The Breitling Watch Source Forums

No, this isn't a post about skeletonised movements! It's about what I believe is a long overdue requirement for transparency (and at times, honesty) about the movements manufacturers are using.

The reason for this post is three-fold. Firstly, I was chatting to a watch-fan mate over a beer a few nights ago and he asked me what a "modified" 2824, or 7750, or 2892 really meant.... and I couldn't give a definitive answer. As we know "modifying" can cover the whole range from simply decorating the rotor, through buying in ETA ébauches and physically swapping out main components, to getting ETA to actually build the movement to the company's individual spec right at the factory (á la IWC).

The second reason for the thread is that Bremont cropped up on here recently, and a few years ago they were guilty of claiming a movement was in-house, when in actual fact it was a "partnership" (at best) with a 3rd party specialist movement maker.

And the last reason is because the other day I saw a post on FB where TAG Heuer were showing off one of their watches, and a guy asked them whether the Calibre 7 movement it uses was ETA, Sellita or in-house. TAG Heuer replied saying something that basically just repeated exactly what's on their website - something along the lines of, "The calibre 7 is a Swiss Automatic Movement with 21 or 25 jewels and 32 to 38 hours of power reserve depending on execution".....which basically didn't even begin to answer the guy's question. Fortunately another user kindly replied that the Calibre 7 is based on either the ETA 2893 or Sellita SW300 which is why they say "depending on execution"......, which is what TAG Heuer should've said in the first place!

All of the above kind of made we question why in this day and age, most watch companies still find it so difficult to simply be open and transparent about their watches. Why is there still such a need to obfuscate the facts? Is it due to some kind of embarrassment? Or is it simply an attempt to justify prices?

I've always quite liked Tudor's method : they simply say "Tudor 2824" or "Tudor 7750" instead of giving them some kind of random brand-specific calibre name. But to be honest I think it should go further than that : I think every brand should publish a section on their movements on their websites saying EXACTLY what their movements are. For example -

Calibre 123456 - Elaboré grade ETA 2824 with the rotor decorated by us in-house.

or

Calibre ABCDE - Based on Top grade ETA 2893 that we purchase as an ébauche from ETA and then assemble in-house, including our own escapement assembly. Escapement assembly is designed and built by us using both Swiss and Chinese sourced components.

or

Calibre 99999 - Based on Chronometer grade ETA 2892, but built in entirety by ETA to our exclusive specifications, comprising a bespoke winding mechanism and escapement assembly including a Breguet hairspring, and a bespoke tungsten rotor. Regulated to 5 positions before casing up.

Now of course I understand that some people don't care about what's inside their watches, and that's fine.... but for those of us who DO care, I don't see why watch companies should seem to be going out of their way (like TAG Heuer did on that FB post) to obfuscate the facts behind their movements. Just be honest and upfront! So what if it means writing a paragraph per movement on their websites? It just means that consumers can be fully informed about what they're buying.

Agree or disagree?

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator

I think what you have outlined is a great idea, watch makers should tell you exactly what is going into your watch.


I know that you are upset by what happened with Bremont a few years ago, in their defense they are moving towards making their own in-house movement. I would say that within three to four years they will unveil their own movement. Hopefully that will put a smile on your face considering it will be manufactured in "Rip-off Britain".

Count me in, Driver! Honestly -- it would be great if any given brand had a link on their website that led to a page describing their movements in the way you have proposed. I'm thinking that, for many brands, that's not likely to happen any time soon. The second that one brand posts its specs, it allows competitors to show why their movements have the edge -- thus, better to keep things a bit ambiguous. I would also imagine that, for much of the watch buying public, those differences don't have a whole lot to do with their purchasing decisions. I think that those of us who care about these kind of things are decidedly in the minority. That being said, your idea, were it to take hold, would certainly be a refreshing change of pace!

_________________
Cheers,
Jim

As far as Bremont goes, while I certainly don't condone any kind of misleading marketing, I'm willing to forgive and move on. If I recall correctly, Panerai also had their moment of infamy a few years back in touting a particular movement as in-house -- until someone thought to open the case back and found differently. Ah, well -- that, too, is now water under the bridge, and certainly doesn't lessen my affinity for Panerai in the long run.

_________________
Cheers,
Jim

Was that pun intended since the watch in question was the 318, the Brooklyn Bridge model?

_________________
Justin
Please contact me via PM for the contact details for Govberg Jewelers
Govberg is an AD for over 50 fine Swiss and German watch brands.
Visit them on the web at http://www.govbergwatches.com or call 800-528-8463

LOL!!! It must have been subliminal.

_________________
Cheers,
Jim

Interesting thoughts Driver. There is no doubt that some brands, looking at Bremont and TAG mainly here, are less than honest and try to overplay their hand in the face of the uninformed casual watch buyer. Absolutely shameful and reason enough for me to completely boycott them. The brand simply looses the most important aspect that makes me fall in love with any maker, their passion for making the product I am ready to shell out several months, an in a few instances, years worth of hard work and sleepless nights at the office. When said passion is replaced with greed and corporate KPIs, that's when I depart.

To contrast, I think its very interesting how some brands take pride in the third market movement they utilize. Montblanc make it a point to advertise they are using Mineva movements and that they own the company now, and they celebrate their ETA movements and openly highlight what modifications and upgrades are done, no more and no less. Aces in my book.

