The Watch Appreciation Thread - Part two (Rolex, Patek Philippe, Audemars Piguet, Jaeger LeCoultre,

[am55]

I'm fairly interested in the imperfections of handmade goods. I'd probably be fine with a little PP case distortion. Alternatively, (and maybe this has been asked already, so sorry if I missed it...), if you are purchasing an 80k watch and you happen to be an absolute stickler for perfection at every turn, prone to intense circumspection, rumination - don't you put the watch under a loupe/macro lens BEFORE you purchase it, not a few weeks later? Is this why Patek suggested the watch might have suffered from wear after the purchase - because it's reasonable to assume that anyone consumed with this level of detail would have done their dd at the time of purchase? (Asking for a friend...)

It takes me days or weeks of living with something to spot the imperfections in it (there are always imperfections) and they would drive me crazy, and I had to teach myself to let go and be grateful for what I had. It's key to happiness IMO but then again key to being a New Yorker is perhaps a constant state of slight dissatisfaction driving the eternal search for the next great thing?

In How Luxury Lost its Luster by Dana Thomas she suggested that the Japanese consumers are the most careful about details, followed by Parisians, followed by Europeans, with Americans dead last, which encouraged some brands to ship their defective goods there. Maybe Foo should visit choco when Japan reopens and source his next Patek there...

 

[RobinMA]

As a PE/IB baller, you demand the best, with assertiveness

 

[chocomallo]

I'm fairly interested in the imperfections of handmade goods. I'd probably be fine with a little PP case distortion. Alternatively, (and maybe this has been asked already, so sorry if I missed it...), if you are purchasing an 80k watch and you happen to be an absolute stickler for perfection at every turn, prone to intense circumspection, rumination - don't you put the watch under a loupe/macro lens BEFORE you purchase it, not a few weeks later? Is this why Patek suggested the watch might have suffered from wear after the purchase - because it's reasonable to assume that anyone consumed with this level of detail would have done their dd at the time of purchase? (Asking for a friend...)

TheFoo does not wear the watch, the watch wears TheFoo. If anything, I feel bad for the damage done to his wrist and the suffering his Daytona and other four Pateks must endure.

Plus his wife bought the watch for his b-day. I think we can all forgive the transgression.

I do wonder, though, whether one can really spot polishing or finishing of a case through photos after all. TheFoo claimed to be an expert and RobinMA confirmed, yet here we are.

 

[chocomallo]

Ah, the pleasure of hosting TheFoo in Japan. If a western shirt thread can generate 200 pages... TheFoo is my 先輩 after all. I’ve a futon reserved for the occasion.

 

[TheFoo]

I have to hand it to the man, though - because he really does think Patek is unequaled in the watch industry (and they might be...) - when they informed him face-to-face of the actual standards used for their case finishing quality control, he was like: "y'all bullshitting...i demand better". I mean, that is bad ass. They say never meet your heroes, but it's next-level **** to meet your hero and just straight up tell them they aren't as good as the mythical version of them you have flying around in your head. Epic.
* claps poco a poco...*

Thanks?

 

[TheFoo]

I'm fairly interested in the imperfections of handmade goods. I'd probably be fine with a little PP case distortion. Alternatively, (and maybe this has been asked already, so sorry if I missed it...), if you are purchasing an 80k watch and you happen to be an absolute stickler for perfection at every turn, prone to intense circumspection, rumination - don't you put the watch under a loupe/macro lens BEFORE you purchase it, not a few weeks later? Is this why Patek suggested the watch might have suffered from wear after the purchase - because it's reasonable to assume that anyone consumed with this level of detail would have done their dd at the time of purchase? (Asking for a friend...)

It takes me days or weeks of living with something to spot the imperfections in it (there are always imperfections) and they would drive me crazy, and I had to teach myself to let go and be grateful for what I had. It's key to happiness IMO but then again key to being a New Yorker is perhaps a constant state of slight dissatisfaction driving the eternal search for the next great thing?

