|
Welcome to part 2 of the 'Conversation with Chuck
Maddox'.
In the first
part we discussed interests and how this watchthing
started, this part will be more focussed on brands and
collecting.
Do you have a maximum budget for a watch (in
general)? So a single watch never will be more expensive
then (let's say) 5000 Euro or USD?
Thus far I haven't spent more than $3,300 on a
watch (prior to getting it in my hands anyway). I haven't
bid above $4,000 thus far. Those aren't fixed limits, but
it's been where I've been
comfortable on the high end
with Internet transactions thus far. Those aren't
"limits" or "budget maximums" just where my comfort level
has bailed out on me in the past...
One of the things as a collector you have to keep a
mind on is not only what is called "the Stein point"
named for OnTheDash owner Jeff Stein... Jeff councils
people to bid to your point of indifference about winning
a watch on eBay and not winning the watch. This is the
point were if you win the watch you feel exactly the same
(i.e. indifferent) as if you are the first runner up.
With the scarcity of some of the models I'm collecting,
I've had to create in my mind a "Stein plus 3 month" and
a "Stein plus 6 month point" which is the same point, but
will you feel the same way about being the first runner
up on a watch 3 and 6 months down the line when another
one doesn't show up to be bid upon.
Counterbalancing those "bidder's remorse" points are
some other considerations. I would guess like many
collectors there is a short list of watches that I'd like
to add to my collection. I try to keep enough money on
hand so that if one of those other watches appears on
eBay just after I've made a purchase I have enough funds
I can consider putting in a serious bid on the second
watch. Or you've just spent $3k on a watch and one of the
other one's on your list comes up, you might have to pass
on it. One of the positions a collector never wants to
get into is when you see a model of watch you feel you
need or the deal is too good to pass up and not really
think you can afford the watch and you go ahead and do a
"I'll buy it and figure out how to pay it later". That's
probably a danger sign you're a little more addicted to
this hobby than is healthy.
And it works both ways... If you
drop a sizable stack of chips on a triple-date Moonphase
you might feel the need to pass on some lesser cost items
that come along soon after.
So, like many other things in
life,
bidding and
purchasing is a bit
of a balancing act. Bidders remorse balancing buyer
remorse, and so forth. And while those figures I have
mentioned above have been what my maximums have been so
far, under the right conditions and for the right watch,
they could be topped.
On the other hand some of my most interesting and fun
watches have come at the other end of the spectrum. I
own at least 5 chronographs
(five automatic, one manual wind, three Swiss three
Japanese) that I have less than $200 into. They are great
fun to wear, work great, keep good time and while you'd
be sad if one of them broke or were stolen, it wouldn't
be as hard of a hit as if you suffered a loss on a nice
Speedmaster/Carrera/IWC/Zenith. A lot of collectors are
hung up on expensive brands and minty watches. The
inexpensive watches with some usage marks are GREAT FUN!
You don't have to have big bucks to find cool and
interesting watches to collect! You can have much more
fun with a cheap beat-up old Jeep than you can in a brand
new Range Rover.
Do you forget about rational 'rules' sometimes,
when bidding or buying a watch you really like?
The only really fixed notion I have in my
(likely less than) rational mind when I'm considering a
watch is to consider how
much money I have on my person, how much money I have in
my various bank accounts, and how much money I can
reasonably count on having in the near future.
As for my interests, for the most part, I'm very happy
and content in a certain niche of chronographs... I like
chronographs basically from within or near my life span,
mainly of the middle to upper middle of the field when it
comes to the quality level of Swiss brands. I don't own a
Rolex Daytona, but if I live long enough to accumulate
the funds to purchase one of the models I like I would
like to someday. Some brands you'll never see me go for
unless I win the lottery... I doubt you'll ever see me
wearing a AP, Lange, Bruget or Blancplan, UN or VC
either. I like the looks of the Reverso so I won't rule
out a JLC, I like certain Universal Geneve's although I
only own a single Space-Compax. There always seems to be
brands I can explore. There are also many lesser known
and lesser appreciated and often underpriced brands that
I find fascinating: Tissot, Zodiac, Certina, and even
more obscure brands that many people haven't discovered.
