@@miroslavrnjakovic8850 no don't care for the gold look it's the Swiss sapphire stainless steel
Hublot don't care about the "experts" and "influencer", they are doing fine because a lot of people like their watches.
This is true. These things are going like hotcakes in Asia.
Invicta don't care about the "experts" and "influencer", they are doing fine because a lot of people like their watches.
I mean they advertise alot in football games and then there are rappers like Jay-Z who mention them in their rap songs so there not completely out of the influencers realm
They're always trying to send Nico samples to change his mind. He keeps turning them down
@@EthanRom That's the right thing to do. People and organisations that believe in their product and care for the opinions of others would strive to do that.
Nico put himself in the trash category.
I like the design of Hublot and the size. I have pretty big wrists (21cm) and prefer to wear Watches with 43-46mm and many many of the watches that speak to me are just to small for my preferences. There is of course some Breitling and Panerai but Hublot gives that "unusual" feel.
But I agree with you - I too don't really understand the "copycat" tag. The Tissot PRX, the ML Aikon and even the VC Overseas have more in common with the Oak than to classic fusion in my opinion but earn much less hate.
I have very small wrists, but I still love my 45mm hublot
Stop hating on hublot. We need idiots with too much money blowing their loads on hublot and not good stuff.
Lol, yeah let's keep the masses dumb while we scoop up the gems.
thats good advice lol
@@ItsNeverTooHot4Leather Bought your Vostok yet?
you will hate it if you cant afford it
@@oralkombat5479 I adore A. Lange & Söhne, but I can't afford their watches....I guess that undermines your theory.
The reason for Hubolt is that it combined all those factors in 1 brand. Some brands have 1 or 2 of those problems, but Hubolt manage to combined them all in one.
The problem with Hublot is that because they started in the 80s they don't have 'heritage' pieces, but also in the 80s no one cared about 'heritage' pieces... it's just that as time moved on all the other brands dumped their 'modern' 80s designs and picked up their 60s designs, Hublot couldn't do that. Most watch 'enthusiasts' basically don't like anything that looks remotely modern, so what should Hublot do? Make something that looks old? They would get even more grief for that. As for price, well how come the Royal Oak gets a free pass on that? Price is a product of what people are willing to pay, and people are obviously willing to pay.
Good point. I also think the 'heritage argument' is spurious in any case. The idea that a new company (life Nomos) can't be 'luxury' because they lack history, while long established brands that have changed ownership so often that they are little more than a badge, somehow can, is ridiculous.
I could listen to Jenni saying Hublot a hundred times. I was interested in purchasing a Hublot until I saw this, very objective. Just purchased a JLC Polaris, H Moser Rose Gold Pioneer and Blancpain Fifty Fathoms to add to my collection based on her recommendations. Thanks Jenni!
I don’t hate Hublot either. But, they don’t speak to me, as well. They get way more hate than they deserve. A luxury watch being hated because it’s overpriced? That’s hilarious! The same person that says that is plopping down 4-5 times retail for a panda Daytona.
Daytonas are indeed ridiculously overpriced on the secondary market, although not for long it seems. But at retail price Rolex certainly offers better value, and it’s kind of silly that some Hublot models with a very basic ETA or Sellita movements have higher RRPs than Rolex.
That's not rolex's fault. That's how it is in the 2nd hand market
@@Youthuba I didn’t blame Rolex. Not do I.
@@Youthuba sure, my point was that at retail Rolex is actually kind of reasonably priced unlike Hublot. The only problem is the limited supply of Rolex watches and that is indeed their fault and probably intentional.
@@Youthuba it’s true it’s not Rolex fault.. it’s my grandma’s fault cus she created the waiting list and the she makes it a wishlist.. and I’m so sure she’s gonna make it in your dreams list
Those explanations might be the silliest excuses I ever heard to hate a brand. I just love how people with an accent get to see what class is. You buy what you like. Human beings have been flexing since the beginning of time.
Not just Hublot, I'd put Rolex in the same category - status symbols for the insecure flexers...granted some Rolex owners are genuine enthusiasts who value the brand, but in general they are purchased by folks who just want the name recognition.
