IS IT A FAKE OR A REPLICA

[solkryssare 109]

Our watches are fakes and we are just kidding our self calling them replicas.

 

+1 Sol, however there's nothing greatly wrong with fantasising, calling them reps on the fora does no harm, but we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that we can only gild the lily so far !

 

Oh I totally agree mate. I call them replicas as well. Sounds better.

[Brightlight 0]

I think the term has more to do with what you are trying to convey. If you are trying to pass it off as a Gen, then its a fake. If you are proud of it, and telling others that it isn't a gen, but a high quality watch resembling the gen, then it's a replica. If you simply dont mention it to anyone, it doesnt much matter either way. The intent is what drives the term I think.

+1

 

I can't for the life of me understand why people are so reluctant to admit it is a fake. Try telling the Customs, the Gen manufacturers or the authorities it is a 'replica' and see what they say. It is illegal, a fake and a counterfeit despite closing your eyes and making up what you want to tell yourself it is. The fact that the UK Customs, probably the most lax in europe, turn a blind eye currently because they have bigger fish to fry doesn't alter the truth.

[midasmook 14]

I think the term has more to do with what you are trying to convey. If you are trying to pass it off as a Gen, then its a fake. If you are proud of it, and telling others that it isn't a gen, but a high quality watch resembling the gen, then it's a replica. If you simply dont mention it to anyone, it doesnt much matter either way. The intent is what drives the term I think.

+1

 

I can't for the life of me understand why people are so reluctant to admit it is a fake. Try telling the Customs, the Gen manufacturers or the authorities it is a 'replica' and see what they say. It is illegal, a fake and a counterfeit despite closing your eyes and making up what you want to tell yourself it is. The fact that the UK Customs, probably the most lax in europe, turn a blind eye currently because they have bigger fish to fry doesn't alter the truth.

So we should just call our forum the Fake watches guide then. Do you also subscribe to the Fake watches are for Fake people theory?

[Brightlight 0]

I think the term has more to do with what you are trying to convey. If you are trying to pass it off as a Gen, then its a fake. If you are proud of it, and telling others that it isn't a gen, but a high quality watch resembling the gen, then it's a replica. If you simply dont mention it to anyone, it doesnt much matter either way. The intent is what drives the term I think.

+1

 

I can't for the life of me understand why people are so reluctant to admit it is a fake. Try telling the Customs, the Gen manufacturers or the authorities it is a 'replica' and see what they say. It is illegal, a fake and a counterfeit despite closing your eyes and making up what you want to tell yourself it is. The fact that the UK Customs, probably the most lax in europe, turn a blind eye currently because they have bigger fish to fry doesn't alter the truth.

So we should just call our forum the Fake watches guide then. Do you also subscribe to the Fake watches are for Fake people theory?

 

Nothing wrong with using the euphemism 'Replica watches' but surely we realise what they are? They are just a dodgy as counterfeit football shirts, handbags or DVDs.

[midasmook 14]

I think the term has more to do with what you are trying to convey. If you are trying to pass it off as a Gen, then its a fake. If you are proud of it, and telling others that it isn't a gen, but a high quality watch resembling the gen, then it's a replica. If you simply dont mention it to anyone, it doesnt much matter either way. The intent is what drives the term I think.

+1

 

I can't for the life of me understand why people are so reluctant to admit it is a fake. Try telling the Customs, the Gen manufacturers or the authorities it is a 'replica' and see what they say. It is illegal, a fake and a counterfeit despite closing your eyes and making up what you want to tell yourself it is. The fact that the UK Customs, probably the most lax in europe, turn a blind eye currently because they have bigger fish to fry doesn't alter the truth.

So we should just call our forum the Fake watches guide then. Do you also subscribe to the Fake watches are for Fake people theory?

 

Nothing wrong with using the euphemism 'Replica watches' but surely we realise what they are? They are just a dodgy as counterfeit football shirts, handbags or DVDs.

