TAG Watch Repair Cost - SCAM

shaun_from_Africa

daytona0 wrote: »

I am gobsmacked. There are people in this world living in poverty and you pay 2k to tell the time.

daytona0 wrote: »

If op is genuinely rich then they should be giving money to charities. Maybe they should donate money to charities who help nicotine addicts, as per your post. Or should we "keep pedalling" 2k watches while people die of lung cancer in the UK?

Careful that you don't get too hurt when you fall off your high horse.
You admit to having an Apple watch, something that is a novelty which anyone could easily live without, so why buy this instead of giving the money to help feed those in poverty? Is it okay for you to spend money on things like this but not okay for others?

As for saying that the OP "should be giving money to charities".
How do know that they don't already do this? Even if they don't, this should be a personal choice and not done simply because others don't agree with how they choose to spend their money.

ARandomMiser

That is about normal for when you buy a watch from the upper end of the market. The warranty has expired and so the costs are on you. Basically they will strip the watch down to its basic components, clean each one and rebuild it replacing pretty much anything that is damaged. You will then get back what looks like a brand new watch with a new 12 month guarantee.

Think of it like taking a car in for a standard service ... you would expect to pay a lot more to service a Ferrari than to service a Dacia Sandero..

shaun_from_Africa

I would be very surprised if there is any stripping down of the watch innards.
As it's a quartz movement, it will in all likelihood simply get replaced with a new one.

photome

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

I would be very surprised if there is any stripping down of the watch innards.
As it's a quartz movement, it will in all likelihood simply get replaced with a new one.

Are you saying that when these watches are sent for a service, the one you get back will be brand new.

sounds like a deal to me

theonlywayisup

daytona0 wrote: »

Do you not think that £1990 of that £2k could have gone towards funding charity groups who help people who suffer from nicotine addiction? I'm sure the £10 surplus could have gone towards a watch which was capable of telling the time...

If op is genuinely rich then they should be giving money to charities.

What the OP does with his/her money is none of your concern.

Keep_pedalling

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

I would be very surprised if there is any stripping down of the watch innards.
As it's a quartz movement, it will in all likelihood simply get replaced with a new one.

I doubt it, the Calibre S movement which no doubt the OPs watch contains, is a 27 jewelled electro mechanical watch so it still has a lot of expensive moving parts that periodically need cleaning.

[Deleted User]

I don't know why everyone's arguing over whether the OP should have bought a £2000 watch or not.

He quite clearly states it was a two million pound watch. In which case, I too would want it to last more than 4 years.

Davz wrote: »

I feel if someone buys a watch worth 2000K it should run for more than 4 years at least and not getting it service is excuse to charge money from the customer.

Keep_pedalling

daytona0 wrote: »

Do you not think that £1990 of that £2k could have gone towards funding charity groups who help people who suffer from nicotine addiction? I'm sure the £10 surplus could have gone towards a watch which was capable of telling the time...

Some people may spend that much on fags each YEAR, but they don't spend that much ON ONE TRANSACTION! 2k divided by 12 months is £167 which MOST working people have in surplus each month (but don't necessarily have a 2k line of credit)! The watch is an impulse buy! Either due to OP being rich (in which case why did they not automatically pay the £377 repair bill for a 3-4 year old item?) or they have a fat credit line (fake "rich person"). It could also be a wedding (etc) purchase, but I'm not really buying that given the brand.

If op is genuinely rich then they should be giving money to charities. Maybe they should donate money to charities who help nicotine addicts, as per your post. Or should we "keep pedalling" 2k watches while people die of lung cancer in the UK?

If people did not buy expensive things from time to time there would be a lot less people in work. I am sure there are lots of things you spend money on that you don't need, but does that mean you should give all that to charity instead?

Yes, from time to time we spend a large amount in a single transaction, for things like holidays and camera gear but we also give generously to a number of charities, and if push came to shove it would be the expensive indulgences that would take the first hit.

The lung cancer remark is just stupid, my father died from that but no amount of charitable giving is going to drastically reduce the number of people getting that as we know that is mainly in the hands of the individual, and the tobacco companies pushing the evil weed.

hollydays

I think there's an element of jealousy when people criticise someone for buying luxury goods. Their money , their choice.

takman

I can't understand why anyone would pay £2000 for a watch like that!. It's not the amount I'm questioning, it's just simply bad value for money.
I have a watch that cost £90, it is waterproof, shock proof, has a solar panel face with rechargeable battery (so never needs a new one). It lights up, it calibrates its time automatically each night so is extremely accurate. It also never needs to be serviced!

Yet a watch that costs over 20 times more is less accurate, less waterproof, more easily damaged and needs regular servicing to keep it going.
So even both watches were the same price I still wouldn't buy the inferior Tag watch... yet people are paying over 20 times more for it!.

How can that even be justified!!!