Rolex has so much genuine heritage and quality and so many other things that Hublot doesn’t have though. I’m definitely not arguing that insecure flexers don’t buy Rolexes as meaningless status symbols because they obviously do, you’re obv right about that. That’s true for pretty much anything expensive. But I def wouldn’t put Rolex and Hublot in the same overall category just because of that. There’s too much that differentiates them
Also a big part of the difference between Rolex and Hublot is that Hublot actively courted the “influencer” and rich kid/nuevo riche customer base.
Lol what an ignorant comment. People buy stuff to show off. Duh. You think a person buying a Patek or AP is just to keep to himself? It’s humble bragging. Still a status symbol. You want to be down to earth then just get a seiko
@@singaporewatchcollector6262 yeah, true, tho the average person hasn't heard of PP or AP - or Hublot either I guess. Good comment, Cheers 👍🏻
Not all peoples who own Rolex are insecure like you.
I love Hublot. They are in 80 the watches that start me in the world of watches. I would probably not buy their latest models but the the time for me they were very innovative
Now this is why I like your channel so much. I fell in love with watches just a few years ago. And the first thing I did, as so many others do is to watch reviews and tier lists etc. Everyone hates on Hublot but never ask the question why. For me personally, as I learned is the design, eta and price tag on Hublot that gets me off. But I’m also biased because I’ve been indoctrinated from the start that it is a shit brand.
I want more people to answer the question why when reviewing or listing a watch. Why is it good? Why is it not? The industry is so messed up. Everyone is like, buy a Patek, AP, Rolex etc. I mean, a Patek costs more than I earn in a year prior to taxes. It would take me four years to buy something like that and then I can’t buy anything else besides food and paying rent. Kids these days are nuked by the Flex industry. If you can’t afford a Rolex, you’re trashy. Rant over.
But I love your content. Really really do.
Owned one that had rubber band, gold case and an emerald green dial. It was a very simple design without a lot of bells and whistles. I got it over 20 years ago and it actually worked pretty well. It was not a bad looking watch. I eventually traded it when I got my first Patek. Don’t really miss it but don’t have any bad feelings about it either. The newer ones I have seen have really gone up in price and look pretty ostentatious. If they ever had a sweet spot, I might have purchased mine during that period.
My boss's boss knew I was a 'watch guy' and excitedly popped into my office to show me his new Hublot that bought. It was some RM looking thing which he 'humble bragged' he only paid 21k for when it was a 30k retail. I had to sit there for 20min as he showed me every detail. The whole time I'm sitting there wearing a Vostok Amphibia with a sailboat on the dial.
You had me at Vostok
Vostok sucks.
@@seanlingham5254 Do you own one? Otherwise your opinion sucks.
It is impossible for Hublot fans to talk about their watch and not talk about how much they paid
i just saw that watch a couple days ago. it's so classic Hublot. To look more expensive and valuable than it actually is
Hot Take: I like Hublot more than Richard Mille. The caseback side of that example that Kai and Jenni filmed is gorgeous.
There are of course examples of other watch brands for each of the 5 points raised, but Hublot combines them all
And as far as I know, charging north of 10k for an ETA based movement is also a novelty (correct me if I'm wrong)
@@emmeo17 came here to say that
And to be clear, ETA movements are fantastic movements. But if you're using someone else's movement, then you're not putting any money into movement R&D ... so then what are you charging $12k or whatever for?
I was gonna say this. Like, I don’t ever see myself wearing Richard Mille, even if I could afford to part with the money. But to call out their lack of heritage overlooks the fact that they make some incredibly complex and impressive watches.
@@wingeren Exactly! ETA movements per se are excellent (all my watches have ETAs or Sellitas, and are even modified), but they didn't cost me a fortune
You hit the nail on the head, Jenni: Hublot’s design language does not speak to me. And if I’m going to spend that much money, it will be on a Bremont.
My main reason for hating Hublot is the value proposition and their claims of using "in house" movements when they were just decorated ETA/Sellita movements.
