The Breitling Watch Source Forums

Sorry about the delay of answering but I was away for a few days.


Even though this is a watch forum, I have to say that BMWs are much more technologically advanced cars than MB, contrary to the general opinion. People, in general, think that since it's a MB it's a better car, no matter what. Don't put me wrong, MB are not bad cars, in fact they are some of the best cars you can buy, but the situation has evolved and BMW just got better. And not only engine wise. But people in general are not quite aware of that fact. However, it's only a matter of time until they do.

Now, on a follow up on Hublot watches, I happened to read an interview of Jean-Claude Biver last Sunday, published in one of the most serious Swiss newspapers, Le Temps (The Time). Here are some excerpts:

Jean-Claude Biver, 61, (who comes from Luxembourg) began managing Hublot in the early 2000s. He had previously worked for the Swatch group being part of the high executives of the company during 7 years. He was first in charge of Omega and then of Blancpain. He greatly contributed in the revival of Blancpain (in the '80s) and Hublot (from 2000 on), two almost extinct makes. As you know, Blancpain was sold to the Swatch group and Hublot to the LVMH luxury group. Although no figures are published since 2007 (when turnover was $ 160 million), the estimated Hublot production for 2009 is 20'000 pieces.

Carlo Crocco founded Hublot in 1980 and remained the major sharehorlder until Hublot was sold to LVMH in 2008. Only since JCB started to manage Hublot the watchmaker started to score impressive results. That is why he and his most close associates decided to propose a management buy-out to Carlo Crocco who, initially, had agreed with the plan and had promised, orally, to JCB that he would sell the company to him.. However, at the last moment, Crocco changed his mind and sold it to the LVMH group instead. Nevertheless, JCB and his team stayed on. Even though watches represent less than 5% of the sales of LVMH, JCB had no choice. He didn't want to pay the same selling price as an outsider who knew absolutely nothing of Hublot. He managed, however, to retain a certain in independency (at least for the time being) with the only obligation to present, once a year, the yearly budget.

Until 2004, Hublot was in a state of "clinical death". Its losses were over $ 3 million for a turnoverof $ 29 million. However, JCB came on board, along with major members from the team he headed when he was at Blancpain: his personnal secretary (since 1979), his director of marketing (since 1996), his director of production (since 1982), his director general (since 1992) etc. Hence, he managed to have a certain stability for the new team. He also managed to persuade some quality "retirees" who were fired from other watchmakers in recent years. So, he got experience. And he got the future by using ceramic, carbon or alloys, high tech in general.

All these people had confidence in him because he had succeeded in the past when he was in Omega or Blancpain. And he also used sponsoring (among others Hublot is the major sponsor of Alinghi, ill-fated defender of the 33d America's Cup).

When the major supplier of Hublot, BNB Concept, went under recently, there was an immediate danger for Hublot. They then decided to buy for over $ 3 million worth of movements and components from BNB. This gave them some space for the next 26 months. At the same time, they were sure that no other competitor would buy that stock with the evident danger of cutting them off.

JCB says that they will never produce a 100% Hublot movement because it doesn't make any sense. Their main movement is the 7750 Valjoux, produced by the Swatch group, and which has proven itself for the last 30 years.

He also regrets that Baseworld comes so late in the year, the danger being that most orders have already been placed.

Nevertheless, January 2010 was the best year ever for the company, with December and November 2009 being also record months. However, by his estimates, we will have to wait at least 18 months before seeing results like we had back in 2008. Because, as he characteristically says, the patient is out of intensive care but not out of the hospital yet.

_________________


- This is Ghost Rider requesting a fly-by. - Negative Ghost Rider. The pattern is full.

wow very cool insight on the company thank you for posting that.

Hi MasterOfEvil,

I have posted some photos for you at the Off-topic Discussion section that you may like.

_________________


- This is Ghost Rider requesting a fly-by. - Negative Ghost Rider. The pattern is full.

Euh... most people couldn't care less about the movement in their watches. It's how they look, and to some extend how much bling it shows off.

I went Panerai because i couldn't care less what other's think, 90% of people never heard of Panerai, and yet they are much better than Rolex's in many criteria's. But EVERYONE knows Rolex, heh?

Hublot are simply huge watches, i look but i would never (and i mean never) consider buying one. Main reason is they are to big/bulky, which doesn't fit my style.

_________________
Panerai PAM212 | Panerai Diver Strap
Panerai PAM111 | Black Croc Strap
Omega Planet Ocean | SS Bracelet
Rolex Submariner | SS Bracelet (Sold, Awaiting Funds)
Breitling Navitimer Olympus | Brown Croc Strap (Arriving)

That's why I said that I find it odd, not that everyone will find it odd because apparently not everyone does. As a self confessed WIS I find the idea of paying AP or Hublot prices for something with essentially the same movement as you might find in say a Hamilton slightly bizarre. I PERSONALLY would find it impossible to justify the cost. We all know there is a massive markup on all luxury watches but if the company has gone to the expense of doing the r&d to make their own movement I'm prepared to accept a premium on the price. I won't pay what I consider to be over the odds for a nice case and name on the dial. Its all down to where each of us draws the line. For many Joe Public buyers a Breitling is too much to pay for a watch. It's all relative.

But I still maintain that if youre prepared to drop 20k on a watch, then theres no way on Earth that I'd want it to be running the same internals as something available for literally 100 times less. But hey that's just me.

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator

I do not quite understand why you are saying this. I understand that Hublot's have ETA based movements but to say that AP as a whole uses rather generic movements is ridiculous. How would you find their in-house 3120 movement in a watch 100 times, or any times cheaper. I like Hublot's based on their innovation in materials and design, but the clump them together with AP is unfair, whilst both great watches AP is head and shoulders above.