Their loss...
Since I know you as one of the Speedmaster-meisters
on the net, can you tell me what you think about the way
Omega is heading too?
Yes, you may. I think if I were to come up with
a single word to describe Omega at this time it would be
unfocused. In the past, even recent past they had
specific product lines and particular niches for most, if
not all of the models in that product line. Their
approach was identify a niche and develop a product to
fill that niche perfectly with a level of quality,
dependability and supportability that we can easily
attain and maintain with a level of service that takes
people's breath away.
In the past couple of years, Omega, with a number of
other brands have been trying to reposition their brand
to some extent... Breitling, TAG-Heuer, Zenith, are the
names most people are familiar with. Each have gone about
it a different way. For Breitling, they've sought to
"add-value" by having all of their products pass C.O.S.C.
testing. TAG-Heuer and Zenith are now both owned by LVMH.
TAG is doing an interesting thing... They are growing
both upscale and downscale. They now use an El-Primero
base movement in some models of their chronographs, and
they've reintroduced some F1 models to reestablish their
entry level models. Zenith finished up supplying
chronograph movements to Rolex, entered the US market and
said "We supplied movements for Rolex, so our products
are priced close to Rolex now" which has increased the
values of Zeniths new and vintage. The latter doesn't
particularly make me happy as there are some models of
El-Primero that I still seek.
Into this fierce higher competition steps Omega. Omega
seems to have listened to people who have bemoaned "Omega
doesn't use their own movements" and with fellow Swatch
Group division Fredric Piguet conceived of a new movement
that they could claim is "an Omega Exclusive". Which is
fine if it functionality, usability, durability and
reliability is on par with your existing product.
Unfortunately it doesn't seem the resulting c.33xx is.
So between trying to position the product upscale, and
dealing with a dicey movement, Omega has come out with a
slew of new models and variations that overlap so much
that I honestly don't thing the customer can decide
between them. I mean on the Speedmaster moonwatch line
alone I had to create a table
to explain all of the differences between Omega's
offerings within the Moonwatches...
An aside:
There are 10 variations of the basic
Moonwatch in Stainless Steel that have been/are/will
soon be offered by Omega in the past 20 months or so.
Add 3 more if you count Gold models, 3 more if you
count Moonphase models in steel, another if you count
the gold Moonphase, and if you want to go back to 1999
you can add the 30th Anniversary edition and the 1957
Re-Edition. Whew!
And this is just the moonwatch line!
Now we also have a slew of new Seamaster Chronographs,
Railmaster Chronographs, DeVille Chronographs,
Constellation Chronographs, Aqua Terra's, Apnea's, many
of these broad product lines with many sub-lines that no
one can keep straight or even find, other than they know
Omega offers/offered 'em. And all of this, 80-90% of the
non-moonwatch line that I mentioned in the previous
sentence is prior to the slew of special editions that
Omega has come out with... Schumacher special editions
every time he wins a world championship (which puts the
1990's Chicago Bulls to shame I'll add), all of the
Olympic Special Editions, the Ernie Els special edition
Connie's, etc.
I'm all for diversity, but there
comes a point when it becomes ridiculous.
In a word, unfocused.
To use a computer analogy... in 1997 when Steve Jobs
returned to Apple Computer after being deposed for 12
years Apple had 15 or 18 product lines... With 6 months
they had four: Pro/Consumer - Desktop/laptop... Today,
six later... Apple has Five computer product lines: the
same as before and a special model geared for Education
Don't you think they have too many models around at
the moment, to me it seems like they are going to make the
same mistake as they did in the 1970s.
Yes, but not for the same reasons as the
1970's...
