Is Harry Winston just a blatant copy of Tiffany?

[megeve]

Found these pics in another forum. According to the owner, she has the pendants for about 2 weeks.

With this kind of quality, I wonder what kind of jeweller would copy their business mode!

Yikes......

 

[Klokke]

Found these pics in another forum. According to the owner, she has the pendants for about 2 weeks.

With this kind of quality, I wonder what kind of jeweller would copy their business mode!

Yikes......

Not sure what your point is. Doesn't all silver tarnish? I don't know much about silver. If it tarnishes does that mean it is of poor quality?

I'm not shopping for silver either but thanks anyway.

 

[Klokke]

I'm curious, Klokke, as a self professed new cut nut, have you been inside Tiffany & Co and discussed Asets, HCA scores and Sarins with any of the sales people? Did they have any understanding of them? Did you find a GG on staff?
I just left my local branch today. I abhor incompetence, especially when it comes to significant purchases, you better know your product inside out or I loose respect very quickly. Those are my needs and what I expect when it comes to "good service". I respect that's not everyone's expectations. I have no feelings either way towards Tiffany & Co or Harry Winston as a business model, if asked, I prefer Harry Winston's designs and execution.
A close friend is set on getting a Tiffany Novo, hence our visit today. When I asked about pavillion facet structure for the cushion cuts in their Novos she had no clue what I was talking about, 8 mains, 4 mains...nothing but blank stares...crickets from the entire sales staff. I asked if they had a GG on staff whom I could speak with, I was told no, no GG at that store, but she could help us.
She then went on to tell me the center stone for the Novo "isn't really a cushion, it is a round diamond that was made a little bit square, it's an exclusive cut to Tiffany"...HUH?
Now I'm not buying this ring, my friend is, she doesn't care AT ALL about the details, she just wants an authentic Tiffany Novo - so be it, absolutely her choice and I know she'll be thrilled when she gets it.
All of us have different needs and different values, different ideas of good customer service.

Hi Maplefemme,

From reading here on PS I was totally aware that the luxury brands didn't emphasize the cut data that PS-ers did and was quite expecting that the luxury SAs wouldn't know much about the cut data.

So, as I mentioned in the OP, my plan was to screen the luxury stock using HCA < 2 and AGA Cut grade of 1A-1B. Surprisingly, almost all of what I looked at (Graff, HW, T&Co) in the 1.7 - 2.5 carat range made my cutoffs. And those that didn't were all close. I'm also using IS and ASET scope to narrow things down further. Some of what I look at is mounted but even adjusting for that the results generally look great and very similar to the references. But stones some are clearly a bit better than others. No huge quality difference between brands but generally HW had more stones with HCA >2 and AGA of 2 and Graff had the fewest. T&Co had a few more with HCA > 2 than Graff. I know HCA is only one data point and that my sample size is not comprehensive so I am not making much of any difference between brands.

So I think this is a good strategy to get the best out of the luxury brands but from what I've seen you could go into any of these places "blind" and still get a really beautiful diamond. And I guess this isn't a surprise.

But I get what you are saying about the SAs. I guess I never expected them to know all about cut data and I guess they should but I'm not going to let it get to me. I'm going into all the stores well-armed with PS tools so it's no problem. As long as they let me play around with my tools ad cell phone I'm fine. I will say that no SAs at any of the stores/brands I visited seemed to know/care about all the cut data. In other words, it seems to be the same at all the luxury brands. It will be interesting to see if and how each brand incorporates the growing consumer cut knowledge into their marketing.

Thanks for the advice!

 

[Haven]

ETA: Btw, I think it might bear mentioning that Tiffany's is only looked at as a luxury brand in certain circles, and above certain carat weights. There are many social circles where the brand is passe and by marketing itself with its silver pieces, it has gone down several pegs in terms of how much of a "luxury" brand it actually is. Not sure what your social circle is like, but that might be something to take into consideration.

I completely agree with Princesss on this point. I didn't know how to say this correctly, so let me ditto my fellow PSer!

Tiffany isn't really considered a luxury brand by most people I know. It's very common, I have to say.

 

[maria121]

I'm glad there are some knowledgeable people who can answer the OP's question. I'd like to add that, if indeed the info was pulled from Wikipedia, any well educated person should know that it is the worst source to pull factual information. Also, I have shared my experiences and have purchased jewelry at both companies earlier on in this thread, but disagree greatly that HW is a copy of Tiffany. OP posted on PS because he wanted to know why people would purchase jewelry at HW given (in his opinion) that HW is a blatant copy of Tiffany. In his words:

"The HW story seems like a blatant and not very good copy of the Tiffany history and business model. And they're really just a front now for a Canadian miner. Knowing all this, can anyone here tell me why anyone would prefer HW to T&Co? Am I missing something?"