In How Luxury Lost its Luster by Dana Thomas she suggested that the Japanese consumers are the most careful about details, followed by Parisians, followed by Europeans, with Americans dead last, which encouraged some brands to ship their defective goods there. Maybe Foo should visit choco when Japan reopens and source his next Patek there...

It’s a fine line (or gradient band?). Of course handmade goods will have imperfections and some such imperfections will sometimes be worse than “normal”. In a weird way, it is nice to be reminded that Patek cases are in fact hand polished. However, I’d like to think I’ve developed enough of an eye over the years to judge reasonably whether an irregularity is merely a natural artifact of being handmade or whether it in fact represents a material lapse in quality control.

In this case, I think the irregularity is just on the cusp of a material lapse. You could maybe argue both ways. But this is the fifth Patek I’ve bought. I don’t think it’s expecting much for them to make right a problem that is in the grey area of acceptable versus not acceptable.

No, I did not like the reception at Henri Stern. Frankly, I was quite surprised and let them know my displeasure. Like I’ve said elsewhere—now I can only hope that Patek will resolve this appropriately. I don’t expect perfection upfront 100% of the time, but I do expect a top tier maker to correct their mistakes.

 

[TheFoo]

You need to buy at least 13 Pateks (or is it 11?) before you have a complete understanding of the extent of distorted case finishing that your Patek has.

Not far from the truth, though you jest. Familiarity through iterative firsthand experience is key to understanding a lot of things.

The real joke is questioning this very basic, uncontroversial principle on the false basis of anti-elitism.

 

[TheFoo]

Out of curiosity, what are some examples of the particular independents or models that you're referencing with this comment?

Who can say? That’s the point. Impossible to tell which makers will go out of business, get acquired by a conglomerate, or simply fall out of fashion.

One other note on independents: Why should it necessarily be thought that any of these brands intend to be long-lived legacy brands? Their hyper-specific dated-ness is the attraction - be super hot for a specific stretch, rather than charmingly boring for 100+ years.

Does anyone honestly believe that Richard Mille thinks their watches are timeless?

Uhh, because you need to be able to service these things.

 

[Journeyman]

It’s a fine line (or gradient band?). Of course handmade goods will have imperfections and some such imperfections will sometimes be worse than “normal”. In a weird way, it is nice to be reminded that Patek cases are in fact hand polished. However, I’d like to think I’ve developed enough of an eye over the years to judge reasonably whether an irregularity is merely a natural artifact of being handmade or whether it in fact represents a material lapse in quality control.

In this case, I think the irregularity is just on the cusp of a material lapse.

A couple of thoughts (more musings, really):

a) Weren't you effusively praising Patek's hand-polishing just a few pages back, and saying that's one of the things that (subjectively) makes Patek superior to brands such as Grand Seiko? As you say, when something is hand-made, there will be inevitably be minor variations or imperfections (just like with your little teacups). Interestingly, these minor differences and imperfections are actually desirable in certain contexts, such as pottery - but then appear undesirable when it comes to something else, such as a watch case.

b) Also, didn't you say that you didn't even notice the imperfection in the case, until someone pointed it out to you under a loupe or a magnifying glass? I understand that it might be one of those "once you've seen it, you can't unsee it" things, but surely if it took close examination under a magnifying glass by someone trained by Patek, then it's not something that anyone would actually notice?

 

[Dino944]

You can look at artisans of even a few decades ago. Daniel Roth is never mentioned on this thread, for example, yet IMO his work deserves to be so more than many other brands that are. Ultimately for posterity you need some kind of original angle; otherwise you are merely one of a series of very good artisans. And of course the bigger places have the means to get themselves documented in enough places to create a "legacy" for future generations to dig into (in the same way Dino quotes brochures from the 1980s).

I think the original Daniel Roth pieces were unique and beautiful, but are a rarity among independents. I think some independent's go so far to be different, that they end up making something unique, but awkward and appealing only to a small audience (perhaps people with a preference for independent's as they like the idea of small niche brands, where they may even have a little input). I've mentioned it before, but a friend had a collection of 40 watches, mostly VC (some vintage some current, and few from other brands), and he liquidated most to buy a JDN tourbillon. The finish is beautiful, he had a little input and got to communicate with Daniel Roth and his son. Still, at about $130,000 I don't think it's more beautiful or special than DR's original creations, or anything from PP, AP, VC, or Lange.

