I am not sure this is very consistent.
You argue that they have devalued the one thing they have, their brand.
But then argue that the brand was built on dodgy foundations.
Which would seem to indicate that there really wasn't that much to devalue.
For me, there was a relatively strong and consistent story based around the slightly clunky tagline of "Tested Beyond Endurance".
It's a bad phrase, but the message was consistent throughout.
The other main consistency was much of the styling, based around the Trip-tick case.
These were 2 of the 4 mainstays of the brand creation. The others were the Limited Editions (most of which left me cold), and the Military Projects (which certainly seemed to be going great), which also spawned newer ranges.
We (as a forum) may not have loved it all, but I think the brand did succeed in getting quite a lot of traction (here and abroad), and I certainly believe genuine value was created in the brand.
But everywhere I look now there is a majority that are bemoaning the new direction, with its evident backtracking on quality and toughness (for instance 904 Stainless may be what Rolex uses, but if you are treating your 316 cases to achieve a 1200 Vickers Hardness, I'll take the 316 any day).
The fact that all of the styling seems also in the process of being ditched really does (as you rightly say) devalue the past performance, as well as the new direction.
And I certainly agree that it will end badly for many, if not everyone involved.