Sounds like IWC until a few years ago.
the have their unico movements now, which is inhouse
They just look expensive that’s all.
Exactly. Liars are trash!
Mostly in-house. Movements not the issue.
What watch vloggers and collectors don’t seem to understand is that, not everybody cares about in-house production and brand heritage, a lot of people just like the look and feel of a watch, and buy it exactly for this reason. The watch market largely rests on these people, which is why brands like Hublot that are often called out) are still doing great.
tag heuer trash too, but not antique heuer watch
But hublot is overpriced, thats not an opinion but a fact if you compare it to other watches with the same movements and specs.
They say Hublot copies AP or PP while Seiko, the traditional watch lover brand, is blatantly copying Rolex and no one gives a crap
@@oa1145 how do you come to that conclusion?
@@bobrocker6582 Find me something with the designs and the patented materials like scratch proof dark gold that Hublot uses in their products
happy to say that i sub on your channel and nico for quite sometime now. on the topic at hand, the power of influencer is really felt by brands in this digital age. at the end of the day, its about personal choice, but thanks to internet we are more educated before making choices. nice vid Jen, keep it up!
scam
I love the design of hublots. The materials good and it feels premium, looks great, and works. Other than the price I don’t see any real problem or reason to hate it. The people buying it make mad cash anyway
I was on the hublot hype train in 2016 and since then they haven’t really changed anything. They used to be trendy, and they haven’t really adapted.
if you're interested in 'Trash", consider a Patek 5085 model...then send it to the Henry Stern Watch Agency in NYC (Patek's service center) to correct all of the issues that these watches shipped with. My 5085 looked like it was stamped by a blacksmith, and had so many defects that the service writer filled a page with complaints. Then they put the case in a vise, dented it, scratched the dial, scratched the movement, stripped 2 bracelet screws. So the AD then sent it to Geneve, and they left all of the defects except the bracelet screw, and returned a dented and badly flawed watch. Patek's official response :"Perhaps you are the not the kind of person who should buy a Patek"! Which is why I always dislike lists like the quoted blogger (Nico) puts forth. Much is based on hype and personal supposition, rather than experience.
That sounds insane. I've never owned a Patek for obvious financial reasons, but I've always assumed their servicing was top notch.
@@Yorosero You'd be surprised, even companies like Rolex are very bad with service. For first time buyers, you will get treated like shit at most Rolex boutiques.
@@Yorosero I was shocked as well. They used to have a fellow named David Jarrett who ran the HSWA back then and he was an arrogant bastard. (in my opinion) It was only when I posted the pics of the watch on TimeZone, still in the shrink-wrap, with the dents in the case, that he finally admitted that it matched their case-holder vice. Prior to that, he blamed my AD and 100 other things. The dealer accepted a return on the watch and it was only 14 years later that I decided to buy another Patek. I went with a 5712, and now I shudder to realize it needs to have its period service....and I have to send it to NYC....
@@itspapaj4732 You are telling the truth. I had a REF6263 Rolex that I owned since I was a kid and had it serviced a few times at Rolex. The last time (I think it was 1990), they scratched the dial and cracked the bezel. I called to complain and they claimed that I did the damage. I asked them how I could scratch the dial and the guy lost his mind. After he yelled at me for a few minutes, he hung up on me. 10 min later the "VP of Service" called me back to apologize, and sent a shipping label. This time they serviced it like they were mad at it, and ground on of the pushers almost flat and gouged the lug. So, I put the watch away for a decade before deciding to have it restored. Now, I think I'll send to LA Watchworks and have them add back all of the lost metal. In recent times, Rolex also destroyed my brother's 6263 by cracking the bezel, and they have disclaimers galore on their paperwork. You are powerless and 'just a number' to them.
Your only reasonable response to their letter after the shit service they gave you is, "yes, you are absolutely correct!"
„First of all it’s Rolex“ These days everybody wants a f***ing Rolex is because they want to make money/ stay in their safe! As you would buy the best and newest car you let it stay in the garage… Go an buy some toilet paper just for the reason that your neighbor can’t have it. So dump! I hope the Rolex bubble will burst!
scam
You're spot on. The entire hobby from a price to performance standpoint don't make sense anyway. Folks should just collect what they want and enjoy, and let that be the end of it.
