This is the problem when a hobby that’s fun becomes a source of income. Most KZfaq reviews drown in this issue

Great video. I spend far more money on my channel than it makes. But I love doing it. I do have one question though... What's with the chair in front of the door in Bobby's house? Is that chair a sponsored placement? Typical.

When watching a watch review I always assume it's an advertisement actually. I'm looking for objective information and how the watch looks from various angles on a persons wrist. I try to ignore the subjective opinions. If the reviewer bought it with their own money that's a big plus.

Great conversation! Thank you. As a new KZfaq content creator, this is valuable information!

Fun discussion. I think the biggest misconception about KZfaq is the “money making”. My channel is almost 3 years old and I only (barely) received a tax 1099 form this year because my channel didn’t make money. I 90% review my own collection and thus BUY way too many watches. HIGH overhead. So, when a brand offers a watch/product for review I’ll gladly accept as long as I can give an honest review. I agree that creates bias - I can’t be downright nasty to a brand that sent me an item for review… but I will be honest and say what I like and don’t like. The problem with some of the bigger KZfaq channels is the commercialization - full time requires money and thus these individuals rarely say negative things about a promoted brand/watch. That’s the measuring stick I use when it comes to watching content. I drop the channels once they become actors and salesman - I prefer a more authentic approach.

I get these comments all the time. I find that people put more than the necessary attention on “bias”. All of us are in KZfaq either to be entertained or educated or both in some rare occasion. It’s near impossible to create content without some sort of bias. People tend to interchange bias with the absence of honesty and sadly i dont think that’s changing anytime soon especially for a niche category as watches. Personally i have valued the relationships that i’ve built with the smaller brands more than the content or algorithm data on youtube. Even if i’ve sold the watches long after the review, the people i connected with are still part of my community circle. This opened up more areas of the hobby for me like watch production. I stopped caring for the algorithm a year back and just go out and make the videos i like to do. New ways of showcasing the products and more engagement with my audience is what i focus now. More on my art than in views. This is a great subject! Thank you for the video. Watched it twice and love to see my buddy @bobbylegs guest star on this one!

Very interesting discussion and it's something that raised its ugly head recently on my channel. No matter how honest or unbiased you are when it comes to reviewing your watches you will always have those who just don't believe you should get paid to do your work. How can you be objective right? I am in the middle of my first tax return having run my channel for 19 months. Suffice to say I will not be a millionaire any time soon! I did an analysis on how much I made per video and it's shocking. I do this for the love of watches. It's my passion and my hobby. I do not get enough financially for it to make sense even though I get the odd free watch which I either give away or sell at a fraction of retail to buy more watches...to again lose money on that purchase. I have had to become thick skinned. I always preface any review of a watch that is given to me with my conditions. I will review without fear or favour. I am happy if they still send me the watch because I have set out how I will review the watch. I have been clear from the outset. There are those that really think they can only trust you if you bankrupt yourself, don't make any money and are destitute on the streets because of your honesty yet they get paid handsomely for working for big corporations that would not exist, shock horror, if they didn't advertise their own products to make their profits. Isn't that hypocrisy?

Great video. What I care about most in a reviewer is sincerity. I think watch enthusiasts can sort through the biases and differences of opinions among KZfaqrs. We just want to listen to reviewers with integrity (like Sam!). If you’re reviewing a watch that you sell in your own store, even if I trust your sincerity, I’ll still keep in mind that there’s going to be a good bit of bias. But overall I trust my instincts: I know what I’m looking for, and I don’t fear any reviewer’s biases.

Great discussion. We all do have our own preferences & "biases", and as a viewer you learn a bit about each reviewer and their preferences. As a big boy I can apply my own "informational context" to every video you upload (e.g. "Sam's gotta have the date on his watches", "Sam is a fan of CW", ..). If you're up front about what you've been given and whether a positive review was guaranteed _(it better not have been)_ , then I've got no problem at all. Bobby emphasized disclosure too. I do accept Bobby's point that a reviewer could be influenced by the watch (or money) they received despite their best effort not to hold back on criticism, but I'd rather that they _are_ able to make the video, and I don't need perfect objectivity (if any of us is even capable of that) to get something out of a video. Generally if you're interested in a watch, you'll learn about it from various sources, and it'll be hard for all of these sources to sync up to deceive you about anything, or hide any fault of the watch that could make you regret buying it.