I don't think the problems that Omega had in the
1970's were because of the many models they offered back
then... The 1970's were a different time and there were
many other and different market forces involved. In a
vast majority of the world the 1970's were a time of
economic turmoil, a time of vast changes in the market
place. A switch from a high precision mechanics to
high-technology electronics. The entire Swiss watch
industry may not have been blind sided by the
Quartz/Japanese invasion, but for the most part they were
powerless to stop if. For the most part only Rolex in the
middle range luxury brand landscape survived largely
unchanged. Omega's strategy for survival was to have a
lot of different irons (manual wind, automatics, quartz,
tuning fork) in the fire so that they had their money on
all horses. The problem then seems that they didn't have
enough in any one winning entrant.
The problem today is that there are so many other
brands out there with similar products the way to really
win new/repeat customers is to distinguish oneself with
either better quality/support or a better all around
deal. Because Omega is concentrating on so many different
models and sub-lines they are distracted enough that
their quality control and customer support appears to be
slipping very noticeably.
Is there a company who has a strategy you like
best? Rolex for not changing a thing (only minor changes)
through the years, or Blancpain for never making a quartz
watch or Tag Heuer to reproduce the watches they made in the
60s (Monaco, Carrera etc.)?
[laughing] Let me run through the
examples you give...
[Laughs] It always comes back to Rolex and
Omega! There is a lot to be said about Rolex's philosophy
of sticking with the classics. There is a reason why the
Model T, the VW Beetle, Jeep CJ, and Porsche 911 have
been largely unchanged for many many years. Because like
them or hate them they did something very well and people
bought them because of that. I know I'd like to see Rolex
be a little more experimental in nature, but I know I
shouldn't get my hopes up... I know Rolex offers a
multitude of ways to customize their watches with
different dials/bezels etc. But I can't get a Chronograph
with a date feature unless I go to a 1950's model.
Blancpain... Quartz movements aren't a sin. Nor are
they anything to be ashamed to have produced. They serve
a valid need for people and some are pretty cool.
While I certainly have preferences,
I don't have problems with Quartz or electronic movements
(Tuning Forks).
TAG-Heuer... Up until four or five years ago TAG had a
strategy I liked... Survival. I hear people bemoan all
the time how they like (the
old) Heuers but hate TAG-Heuer. I've always been
of the mind set regardless of how I've felt about the
current TAG-Heuer line, I prefer a live TAG-Heuer to a
dead and buried Heuer. I believe TAG has the right idea
with the Classics line but I think the implementation can
be improved. I'd like to see them develop close versions
of the original, not some of the "manufactured" classics
like the Monza which only shares the name of the original
Monza. I'd like to see a Carrera re-edition featuring a
manual wind version of a Zenith movement instead of an
ETA/Dubois-Depraz piggyback model. With some of their new
models and concepts though, in particular the Monaco V.4
and the Aquagraph 2000, that TAG-Heuer isn't afraid to
innovate on movements or with the state of the art of
what a serious tool watch can be.
How about the road that independent watchcompanies
like Sinn, Tutima, Fortis, Bell&Ross, Chronoswiss take,
to name a few?
All of the firms you mention have a perceived
market niche and work hard to keep their products great
standard bearers for that niche. Of the ones you mention,
I personally group the first four: Sinn, Bell & Ross,
Tutima and Fortis together a lot... In fact I sometimes
call them the four little Germanic firms... Sinn has
obvious German roots, Bell & Ross were essentially
re-branded Sinn up until the introduction of the Space
three about five years back. Tutima is German, and the
Fortis product line and reason to be is so close to the
other three it seems natural to group them together. Of
those four Bell & Ross is the only brand I don't own
an example of.
Chronoswiss is another interesting brand that has a
narrow prescribed niche in which it operates in and
sticks with it. I love their products, very pretty and a
wonder to look at, I hope some day to own one some day.
But they aren't my typical "big and bold, rough and
rugged watch" fare.