So how is the history and who started what relevant to what you want to get out of this forum?

 

[Klokke]

ETA: Btw, I think it might bear mentioning that Tiffany's is only looked at as a luxury brand in certain circles, and above certain carat weights. There are many social circles where the brand is passe and by marketing itself with its silver pieces, it has gone down several pegs in terms of how much of a "luxury" brand it actually is. Not sure what your social circle is like, but that might be something to take into consideration.

I completely agree with Princesss on this point. I didn't know how to say this correctly, so let me ditto my fellow PSer!

Tiffany isn't really considered a luxury brand by most people I know. It's very common, I have to say.

A few here have suggested there is some perceived greater exclusivity with HW or that HW is more of a luxury brand than T&Co. The reason cited is that T&Co. has more stores and sells silver jewelry that is more accessible to more people. I understand this and agree that HW pieces are less common. By this reasoning though, the mom and pop custom jeweler in town is even more exclusive than HW by virtue of the fact that even fewer have their pieces but OK. I haven't commented on it this because it wasn't really a concern for me. I actually think it makes sense for T&Co to sell gold and silver items given that silversmithing and goldsmithing have been part of their business almost from the beginning.

Now I'm not a jewelry expert but when I hear Harry Winston I think of them as the official engagement ring of the TV show The Bachelor. Or I think of Ben Affleck's ring that he gave J-Lo which I think is still on consignment somewhere (sick ring though it was). I don't see how this nonsense adds to HW perceived exclusivity and luxury. It's actually embarrassing and bad for their brand don't you think? I mean really? The official ring of The Bachelor is super exclusive?!?! And they made a big deal of it on the show for several seasons. It wasn't subtle at all. I think HW should fire their marketing team. You can't erase an association like that.

I'm sure T&Co. courts the celebs as well but when people think of T&Co's associations it's usually with some iconic and/or romantic movie not one of the worst TV reality shows ever. Seems like T&Co has a much smarter and tasteful way to elevate the brand.

 

[eddiexp]

Anyway, no one would be happier than me if this thread died.

Perhaps if you stopped responding in this thread, your wish might come true. Just sayin.

 

[aquanaut]

As someone who is very closely associated with the luxury market, with all due respect, I am a bit amused at the length you are going in order to defend your beloved belle, Tiffany.

Harry Winston is a more "exclusive" company that Tiffany and Co. That is a fact. Here is a definition of exclusive from the merriam-webster dictionary: restricted in distribution, use, or appeal because of expense

It may not have been so in the past, when one copied another's business model, but it is so today. This is true for a number of reasons:

1. As previously mentioned HW pieces are generally in a higher price bracket. This includes ALL of their pieces, not only engagement rings. If the general person wants to acquire a HW piece of jewelery, they WILL HAVE to shell out considerably more than if they wanted a Tiff piece. Your argument of a mom and pop shop being more exclusive is silly because the accesibility is a matter of location & lack of reputation and NOT because of economic factors.

2.HW has emerged as one of the leading watch producers in the last several decades while Tiffany makes entirely undesirable timepieces and to make up for this acts as a "distributor" for Patek Phillippe, housing one boutique in the Manhattan store and occasionaly stamping its name on some pieces. Yes, one may argue that Tiffany never really wanted to get into the high end watch market, but nonetheless they do sell watches and were unable to create their own line, that is able to rival other Swiss Watch Houses.

3. HW has won in terms of its marketing in convincing the general public that it is a very high end, exclusive company that caters to celebrities and royalty. If you take a survey and ask random people this is what you will find. Furthermore, if you speak with anyone who is true upper class they will tell you HW exceeds Tiff without arguement. (http://www.celebritysociety.com/HARRY_WINSTON__Creativity_and_Audacity

4. Apart from the brand name, marketing efforts, origin & history, there is a simple thing called design. It seems that many people believe that HW designs are superior. Also, I believe (although not 100% sure) that all HW pieces are hand made and are not CAD while Tiff does use CAD? (experts please chime in). One of the defferentiating details of HW are the delicate double claw prongs which the company was first to adopt.

At the end of they day one may say that the question of "which company is better" is entirely subjective. Is a Mercedes Benz better than a Bentley or an Aston Martin? Let's assume the answer is arguable. But is a Mercedes Benz more exclusive then a Bentley. The answer is simple, no.

