TemerityB wrote:Unlike many here (and on most watch sites), I'm pretty much a fan of Tag.
I'd have no use for this, however, even if I had that kind of scratch to drop. Something about it just seems too commercially calculated; it's as if Biver is trying to compete with smart watches by offering a cheap version of a time-honored mechanism. It looks nice, but it rings faux to me.
For some reason, this whole thing reminds me of my favorite joke when I was like 10:
Guys picks something up off the ground:
"Looks like dog shit."
Lifts it to his nose:
"Smells like dog shit."
Takes a bite of it:
"Tastes like dog shit ... Good thing I didn't step in it."
I don't know why, but just replace "dog shit" with "a tourbillon" and "step in it" with "buy it" and that's my opinion.
Quite so. The tourbillon is a pretty worthless complication indeed--back when it was invented, it might have had some sort of utility, but in a wristwatch--which will be highly accurate even without it (for the price the Swiss ask)--it's a somewhat silly thing. Tourbillons are, of course, exquisitely beautiful, and for the Smart Set who can afford them, a fine way for them to fritter away their money.
Unfortunately, even if the Chinese have been able to produce a tourbillon for the hoi polloi, it's like seeing an Nvicter Subaqua Homer in Swiss Gold Layering on the wrist of some mouth-breathing imbecile--one knows its not real gold, because the Geek wearing it would never have been able to afford it. The same goes for Chinese tourbillons; they're like those stupid kits you could buy back in the 1970s which allowed you to turn a Volkswagen bug into a Bentley.
I'd rather meet a normal guy wearing a Seiko SKX007--which I did at work the other night--than some Geek wearing an Invicter tourbillon.