I don't know what you mean by dodgy, but unlike football shirts bags etc. the guys on here take great care to make sure the watches are of good quality by mods etc. I refuse to pay Panerai for a watch that uses a 6497 movement in it with Panerai stamped on it. I supose you could claim they are using fakes by calling it a Panerai movement.

What about homage watches are they the same ?

I think we agree we don't use gens but maybe I think that the term Fake is used as a derogatory term and means junk.

Maybe I'm just a sensitive wee soul but I enjoy my hobby and I think you do too.

[sconehead 5]

I have fakes, reps, copies, whatever you want to call them, along with a few gens. Who cares what other people call them anyway? To me they're all just nice watches...some with better QC at higher prices...'tis all...

[turnipz 0]

Fake watches are for fake people? What does that even mean..

 

If you base your personal worth on the watch you wear then maybe you should rearrange your priorities. Not to say anyone here believes it.

[Member X 91]

If you base your personal worth on the watch you wear [or the worth of others on the watch they wear] then maybe you should rearrange your priorities.

Nail.

 

Head.

[turnipz 0]

Whats the difference between the person pumping your gas wearing a rolex and the person pumping your gas wearing a replica?

 

About 5 grand.

[Baldrick 1]

To break down your points and burst your bubble.

 

1.

I don't know what you mean by dodgy, but unlike football shirts bags etc. the guys on here take great care to make sure the watches are of good quality by mods etc.

That doesn't legitimise them any further, as stated before you can only gild the lily so far, regardless of the quality they are still fakes. and the 'quality' aspect applies to football shirts also, I just bought a Barcelona shirt for my nephew, the supplier was at great pains to point out all the relevant logos / stitching / labels and feel of the shirt to justify his price, same as a fake watch supplier.

 

2.

I refuse to pay Panerai for a watch that uses a 6497 movement in it with Panerai stamped on it.

Regardless of your fiscal attitude towards Panerai watches, the price they charge is not simply a reflection of the movement used, if that were the case the entire Swiss industry would be defunct with it's persistent use of low-price ETA ebauche, if you don't feel they represent value for money, don't buy them, do as you currently do, buy a fake.

 

3.

I supose you could claim they are using fakes by calling it a Panerai movement.

 

No, that's analogous to saying that Jaguars are fake because they use(d) Ford parts or Rolls Royce are fake because they use BMW parts or Ferodo / Pirelli / Lucas / AC Delco parts, or a Panasonic plasma is fake because it uses a Hitachi screen or semi-conductors, out-sourcing is common to all industries, even the Chinese fake industry, thye fact that Panerai chose to use Unitas 6497 or Angelus or rolex movements doesn't justify calling them fakes any more than the fact that rep panerai using 6497 mov'ts justifies calling them genuine Panerai.

 

4.

What about homage watches are they the same ?

 

Whilst they may not blatantly use a company's logo, they do frequently breach patent and copyright designs, they're still fakes, we're gentler on them because they don't have the 5 letters on the dial etc.

 

5.

I think we agree we don't use gens but maybe I think that the term Fake is used as a derogatory term and means junk.

 

I don't see agreement here, I use gens just as much as fakes, if you think that deferring the use of the term fake and replacing it with replicas, despite any hard work carried out by a member ( which after all is to take it nearer the genuine article), legitimises it, then I believe you need to think again.

 

These are fakes, Government bodies / manufacturers / retail outlets AND the general public outside of these fora, know them for what they are, moody kettles / fugazzis / knock-offs / fakes, sorry, but there it is.

 

6.

Maybe I'm just a sensitive wee soul but I enjoy my hobby and I think you do too.

 

As do we all, but when you're sweeping up pig shit, you can only get rid of so much of the smell.

 

As I've often said and as Member X states above, if your character / status or personal worth are wrapped up in the clothes / watch / car you drive, time for personal re-assessment, it's about character / family / morality and social values, not the D&G label on your suit / handbag or logo on your watch.