One firm that I frequently mention as one that I am
very fond of is Ventura. They too are a niche player in
the market place. They have one very defined niche:
Bauhaus watch design that I just absolutely love. The
only Ventura models I don't like are some of the more
recent garish gold and Diamond encrusted models which I
feel break the Bauhaus mold. What I like about their
designs is that they are so striking and beautiful they
are going to still look modern and beautiful in 30 years.
They are timeless.
Your preferences for chronograph movements is
probably no secret, you like the Lemania movements best,
hmmm.... Yeah I guess. I like Lemania's a lot,
probably best too.
especially the out-of-production Lemania 5100
movement.
I do have a fondness for that model, more so
than many collectors, but there are other very strong
5100 fans out there.
What are you thoughts on Lemania movements in
general (i.e. Omega/Lemania caliber 321, 861, 1861, 1040,
Lem 134x, Lem 5100)?
Let me run through them in order too...
c.321: A beautiful classic chronograph movement
(along with the 27 CHRO c12, it's predecessor). A
beautiful movement to behold, neither the Valjoux 72
series nor the Zenith HP146 movements (both fine
movements) are as handsome as this movement. Tough as
nails, has the column wheel instead of the c.861's
lever-cam arrangement. Now, while 99 out of 100
chronograph collectors will tell you that they prefer the
Column Wheel and the looks of an arched bridge, in terms
of function there is little if any difference in actual
day to day usage in my experience. This, I'm easy going
on the Column-Wheel/Lever-Cam question.
c.861 Family: Remember there are a number of
variants of this movement. If Omega replaced the c.321
with anyone else, people would have descended on Bienne
with torches and pitchforks. Every bit as tough s the
c.321, easier to manufacture, higher beat movement, not
as pretty as the c.321. Some people have accused me of
having a preference for the c.321 in the past. I like
them both. Both are great movements. c.1861... I'm
odd that for some reason, I personally prefer silvery
colored watches (Steel and Titanium) but I prefer gilt
plated (Gold colored) movements. I can't explain why but
I do. Aside from the color Rhodium is a superior material
for plating watch movements [full stop].
c.1040/c.1041 (Lemania 1342): Kinda the odd man
out in Lemania's chronograph lineup. It has an odd
"common-axial" subdial at 9 o'clock that
leads to a asymmetrical subdial layout that is, well...
Odd. Hard to get used to, especially if you're used to
the 5100 or Valjoux 7750 layouts. However, when you look
at the movement in comparison to the 5100 the 1040/1041
is has a much nicer look and better level of finish than
any 5100 I've seen save for the Alain Silberstein models.
A very nice movement that is frequently lost in the
shuffle because of it's odd dial-layout. Aside from the
odd subdial layout the one thing I really don't care for
on this base movement is the "quick change" date
feature... On the c.134x models, it seems to have a heavy
"camming" motion to the quick change, while on the 5100
and Valjoux 7750 it's a light crisp "snick-snick" feel to
the action. I only have one of the c.1341 model Lemania's
in a Wakmann perpetual calendar model. I haven't been
particularly impressed with the Wakmann's performance.
Perhaps I'll sample a Tissot c.1341 in the future.
Lemania 5100: The "AK-47" of chronograph
movements: accurate, dependable, reliable, can take
punishment that no other watch can survive and keeps on
ticking. Certainly not the prettiest movement in the
world, or the most elegant of operation, but provides a
multitude of information in the easiest to read layout of
any watch with so complex of a feature set.
You didn't mention a couple of movements RJ, so I
will... Valjoux 7750 family...
Correct, it was left out by
purpose, since I am personally not very fond about it
:-)
[Hmmm... Besides it's
commonality is there any particular reason why you don't
like it? I'm curious...]
I also think it is not a very
interesting movement to discuss, because like the
non-chronograph ETA2892-A2 movement, it is very common.
[I also didn't branch out
into the ETA/Dubois-Depraz or the LWO 283 which was
recently acquired/bought by Dubois-Depraz... or the
Micro-Rotor movements (of the
Breitling/Buren/Heuer/Hamilton fame of the 1970's... And
one watch that I will insist on discussing at least
briefly... The Omega c.33xx movement. Do you think we
should discuss the Micro-Rotor and these two Module
movements too?]
