Fitz's Youtube Channel

Fitz II

Snobbery is a matter of perspective i suppose, a term easily levelled and difficult to defend without going on the offensive. I think the term is passive aggressive and the enemy of critical review. You allow yourself to stagnate when you level this accusation, as once you have decided critics are snobs you can ignore their points without consideration of their merits.

Cyclingtourist

Fitz II wrote: »

Snobbery is a matter of perspective i suppose, a term easily levelled and difficult to defend without going on the offensive. I think the term is passive aggressive and the enemy of critical review. You allow yourself to stagnate when you level this accusation, as once you have decided critics are snobs you can ignore their points without consideration of their merits.

How about watch-condescension? The tendency to dismiss all watches from the brand and those who buy them as ignorant people duped by brand marketing.

You don't think there's a lot of this around Invicta?

Fitz II

Cyclingtourist wrote: »

How about watch-condescension?

Watch-condescension is just another phrase for snobbery.

Cyclingtourist wrote: »

The tendency to dismiss all watches from the brand and those who buy them as ignorant people duped by brand marketing.

You don't think there's a lot of this around Invicta?

You might say that, I couldn't possibly comment.

Wibbs

Cyclingtourist wrote: »

How about watch-condescension? The tendency to dismiss all watches from the brand and those who buy them as ignorant people duped by brand marketing.

You don't think there's a lot of this around Invicta?

There's a lot of that around Rolex.

Cyclingtourist

Fitz II wrote: »

Watch-condescension is just another phrase for snobbery.

Yes.

You might say that, I couldn't possibly comment.

Yes, I do believe there is based on what I've picked up from YT and comments by watch enthusiasts.

I considered buying their 1953 retro diver but it was out of stock last year for over six months and in the end I ordered my San Martin instead and while waiting for it to arrive they got the 1953 briefly back in stock. Most of their watches are either too big or too blingy for my taste but I wouldn't be condescending/snobbish if I came upon someone wearing one.

scwazrh

Fitz II wrote: »

Watch-condescension is just another phrase for snobbery.

.

As is sexist racist nazis believe it or not ..

Fitz II

scwazrh wrote: »

As is sexist racist nazis believe it or not ..

You might say that, I couldn't possibly comment.

Fitz II

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vR7-MCFFr6Y

Rolex James Cameron Deep Sea with thanks to Unkle. Not that happy with the review, didnt get enough footage and some was not great quality, could do better.

https://youtu.be/vR7-MCFFr6Y

Wibbs

Looked good to me Fitz. Jaysus it's a tank alright. Well I suppose with all the talk of homelessness and lack of suitable properties, if push came to shove I could live in it. Cool watch though.

Blanchy90

Just watched it there, I don't know too much about Rolex so I thought the review was very interesting.

One small criticism I think you went a bit fast in the early stages of the video both in talking and moving the watch.


Are you filming and doing the voiceover separately? I'm still trying to figure out the best way to do my videos, hopefully I'll have the Seamaster review up this weekend

Fitz II

Blanchy90 wrote: »

Just watched it there, I don't know too much about Rolex so I thought the review was very interesting.

One small criticism I think you went a bit fast in the early stages of the video both in talking and moving the watch.


Are you filming and doing the voiceover separately? I'm still trying to figure out the best way to do my videos, hopefully I'll have the Seamaster review up this weekend

Yep pre recorded the video and voiced over...I think it works better to do the voice over with the watch in hand. it slows you down and makes you more deliberate. This means if people are giving me a watch for an hour I need to be prepared with my points ahead of time, again thats difficult on a watch you have not handled before, your points are then somebody else's points really.

Wibbs

I don't think it was too fast anyway. I much prefer your delivery to the all too usual half hour of waffle and endlessly spinning macro shots. That's just me mind you. There's critique involved too. Not just again the usual this [insert brand/model here] is the best evah! Until next week...

redlead

Excellent job I have to say Fitz. Each video is getting noticeably better than the previous one.

unkel

Another quality review there Fitz II. Well researched, well presented, not shy to give your own view on it, good and bad.