[jmd33 0]

I'm not sure I agree with everyone.

 

What we are dealing with are connotations of words with similar meanings:

 

______________________________________________

 

rep-lica

n.

1 a reproduction or copy of a work of art, esp. a copy by the maker of the original

2 any very close reproduction or copy; facsimile

—SYN COPY

 

 

fake

vt., vi.

1 to make (something) seem real, satisfactory, etc. by any sort of deception or tampering, to practice deception by pretending or simulating (something)

2 to improvise

n.

1 anything or anyone not genuine; fraud; counterfeit

2 [informal] a deceptive act, movement, etc.

adj.

1 fraudulent; not genuine; sham; false

2 artificial; not real; specif., made of synthetic fibers, to resemble animal fur !fake fur"

—SYN FALSE

fake out [informal] to deceive or outmaneuver as by a feint, bluff, or deceptive act

 

__________________________________________________

 

I don't agree that a "replica" connotates a sanctioned copy. I think the term "replica" connotates a reproduction that is "close" to the original - whereas the term "fake" connotates something negative, deceptive, (to me, lower quality), etc... .

 

Maybe this is sweeping pig shit, but to me a $500 replica watch with a gen (or copy) ETA movement, some other gen parts (or other mods) would properly be termed a "replica". Where a Canal St. POS you would just throw away when it has an issue would be a "fake".

 

I do not think the terms are as direcly interchangable as some would think.

Edited October 5, 2010 by jmd33

[Baldrick 1]

Not a replica if not sanctioned, if it came to court, believe me regardless of whether it's $50.00 or $500.00, fitted with Clark crystals or otherwise, legally it would be a fake!

 

When the dictionary terms were coined, I don't think Webster had embraced the notion of the Chinese fake industry!

[Brightlight 0]

I don't agree that a "replica" connotates a sanctioned copy. I think the term "replica" connotates a reproduction that is "close" to the original - whereas the term "fake" connotates something negative, deceptive, (to me, lower quality), etc... .

 

Maybe this is sweeping pig shit, but to me a $500 replica watch with a gen (or copy) ETA movement, some other gen parts (or other mods) would properly be termed a "replica". Where a Canal St. POS you would just throw away when it has an issue would be a "fake".

 

I do not think the terms are as direcly interchangable as some would think.

 

Call it what you like. In a sense yes they are 'replica's of the genuine article, they are also fakes, the two terms are not mutually exclusive. From your own definition - "anything or anyone not genuine; fraud; counterfeit". Even one of VDB's Vintage Pam 'Replicas' costing many thousands of dollars is still a 'fake' and a 'counterfeit' which depending on the morals and ethics of the buyer can be used to commit 'fraud'.

 

Nothing changes this, nor does it make any difference if you enjoy watches and enjoy this hobby as I do, there is no getting round our replicas/fakes are illegal and are counterfeits.

 

As Shakespeare said "That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet"

[Star 0]

I'm not trying to deceive myself nor anyone else. I call it what it is....a BRAND NEW-VINTAGE, GENUINE-ULTIMATE REPLICA-FAKE, VERSION #3 HOMAGE WATCH

Edited October 5, 2010 by Star

[greg_r 83]

If people ask me whether it's a fake watch, I just show it to them: "No look, it's real - it tells the time and everything!"

 

Fake, replica, knockoff, counterfeit, hooky - sorry, none of those. It's called a WATCH

[midasmook 14]

To break down your points and burst your bubble.

 

1.

I don't know what you mean by dodgy, but unlike football shirts bags etc. the guys on here take great care to make sure the watches are of good quality by mods etc.

That doesn't legitimise them any further, as stated before you can only gild the lily so far, regardless of the quality they are still fakes. and the 'quality' aspect applies to football shirts also, I just bought a Barcelona shirt for my nephew, the supplier was at great pains to point out all the relevant logos / stitching / labels and feel of the shirt to justify his price, same as a fake watch supplier.