Your 5 reasons are enough for me, and it seems, most. Top reason is their pricing gives me the impression that they’re laughing at their ill-informed customers from their hollowed-out volcano whilst counting their dirty cash.
Great vid as always Jenni. I still love you way more than is appropriate.😉
scam
@@brianmckibben2300 …the above message and Hublot both!
Jenni, I can't speak for most watch enthusiasts, but there is a tier of untouchables. These are watches you would love to own but dare not let anyone know you own them lest you be thought of a snob. But when you have the bling, it's a different story. As for watches, the most endearing to me are the ones I wear the most.
Hublot deserves all the hate JUST because they don't make those screws align. Especially for that price.
All good points, Jenni. I don't gravitate to Hublot, but I do celebrate anyone who buys one and genuinely loves their watch.
I think it is a combination of factors, it is one of the few brands that match a lot of the points you made...
And, for the normal watch enthusiast, who are not in for the status, sometimes it is painful to see how something you have a genuine interest in is co-opted by capitalism to sell overpriced stuff, and yes, it happens to other brands too, but we tend to justify it with history, heritage, or the complexity and challenge of an in-house movement, but if a brand is doing the full status symbol thing and lacks something like that, it hits us in a painful spot, where we can see that the brands that we love are doing it too, even if we justify it...
Anyway, i'm happy with my Seiko 5 for now !
The same thing is for most non precious metal watches selling over $10k. A royal oak is no way worth 30-50k, a Richard mille for 10x that. It is all about what your customer base is willing to pay, not about making a fair profit.
@@casualsuede Mmmm, I was thinking the same thing. OP was really close to that, just not quite stitching together that it's the same logic, the difference is that people accept it in one case and not the other, simply because in one case the believe the status is deserved.
Personally, I think that status is still a trap with the brands that people respect. The only difference is how you personally feel about it. You still buy it for the name. You wouldn't pay nearly that for another name.
And it's funny, once you understand these things, you start to see how it's like that in many industries, with fans surrounding them in internet communities, propping up an inflated value for the products.
And yes, people are willing to pay... but yes... companies selling the products do take advantage of that. And the paths that money moves across don't really benefit consumers at all. You get your status piece, they get lots of cash to keep up in a top-level bubble of investing games. And this all tells them that what they're doing is the right way to go... essentially justifying the exorbitant pricing seen on these legacy brands.
It's ruined my taste for a lot of fancy things out there. I really couldn't care less if I ever own an AP or a Rolex because I understand that a large chunk of the value is fake. Take away the status from the actual physical watch, and the value drops immensely. In a world with quite a lot of poverty in it, this imaginary value strikes me as something a bit grotesque. I would feel bad even wearing a Rolex in many places.
They are all sort of 'tainted' by this mindset that status is valuable. It's something we as buyers don't really benefit from, yet continually not only make excuses for, but support.
Is not capitalism what saved heritage brands after quartz crysis? “Luxury” is epitome of capitalism.
Sorry for just now getting around to seeing this one, but I really love and respect that you took such a stance on such a controversial topic on the internet today! Well worded, and such a great video!
The issue is how much they charge for their watches based on the 'quality' you get for that money. If they were half the price, I doubt the hate would be as strong. Just my opinion, but if people like them and own them, that's fantastic, to each their own. The great thing about this hobby is there is something for everyone.
i mean, do you get 80 000$ of quality in an AP RO ? I know ressell value yada yada yada, but do you, really ? Even the cost of production, if you'd think it cost AP a thousand in materials it would be an overestimation by a lot, Tag heuer sells a 2000$ watch with a quartz movement, there is nh35 watches that costs over a thousand, and people likes them.
I paid $37,000 for a spirit of Big Bang and sold it for $8,000. I’ll never buy one again!
#4 doesn't bother me at all. I, for one, don't mind a common movement. It always seems like such a tragedy that there are extremely valuable timepieces that cannot be serviced because spare parts for them don't exist.