Weird to see my own watch on Youtube I like the pic with my hand in my pocket, you can see the watch doesn't look particularly big on me at all (in my view)

One question, you state that you can get this watch for in or around detail (€12,450) and normally you do your research thoroughly into this. I've just checked chrono and the cheapest one in the EU is €13,700. And average is a bit over €15,000. That's fairly significantly over retail? Of course not the twice retail as we have seen on some popular Rolex like the OP fancy colours and the Daytona.

Thirdfox

Wibbs wrote: »

I don't think it was too fast anyway. I much prefer your delivery to the all too usual half hour of waffle and endlessly spinning macro shots. That's just me mind you. There's critique involved too. Not just again the usual this [insert brand/model here] is the best evah! Until next week...

Ever Olympics is the best one ever until the next one

You know something I miss from watch reviews that are present in other reviews I read about products? Comparisons.

"This VW Golf's ride is a bit too firm - I much prefer the Toyota Camry's" - "The Bosch xyz123 washing machine has a 5000 rpm wash cycle which is 2000 rpm less than the leader in the field Samsung def456 with 7000 rpm".

Because - isn't that what a reviewer is paid to do traditionally? Use their extensive knowledge about cars/phones/washing machines to give readers/viewers a good idea of how 1 product compares to the other?

But in the field of jewellery this is obviously harder since we're not talking about tangibles - the intangible happiness you get putting on a diamond ring or a Rolex sub can't be measured in rpm/bhp/ghz.

But… I think comparisons is a niche which most reviewers can't afford to do since they only have one watch in their hands to review - whereas you have a decent collection to compare and contrast - how does Bosch (Patek) compare to that Samsung (Lange) washing machine? :pac: - cover the intangibles and feel certainly - but tangible comparisons - even if just a simple price comparison so people see what more they get for the €X more paid may be useful information to allow people to understand how one watch compares to its competition in your subjective opinion. I.e. Doug Demuro's doug score on cars…including luxury cars.

scwazrh

That really is a monster of a watch , I wouldn’t be brave enough to buy it but fair play to you Unkle .It actually looks appropriately sized on your wrist .

The reviews are very good Fitz , I do like your “ who is this watch for part? “

Wibbs

unkel wrote: »

I like the pic with my hand in my pocket, you can see the watch doesn't look particularly big on me at all (in my view)

It doesn't. Remind me never to pick a fight with you. It doesn't look too huge on Fitz' wrist either. I need to eat more shredded wheat or something. No wonder I'm one of the vintage guys around here.

Wibbs

Thirdfox wrote: »

But… I think comparisons is a niche which most reviewers can't afford to do since they only have one watch in their hands to review - whereas you have a decent collection to compare and contrast - how does Bosch (Patek) compare to that Samsung (Lange) washing machine? :pac: - cover the intangibles and feel certainly - but tangible comparisons - even if just a simple price comparison so people see what more they get for the €X more paid may be useful information to allow people to understand how one watch compares to its competition in your subjective opinion. I.e. Doug Demuro's doug score on cars…including luxury cars.

Good idea, though Fitz kinda did that already with the Patek vid. Noting that it's a bargain in that pricepoint compared to others.


Do NOT get me started on Doug...

893bet

unkel wrote: »

Another quality review there Fitz II. Well researched, well presented, not shy to give your own view on it, good and bad.

Weird to see my own watch on Youtube I like the pic with my hand in my pocket, you can see the watch doesn't look particularly big on me at all (in my view)

One question, you state that you can get this watch for in or around detail (€12,450) and normally you do your research thoroughly into this. I've just checked chrono and the cheapest one in the EU is €13,700. And average is a bit over €15,000. That's fairly significantly over retail? Of course not the twice retail as we have seen on some popular Rolex like the OP fancy colours and the Daytona.

Do you really believe the c24 prices is the question. If you are selling yes of course. If you are buying you are in there looking for 10-20 percent off.

The last watch I bought from c24 was almost 18k. I moved outside of c24 and only parted with 16k. A lot of watches on c24 you will find the same watch, from the same dealer on their website or eBay for a cheaper price.

