patrick_y
[PuristSPro Moderator]
33533
Why are you surprised?
You're unreasonable in your expectations here. I don't know what you wrote to these publications - but if you were an editor at one of these publications, would you write back to an emotionally charged letter from an irritated collector (I'm making the assumption that your memo was emotionally charged and irritable). Why would a watch publication publicly point out in print something that is of such little consequence to so few people. It's mass market news consumption for the mass market. Why would they waste half a page for something so niche? And obviously, Bulgari is an advertiser with many publications. Nobody bites the hand that feeds them if they don't have to - publications follow this rule too. Lastly, it was probably a mistake. Sure, Bulgari is being a lousy company here by making this mistake and not caring enough to rectify it. I agree with you that Bulgari is making a mistake. But you make it seem like it's the end of the world and you accuse Bulgari of planning this conspiracy. Seems like you saw Bulgari do something wrong and now you can make any accusation and you think your accusations are definitely "right" because Bulgari was definitely in the "wrong."
Locked
login to reply
Finissimo “US & Canada Exclusive” Buyers
The Salmon dial was marketed last year as a 50 piece North America only edition. Did you buy the Salmon dial Finissimo last year and was misled by that marketing. MODERATOR EDIT: Here are the facts: I was verbally told by my Bulgari Boutique Salesperson t...
I did not hear about this.
What happened? Did someone just make a mistake on the marketing end or was there supposed to be a specific US/Canada edition?
Evidence of BVLGARI CEO knowing about this
Not only does he know, he supports it! This is an interview with bvlgari ceo Babin released a couple days ago. Listen from minute 4:30
He is aware there is NO LIMITATION. This video is a few days old
This video proves he is aware of unlimited production from 2024 of what was communicated as limited and exclusive the prior year
Of course he is aware of the unlimited production now. He is the CEO of Bulgari.
Doesn‘t prove that Bulgari themselves marketed the watch as a limited edition of 50 before, though.
Actually they did mention say it
They did in the press release (now deleted). I have email correspondence from two Bvlgari staff confirming it. Every single respectable watch blog or website did categorically specify the number of pieces to be made. They can’t all magically say that numb...
Question is, if you can prove this. I checked the wayback machine and the bulgari website only mentioned the us&canada exclusive special edition. Of course, that doesn‘t mean it wasn‘t mentioned in the press release.
Also, limited bulgari watches usually mention the limitation on the watch (glass, case). There‘s nothing like that for this watch afaik
Misleading marketing and false advertising
It’s irrelevant what’s on a product. What matters is how it’s described to a customer and whether or not that product is what was marketed. The law does not define what constitutes limited by whether or not there is a numbered case. There are limited edit...
I wouldn't say it was done maliciously...
This is obviously a HUGE oversight on the Bulgari corporate team. It's actually fraud. Now, there's civil-court fraud and there's criminal fraud. In USA at least, criminal courts would need a "criminal intent" or "mens rea" where the Bulgari team purposel...
None of the watch publications who marketied the watch last year said anything
An entire organization and its suppliers and distribution networks making an honest mistake by activating an entire supply chain and marketing a product and updating the website? Come on we can’t be taken for granted like that. You know NONE of the public...
Why are you surprised?
You're unreasonable in your expectations here. I don't know what you wrote to these publications - but if you were an editor at one of these publications, would you write back to an emotionally charged letter from an irritated collector (I'm making the as...
Clear market manipulation
All brands abuse limited edition and “special” edition watches. Never came such a blatant and arrogant abuse. How can the SAME watch with the same reference number be exclusive and limited in production, and the next year it isn’t. What makes this more ob...
Well...this is pretty incontrovertible.
That's a shame. I liked the Octo Finissimo. But I can't appreciate this kind of chicanery happening so tacitly.
I think some perspective needs to be added here...
Yes. Bulgari made a mistake. But to call it clear market manipulation, a conspiracy, and everything else here that Riomare has declared, is a stretch. Once a big brand like Bulgari has made a mistake, some big complainers will come in and make the most ex...
Here's the full text of March 31, 2023 PR at WatchTime
Octo Finissimo edition for the U.S. (Ref. 103856). Limited to only 50 pieces, Pricing for the Bulgari Octo Finissimo Tuscan Copper is marked at $13,300. ...
Thank you this is helpful. Appreciate every contribution to get them
Appreciate all the help and attention this deserves. Bvlgari disrespected the watch community. Such behaviour by a brand that’s part of the larger LVMH conglomerate should not be allowed.
One of many watch publications that propagated the limited propaganda
Hodinkee quoting the 50pc. Where do all watch journalists get production information and in many cases money ...
Can't really do much...
I wouldn't personally waste too much time on this or get too worked up. I feel like brands all mislead about limited editions. They always release stuff that is just barely different and justify another X watches with that. Not saying it's right, but what...
Submissive defeatist attitude propagates more market abuse
This goes beyond the typical limited edition marketing angle. The same watch with the same reference number is just no longer limited. How can you not attempt to hold them accountable? It's a social obligation to have such vile behavious in the spotlight ...
This is of course unfortunate and annoying
But if you hoped for a positive development of the market value due to the limitation, you should rather have bought an unlimited Rolex. Since its beauty remains the same I would continue to enjoy it. At least you have enjoyed the watch one year earlier t...
Irrelevant
I am not here to discuss subjective views on beauty and what watch to pick, this isn't relevant to the topic at hand.
Perhaps some people simply can't resist untruthful, unethical salesmanship?
Reminds me of what happened at TAG Heuer in ~2009, when rights were bought to a Seiko chronograph calibre. "In-house" was all the rage back then, so TH flogged the modified movement as having been designed 100% in-house. Nowadays, being a limited edition ...
Perhaps it is more like fraud
saying something is exclusive to a region or to a certain number of pieces when it is false is misleading marketing and a federal offense.
A Federal Offense?
Riomare, you've really made a lot of completely unhinged accusations here. A federal offense? Are you a lawyer? Please go find an AUSA or attorney general to prosecute. I absolutely agree with you that Bulgari did something unethical and something lousy, ...
Perhaps the first 50 were reserved for the North American Market.
Did they marked something on the back of the case? And now as the first 50 are gone they can flood the market with the next 51 and more pieces😂