I apologize if you signed up for email updates on Horolonomics but you haven't received an update since July or so. Google closed a service I was relying upon for those updates and I'm only now figuring out how to transition to a new service. The good news is that my next post is a big one and I figured all this out before that one went live.
This isn't the code I had to fix but it is close. If you're reading this after receiving an email, I moved your subscription to my new service. Hopefully you are OK with that, if not, you should be able to unsubscribe on the new service. If you have any concerns please DM me on Instagram (@katimepieces) and I will fix things.
Again, my apologies for the delay on fixing this. Horolonomics is a one man operation and sometimes it takes me a while to figure out the magic of tech. As always, thank you so much for reading and spreading the word. It means a TON to me.
Let's get some preliminaries out of the way: I don't particularly admire or respect how Patek CEO Thierry Stern responded to criticism of Cubitus, the brand's newest release. Three pocket watches on display during the 2017 Patek Philippe Grand Exhibition in NYC. Here's what he said : “The haters are mostly people who have never had a Patek and never will, so that doesn’t bother me.” Does this remark seem filled with hubris and disrespect for potential buyers? Yes. Will it matter for Patek financially? I don't think so. Let me explain. In order to understand the financial side of watch brands, we should never forget that retail buyers are not their customers (with some rare exceptions). I know that sounds crazy, but it is 5,000% true. For a brand like Patek, the primary watch market is financially mediated. There is a third party standing between brands in Switzerland and collectors. Namely, Patek sells to authorized dealers, they don't sell to collectors....
This may not come as a surprise, but I do not read German-language newspapers on a regular basis. Dial of a vintage Omega Constellation, pie pan. I am, however, keenly interested in a scandal involving the Swatch Group and a "Frankenwatch" Speedmaster which was sold at auction a while back for over $3 million. I won't go into all the minute details here, but the punchline is that Swatch Group bought the watch only to discover that some of its own employees may have been part of a conspiracy to assemble a watch which would be quite rare and important if it were authentic. But, apparently, it was not authentic. When the deception was uncovered, various people who were part of the "inside job" lost employment and, reportedly, legal authorities were notified in Switzerland. I originally wrote about this in 2023, you can read my coverage here . There's been excellent reporting on this matter from many sources (see, for example, this story from Bloomberg). ...
While listening to a recent episode of the A Blog to Watch Weekly podcast, a debate over strategy and pricing at the watch brand Oris caught my attention. An Oris watch. The brand has used Sellita movements. The issue at hand was this: do Oris Diver watches, featuring the in-house calibre 400 movement and priced just over $4,000, make any sense? This question is relevant because other, similar, Oris Divers with a Sellita-derived movement are available for under $3,000. At first blush, I understand and, to some extent, agree with those who question whether it makes sense for Oris to move "upmarket" and still offer lower-priced models. But I think some recent events in Switzerland suggest that buyers should strongly consider, or perhaps prefer, the newer references with in-house movements even though they may carry a premium. When any brand sources materials from other companies, they face something the field of finance refers to as "counterparty risk." Your p...
Comments
Post a Comment