Not to mention a lot of the c24 sales are dealer sales. Irrelevant to the private market. I sure as **** don’t offer any warranty on any watch! E.g below is a brand new 2021 dealer sale for 14.2k. Assuming 10 percent off if you can get away from c24 then that is pretty much retail.

https://www.chrono24.co.uk/rolex/rolex-sea-dweller-deepsea-nuovo-2021-full-set-con-documenti-e-scatola-rolex--id19440580.htm?SETLANG=en_GB&SETCURR=EUR

Thirdfox

Wibbs wrote: »

Good idea, though Fitz kinda did that already with the Patek vid. Noting that it's a bargain in that pricepoint compared to others.


Do NOT get me started on Doug...

And I think that's something that's often conspiciously missing from watch "reviews" - sure the reviewer mentions "I didn't quite like design" - BUT the key thing is that they don't then say "it was done much better in watch XYZ" - because brands don't want a reviewer who mentions other brands and in fact "helps" their competitors... But then isn't the review an advertisement (or a spec run-through) rather than something consumers can use as a guide for purchasing decisions?

Because that's what traditional reviewers do right? Purchase the model and they can say whatever they want about it - point out flaws, point out better competitors etc.

Would Jody (or any of the large reviewers) ever say in a Citizen review "actually - the Seiko is much better overall and people should get that in my opinion unless there is something you absolutely love about this Citizen"? I see that in online car reviews.

And Doug may be a bad example seeing the amount of luxury car dealerships that loan him review cars

redlead

Watch comparisons of mid tier brands is fairly difficult because comparing specs on paper is usually a load of nonsense in my view. For instance, I was arguing about this the other day with a friend who rolled out the usual "Omegas are technically superior to Rolex" line that you usually hear from lads that have seamasters and don't have subs. If having a more complex Co axial movement makes it technically superior, then I just don't agree. It is more technical but not superior in my view. The benefit of a Co axial movement is theoretically less wear and tear . If that is the case, then why does a seamaster have a 5 year service interval and a sub has 10? Modern lubricants just make having a Co axial movement unnecessary. Both watches have excellent movements that keep great time so something like a greater power reserve might actually be more useful.

This is a long winded way of saying how can you really compare watches in the same bracket when they are almost guaranteed to have a similar standard of finish and movement etc. I like seeing watches assessed on their own merits.

Fitz II

unkel wrote: »

Another quality review there Fitz II. Well researched, well presented, not shy to give your own view on it, good and bad.

Weird to see my own watch on Youtube I like the pic with my hand in my pocket, you can see the watch doesn't look particularly big on me at all (in my view)

One question, you state that you can get this watch for in or around detail (€12,450) and normally you do your research thoroughly into this. I've just checked chrono and the cheapest one in the EU is €13,700. And average is a bit over €15,000. That's fairly significantly over retail? Of course not the twice retail as we have seen on some popular Rolex like the OP fancy colours and the Daytona.

Thanks again for the watch Unkle, and certainly you wear to watch well and are totally used to it, looks very well on you. But you were laser focused on this watch for a long time and knew exactly what you were getting into. Its a total beast.

12450 is retail and the chrono graph I put in is the worldwide selling prices, not the asking prices. Average at the moment is around 14100, minus the chrono 6% which is not value in the watch thats dealer or platform profit so around 13250 in the watch, so 750 profit on a totally average sale. For me thats in an around retail. Its not until you have 3 or 4 thousand in profit in a watch that it becomes (for me) an "investment" proposition with 13k tied up in it. But this is Rolex we are talking so any watch that you buy today and sell tomorrow for the same money is a total win, and I know you bought this watch well. If you want the watch as a watch, then the resale price is mostly unimportant.

I like a comparison myself, and at this stage I have had a lot of watches to compare against. I also tend to buy the usually benchmarks so its a good standard candle.

Cyclingtourist

Fifty subscribers, time for a watch-giveaway?

Wibbs

As 89 notes Chrono24 is not a good way to judge values. It's chock full of dealers and their notions. The rest of the private types tend to be serial flippers looking to get back something. That's new and current stuff, their vintage offerings "values" are even worse and almost always beyond daft. Again, dealers smoking the wacky baccy.

unkel

Wibbs wrote: »

It doesn't look too huge on Fitz' wrist either.