Wear what you want, but this video does a good job of explaining why there is no price justification for Hublot.
People: Hublot is so overpriced
* Proceed to pay much more than retail to get a Moonswatch *
On a more serious note:
I do think that Hublot is overpriced and their design certainly does not speak to me... But still, I understand that it appeals to a certain demographic of people so yeah.
And I truly believe that the best watch one can wear is the one they are wearing right now...
i own a Classic Fusion Hublot cos of its design & dial. End of the day - buy what you like, buy what you can afford. This Hublot issues will not end. Let's look at other"flaws" in other brands:
a. IWC Pilot Le Petit prince - uses ETA and price is not cheap
b. Richard Mille - any heritage involved?
c. Gerrard P. - full of heritage and long history of watch making & not getting the respect - why?
d. Omega - as Jenni mentioned - copy cat Rolex
Thank you, while they certainly deserve criticism, i always found this crazy hate more of a community watch snobism than anything else. And btw the analogy about the bentley is kind of wrong because Bentley while not having Ford engines have Volkswagen engines lol.
Over the past year I have been window shopping every time I passed a high end timepiece store. They have all the top brands with their wings and crowns. And since this was window shopping my budget was unlimited so time and again I would just select the watch that called to me. And it was Hublot. Never heard of it. ZERO other than one small cardboard ad for it on a resort bus.
I decided I would have a Hublot.
So for fun yesterday for the first time Ever I did a video search and found a video of why they are the most hated brand. It is funny to me that the one watch I wanted was the most hated. And I still want it and will have one eventually. I know the story of Rolex and Breitling etc and their pedigree.... and I wonder if that is also why I didn't choose them with my unlimited budget.
Hublot is understated and high tech looking to me.
I am going to have one anyway even if I have to sit through a series of "TOLD YA SO" RUclips videos.
When all is said and done.. Its is if the only real crime Hublot has committed is existing without a snooty pedigree. Given that the people smearing Hublot claim that Hublot watches are pure status symbols it seems like projection, for these watch snobs to gang up on Hublot for not having pedigree. Its is more about jealousy than any real defect or inferior problem.
i would say hublot would be a great watch if priced right
scam
I love the little red 'i' graphic on the side so that you can scroll through the video and know when the next point beings. Very clever !
I agree with almost everything in this video... except the idea that Hublot has been unlucky. Hublot has done an excellent job of targeting a certain demographic...Its reputation as a status symbol (devoid of substance) has been hard earned by spending untold millions on marketing itself as a "wealth lifestyle" brand.
Status symbol? Lmao gtfo u work for them don’t ya
I remember when you bought a 5lt can of Castrol Oil and they threw in a Hublot. I bought two 2.5Lt cans instead.
I wasn’t sure how I felt until I tried on the Classic Fusion a few weeks ago. It’s not a bad watch. I had 11 pieces already, this one was worth adding. Not for flexing but for personal preference. It’s simple yet fun
Her smiles contagious
I like them a lot actually, they do a lot of cool things with materials and design. I'd just never pay what they go for.
get it second hand... if you can get it for 60 % off msrp you should be able to break even.
chrono24 is your best friend
My good friend owns Hublot, Richard Mille and Jacob n Co watches. I tell him all the time I don’t like those things they are too gawdy and this and that. We went on a short trip together and he wore a Hublot Big Bang that was encrusted with diamonds! I teased him for owning such a thing. I was also mesmerized by it. My eyes were glued to his wrist the whole damn week.
I actually respect some of Hublot’s most recent innovations. They do a lot of interesting work with materials, too. I don’t like the designs, but to each their own.
Saying hublot has “innovations” is the most ludicrous thing I’ve heard to do with watches
@@jmemphisTX I mean they have the magic gold alloy which kinda counts. Not worth the price tag tho.
I agree Hublot is overpriced and not that innovative, but they are far from the worse watch brand. Check out the absolute garbage that Stauer puts out - and the quality is by far the worse - I was given 2 as presents and in both cases each watch fell apart in less than 6 months.
