paysdoufs
·No. But they could make neovintage Heuer a “brand within a brand” - a bit like what Chopard is doing with L.U.C. or Rolex has done a for long time with the Cellinis. Is that (or has that ever been) a winning strategy? No idea…
True, surely vintage enthusiasts would prefer old movements...
Yes, but while everyone else was gleefully rubbing their hands at the thought of being able to fire all the creative designers and save a bunch of cash TAG were reaching for the paracetamol and wondering how they could navigate the whole TAG Heuer / Heuer nonsense all over again... cue endless internet geniuses claiming they should never have changed the name and/or an equal number of geniuses saying it's good because it tells them which watches are good and which are bad. I mean some of these people can't even grasp that the watches come from the same factory it seems.
If there is one reason why it seems like the change was bad it's that it gave the watch community a way to lazily differentiate between good Heuers and bad TAG Heuers. No other watch manufacturer has this unique problem to contend with.
I just wish TAG was a little bit more like Hublot, it would make things so much easier for everyone
Biver was spot on. It was so arrogant of Mansour Ojjeh to slap his company name in front of Heuer!
I laughed when he said "It's like if I bought Ferrari and changed the name to BIVER Ferrari".
Isn’t that how most teams worked? Those bank rolling the team got their name first?
Yes, that's the norm. But I was really talking about the engine, not the team name. The engine was a Porsche, not a TAG.
What would have happened to Heuer if TAG g he ad not purchased them?
They would've remained Heuer.
Whatever their alternate future might've been is moot. My point still stands, the conundrum is his fault.