No it didn't. But with the glidelock fully closed, it was still a few mm too big for Fitz and that makes this top heavy watch wobble around and topple over. You really need to wear it without too much play or it gets annoying. For the same reason I'm also very glad that I did not end up with the 116660 - I don't think I would have kept that one long

Fitz II wrote: »

the chrono graph I put in is the worldwide selling prices

That's a bit of an issue. Any Rolex can be bought substantially cheaper in China, Russia, Japan or the USA. Now if you do a lot of international travel you could probably get away with going over without a watch, buy one and bring it back (without box or papers) and not declare it. This particular watch was bought in the EU in an airport AD by someone travelling outside, so the buyer avoided the VAT

But for most people that's not an option or not a risk they would be willing to take and only EU prices are relevant

Therefore as an easy benchmark, I usually take the cheapest one for sale in the EU (and deduct something for negotiation)

unkel

Wibbs wrote: »

As 89 notes Chrono24 is not a good way to judge values. It's chock full of dealers and their notions.

No doubt you're right there for most watches. But here we are talking current Rolex steel sport watches and I'm not so sure if your point stands.

I did a lot of looking and contacting dealers directly (after spotting their Rolex for sale on Chrono) in the last year and there really was very little in it. Often nothing, zero. Price is the price. A good comparison also is to check all EU entries for a certain reference on Chrono and then do the rounds on many grey market dealer websites in the EU. Often the prices on their websites are the same or higher and nearly without exception, there was little to zero room for negotiation (over the phone or via email). Perhaps if you showed up in the store with a bundle of cash, you'd get more. I haven't tried that.

Wibbs

I know a chap who bought a Sub a few years ago in Las Vegas of all places(and it was still cheaper than here even with the drunk tourist markup) and got an American mate of his to send the box and papers by post a few months later. Maybe that would raise flags these days?

Fitz II

unkel wrote: »

That's a bit of an issue. Any Rolex can be bought substantially cheaper in China, Russia, Japan or the USA. Now if you do a lot of international travel you could probably get away with going over without a watch, buy one and bring it back (without box or papers) and not declare it. This particular watch was bought in the EU in an airport AD by someone travelling outside, so the buyer avoided the VAT

Hey man I am an international youtuber....YouTube knows not borders.

unkel wrote: »

Therefore as an easy benchmark, I usually take the cheapest one for sale in the EU (and deduct something for negotiation)

Just remember to do the opposite when selling

unkel

Wibbs wrote: »

Maybe that would raise flags these days?

I don't think so. What can they do?

Customs officer: "Have you proof you already owned that watch when you left Ireland, have you proof of purchase"

Dude who bought Rolex cheaply in Vegas: "no, I have no proof and no, I bought it off a mate"

End of story. And if ever questioned why he received an empty box and some papers (without his name on it obviously) he'd just say he collects boxes

Obviously if you do carry evidence on you that you bought it outside the EU and brought it in, without declaring it, you could be in serious trouble. For a €500 Seiko you'd probably just get a fine. For a €13000 Rolex, you'd be lucky to get away without a criminal conviction. And we all know about the dude who imported some garlic into Ireland without paying VAT / duties and he is now serving a 6 year jail sentence.

Cyrus

unkel wrote: »

No doubt you're right there for most watches. But here we are talking current Rolex steel sport watches and I'm not so sure if your point stands.

I did a lot of looking and contacting dealers directly (after spotting their Rolex for sale on Chrono) in the last year and there really was very little in it. Often nothing, zero. Price is the price. A good comparison also is to check all EU entries for a certain reference on Chrono and then do the rounds on many grey market dealer websites in the EU. Often the prices on their websites are the same or higher and nearly without exception, there was little to zero room for negotiation (over the phone or via email). Perhaps if you showed up in the store with a bundle of cash, you'd get more. I haven't tried that.

I think if you try the Cameron is achievable at retail mainly because its too big for most people!

