Horological Meandering

KMII
[Montblanc Moderator]
40399

• Show profile
• Show other posts

Is quartz responsible for the US$17 million Paul Newman Daytona?

I am not necessarily looking for a scientific treatise here but have been wondering lately if the incredible rise in certain vintage watch prices is not a direct result of quartz as a technology.




I am not referring to the general interest in vintage watches - interest in vintage products has been going on in non-watch spheres, where no technology leaps took place, too.

But without the Seiko Astron, the GP response and the so called Quartz Crisis, my hypothesis is things would be different. Many Swiss brands would have disappeared just like they did, due to not quite matching the production efficiency of the Japanese. Some would have survived, again like they historically did.

Would brands like Blancpain get revived? Who knows but the statement that they never did quartz would certainly fall flat in such an environment. Zenith would probably be on its El Quarto movement or beyond.

But with little romanticism about the ‚only possible‘ mechanical movements (after all the underdog, traditional, more emotional aspects you could raise as defence against quartz would not work if there was no quartz), I guess quite some of the induced emotionality would be gone.

Sure, vintage Pateks and Vacherons would still fetch top dollar at auctions but would Daytonas, FFs and the rest do, too? In the end you are talking more about a big engined Corvette or an E-Class MB of their time rather than 250GTO Ferraris.

So what’s your view, should vintage watch dealers and quite some watch industry executives be giving thanks for their good fortune at the quartz altar on a regular basis? Or is the hypothesis simply outrageous and patently wrong?