It is interesting to note that I raised the subject of FaceBook in 2009, and many people here were dubious about its potential relative to the IWC audience, or even believed it would never occur. The initial post I made was at http://www.iwc.com/forum-en/topic/207577.html?page=1
As you will note then I was urging adaption to new technologies for IWC, despite the misgivings of some members here.
To me the issue is not one of adapting to new technology --that is almost a given-- but rather meeting effectively the needs of our members. To that end, candidly the demographics have changed remarkably. People on this forum generally are much more interested in community and less interested in history, technical mechanics. etc. One can look at that by the numbers of posts in each section, and the topics discussed (the smallest forum based on number of posts is the technical section of the German forum --a total since inception of 6 posts and 12 replies).
Recently, a person posted on the vintage forum here a pocket watch and wanted to know its age --for the first 36 views no one responded (I finally did). At the same time, there were new posts on four topics in the Community section, dealing with issues other than watch design, operation or similar matters. It is, candidly, a different community now and the issue is how to exploit existing (and future) technologies to deal with that.
3,732 Discussions and CommentsMember since March 28, 2001
Well, in the news department Facebook beats the forum, again. Watch news, that is, presented by IWC. A new Big Pilot Perpetual Calendar is shown there, since yesterday already. Did nobody notice? I think the watch looks pretty nice indeed! On Facebook at the moment almost 300 "I like"s and 37 comments.
Kind regards, Paul
What you do may not be so important, but it is very important that you do it well. (my variation of a saying by Gandhi)
Definitely, Cellar always get the right word first!
Thank you Michael!
Regards,
Jean
Regards,
Jean aka One of these days, 5449 will be mine
http://www.iwc.com/forum-en/topic/207577.html?page=1
As you will note then I was urging adaption to new technologies for IWC, despite the misgivings of some members here.
To me the issue is not one of adapting to new technology --that is almost a given-- but rather meeting effectively the needs of our members. To that end, candidly the demographics have changed remarkably. People on this forum generally are much more interested in community and less interested in history, technical mechanics. etc. One can look at that by the numbers of posts in each section, and the topics discussed (the smallest forum based on number of posts is the technical section of the German forum --a total since inception of 6 posts and 12 replies).
Recently, a person posted on the vintage forum here a pocket watch and wanted to know its age --for the first 36 views no one responded (I finally did). At the same time, there were new posts on four topics in the Community section, dealing with issues other than watch design, operation or similar matters. It is, candidly, a different community now and the issue is how to exploit existing (and future) technologies to deal with that.
Regards, Michael
mfriedberg@iwcforum.com
Last edited: 5 April, 2012 - 19:53
Kind regards,
Paul
What you do may not be so important, but it is very important that you do it well. (my variation of a saying by Gandhi)
Last edited: 23 October, 2011 - 13:31