Sam, Bobby, your contributions to this discussion have been excellent. I truly appreciate the unique insights you've both brought to the table. When it comes to Teddy, Nico, and WatchFinder, we understand they're trying to sell us pieces from their stores. However, the quality of their content and the information they provide are still free. We, as consumers, can glean data from their content and apply it, fully aware there's an angle to it. The whole process once you make content is transactional. I've watched Teddy's, Nico's, and WatchFinder's content for COUNTLESS hours. I never purchased a timepiece, but my viewing time has helped them. Lastly, it all comes down to access, access to watches, outlets, and, most importantly, people. Access is essential; if we make friends along the way, that's even better! Great video! It's a conversation that could quickly go on for hours!

Great subject and a very enlightening discussion, thankyou for your honesty and candor.

Important topic - thanks for the discussion!

Great conversation and debate, thoroughly enjoyed it! Very good points all around. The fact that we all have bias is an interesting one, and something some people struggle with - some of the comments I see really look for a deeper reason why a reviewer doesn't agree with them, and get quite passive aggressive with it ...rather than just accepting a different point of view and politely expressing their own opinions in the comments.

Great video guys. I like the transparency. 👍

Great idea giving your free watches to channel members 😃

Nice one. Isn’t everyone legally required to disclose if they have a relationship with the brand? Or are there loopholes for getting around that?

hey were did u get that thumbnail from might need it for me friend

Sam, another great video that would work well for a podcast... In my opinion, take what you can from it! I enjoy all KZfaqrs' videos, but I won't necessarily purchase a watch based on their recommendation, nor will I dismiss one because they criticize it. For instance, Pete McConvill's content is enjoyable to listen to, but I often find myself disagreeing with him most of the time. People should conduct their own research when watching videos and form their own opinions when the watch is on their wrist... To many followers in this world... Too many looking to be influenced

The lack of trust will always exist because there is no real way the viewer can know how hard the content creator fears losing access (and it is not the viewer's job to know). Sunk cost concerns are the same level of any inherent bias (Tudor will sell me a watch regardless of my view of the one I bought). Personally, if the watch is returned to the manufacturer (a loaned review copy) I tend to assume the reviewer will be relatively unbiased as I would if they review a watch they bought for themselves (the latter being my review method). I generally avoid reviews where the reviewer is getting to keep the product (I might watch to see the footage and the stats, but I just cannot bring myself to trust the opinion).

As long as there is full disclosure and the viewer takes their time to see/read multiple reviews, I see no issue. At the end of the day it’s the reviewer that’s being exposed based on their work quality, ethics, etc. The majority of people will understand. What I cannot stand is KZfaqrs pretending to be holier than thou, bashing everyone around them for being biased, profiting etc., when they are clearly doing the same (or worse)….

Great video sam. I assumed it was not something you did for profit but ultimately it is unfortunate that all you great youtubers dont get compensated for your time. Getting paid would be beneficial for you guys. It would allow you the opportunity to get better equipment, go out and do more detailed reviews and spend more time on it. I personally have benefited from the information and feel quilty that i dont pay for it.

My assumption has always been (I might be naive:p) that watch review channels did it for fun, and that there was absolutly no way of making any money of it. The era of making money, atleast significant sums, on youtube is long gone. I might be wrong:p Being given, or lent, a free watch is a must, I'm guessing. Or else you would be relaying on reviewing your own watches, and watches of your friends.

KZfaqrs and so called influencers are just for laughs and entertainment. We are not here to fund your KZfaq hobby. We are able to think critically and choose what we want without people online. I would never buy anything based on a reviewers opinion as they don't know what I like, any links, discounts, affiliates, sales is a massive red flag and I ignore.

Sam, you give us enough with cues when you're not exactly fond of a watch during a review. I think you would call out anything that was garbage or quality control issues, etc. However, when it comes to aesthetics and personal preference on watch design that is less important during watch review videos. Also, we can always listen to the live streams for unadulterated opinions on watches🙃🙂

Good video. I think you were being a little too hard on yourself, Sam, about how you could be better. You do a great job with your content. Throw yourself a bone and give yourself a little credit. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with a reviewer accepting payment because it's the content and the integrity of the creator that will keep me coming back.

If the content creators are dependent on the payment from watches delivered, I can NEVER trust the reviews. I know they all have “moans & niggles” but they might never be honest, because, they have to look out for the future, and not burn bridges…..

Hello, my comment was deleted, how come???

a reviewer reviewing a watch i own and dont mention all the faults with it. which im aware of and other viewers should be as well. like very noticeable issues. or a reviewer who doesnt show a bezel action or mention its quality ON A DIVER. these kind of things make me lose respect to these youtubers. i dont mind if you get free stuff and sell it or whatever. but dont pee into the well youre drinking out of.. there are 4-5 chanells i follow but i question everything they say. these things tend to happen on larger channels..

Ha ha ha criticising a colour, on a watch that has plenty to choose from, is just ridiculous 🫣🙄