893bet

All this talk about making profit from watches makes me a little sad. But I do accept it’s hard to ignore as a factor. Me included.

Fitz II

893bet wrote: »

All this talk about making profit from watches makes me a little sad. But I do accept it’s hard to ignore as a factor. Me included.

I hear ya, but it does make the justification of having these watches easier. And it's made the market far more active and liquid.

unkel

Fitz II wrote: »

I hear ya, but it does make the justification of having these watches easier.

I couldn't justify putting thousands in a watch if there was a chance I would lose significantly on it. It's nice if I can sell a watch for more than I bought it for (=profit) but that's not my reason for buying this watch as you have pointed out yourself: many other Rolex steel sports watches would be a better bet as an investment

I've worn this watch pretty much 24/7 since I got it nearly 5 months ago, I am not careful with it. As anyone can witness from your video. Maybe that's the reason you shifted it a bit quickly in your hands to make the scratches on the clasp less noticeable?

Thanks for doing the video and sharing it with all of us here, and an ever widening fan base no doubt! I particularly like this photo, it's in the video but I might as well stick it up here:




For reference, I'm a bit over 6'1, 100kg and my wrist is about 7.6". By no means a big lad. On a guy say like Jeremy Clarkson (6'4, 150kg, wrist over 8"?) it would probably look too small.

gameoverdude

unkel wrote:

For reference, I'm a bit over 6'1, 100kg and my wrist is about 7.6". By no means a big lad. On a guy say like Jeremy Clarkson (6'4, 150kg, wrist well over 8"?) it would probably look too small.

Sure just a slip of a lad(no insult intended). The watch looks well on you.

banie01

unkel wrote: »

For reference, I'm a bit over 6'1, 100kg and my wrist is about 7.6". By no means a big lad. On a guy say like Jeremy Clarkson (6'4, 150kg, wrist over 8"?) it would probably look too small.

You'll have to lend it to me for a thorough assessment of size and proportion on 6'4"+ male

I'm not as chunky as JC :P but at 100-102kg and a similar sized wrist as yourself it's the only way to be certain


@Fitz, another enjoyable video. There is certainly a growth in confidence and engagement on every video so far.
No punches pulled in terms of who the watch would suit either.
It's refreshing to get a definite opinion without its being shouted at you on YT vid.

Fitz II

banie01 wrote: »

No punches pulled in terms of who the watch would suit either.
It's refreshing to get a definite opinion without its being shouted at you on YT vid.

I am trying to be fair and not ignore elephants. Every watch has a market. I have a vid planned on the Rootbeer wondering if two tone is for sketchy ould fellas? Is the Daytona the most illegible watch in history? Does the Casio Duro make all cheap watch redundant? Is a vostock a POS or not? I think when you take a love or hate approach you miss the all the nice nuisance that make the hobby interesting.

Cyrus

unkel wrote: »

I couldn't justify putting thousands in a watch if there was a chance I would lose significantly on it. It's nice if I can sell a watch for more than I bought it for (=profit) but that's not my reason for buying this watch as you have pointed out yourself: many other Rolex steel sports watches would be a better bet as an investment

I've worn this watch pretty much 24/7 since I got it nearly 5 months ago, I am not careful with it. As anyone can witness from your video. Maybe that's the reason you shifted it a bit quickly in your hands to make the scratches on the clasp less noticeable?

Thanks for doing the video and sharing it with all of us here, and an ever widening fan base no doubt! I particularly like this photo, it's in the video but I might as well stick it up here:




For reference, I'm a bit over 6'1, 100kg and my wrist is about 7.6". By no means a big lad. On a guy say like Jeremy Clarkson (6'4, 150kg, wrist over 8"?) it would probably look too small.

Looks good on you to be fair!

How are you bonding with the panerai?

unkel

Cyrus wrote: »

How are you bonding with the panerai?

Liking it very much. Well not so much the model that I have in particular as it's a chrono. But the whole look and feel and size of the Panerai is just right. Already looking at what Panerai I will get next. Would have to sell this one though, and some other watches too.

unkel

Ha! There's a 126660 just come up for for sale on ichrono. €14,500 non-negotiable.