However, feel free...
If the 5100 is the AK-47 of chronograph movements, the
7750 is the Swiss Army knife of chronograph movements. I
run out of digits to count variations on before Swatch
Group runs out of variations of this ubiquitous movement.
While personally I prefer the 5100 for durability, ease
of reading (that center chronograph minute hand again),
and 24-Hour register, I also am fond of the 7750.
Recently I purchased a Katun limited production run of
the Sinn 144 GMT which has a GMT complication of the
Valjoux 7750 and I really REALLY like that watch. If you
are looking for a great full featured watch that has all
the bells and whistles (but you can't get a 5100) the
Sinn 144 GMT is a candidate worth considering.
I know that nearly as many people
in the "Haute Horology" crowd look down their collective
noses at the 7750 as the Lemania 5100. Admittedly this is
about the most common chronograph movement out there
these days. But some movement has to be. It's a good
solid movement, perhaps not the easiest or most exciting
movement to service, but it gives a lot of bang for the
buck and is a strong performer. I don't feel the 7750
family is as easy to read quickly or able to endure as
much abuse as a 5100, but aside from those things it does
everything else well in my book.
The Omega c.33xx movement
(c.3303, c.3313, and c.3301)... This subject is one
that I've probably spent more time on and experienced
more contention than any other since I started collecting
watches. A couple of years back Omega announced with much
fanfare that they were going to be releasing a new
chronograph using a movement codeveloped with Frederic
Piguet. Piguet had developed and sold to some higher end
brands a movement called the c.1185. The new Omega-Piguet
movement was a new movement incorporating many of the
features that the 1185 possessed but was to be a new
movement. Omega came out with the watches and a bunch of
people jumped on the "In-House movement" (a bit of a
misnomer, it's an Omega Exclusive, but in-house could be,
and has been, debated) bandwagon and bought one. At the
time I urged people be cautious because there were
frequently problems with new movements and it seemed to
me to make sense to hold off purchase for a year, maybe
two to see if there were any problems with the movement.
It didn't take long, but the
first reports of problems started coming in... ... and
they continued to come in, and have kept on coming in,
and while we are in a lull currently (about 6 weeks since
we've heard of a new problem) we have come to expect a
new problem report every couple of weeks.
A TZ Omega Forum regular was
kind enough to post a service bulletin that detailed four
main problems with these movements. [I can post links
if necessary] To sum up there are some parts that
these movements were shipped with that have since been
revised to correct problems that were discovered after
these watches were delivered to dealers and customers.
While Omega says they have taken steps to correct these
issues, it is at the very least debatable if they are
enough for a firm who wishes to keep the kind of customer
relation rapport they have enjoyed in the past.
I feel the c.33xx has potential,
but unfortunately, thus far, it hasn't lived up to
expectations that people had for it. Omega/Piguet may be
able to overcome the problems they've experienced in
time, but they have a ways to go... There is more they
could be doing to minimize this issue from a dealer and
from a customer standpoint.
I recently had an email
conversation with Jean-Michael the owner of both
lemania5100.net and navitimer.net and this is how I
summed up my feelings on the c.33xx movement:
Thus far, it's been my
observation that the c.33xx is the antithesis of the
5100... Where the c.33xx is beautiful, the 5100 is
comparatively crude, where the c.33xx is
sophisticated, the 5100 is basic. Where the 5100 is
dependable, the c.33xx has been flaky, where the 5100
is rugged, the c.33xx is fragile.
That is my impression of the
c.33xx movement family based on what I've seen.
Do we want to talk about the
Micro-Rotor and Piggyback movements?
Have you ever seen a Lemania movement used in Patek
Philippe watches seen up close & personal?
I've only had quick glimpses of
Patek's and never had an
opportunity to look at the movement.
What did you think of it, did it gave you a thrill?
