Antonio wrote:
if it serves to pump money and good image into GA, I am glad.
Good way of looking at it.
The way I see it…I dont spend my money on that kind of thing, but if it serves to pump money and good image into GA, I am glad.
I do not support Red Bull products, but I like the fact that so much of that money is used to promote GA activities that the public appreciates.
Likewise with people spending their spare money on watches that support GA…
While few uninvolved people would directly provide monetary support for GA activities I guess quite a few more people are happy to spend a lot of money on watches , part of which is later used to support GA activities.
I don’t see whats wrong with that.
MArketing hype? Thats in big part what a free economy is about, as long as it is not deceiving (ie it is still a very good watch), I dont see anything wrong with it. Even if all that money only served for the owner to spend it on a Ferrari or his new airplane toy, I still support it: that money goes on to support a lot of families that work to build those toys, so much more than if it is spent on speculative business.
I never cease to be amazed at the sort of marketing that appears to work.
But then, I’m probably not their target customer.
It’s all effective marketing which seems to work. As I said earlier I am surprised this Spitfire stunt got IWC rather than Breitling which is more traditionally associated with that sort of image. IWC have tended to go for the “top gun jet fighter pilot” watch image, with the infamous ceramic cases.
It’s arguably no more cringeworthy than the Patek Phillipe advert campaign which is pretty good at shifting watches costing 20k and up, by saying you never actually “own” a PP 
I saw this on a poster the other day
It reminded me of some “flying schools” not so far from where I am based, and the characters in them
I’m just surprised fancy watch sales make the money they apparently do… That dissuades me from buying one because while I’ve fairly regularly bought hard to manufacture mechanical toys I have zero interest in lining the pockets of someone who has figured out a way to sell intangible image to the gullible and vain, backed up by routine hardware.
Same with Red Bull – nobody I know actually drinks the stuff, but somebody, somewhere must do so and it makes money… but not my money!
Me too. I get a little iffy with all these corporate endorsements and the whole warbird scene. It’s like a playground for billionaires. Same guys who buy a Chateau/Napa winery and charge $200/bottle dabble in this, far removed from GA. There’s also an elitism in the warbird scene that I can’t stand.
Does the emotive imagery work for you? I’m too cynical now to get excited but this kind of “Out of Africa” vibe.
I had a look at their site and from what I can see there, it doesn’t appear to be yet another “fake charity” stunt like this one and so many others in GA.
Instead, these guys seem to have got a load of brands to pay for the trip. Well, good luck to them. It should work if they get the funds, and nothing big breaks enroute, because there is no possible way for the sponsors to find out if it worked or not. I just hope that nobody ends up spending money on another dodgy Swiss watch 
Interesting that Breitling – the most obvious “aviator lifestyle brand” – are not paying up.
The main site says they will do it in 400nm legs.
Am I the only one that finds these things slightly distasteful?
Someone is getting to have the time of their lives, doing a lot of flying in an extremely expensive aircraft that most of us would kill for 30 minutes in.
And other people are paying for it. Sometimes the money comes from the sale of silly watches, sometimes they are charity fundraisers, sometimes just fundraisers to make the thing happen, sometimes it’s all a bit blurred. However it works, the vibe is that the whole thing is worthy and important, the people involved heroic and visionary.
Call me a killjoy, but I see nothing to applaud in having a lot of fun and somehow having convinced other people people to pay for it. It turns off the true amateur aviator in me.
Peter wrote:
My understanding is that a Spitfire needs constant maintenance. The logistics involved in this must be quite interesting.
You mean money? Same as moon landing, probably was fully funded by luxury watches
https://www.esquire.com/style/mens-fashion/a28606932/iwc-spitfire-pilots-watch-flight/