 

2.

I refuse to pay Panerai for a watch that uses a 6497 movement in it with Panerai stamped on it.

Regardless of your fiscal attitude towards Panerai watches, the price they charge is not simply a reflection of the movement used, if that were the case the entire Swiss industry would be defunct with it's persistent use of low-price ETA ebauche, if you don't feel they represent value for money, don't buy them, do as you currently do, buy a fake.

 

3.

I supose you could claim they are using fakes by calling it a Panerai movement.

 

No, that's analogous to saying that Jaguars are fake because they use(d) Ford parts or Rolls Royce are fake because they use BMW parts or Ferodo / Pirelli / Lucas / AC Delco parts, or a Panasonic plasma is fake because it uses a Hitachi screen or semi-conductors, out-sourcing is common to all industries, even the Chinese fake industry, thye fact that Panerai chose to use Unitas 6497 or Angelus or rolex movements doesn't justify calling them fakes any more than the fact that rep panerai using 6497 mov'ts justifies calling them genuine Panerai.

 

4.

What about homage watches are they the same ?

 

Whilst they may not blatantly use a company's logo, they do frequently breach patent and copyright designs, they're still fakes, we're gentler on them because they don't have the 5 letters on the dial etc.

 

5.

I think we agree we don't use gens but maybe I think that the term Fake is used as a derogatory term and means junk.

 

I don't see agreement here, I use gens just as much as fakes, if you think that deferring the use of the term fake and replacing it with replicas, despite any hard work carried out by a member ( which after all is to take it nearer the genuine article), legitimises it, then I believe you need to think again.

 

These are fakes, Government bodies / manufacturers / retail outlets AND the general public outside of these fora, know them for what they are, moody kettles / fugazzis / knock-offs / fakes, sorry, but there it is.

 

6.

Maybe I'm just a sensitive wee soul but I enjoy my hobby and I think you do too.

 

As do we all, but when you're sweeping up pig shit, you can only get rid of so much of the smell.

 

As I've often said and as Member X states above, if your character / status or personal worth are wrapped up in the clothes / watch / car you drive, time for personal re-assessment, it's about character / family / morality and social values, not the D&G label on your suit / handbag or logo on your watch.

 

You have not burst any bubble of mine and I don't need you breaking down points of mine which were meant as an answer to Brightlight.

I stick by everything I said and for your information I have never been anything other than truthful when anyone asks me about any watch I wear whether it's rep or gen. Not that it happens very often as most people know nothing about watches.

The most knowledgeable watch people I know are all rep, fake watch collectors.

I have a mate who has three Panerai watches and he doesn't believe mine are fake even when I point out the difference.

I have another mate who was pig sick when I done a side by side review of both his and my Pam 088.

There is so obviously a different meaning between replica and fake in the way we view our hobby otherwise we as I said we would be the fake watches guide.

Personally I don't care what it's called rep,fake or homage I love this hobby but you are kidding yourself on if you think that others don't call our watches and us fake and mean it in a derogatory term.

[2paraxman 0]

i think snides copy fakes reps should really be called kiddas your kidding some of the people and of course yourself that you got a watch your really cant afford the real mcCoy ps before you all moan this does not includ some of the peeps in here

[jmd33 0]

It is very interesting to see everyone's perception.

 

I'm not sure the synonyms of "fake" or "replica" have anything to do with legality. Again, this started out with a label difference and mere connotation differences between the two terms.

 

If you want to now include the issue of legality as the determining factor then there becomes no difference. If the basis for the definition is legality then "fake", "replica", "copy", whatever - then they are all "counterfeit".

 

I guess, to me, legality has nothing to do with the original discussion. There is no dispute that having something with another's trademark and re-selling it is not legal - but that still doesn't answer the issue of the difference between something that is a "fake" vrs. something that is a "replica" [if there is any difference at all].