They are nice watches, but they are really out
of my interest sphere. It would be like me looking at
vintage Bugatti's, they are so outside my interest
sphere, I can appreciate their beauty on a certain level,
but my tastes are more blue collar than white tie.
And the size... aside from the
fact that they are a bit 'vintage Bugatti', and thus with
ditto pricetag, they are small!!
Well the price tags are
certainly anything but small! The are really outside my
serious interest sphere, and as such while I'll give them
a glance in a display case, they won't get much other
scrutiny. On the other hand, even though I'm not exactly
going to me mistaken for a jockey being John Candy sized
as I am, I have bought some smaller chronographs the past
couple of years. A Bucherer, a couple of Tissot's and a
couple of Tourneaus that are on the smaller side (smaller
than a 1960's Seamaster or Carrera) and they are nice
watches and great to wear as a change of pace.
[This passage helps this
sound much more like a conversation]...
Back to the Valjoux-series,
are you fond of the older valjoux
movements, like the valjoux 72 family?
Yes, I am. I own a number of Valjoux 72's as
well as the many variations: v.721 (Seafarer), v.723
(triple-date), several c.724's (GMT Complication), c.726
(Improved c.72), and a c.728 (single register with a
center pinion chronograph minute counter (similar to the
Lemania 5100 and 1341/2) and the v.88 (triple-date
Moonphase. A very good solid movement. I don't feel it is
as pretty as the Lemania 321 but it's very nice, more
variation in features. The Valjoux has a number of very
long and delicate levers that the Lemania either doesn't
have or are shorter or much thicker, which contribute to
the Lemania's reputation for robust movements that can
take punishment well. BTW, for those who are interested
the v.727 refers to the Rolex version of the Valjoux 72
typically.
I've said in the past, and drawn the ire of some
moonwatch fans, when I've said I'm not comfortable
blaming the 72 for the failure of Rolex and Longines in
the NASA astronaut watch tests. One can't easily lay the
blame for the disqualification of the Longines-Wittnauer
(popped crystal) and Rolex (warped hands) competitors for
the NASA testing at the feet of the Valjoux 72 because
their failures were non-movement related issues. We may
never know if, say, a Omega manufactured v.72 might have
been able to have pass the NASA tests.
As for Zenith, you have a few El Primero driven
watches,
A few. I received one between parts 1 and 2 of
this conversation.
what do you think about this movement qualitywise?
I think in terms of technical design it's still
the high water mark. Manufacture quality... It's the
equal of anyone else's work in my opinion.
Is the movement hyped do you think,
Certainly it's acclaimed, in my opinion for good
reason. Hyped? Perhaps, but not over hyped. I mean no
other movement in mass production can do what it does,
and it has done it for 35 years now.
or does it really live up to its quality-image on
the several watchfora?
I feel it does, and I feel many other people
would feel the same way.
Let me put it this way. How many Omega fans would line
up to buy a moonwatch equipped with an El-Primero
movement, how many Breitling owners? IWC? I think the
line would go out the door.
Rolex used the Zenith El Primero movement for a
while in their Daytona.
Yes, and they labored for a number of years to
develop their own in-house movement. A move I applaud.
That's a significant investment in resources and faith
that the ends will justify the means.
Why would Rolex have downgraded the bph to 28800
instead of maintaining the 36000 bph and did some more
changes in construction (like the escapement and balance),
to maintain a certain quality in their Daytona
models?
My knowledge of Rolex's motives is probably at
the competent guessing level. But it's been my
observation that Rolex prefers tradition, durability and
ease of servicing over other considerations when there is
a conflict. So they fine-tuned the movement to their
tastes. No different than Carroll Shelby making changes
in the GT-40's he was supplied in Ford's quest to win
LeMans in the 1960's. A watch beating at 28,800 is not
going to need service as frequently or as exotic of
lubricants as Zenith uses in it's tune of the El-Primero.
