One Watch I Wish Was Never Created

The responses ranged from surprising to downright hilarious, and I must say, they truly made my day. Read on to discover which timepieces our writers would gladly erase from history!

What an interesting question! This one really made me think. I must admit, I don’t wake up every morning, drenched in cold sweat, screaming obscenities into the ether because I’m so thoroughly traumatised by the frequent missteps made by brands, nor do I feel personally slighted by any particular model. 

However, the more I thought about it, the more I got to thinking that the whole trajectory of watchmaking could have been changed had certain releases been scrubbed from history. Deleting most of the seminal models in the annals of fine watchmaking would surely have had a negative effect on the industry’s trajectory (imagine a world without the Rolex DateJust, the Audemars Piguet Royal Oak, or the Ulysse Nardin Freak, for example), but while pondering that point, I realised that there was one version of a very important watch that almost certainly did more harm than good (and many collectors are still paying for it to this day).

It might be low-hanging fruit (and it wouldn’t surprise me if this model has been mentioned multiple times by my fellow contributors), but I reckon that the Patek Philippe Nautilus Tiffany 5711/1A-018 was a blight upon our craft, for all the wrong reasons.

The Nautilus is an icon. I adore it. It’s elegant, ground-breaking, and timeless. I love Tiffany. The shade of blue for which the luxury maison is best known is a sumptuous shade, capable of wordlessly conjuring a sense of luxury by association. Put those two things together and you have a stellar watch, right?

Right.

The problem is not with the watch itself. If anything, it was too desirable. If it had been unlimited — perhaps a boutique-only edition but freely available — it wouldn’t have done a shred of damage to the collecting hobby; it would have been seen as a cool throwback to a much-missed era of co-signed dials being the norm. But it wasn’t. It was strictly limited and, worse still, apparently reserved for “special” people only. It was a slap in the face for the people who love watches for what they are rather than what possessing them represents. It poured petrol on the already raging blaze of hype tearing through the industry. It drove up prices on the secondary market and warped everyone’s perception of what the industry was all about, resulting even in brands increasing the prices of their novelties because they suddenly seemed like “great value” in comparison to “pre-loved” versions.

It wasn’t just down to this one watch, of course, but if this unfortunate phase of mass market manipulation could be represented by a single model, I think it would be this one. Therefore, I wish it’d never made it off the drawing board and, instead, left us all in peace.

I’m definitely not alone in my opinion; the one watch I could happily live without is the Hublot Big Bang. Hublot in general gets a lot of hate from the watch community, and I have no problem admitting the mass of negativity surrounding this Swiss manufacturer has influenced my own distaste in them. Why do so many screw their noses up at Hublot, in particular the Big Bang? Well, it’s largely down to the fact that these watches are predominantly popular with non-watch enthusiasts. More often than not, you see them on the wrists of celebrities and overpaid millionaires.

This is where my main issue lies. Hublot seems to focus more on marketing than substance. They seem to prioritise aggressive marketing and celebrity endorsements over horological innovation. Their designs are also divisive and go strongly against my love of minimalistic, more refined watchmaking. The Big Bang is large, flashing and in my opinion, ostentatious. It’s not to my taste at all.

Finally, we’ve got to talk price. I’m happy to admit I can’t afford a Hublot, but even if I could, it’s not something I would spend my money on. They are overpriced for what they offer, especially considering some of the movements they use. Sure, there are some that use in-house movements but even those with base ETA calibres are not justified by a reasonable price tag. It’s not even like the brand has much horological heritage to rationalise it either. If you want something that looks and feels like the Hublot Big Bang, save several thousand and check out our affordable alternatives here: 

This perfectly explains what I'm on about - one image is the so-called affordable luxury watch from Daniel Wellington, while the other is virtually the same piece found on Chinese wholesaler Alibaba. That watch can be purchased for single-digit dollars per unit, or even less in bulk, and can have a logo printed on it, and then sold at a high markup by brands claiming them as their own.

I have to defer to the excellent work of Ben Arthur from Ben’s Watch Club for a lot of the research into what is fundamentally a money grab, but the point stands. People should not be sucked into this and taken advantage of, so if watches from these brands and others were vaporized off the face of the earth, then it wouldn’t be much of a miss.

The Patek Philippe Nautilus is often hailed as an icon in the world of luxury watches. But despite the high regard and hefty price tag, I just can't get on board with its design.

Many enthusiasts appreciate its intricate craftsmanship and prestigious brand, but to me, the Nautilus is bulky, boxy, and lacks the elegance one expects from a high-end timepiece.

I should also clarify this is a sentiment unique to the Nautilus’s overall design, as I love other bigger, robust, and high priced tool-esque watches from the likes of Sinn and Breitling.

For just one example, take the "ears" on the sides of Nautilus case, intended for symmetry. To me, these seem goofy, unnecessary, and awkward, further diminishing its appeal.

I also find the Nautilus to be overly hyped in general. It's a watch that many feel pressured to like simply because of its status and the brand behind it. This peer pressure in the watch community can make genuine preferences feel invalid. I feel a watch should be more about personal connection and style, not just about following trends from rappers, celebrities, or even industry thought leaders.

That said, I know The Nautilus and Royal Oak are sometimes credited with "saving" the watch industry, during the Quartz Crisis when traditional Swiss watchmaking was under threat from cheaper, more accurate quartz watches from Japan. That’s the one reason I can’t say that I’d want to snap my fingers and wish The Nautilus completely out of existence. Instead, I’ll just say that the Nautilus’s price point is absurdly high for a design I find unattractive.

We know the world of horology is vast and diverse, with countless watches catering to every taste and preference. However, amidst the plethora of watches available, there are inevitably some that leave enthusiasts feeling less than impressed. The question arises: is there a watch that I wish hadn't been made?

I’m not sure. If you ask any brand owners the same question, they may have a very different answer. I haven’t invested tens of thousands of pounds into the development of an awful watch, some of them have.

However, this is an objective question, as of course there are watches I don’t like as much as others. But to single one out, I’m not sure if that’s possible.

For every watch I dislike, there will be many others questioning my decisions and reasons. We are all very different creatures, having many differences and quirks between us. So I chose a style of watch instead.

One example that often sparks debate is the proliferation of homage watches. These are watches that closely resemble iconic designs from established brands. While some view homage watches as a form of flattery or an affordable alternative to luxury timepieces, my view is that they lack originality and dilute the exclusivity of the original designs.

Similarly, the trend of oversized or excessively complicated watches has drawn criticism from purists who believe that horology should prioritise functionality and craftsmanship over flashy gimmicks.

Ultimately, the watch industry is driven by innovation and creativity, with each new release sparking discussions and debates among enthusiasts. While there may be watches that some wish hadn't been made, they serve as a reminder of the diversity and dynamism of the horological landscape.