AP has "gone to the expense of doing the r&d to make their own movement" many times over, whilst they may not be purely 100% inhouse on everything they are not using anything close to an ETA based movement (sure they use a chrono module);, to say they just stuff a regular movement in a nice case is false. I do not understand why you would say that an AP with an in-house movement and its immaculate case work is not nearly worth the money but a similarly priced Patek or Vacheron (any top-notch brand) may be?

Your original post made it sound like you were surprised, and i responded that most people couldn't care less about the movement in their watches.

_________________
Panerai PAM212 | Panerai Diver Strap
Panerai PAM111 | Black Croc Strap
Omega Planet Ocean | SS Bracelet
Rolex Submariner | SS Bracelet (Sold, Awaiting Funds)
Breitling Navitimer Olympus | Brown Croc Strap (Arriving)

I find AP to be a little confused with their whole movement direction. They undoubtedly have a tremendous history of extremely fine watchmaking. However, the mechanical renaisance saw them playing this down in favour of consumption of movements from JLC - not truly generic, but not AP exclusive movements either - and where they did make distinctions from JLC they weren't necessarily what most people would consider enhancements - slowing the beat for example. I find this even more amazing when you think that AP were at the forefront of things like the wristwatch tourbillon. They do seem to be investing more heavily in new movement design of late, but I'm still not entirely clear what they are trying to do - produce their 25 - 30,000 watches a year by leveraging the JLC movement engine or move back to exclusive AP calibers and accept that the production volume may go down (and prices increase further).

From what information I have garnered it seems as if they are trying to incorporate their 3126 movement into the Offshores more and more each year, I am assuming that in a few years they may (may) phase out the JLC movement in the Offshore.

I agree with you that AP has not been as focused on movements as Patek or other elite watch companies for the most part, but what I think they have focused on helped them more than any movement could. From the time Genta designed the Royal Oak, and then the introduction of the Offshore, to some of the crazy limited edition Offshores (have you seen the Grand-Prix) they have carved out a unique niche in the top-tier watch makers. They have managed to distinguish themselves from companies such as Patek, Vacheron, or A. Lange Sohne which makes them, if not more appealing, at least more noticed. I know that Patek does sell marginally more watches per year than AP, but no doubt without the Royal Oak Offshore line their sales would be way down.

I think they have done a great job in establishing themselves over the past hundred and some years, but recently they have done an especially great job in making their product "special", how many other company would make $100K + sports watches? Sort of nonsensical, but it works, I like them as do many others even if it does not really make that much sense.

If they start to incorporate their in-house into all of the Offshores and perhaps come out in the future with an integrated chrono they will have hit a grand-slam per se, they will have made their statement with what type of (rather unique) watches they sell and they will have not just the provenance but the full package (with movements) to make their watches unrivaled by anything.

I'm obviously not talking about the AP watches that HAVE in-house movements : no, I'm talking about models like the ROO chronographs that cost (at least what I consider to be) a heck of a lot of cash and house an ETA based movement. Sorry I guess I should've qualified my statement further to avoid confusion.

All I am saying is that I personally wouldn't entertain buying any watch - Hublot, AP (and yes, I mean the ones with ETA based movements), and others - that costs 20k without it having a unique movement in it. And yes I know AP modify the eta movements they use in their ROO Chronos but at the end of the day they are still modified etas just like Breitlings are. For me, the whole package has to stack up - obviously I wouldn't buy a watch just for the movement if I didn't like the case, and for me the same applies in the other direction too. In terms of AP, the only models I like the look of aesthetically are the ROO Chronos..... but I won't pay that sort of money for one because of what's inside. Just my opinion - I don't expect people to necessarily agree with it.

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator

This is my hang-up, what AP uses an ETA based movement? The Offshores use a slightly modified version of the JLC 889 (which is not an ETA based movement, correct) and most of the newer Offshores use the in-house 3126 movement, and it seems like they keep integrating the in-house movement into Offshores.

Where are the ETA based movements in the Offshore, I am not finding any?

Ok I'll concede on the AP using ETA front. I always believed they used to use ETA before JLC but I've just checked and you are quite correct. My mistake.

But for the price of a ROO I'd still expect a watch to have a full in house movement, irrespective of the quality of the base movement.

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator

At least now they have the in-house 3126 movement in many of the Offshores. I really hope that eventually they come out with an integrated movement and stop using the DD Chrono module. I do agree that for the price they should have an integrated movement, but the future shall tell I suppose.

That is exactly the point I was trying to make earlier on on this forum but MasterOfEvil didn't seem to get it or maybe I didn't express myself clearly.

That said, the latest information on Hublot is that it became the official time keeper of the Formula 1. Don't you think that the exaggerated prices of Hublot watches give the chance to Jean-Claude Biver for yet another (after the America's Cup, among others) show off?

_________________


- This is Ghost Rider requesting a fly-by. - Negative Ghost Rider. The pattern is full.

I understand that was your point, but you point was wrong. AP does not use ETA based movements. I had no problem seeing why many do not like Hublot because they do use modified ETA movements, but AP is a different story.

It seems as if Mr. Biver understands what he is doing. He has managed to "re-launch" the brand and has made the Big Bang massively successful for what type of watch it is. He posts on the TimeZone forums and provides excellent customer service. Whilst Hublots are certainly not the best watches in the world they have created a product niche and have been able to establish themselves and most importantly make themselves money. When it comes down to it, as Mr. Biver said in your quote that they do not really care if they have an in-house movement, all that matters is that they make money, and there is not really anything wrong with that.