WatchProSite|Market|Digest

Independents

Are we shooting ourselves in the foot with our demands for "manufacture" movements?

 

I've been ruminating over this question for a while and I want to hear your ideas.
Are we shooting ourselves in the foot with our demands for "manufacture" movements?
On one hand the market seems to be demanding unique movements even from manufacturers making only small quantities of watches, such as the independents.  On the other hand the prices of such watches have been increasing in leaps and bounds to astronomic levels.  

My question:
Is the uniqueness of a watch dependent on the uniqueness of its constituent parts or on the uniqueness of its total functionality or form?

Or, more down to earth:
Is there really a utility of any kind in having no part in a watch movement be shared with that of another movement?  If there is, then is that worth the price difference and potential parts supply problems for repairs in the future?

As an example, I have some watches below that all use the same basic gear train from the 7001 movement.  These are just the first that came to mind, I am sure there are many more to be found.  Are they less because of that?  Or is the creativity that they exude not related to the sourcing of some of their parts at all?  Or none of the above?
What do you think?
Don



Vianney Halter Antiqua





Hautlence HLQ





Ballouard Upside Down





Urwerk UR203




  login to reply