[Member X 91]

Nicely summed up

[Baldrick 1]

You have not burst any bubble of mine and I don't need you breaking down points of mine which were meant as an answer to Brightlight.

 

Given that your post is part of the ongoing discussion, I have as a member every right to contest and break down your points as a rebuttal !

 

I stick by everything I said and for your information I have never been anything other than truthful when anyone asks me about any watch I wear whether it's rep or gen. Not that it happens very often as most people know nothing about watches.

 

I'm sure you do, it doesn't change anything tho, as for your truthfulness, I never stated otherwise, therefore have no need of your information.

 

 

The most knowledgeable watch people I know are all rep, fake watch collectors.

Knowledgeable or not, they're acknowledged collectors of 'fake watches'.!

 

I have a mate who has three Panerai watches and he doesn't believe mine are fake even when I point out the difference.

You're doing as good a job in convincing him, than you are convincing others on here that they shouldn't be called fakes because it's derogatory, once again the truth is, if the watch / t-shirt / handbag / Ferodo / AC Delco part is not officially sanctioned by the manufacturer, then it's a fake, it doesn't matter how well made it is ( usually inferior ), it could actually be better engineered than the original, if it carries the copyright owner's brand / logo / TM, it's fake, it is representing itself as something it';s not.

 

 

I have another mate who was pig sick when I done a side by side review of both his and my Pam 088.

 

I'm sure a quick intro to Mary or Reg will settle his queasiness, altho it sounds as tho' he bought on the strength of status, rather than a desire to have a fine timepiece replete with all the QC aspects that accompanied his purchase, and why he should be sick I fail to comprehend, I'm sure he paid a fair price, commensurate with the market price for the item.

 

There is so obviously a different meaning between replica and fake in the way we view our hobby

 

That may be the case, but it's peculiar to these fora, the great ( washed ) and unwashed public do not and would not subscribe to this notion, we as members here stick our heads under the blanket to avoid the monster, if we don't peek out, he ain't there.

 

otherwise we as I said we would be the fake watches guide.

 

Grammatical semantics, how many people would search for 'fake watch forums', not many, most search in the first instance for 'fake Rolex' and thru' a process of acquired knowledge and 'Google is your friend', end up on these fora, but for every one who ends up here, there are a dozen who end up just buying a 'fake' from a scam website, this is evidenced by looking at the membership numbers of all the rep fora, they boast of 'thousands' of members, but if you analyse the membership, there are really only a small number of hard-core posting members, who in most instances spread themselves across all fora, look at the 'members list' and see how many are non-posters, people who come looking for their Rolex / Omega fix, get on the train and depart, the remainder find themselves in a club, where the others deal in replicas and detest the term 'fake' :gayvikingmusic:

 

Personally I don't care what it's called rep,fake or homage I love this hobby but you are kidding yourself on if you think that others don't call our watches and us fake and mean it in a derogatory term.

 

That seems like a complete volte face , your initial post seemed to convey an emotional response on your part regarding the inclusion of rep watches in the general category of 'fakes', advocating the separation of rep watches from 'fake' 'dodgy' football shirts etc , based on the quality (?), price, mods and overall character of members on the fora.

 

Your assertion with regard to the term 'fake' being a derogatory term is entirely correct, it is a derogatory term and justifiably so, these products are the result of theft, Chinese companies who are involved in that theft, they are the head of the snake, we are the tail, they and we are complicit in this criminal endeavour.

 

Doesn't matter which way you cut the cheese, if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and talks like a duck, it ain't an aardvark, it's a duck.

[sconehead 5]

...what about a platypus?

[Baldrick 1]

Aussie animals don't count, they're from another planet, just like monkeys ( filthy creatrures )

[greg_r 83]

Aussie animals don't count, they're from another planet, just like monkeys ( filthy creatrures )