Omega
And the Winner Is…
Omega
And the Winner Is…
At this stage in life, I no longer feel the need to defend Casablanca as the greatest film of all time, nor the Beatles as the greatest group ever. As far as I’m concerned, anyone who disagrees with me must be benighted in some way, suffering either the misfortune of ignorance (lack of experience, age, exposure to the above or poor education), underdeveloped tastes or the biological curse of stupidity, about which nothing can be done. My days of proselytising are over, but even more so when confronted with a committee, public voting or other form of selection beyond my power. Which brings us to watch awards.
Naturally, one must show solidarity and support the choices for any honours one’s own organisation elects to bestow upon individuals and timepieces – in my case, this magazine’s highly-coveted awards. I nominate and I vote. I accept the results of this democracy. Were I still of a combative mien, I would save my spleen for the egregious corrupt industry awards that are so politically motivated as to beggar belief. Our awards are chosen by editors and staff who are not on the take, nor pressured into voting a certain way.
That extreme example, however, shows how difficult is the process facing judges when we nominate, eliminate and elect the recipients of awards. Even with the methodology of multiple categories to spread the recognition, the number of eligible contenders in each is overwhelming: the watch industry has been so prolific these past two decades that the number of annual releases is in the low thousands. Any one of you could easily name a dozen chronographs, let alone tourbillons released this year alone. So, how to choose?
Far more important is: What do awards mean? Why even bother? While winning an Oscar might put more bums on seats, sending audiences to films they might have missed or ignored, that inducement is only to buy a ticket for a tenner. But does anyone buy a £30,000 watch because it won an award? The same question is asked of brand ambassadors, and the answers are always the same: “Yes… and no.”
“But,” they then tell me, “the fact that we can then get his/her image on a magazine cover or splayed across ads brings attention to the brand.” And that is the real reason, rather than attributable unit sales. So, too, do awards – whether legit or politically motivated – increase awareness of the winner. In a world as overcrowded with watches from which to choose in every category, for most brands, that’s enough.
There are, of course, brands for whom awards might actually be irrelevant, as in: they don’t need the kudos. Categorically, Rolex, Patek Philippe, Cartier, Omega and a handful of others are so strong, so established, so admired that bestowing honours upon them is a bit like saying Petrus had another good year. All, however, have the good grace to show their gratitude as does Meryl Streep upon receiving yet another Oscar nomination.
If our awards lead you to discover a watch or brand you might never have considered, or to learn of an individual who has contributed mightily to an industry we love, then the awards have achieved all that we ask of them: to champion excellence, in a field overloaded with it.