To a more surprising degree, I have been exploring Vacheron Constantin as a brand recentely, after falling in love with the overseas, and was quite taken with their top of the line perpetual calendar, although I was very surprised that it did not have an in house movement at its price range. What was more surprising was that they took great pride in that fact. The Patek equivilant uses an in house movement naturally, and I got in contact with a Geneva rep through a London boutique AD I recentely visited and organized by AC purchase. Their official response was that there was nothing wrong with using a third party movement if it provided the feautures they where after (luxurous feel, good looks, history, reliability, etc) and that it was modified to the extent that they made it theirs. He also hastened to remind me that their version was 30K less than Patek's, and pointed out the finish and moonphase was considered by many to be superior, to which I agree. That made more sense than the other AD who simply said they did not have to prove anything, falling short of a full answer.

There you have a legendary house with undeniable watchmaking skills (just take a look at their latest Twin Beat) that proudely advertises a third party movement, and did the pricing and advertising right, not to mention the communication with potential customers.

One of the great things about the internet is that it usually counters false advertising, at least to those who do a bit of research. I do not believe that Bremont's attempt has garnered any results, in fact it has detered serious watch enthusiasts. While companies like Vacheron, who price fairly, communicate clearely, and take the time to answer and inform will always be respected, even if the buyer decides against the watch for personal criteria.

That goes for the world of business in general, I have seen many charletons who might close a deal or two by cheating and lying, but in the end its rare that they get away from it for long. An honest, hardworking businessman who gains the respect and loyality of partners and customers tends to win the big game (unfortunately there are of course rare exceptions!)

_________________
Certified watch nut.

Seriously??? That's news to me! That would really surprise me since I have followed Panerai from the start and I have always been very impressed by their loyality and candor to their fans ("Paneristi")

_________________
Certified watch nut.

And one of the worst things about the internet is that it frequently blows things out of proportion — often as a result of misunderstanding or misinformation — and serves as a substitute for actual research for all too many. Unfortunately, this dynamic is often at work when it comes to discussions about Breitling on many forums.

_________________
Cheers,
Jim

Yup — as Justin notes, it was the Brooklyn Bridge limited edition that was found to contain a plain, undecorated Unitas 6497movement, instead of the advertised Panerai OP II movement (note: I recalled this incorrectly as an in-house movement, but the point is the same). Panerai later offered to replace the imposter with the correct movement.

_________________
Cheers,
Jim

I agree with Driver. They really need to just be honest about their movements. Personally I don’t see any backlash from them telling people “this movement is a ETA blah blah blah, the movement has had the following modifications “


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So we are going off topic, but as an admitted Panerai fanatic, and someone who has deep passion for the brand, I did some research.


First of all, I have to say that I was quite surprised by this event! No brand/organization is bulletproof, and mistakes can happen in any organization. Some forgivable, some not. I am still undecided on this one, it is a shocker for sure! If for no other reason, is that it happened under the leadership of Bonati, the great man who steered Panerai into the worldwide phenomina it has become. I have zero doubt that this happened without his knowledge, but it does, to some degree, tarnish the brands reputation. There absolutely should have been much better control over the process of releasing the limited editions, and this seems like the brain fart of a newbie trying to achieve better margins rather than some dubious plan at a higher level. It just goes against everything else that is modern history Panerai.


I would also say that this single, isolated eff up does not equate Panerai to Bremont's obviously intentional misadvertising. This is more in line with the issue IWC had with their 7 day movement, as in it is an issue that is in stark contrast to the overall direction and history, rather than the trend. It is important to take into consideration that Panerai never claimed it was in house, but rather said that it was unique to the Brookly Bridge LE, which was technically true albeit alluded to something else, unacceptable behaviour and correlates to the subject issue of this thread. Whoever is responsible should have been fired, this type of mentality is the death of a business, ANY business. The fact that Panerai apologized for not being as clear as they could be and offering to replace with a different movement was the right move, that demonstrates it is not acceptable behaviour to them. Its still shocking how a completely undecorated, absolutely off the shelf movement could have been installed and sold without management notice. Unbelievable! And stupid, someone was bound to open up the watch for servicing at some point??!!


The issues IWC and Panerai had DEFINATELY take points away, but in my opinion do not equate to the overall shilling direction the aforementioned brands have. What this situation does prove however, if that the corporate structure has taken hold in Panerai, where I was under the impression that Paneristi with a passion still had full creative and technical control. I am truely saddened by this. All that history, all that innovation in truly cutting edge movements and advancements, tarnished for the sake of saving on a single LE.

_________________
Certified watch nut.

On a side note, as I was researching this issue I came upon a conspiracy theory by some of the watch guys, wondering if this was an inside joke, paying homage to the Brooklyn Bridge con-man who sold it twise a week on a regular basis, and is considered the greatest con-man in American history.


I have heard some wild tales, but that one takes the cake and the left over batter....

_________________
Certified watch nut.

Yes I guess I should be more supportive of a British brand, and in all honesty the whole "partnership movement" thing doesn't actually bother me too much as it is all water under the bridge......, but their pricing for what you get most definitely does bother me!

I agree it's great that they're working on their own movement, and I would truly like to see a British watch brand back on the map so to speak, but given their current pricing (i.e. IWC prices, with a 1/10th of the history), I shudder to think what price an in-house piece will come in at.

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator

I totally agree Altair.

Despite what it may sometimes seem, I'm not anti-outsourced movements at all. ETA/Valjoux, Lemania, Minerva, Sellita, etc, can all produce decent-to-great movements that do fantastic jobs. In actual fact, one of my most accurate pieces is actually a Steinhart that runs an ETA 2893 Elaboré (so not even Top or Chronometer grade) that runs at a constant +2 secs a day and delivers a full 50 hours of power reserve.

So I'm not anti-outsourced at all : I just think there needs to be industry-wide transparency, and less "smoke and mirrors".

_________________
Driver8

Site Moderator