 

[Klokke]

As someone who is very closely associated with the luxury market, with all due respect, I am a bit amused at the length you are going in order to defend your beloved belle, Tiffany.

Harry Winston is a more "exclusive" company that Tiffany and Co. That is a fact. Here is a definition of exclusive from the merriam-webster dictionary: restricted in distribution, use, or appeal because of expense

It may not have been so in the past, when one copied another's business model, but it is so today. This is true for a number of reasons:

1. As previously mentioned HW pieces are generally in a higher price bracket. This includes ALL of their pieces, not only engagement rings. If the general person wants to acquire a HW piece of jewelery, they WILL HAVE to shell out considerably more than if they wanted a Tiff piece. Your argument of a mom and pop shop being more exclusive is silly because the accesibility is a matter of location & lack of reputation and NOT because of economic factors.

2.HW has emerged as one of the leading watch producers in the last several decades while Tiffany makes entirely undesirable timepieces and to make up for this acts as a "distributor" for Patek Phillippe, housing one boutique in the Manhattan store and occasionaly stamping its name on some pieces. Yes, one may argue that Tiffany never really wanted to get into the high end watch market, but nonetheless they do sell watches and were unable to create their own line, that is able to rival other Swiss Watch Houses.

3. HW has won in terms of its marketing in convincing the general public that it is a very high end, exclusive company that caters to celebrities and royalty. If you take a survey and ask random people this is what you will find. Furthermore, if you speak with anyone who is true upper class they will tell you HW exceeds Tiff without arguement. (http://www.celebritysociety.com/HARRY_WINSTON__Creativity_and_Audacity

4. Apart from the brand name, marketing efforts, origin & history, there is a simple thing called design. It seems that many people believe that HW designs are superior. Also, I believe (although not 100% sure) that all HW pieces are hand made and are not CAD while Tiff does use CAD? (experts please chime in). One of the defferentiating details of HW are the delicate double claw prongs which the company was first to adopt.

At the end of they day one may say that the question of "which company is better" is entirely subjective. Is a Mercedes Benz better than a Bentley or an Aston Martin? Let's assume the answer is arguable. But is a Mercedes Benz more exclusive then a Bentley. The answer is simple, no.

I'm not defending Tiffany and I came into this with no opinion either way. Just reporting some facts. You, however, appear to be defending HW and doing so only with your opinions.

1) Yes. We all know HW has no history with silver and doesn't sell it. They sell fewer but more expensive items and are therefore worn by fewer people. Just like the single store custom jeweler that sells expensive items and no silver. You might not like this analogy but it fits your argument.

2) HW watches are a not well regarded by serious watch collectors. Just jewelry items and some gimmicky one-off designs. Worst of all is that they farm out their movement manufacture and use pre-made movements. And some of their movements are even quartz!! In the Patek, Vacheron, Audemars, Breguet, Rolex, Ulysse Nardin pantheon, HW watches don't even merit consideration. But we're not talking about watches really.

3) HW has won? Won what? Are you speculating or do you have actual survey data. If you mean they won the demographic that watches The Bachelor I guess that's probably right. And is that good for them and their "exclusive" branding?

4) Design is totally subjective. Some like HW, some like T&Co. Some, like me, like both.

Thanks for sharing your opinions. But you shouldn't present them as facts.

 

[Laila619]

1) Yes. We all know HW has no history with silver and doesn't sell it. They sell fewer but more expensive items and are therefore worn by fewer people. Just like the single store custom jeweler that sells expensive items and no silver. You might not like this analogy but it fits your argument.

You totally missed the point about what 'exclusive' means.

 

[aquanaut]

As someone who is very closely associated with the luxury market, with all due respect, I am a bit amused at the length you are going in order to defend your beloved belle, Tiffany.

Harry Winston is a more "exclusive" company that Tiffany and Co. That is a fact. Here is a definition of exclusive from the merriam-webster dictionary: restricted in distribution, use, or appeal because of expense

It may not have been so in the past, when one copied another's business model, but it is so today. This is true for a number of reasons:

1. As previously mentioned HW pieces are generally in a higher price bracket. This includes ALL of their pieces, not only engagement rings. If the general person wants to acquire a HW piece of jewelery, they WILL HAVE to shell out considerably more than if they wanted a Tiff piece. Your argument of a mom and pop shop being more exclusive is silly because the accesibility is a matter of location & lack of reputation and NOT because of economic factors.