Gerald Genta is a designer who produced some impressive and iconic designs for AP, Patek, Omega, Bvlgari, Cartier etc....but on his own as an independent...be it the brand Gerald Genta or Gerald Charles... several of his pieces just fall flat or weren't that attractive. Who here even knows what a current Gerald Charles looks like without looking up their current collection? I certainly didn't.

Amusing but I don't want a Disney character watch. This appealed to a friend who collected jump hour pieces.

Sure designs like this last one were absorbed and used by Bvlgari, and in some ways they made it more wearable. But some of his designs are just tough to love.

 

[NakedYoga]

Who can say? That’s the point. Impossible to tell which makers will go out of business, get acquired by a conglomerate, or simply fall out of fashion.

I mean...you can, ostensibly. You said that you think most of those independents will be largely forgotten and noted what you consider obnoxious design elements. I'm just curious what you personally had in mind when you made that comment.

 

[TheFoo]

I mean...you can, ostensibly. You said that you think most of those independents will be largely forgotten and noted what you consider obnoxious design elements. I'm just curious what you personally had in mind when you made that comment.

I’m not sure how I can be more clear. In general, independents have not had a great track record of survival. The biggest names from the 90’s and 00’s (Franck Muller, Roger Dubuis, Daniel Roth, etc.) are but shadows of their former selves, in many cases having been radically transformed after acquisition by a larger company.

Today’s independents are prone to the same risk. A key advantage of older, established makers is precisely that they are older and established.

 

[NakedYoga]

I’m not sure how I can be more clear. In general, independents have not had a great track record of survival. The biggest names from the 90’s and 00’s (Franck Muller, Roger Dubuis, Daniel Roth, etc.) are but shadows of their former selves, in many cases having been radically transformed after acquisition by a larger company.

I'm not sure how I can be more clear either. I'm asking for current examples of those independents that you think are going to be relegated to the dustbin of irrelevance or that you find to be obnoxious or whatever. If you're just talking in generalities rather than having any specific examples in mind, I suppose I misunderstood you.

Today’s independents are prone to the same risk. A key advantage of older, established makers is precisely that they are older and established.

While true, that's a bit tautological, no?

 

[Ebitdaddy]

Romain Gauthier using things like proprietary screws is pretty scary for serviceability down the road but Chanel does own a piece of them.

 

[RobinMA]

I think the original Daniel Roth pieces were unique and beautiful, but are a rarity among independents. I think some independent's go so far to be different, that they end up making something unique, but awkward and appealing only to a small audience (perhaps people with a preference for independent's as they like the idea of small niche brands, where they may even have a little input). I've mentioned it before, but a friend had a collection of 40 watches, mostly VC (some vintage some current, and few from other brands), and he liquidated most to buy a JDN tourbillon. The finish is beautiful, he had a little input and got to communicate with Daniel Roth and his son. Still, at about $130,000 I don't think it's more beautiful or special than DR's original creations, or anything from PP, AP, VC, or Lange.

Gerald Genta is a designer who produced some impressive and iconic designs for AP, Patek, Omega, Bvlgari, Cartier etc....but on his own as an independent...be it the brand Gerald Genta or Gerald Charles... several of his pieces just fall flat or weren't that attractive. Who here even knows what a current Gerald Charles looks like without looking up their current collection? I certainly didn't.

View attachment 1738370

View attachment 1738371
Amusing but I don't want a Disney character watch. This appealed to a friend who collected jump hour pieces.

Sure designs like this last one were absorbed and used by Bvlgari, and in some ways they made it more wearable. But some of his designs are just tough to love.

The Disney watch should be seen in its sociologicalistorcal context - at that time, ballers in IB/PE also wore Iceberg sweaters, prime Iceberg.