why hublot eta bad | do watch collectors hate hublots

Hublot. The name itself is enough to ignite passionate debate amongst watch enthusiasts. For some, it represents a bold, innovative, and visually striking approach to horology. For others, it embodies everything wrong with the modern luxury watch market: ostentatious design, perceived lack of in-house movement development, and a price tag that doesn't align with the underlying value proposition. This division is so stark that you’ll frequently find forum threads and Reddit posts dedicated solely to expressing disdain for the brand, questioning its legitimacy, and even outright hating on its clientele. This article will delve into the reasons behind this widespread "Hublot hate," examining its design choices, movement origins, perceived value, and the impact it has on the broader watch collecting community.

Why is Hublot Bad? A Confluence of Factors

The "Hublot hate" isn't a single, easily defined phenomenon. It's a complex issue arising from a confluence of factors, each contributing to the negative perception held by many watch aficionados. Let's break down the key elements:

1. The Design: Gaudy and Ostentatious?

Perhaps the most common criticism leveled against Hublot is its design aesthetic. The brand is known for its bold, often oversized cases, aggressive angles, and use of unusual materials like rubber, carbon fiber, and ceramic. While Hublot often touts its "Art of Fusion" philosophy, some argue that this fusion results in designs that are simply gaudy and lack the timeless elegance found in more traditional watch brands.

Many collectors appreciate the understated sophistication of a watch that blends seamlessly with an outfit, a quiet statement of refined taste. They prefer the "easter egg" effect – a watch that only another enthusiast might recognize and appreciate upon closer inspection. Hublot, on the other hand, screams for attention. Its large size, vibrant colors, and unconventional materials make it impossible to ignore. This ostentatiousness is seen as a sign of poor taste by some, a desperate attempt to flaunt wealth rather than appreciate the artistry of watchmaking.

Comparisons are often drawn to brands like Richard Mille, Jacob & Co., and even Audemars Piguet's Royal Oak (though the Royal Oak has a far more established and respected history). These brands share a similar penchant for bold designs and high price tags, often attracting the same criticisms regarding ostentation and perceived lack of value. However, Hublot often bears the brunt of the criticism due to its perceived reliance on outsourced movements and its relatively short history compared to the other brands mentioned.

2. The Movement: ETA Reliance and Perceived Lack of Innovation

A significant point of contention lies in Hublot's historical reliance on ETA movements, particularly in its earlier models. ETA, a Swiss movement manufacturer, produces reliable and affordable movements that are widely used in the watch industry. However, for a brand positioning itself as a high-end luxury watchmaker, using an off-the-shelf movement is seen as a compromise on quality and craftsmanship.

While Hublot has since developed its own in-house movements, such as the Unico chronograph, the perception of reliance on ETA movements lingers. Critics argue that Hublot's high prices are unjustified when the core mechanism of the watch is not developed and manufactured in-house. They believe that a true luxury watch should have a movement that is designed, assembled, and finished by the brand itself, demonstrating a commitment to horological excellence.

This criticism is further fueled by the fact that other brands in the same price range, like Rolex and Patek Philippe, have a long history of producing their own movements, showcasing their technical prowess and dedication to the art of watchmaking. The perceived lack of in-house movement development in Hublot's early years, and the lingering perception even with the Unico, contributes significantly to the negative sentiment.

3. The Price Tag: Value for Money (or Lack Thereof)

The price of a Hublot watch is often a major sticking point for critics. Given the design choices, the historical reliance on ETA movements, and the perceived lack of horological innovation, many argue that Hublot watches are simply overpriced. They believe that the brand is charging a premium for its marketing and brand image rather than for the inherent quality and craftsmanship of the watch itself.

Collectors often point to other brands that offer similar levels of finishing and complexity, with in-house movements and more understated designs, at a lower price point. This perceived lack of value for money is a major driver of the "Hublot hate." People are willing to spend a significant amount of money on a luxury watch, but they want to feel that they are getting their money's worth in terms of quality, craftsmanship, and horological innovation.

4. The Brand Image: Marketing Over Substance?

Hublot has cultivated a strong brand image through strategic partnerships and high-profile endorsements. The brand has associated itself with luxury sports like football, Formula 1 racing, and golf, sponsoring major events and athletes. While this marketing strategy has undoubtedly raised brand awareness and visibility, it has also contributed to the perception that Hublot is more focused on marketing than on substance.

Critics argue that Hublot is leveraging its marketing prowess to sell watches to a clientele that is more interested in status symbols than in horological artistry. They believe that the brand is prioritizing brand recognition and celebrity endorsements over the development of innovative and technically impressive timepieces. This perception further fuels the criticism that Hublot is overpriced and lacks genuine value.