Rolex owners are known for using their watches the way an
adventurer would use a Land Rover. Zenith has a different
market segment it prefers. You'll notice the relative
lack of sports models in Zeniths more recent product
lineups. Sport's models: Sub's, GMT's, 'Dwellers,
Daytona's are Rolex's bread and butter.
What is your opinion on servicing chronograph
watches? You have quite a few vintage chronograph watches,
and 'specialties' as well (Speedmaster (Pro) caliber 321
models,
Well, certainly not just c.321's on the
Speed/Seamasters.
Breitling Navitimer ref.806, Zenith El Primero).
Maintaining these watches isn't cheap, have you got a
schedule for this, or do you only service the pieces who get
regular 'wristtime'?
I inspect virtually all of my watches under
high-magnification upon receipt. If the watch looks clean
and lubricated properly (damp in the right places, but
not dry or wet), I'll wear them, testing for function,
accuracy and reliability. If I have any doubts I'll
take/send it to one of four people I've sought out and
trust. Two of the fellows are Chicagoland local for me,
one is in New England, the other in the greater Toronto
Canada metroplex. Baring them I'll send it to the factory
or an authorized service center.
I do keep my watches in a safe climate controlled
location with adequate heating/cooling humidity controls
to keep the watches happy. And remember that with very
few exceptions most of my watches get very scarce wrist
time. So they don't get a lot of wear. If I haven't worn
a watch in a long time and it's turn is up, I'll wind it
up, give it a whirl and if I have any cause to suspect
something amiss I'll inspect and deal with it.
Aside from that I'm working to establish a regular
schedule for my watches to get at least a clean and lube
every couple of years. I'm not entirely there yet, and it
is far from automatic, but that's the long term plan.
Back to a more general point of view on watches and
the watchbusiness. Can you give me a quick thought on the
Swiss watch industry, the German watch industry and the
Japanese watch industry?
I'm not going to take these in order... But,
hmmm... Japanese watch industry... I think there
was a time where they were incredibly innovative and
aggressive in the marketplace, being among the first to
develop an automatic chronograph movement, an early
adopter of LED and LCD quartz technology, as well as
realizing the benefits of analog quartz offerings, then
for the most part they rested on their laurels for a
while evolving instead of innovating. The past couple of
years I've seen some really interesting ideas and things
coming from Seiko and Citizen (especially) as well as
Casio and even Timex. I've long said that one would be
hard pressed to find a better deal "bang for the buck"
than a Casio G-Shock watch. It's good to see some of the
nifty new things, both technological and quality wise on
the Japanese front.
The German brands... I'm going to assume you
mean the German brands we were talking about earlier...
Well, I meant the German
watch industry in general, which includes A. Lange &
Söhne, Glashuette Original, Nomos etc.
For the most part these brands
are outside my usual interest sphere. I admire the
quality and inventiveness of their movement and
configurations. They watches each create are
technological a tour-de-force. However with these three
they aren't going to be mistaken for tool watches. I will
say that I personally consider Nomos to be one of the
hidden gems of the watch industry. They make beautiful
watches at a reasonable cost and every owner I've ever
talked to has been thrilled with their purchase.
As for the German "Tool Watch"
brands... The big problem
they face is the supply of
ebauches. Which involves the Swiss watch industry... Up
until a couple of years ago all four of these brands:
Sinn, Bell & Ross, Tutima and Fortis were heavily
dependent on the Lemania 5100. Bell & Ross started
transitioning about the same time they were cutting their
ties with Sinn, and seem to be completely 7750 based.
Sinn still has a few 5100 models available but they are
getting scarce, and once they are gone... They are gone.
Fortis started transitioning after Bell & Ross and
with the exception of a limited edition B-42 is
completely over to the 7750. Which leaves Tutima... I
really don't know what Tutima's plans are. They are
probably the smallest of these brands in terms of size
and sales. It's possible they have a surplus of 5100's
and can continue production for the time being and
perhaps into the future. But sooner or later they too
will have to switch to something.