@@jmemphisTX Off the top of my head they are the first to come out with a full sapphire glass case. They experiment a lot with their materials.
I had a full ceramic Spirit of Big Bang and I loved it. But as I got older (42 now) with my eyesight failing me I can't read the dates nor the time on their skeletonized watches with me anymore so I sold it. The design of the watch wasn't as great as I thought they were when I bought it at 35 so I think Hublot is a watch the appeals to the younger crowd.
Anyone know what the Rolex at 6:59 is please? That watch is gorgeous!!
to be fair almost all luxury watches are overpriced , paying for the brand and controlled exclusivity!
you are right, Hublot watches are not trash.
They are below trash.
Thank God that someone admitted that all watches above a certain point are overpriced!
I would think at 10k CDN you start paying less for quality and more for name
that is the best yet most underated video that i have watched and very well explained and thought out good job!!
Totally love this clip. Broke down the Hublot situation very nicely and easily understandable. Your opinions are fantastic and truly objective. And this is why your contents are so loved! Kudos!
Two watches, one on each wrist!! “This” is when you know you are at a higher level!! And the rest of us are simply mortals!!😋
Every one of those points could be applied to some other brands (I won't name my own suggestions!), as you mention at the end of the video. You only have to dip into the average comment section to see why so many in the watch community hate Hublot - it's a lot to do with snobbishness towards the people perceived to buy them, as shown by the derisive comments of "footballer/rapper watches".
That is so true - 99% of the hate Hublot gets is just people trying to position themselves as better than the people that buy Hublots.
Hublots eta movements don’t cost $100. They are finishing them and there is a cost to that including the materials they want in the movement. What is the cost of an in house movement vs an outsourced one? I guarantee you in either case it’s an immaterial cost relative to the price of a luxury watch.
Hublot's doing great in material research
When you mentioned each point separately, I began to think that maybe there was indeed some hidden reason behind the dislike for the brand. But the thing is, Hublot has all those things. Perhaps Omega copies designs, but they have a history and movements that set them apart from any other watch; maybe Richard Mille has less history than Hublot, but the movement of each watch is a masterpiece of engineering; Rolex and Patek have become symbols of status, but they have a history that backs them up, and the craftsmanship behind each of their watches prevents that symbol from being empty. Tag Heuer may use ETA movements, but their prices are not as high as those of Hublot, and ultimately, with the price, I believe it's all these aforementioned reasons that make the price so absurd compared to other brands.
Having said that, this is the first video of yours I've seen, and I really liked it. Great job.
To each his own, Jenni. Folks collect what speaks to them.
Do they?
Extraordinary video. Congrautulations. You are so objective!
I own the Hublot Spirit of Big Bang and LOVE IT!
El Primero Movement, beautifully finished with cutting edge materials - titanium, ceramic, rubber and MOST importantly - gets “watch connoisseurs” into a knot!!
I LOVE my Hublot as part of my collection - living alongside my Rolex, AP ROO, Panerai, IWC, Omega, etc.
The fact that so many people mindlessly hate it (many without ever handling a Hublot themselves) - actually makes that watch even more fun to wear and own!
The problem is when you add the total combination of 1+2+3+4+5 together... thats the problem with hublot. I have the big bang chrono which I like the look of. But its also an uncomfortable watch with a sharp clasp which digs into wrist my so I do not wear it often... 6th problem.
The thing that I really like about Hublot's designs is that they aren't afraid to make the clockwork the star. I like it when brands don't hide the amazing engineering behind a silly dial. The moment itself becomes an integrated part of the visual appeal, and not only visible through a hidden portal through the case back. If I made Hublot money, I'd definitely get one.
for real. I've spent days looking for a new watch and out of the "haute couture" watch brands, funnily only Hublot are ones where I've said "man, I wish I could afford that". everything else is just, well, ugly.
@@els236 yeah. There's only so many of the same watch you can see before you stop being impressed.
@@theboots39 that’s just you bruv. I think dials are a whole world of their own. It’s very narrow to think that exposed movements are beautiful and dials are boring. Some dial finishes are so gorgeous, they become the sole reason why the watch should be bought.
