Really enjoyed this. The GPHG archive in my view is a remarkable public record in an industry where structured data is often lacking.
It's not quite an industry census, but serves as a record of what brands considered worth putting forward, and therefore I guess of marketing intent and changing tastes.
I’m not convinced the fee-paying model is inherently a flaw in the way that people say it is. It creates a bias in who enters, yes, and it means it can never truly capture the best of the whole industry. But funding the awards through a handful of major industry sponsors, for instance, could create a bias that is way worse. I can't immediately think of a clearly better way for an institution like this to sustain itself while maintaining some credibility and independence. So it is a competition for those who enter. That doesn't seem that bad to me – the entry price is not prohibitive for most.
And what it has given us is an archive that the more closely you look at it, the more I believe it has to say.
Thanks for reading! Here’s a new awards structure coming soon… brands don’t get to decide what competes… it’s basically by the industry for the industry.
The bias here is who gets to judge but - it’s focused on people who are objectively qualified. Not just celebrities and personalities. So we will see how that goes soon enough
That’s just the judges / jury I think. For example they can nominate a Rolex Land Dweller for the novel escapement and as watchmakers, evaluate on its merits not vibes
Really enjoyed this. The GPHG archive in my view is a remarkable public record in an industry where structured data is often lacking.
It's not quite an industry census, but serves as a record of what brands considered worth putting forward, and therefore I guess of marketing intent and changing tastes.
I’m not convinced the fee-paying model is inherently a flaw in the way that people say it is. It creates a bias in who enters, yes, and it means it can never truly capture the best of the whole industry. But funding the awards through a handful of major industry sponsors, for instance, could create a bias that is way worse. I can't immediately think of a clearly better way for an institution like this to sustain itself while maintaining some credibility and independence. So it is a competition for those who enter. That doesn't seem that bad to me – the entry price is not prohibitive for most.
And what it has given us is an archive that the more closely you look at it, the more I believe it has to say.
Thanks for reading! Here’s a new awards structure coming soon… brands don’t get to decide what competes… it’s basically by the industry for the industry.
https://www.rubisawards.com/
The bias here is who gets to judge but - it’s focused on people who are objectively qualified. Not just celebrities and personalities. So we will see how that goes soon enough
Rubis definitely looks interesting, thanks for sharing. Will keep an eye on developments there.
At a glance it seems to be mainly comprised of independents which of course could introduce different sorts of biases but let’s see!
That’s just the judges / jury I think. For example they can nominate a Rolex Land Dweller for the novel escapement and as watchmakers, evaluate on its merits not vibes
but will they is the question 😉
Excellent takedown, or rather, tear down of the data.