A moment of rage here for the 5100... It's a
shame that Swatch either with intent or neglect is
putting the 5100 out to pasture. The reasons aren't
because the watch is a failure, or unpopular or there is
a lack of demand for it, but rather it isn't pretty in
the opinion of the watch movement appreciation society
and no one within Swatch or Lemania is interested in
putting their wing over it and protecting it. It's a fine
movement, a better performer than many of it's
replacements (c.33xx among them) are. If Swatch, or
Lemania can't be bothered to make it, then license it or
sell it off like they did the LWO 283 movement to
Dubois-Depraz! There aren't a huge number of
automatic-chronograph movements around that watch firms
can use to make watches. We need more choices not fewer.
If I ever win the lottery maybe I'll approach Swatch.
The Swiss watch industry... The biggest cloud
on the horizon for the Swiss watch industry is Swatch's
decision to stop supplying base ebauches to anyone
willing to pay for them. I forget the exact date, but in
the near future, Swatch will only sell assembled
movements to non-Swatch group firms. I understand and
empathize with their situation... Unscrupulous groups
have been purchasing base movements and making convincing
replicas out of them. But what does this mean to firms
using them? Higher costs for movements they incorporate
into their watches. What does that mean to the customer?
Higher prices. With the exception of Rolex, Zenith, some
of the high-end manufacturers, all of whom make their own
movements, and of course Swatch Group companies
themselves this means they either have to pay Swatch
Group for their reluctance to support the Swatch/ETA
movement conglomerate, find a new movement supplier, or
make their own. Will this cause a flurry of movement
development among non-Swatch firms? Perhaps for simpler
movements, less likely for chronographs. Which I believe
for most firms and for consumers expect prices to rise
significantly in the next couple of years. On the other
hand, the global economy, which had been in something of
a funk ever since the "Asian Contagion" of the higher
prices without difficulty. Hard to say.
I also think that some of the Watch conglomerates will
continue to cherry pick independent firms to add to their
portfolio. With some of the firms we've mentioned going
up stream in the niche market place I can see "the bigs"
looking for other firms, set up and ready to go to fill
in the areas that those firms have started to neglect.
Wittnauer, Waltham, Oris, Limes, Glycine, Revue Thommen
among others might be good candidates with followings,
enough heritage and fame to be valued additions.
Are you aware of the "new" Dutch watchcompany
called Van der Gang, which is besides Christiaan van der
Klaauw our own watchcompany in The Netherlands?
While I've heard of Christiaan van der Klaauw, I
was unfamiliar with Van der Gang. I guess I have to do
some Google searching! This is why I consider myself a
student of the topic at hand. For I'm always learning new
things.
What do you think about their chronograph and the
fact that their influences are very obvious (IWC Portugieser
Chronograph)?
Give me a URL RJ, and I'll form an opinion.
Do you like the IWC Portugieser line any way, as a
chronograph-nut?
I think the Portugieser line is an interesting
line/watch and very very beautiful. I am not as big of a
fan as many people are because I'm an hour-register sort
of guy and I feel a chronograph lacking an hour register
is of limited utility. I own several Porsche-Design/IWC
Chronographs which I am very fond of. I wish they were
still available new and still easily findable used at
reasonable prices.
Ironically of the current IWC models the one I really
like the most is the Da Vinci line. I think the Da Vinci
(either the original or the Rattrapante) in Gold is the
ultimate dress watch... In fact one I've heard my Ed.
Heuer & Co. 125th Jubilee chronograph likened to a
"Little Da Vinci", and if you look at the "Small Da
Vinci" you can see why...
Reference 3736 from IWC. The small
Da Vinci in 18 ct. yellow gold with brown crocodile
leather strap.
Ed. Heuer & Co. 125th Jubilee
(1985) Chronograph
(You want to skip this
one?)
Your call RJ. I'll need
some links to form some opinions though if you want to go
ahead.
Thanks Chuck!
Readers, beware of the next part of the conversation!
It will be about the online watchcommunity, watch collecting
and eBay!
click here
to return to the blog!
|