@@lakshbhambhani8565 You're missing the point. Dials can be beautiful, sure. My point is that the mechanism can be beautiful too. Most watches take this incredible feat of engineering and craftsmanship and hide it. Can the dial they use to hide it be beautiful? Sure. But Hublot is one of the few companies that focuses on making the movements themselves the stars. Anybody can put a Rolex dial on a cheap quartz movement. That's why there are so many cheap fakes, "homages" and imposters. It's much harder to fake a watch that has nothing to hide.
@@theboots39 fakes and imposters don't offer the same quality of finish and craftsmanship, dial or no dial. I was handed a fake seamaster once, it took me under a second to point out a bajilion reasons why it was fake. My friend was wearing a Reverso the other day, maroon dial. No you can't copy it. AP Royal Oak dial, there's a whole process to it, not easy to copy.
So, no, dials don't make it easy to fake a product.
On the other hand, first copy fakes also have ETA / Selita movements. It's not that hard to showcase a movement, even for fakes. Hublot is not doing anything ginormously great by showing off the movement.
In contrast, some watchmakers invent absolutely radical movements like Richard Mille, Ulysse Nardin, Jacob and Co. Some watchmakers make gorgeous movements like A. Lange & Sohne. What they build is *worth* showing off, and they do show it off! They also charge a bomb for it.
If you're into skeletal movements, there's a bunch out there. In comparison to Hublot, I remember seeing an equally well finished skeletal movement from Tag Heuer at less than half the price. But of course, you don't get the rich dude feel from Tag, the way you get from Hublot. That's where the enthusiast community starts the hate. For them, it's not about the flex as much as it's about the craft. And that's why Hublot stops shining out.
The way you delivered "Shittest" was great
I just don't find Humblot designs to be very nice. I'll gladly wear a Seiko or Casio any day over any Hublot.
I love Hublot both the brand itself and their waches , they are doing great job in my opinion no matter what others think
Fun fact: A Ford motor though not used for a Bentley, was indeed used for an Aston Martin Vulcan. The engine block of the Aston Martin Vulcan was based off of the Duratec 3.0L V6.
There is always that one nerd...
@@ncode03 And there has to be that one turd
@@HamzaFaruqui at least he’s not some filthy talib
Lame fact
The fact that there is so much hate for this watch and brand...makes me want one even more.
Thank you Jeannie for breaking this down dispassionately. Luckily for me, I detest the style of Hublot watches so I am not tempted to buy one.
Eventually quartz where more affordable but when they first came out the where expensive. But went down in price quickly after that.
I love Hublot and don't care what people say. Their design is #1 for me...
I have a Hublot Tourbillion Sapphire spirit of big bang and don't care what others think. Nor regret the purchase. If you want heritage, then why everyone has iphones and not Nokia's. If people complain about resale, then.... they really couldn't afford it could they? I buy what I would like, not what others would like. I love the look, I love the simplicity elegant movement it has and I love to watch the mechanical movement working.
Aston’s V12 is based on Ford. Bentley shares part under Volkswagen group.
Jenni. My eyes 👀 keep staring at your hand movements, admiring the blue watch your wearing :) . Does anyone know what kind of watch that is?
I love her honesty (almost never uttered in the industry) that almost all expensive watches are vastly overpriced. People are buying status thru inflated prices.
Yes. There are many deniers and even hypocrites among watch ethusiasts and reviewers.
18:49 I just picked up two classic fusion ultra thin king gold 45mm, one is wit a polished white dial and tan band , the other is with a polished black dial and black aligator band. Both have the manual winding about 2.9mm thick in house movements, they are both stunning watches, especially the black one. Both show very high accuracy on the time grapher. Jenny is spot on that Hublot got the short end of the stick with social media, and yes, all the watch companies take notes from each other, look at Omega and their speedmaster line, the only that went for a space walk (Ed White 321) or went to the moon.
Inthink the classic fusion line 45mm is stunning period.
Sorry for the typos... thumbs are too big😮