2.HW has emerged as one of the leading watch producers in the last several decades while Tiffany makes entirely undesirable timepieces and to make up for this acts as a "distributor" for Patek Phillippe, housing one boutique in the Manhattan store and occasionaly stamping its name on some pieces. Yes, one may argue that Tiffany never really wanted to get into the high end watch market, but nonetheless they do sell watches and were unable to create their own line, that is able to rival other Swiss Watch Houses.

3. HW has won in terms of its marketing in convincing the general public that it is a very high end, exclusive company that caters to celebrities and royalty. If you take a survey and ask random people this is what you will find. Furthermore, if you speak with anyone who is true upper class they will tell you HW exceeds Tiff without arguement. (http://www.celebritysociety.com/HARRY_WINSTON__Creativity_and_Audacity

4. Apart from the brand name, marketing efforts, origin & history, there is a simple thing called design. It seems that many people believe that HW designs are superior. Also, I believe (although not 100% sure) that all HW pieces are hand made and are not CAD while Tiff does use CAD? (experts please chime in). One of the defferentiating details of HW are the delicate double claw prongs which the company was first to adopt.

At the end of they day one may say that the question of "which company is better" is entirely subjective. Is a Mercedes Benz better than a Bentley or an Aston Martin? Let's assume the answer is arguable. But is a Mercedes Benz more exclusive then a Bentley. The answer is simple, no.

I'm not defending Tiffany and I came into this with no opinion either way. Just reporting some facts. You, however, appear to be defending HW and doing so only with your opinions.

1) Yes. We all know HW has no history with silver and doesn't sell it. They sell fewer but more expensive items and are therefore worn by fewer people. Just like the single store custom jeweler that sells expensive items and no silver. You might not like this analogy but it fits your argument.

2) HW watches are a not well regarded by serious watch collectors. Just jewelry items and some gimmicky one-off designs. Worst of all is that they farm out their movement manufacture and use pre-made movements. And some of their movements are even quartz!! In the Patek, Vacheron, Audemars, Breguet, Rolex, Ulysse Nardin pantheon, HW watches don't even merit consideration. But we're not talking about watches really.

3) HW has won? Won what? Are you speculating or do you have actual survey data. If you mean they won the demographic that watches The Bachelor I guess that's probably right. And is that good for them and their "exclusive" branding?

4) Design is totally subjective. Some like HW, some like T&Co. Some, like me, like both.

Thanks for sharing your opinions. But you shouldn't present them as facts.

You seem to be blantanly ignoring/deliberatly not 'understanding" everyone's points. You are entitiled to you own opinion.

However:

1) This has nothing to do with selling silver. As an example of "exclusivity", HW only uses D-F color while Tiff goes down to I color. There is a reason for this, it is not coincidental. And your anlogy does not work because you aren't comparing apples to apples. A fair anology only works when both are global coporations, with long history & legacies, who use heavy marketing and PR etc.

2) I am in the watch business and you are completely wrong to say that HW is not regarded as a serious watch by watch collectors. Also, if you do research you will see that many of the above mentioned companies use pre made movements by other manufacturers. Patek uses Lemania movements, the previous generation (10 years ago)of the Rolex Daytona used a Zenith Chrono, Vacheron Constantin uses Frederic Piget movements, IWC uses Valjoux 7750 automatic chronographs.

3)HW has achieved the perception of itself being a very prestigious high-end company that generally caters to the elite or very wealthy. The Bachelor was just one example. There are hundreds of others.

Anyway, spend your money wherever you want, it doesn't make a difference to us!

 

[aquanaut]

Also, Patek has quartz models as well. It does not make it a bad company. It is well known within the industry that many women find quartz more desirable because it never needs to be wounded/adjusted. A patek Twenty4 quartz watch is still in the neighborhood of $10k

 

[texaskj]

I can't decide if this thread is more of a hot mess or a train wreck

 

[risingsun]

Let's have some honesty here. You came onto this forum to "educate" us about Tiffany and HW's business models and why you preferred Tiffany--it's an American company. This, despite that fact that they receive ~30% of their diamonds from HW. You asked why would anyone make a purchase at HW who, in your opinion, has "copied" Tiff's business model. You did not come here asking for our help.

Why do you suppose schools such as Harvard, U.Penn, MIT, etc. have top rated business programs. They teach, among other things, about different business models. It's called using the tools needed to get the job done, not "copying" from someone else

Go buy your ring and be happy.

 

[Imdanny]

...I am a bit amused at the length you are going in order to defend your beloved belle, Tiffany."

ROTFL.

 

[natsplat]

I can't decide if this thread is more of a hot mess or a train wreck