Tony C.
1239
Thank you, Michael...
I appreciate your thoughtful response, though we will have to agree to disagree on a few points.
As to this question:
"Aside from the cost, is there a reason why you would not want that done while the watch was there?"
my answer is twofold. First, while I can readily afford to pay for premium services, cost was an issue on principle. I see no possible reason why service at AP should cost double what one would have to pay a top-class, independent watchmaker to perform the same level of service. Perhaps you recall a post that I authored in recent months concerning an orphaned Gubelin (aka AP) VZSSC movement that was turned into a beautiful marriage. The VZSS movement was arguably the finest hand-wind caliber ever developed and manufactured by AP, and one of the best ever produced. My watchmaker not only completely overhauled the movement to the highest standards, but also manufactured a replacement for a broken part.
Here is a list of the work that was done:
Manufactured a new stem.
Full movement restoration.
Flat polished all necessary components.
Burnished all pivots as necessary.
Re-polished all polished bevels/chamfers on bridges.
Adjusted Escapement/Hairspring and regulated to within factory standards.
That work was done for half of the cost of the "required" movement service at AP, a service that would not have included the manufacture of any parts.
I do understand that AP has the benefit of spare parts, as well as valuable in-house familiarity of their movements, and a high standard of restorers. I can, therefore, understand why a premium is warranted. But a 100% premium is, in my view, well over the top.
The second, more important reason that I chose not to have the movement serviced by AP, was also based on principle. Simply put, I can think of no good reason why the specific wishes of the owner should not be respected. If, for example, an owner wanted to bring a vintage watch up to a high cosmetic standard, but had no intention of actually using it, on what possible basis would it be reasonable for AP to reject the requested service parameters? I defy you (or anyone else) to provide an analogue in any other industry, in which a simple cosmetic service is requested for a machine, but the manufacturer rejects the request unless an expensive mechanical service is, against the wishes of the owner, also completed.
I stand by my original conclusion, which is that such overly rigid policies are a reflection of an ossified and anachronistic corporate mindset, and that they are likely to prove damaging in the long-term. As a related aside, years ago IWC was appropriately pilloried by a number of vintage collectors for somewhat similar behavior (e.g. insisting on part replacements that were neither requested nor desired; failing to return parts that had been replaced, etc.). I am happy to report that they have revised some of their policies, and mollified vintage collectors (some of whom also purchase contemporary models) as a result.
All vintage watch collectors have great respect for history and tradition, but we live in the 21st century and adapt accordingly. I would hope that AP thinks somewhat along the same lines, and perhaps they will consider reviewing some of their policies in that light.
More posts:
Disappointing service experience
I will begin this post with a few qualifications. As some readers know, I am primarily a collector of vintage watches. It should come as no surprise, then, that the recent, negative experience I had with the AP service department relates to a request for ...
not really surprised....
AP may have a policy that every watch that the company works on must have a service (or at least a record of a recent previous service by the company must be present) or AP will not perform any other type(s) of service on the watch, even cosmetic changes....
Sorry to hear of the difficulty Tony.
Let me start by saying that I applaud the manner in which you wrote your post, and wish others would use it as a model when voicing displeasure. As for the content of your post, I see both sides of the equation to be honest. I am currently working on a wr...
Thank you, Michael...
I appreciate your thoughtful response, though we will have to agree to disagree on a few points. As to this question: " Aside from the cost, is there a reason why you would not want that done while the watch was there? " my answer is twofold. First, while...
Hi Tony.
I do understand where you are coming from. I'm going to follow up with you by PM.
Welcome to the world of high end products.
I have had a few watches serviced by AP (one is going to the AP spa tomorrow for a case refinish but due to the age I know they will require a service), sure it is expensive but the workmanship IMO is first class. Every time a watch is returned I fell lik...
Service
I appreciate your input, Jerry, but I never suggested that AP's technical services were anything other than outstanding. My complaints are about policies relating to service, not the actual service itself. Regards, Tony C.
Not just AP
In a similar vein, although to me even more ludicrous; It does appear these days that although you buy a watch, you no longer truly own it all. When it comes to service items, some companies charge you for the new part, but refuse to return the old part (...
Hi Tim...
I couldn't agree more with the absurdity of the policy you mention: In a similar vein, although to me even more ludicrous; It does appear these days that although you buy a watch, you no longer truly own it all. When it comes to service items, some compan...
I've argued for years that is theft...
...To take someone else's property without their permission is theft. I would never purchase anything from a company that has that practice. Tony