Linky

scwazrh

unkel wrote: »

Ha! There's a 126660 just come up for for sale on ichrono. €14,500 non-negotiable.

Linky

Was just going to post that .Maybe fitz’s review has started some Irish hype for the deep sea

banie01

scwazrh wrote: »

Was just going to post that .Maybe fitz’s review has started some Irish hype for the deep sea

So Fitz is an influencer!?
That's a sign!
It's time for me to release my sex tape and hoover up the reality TV deals

unkel

scwazrh wrote: »

Maybe fitz’s review has started some Irish hype for the deep sea

Somehow I doubt that

I can't see much hype starting for the JC myself, unless it is discontinued. I have heard the watch talked up by certain Rolex heads though. Who knows and who cares. I won't get any more or any less sleep over it either way. It's a class watch though. I love it.

banie01

unkel wrote: »

Somehow I doubt that

I can't see much hype starting for the JC myself, unless it is discontinued. I have heard the watch talked up by certain Rolex heads though. Who knows and who cares. I won't get any more or any less sleep over it either way. It's a class watch though. I love it.

I really like it too, it's a substantial piece that is the epitome of its type IMO.
A lump of tool that will do the job even after the user breaks

Blanchy90

Fitz II wrote: »

Yep pre recorded the video and voiced over...I think it works better to do the voice over with the watch in hand. it slows you down and makes you more deliberate. This means if people are giving me a watch for an hour I need to be prepared with my points ahead of time, again thats difficult on a watch you have not handled before, your points are then somebody else's points really.

I'd say it's very tough to do it in just an hour.

So far I've just done the voice over with the watch in hand, I try to shoot b roll from different angles incase I miss something and need to add in something at a later stage. It can also be handy for comparison videos in the future if you have extra footage you haven't used.


I'm completely new to YouTube but I've done videos in work ( and worked with people far more talented than me haha) it can be helpful to time out the voice over in advance to get an idea of timings for recording

banie01

It's great to see Fitz and Blanchy's reviews and channels in action.
I have very, very few YT subs and when I say that I mean despite years of using that platform I still have single digit numbers of creators I'll sub too.
Happy to say of the 3 watch folks I have clicked sub on

Ye are all regulars here, Fitz, TF and Blanchy.
All power to ye lads, may the pleasure of a thumbs up bring ye joy.

I can't see myself going down the YT route, I have taken a leaf out of TF's book with buying a lightbox tho!
I'm thinking that I may learn to take a decent photo and share my own shots of models, collectibles, comic art and meagre watches in insta properly at some stage.

Also!
Not got a lot in the way of watches, but happy to lend a piece to the review cause when I'm next up in the smoke and more than an hour could surely be arranged too.

Keep up the good, improving and interesting bids!

Thirdfox

Btw Fitz - I'm just wondering is it just myself or are there a few artefacts in the video at the beginning?

What editing software are you using? I'm cheapening out and using the free Hitfilm Express (you can choose to buy add-ons if/when you need it rather than buying the whole package straight off) rather than the standard Adobe AfterEffects - hey it renders even up to 4k fine for my purposes and it's free so a few hundred euro saved on annual subscriptions I guess...

Oh and I use Gimp 2.0 instead of Adobe Illustrator too - freeware alternative that is akin to photoshop 6.0 - powerful enough for my purposes and bonus that it comes with the funny name :P

Fitz II

No artefacts on my side :)I am using Powerdirector, its not bad once you get over the funny interface and not too expensive, most important thing is it has limited access to a stock vid, photo and music library. Supports all formats up toe 8k but I only have a HD camera at the moment but it does 60 FPS which I think is more beneficial than the higher pixel count. Constantly tweaking the setting to try get out nice output, have a vid tomorrow that I think looks great. I use gimp too but dont do much image manipulation.

unkel

Fitz II wrote: »

have a vid tomorrow that I think looks great

You tease! What watch?

Wibbs

There's an 80's vibe to the opening.

Fitz II

Wibbs wrote: »

There's an 80's vibe to the opening.

https://youtu.be/HwUOpyM-Muo