Patek Philippe

patekova
1573

• Show profile
• Show other posts

New Year's Suggestions (Wishes) for Patek Philippe

Unfortunately, it is apparent to me that Patek has slipped a bit from its position of pre-eminence. Many formerly fervent purchasers of contemporary Pateks are considering (or in fact are) moving on to other brands. Some reasons given are: the prices are too high, too many are being made and are consequently "not so special" anymore; similarly, they are very easy to find - half the fun was in the hunt. Further evidence of slippage is the availability of many models that in the past would have commanded a premium over list price that are readily available at extreme discounts. For example, shortly after the 5970 was introduced they were selling on the secondary market for many thousands above list price. Shortly after the 5270G was introduced it was available at many thousands under list price. The perpetual chrono has long been regarded as the standard bearer of the Patek line starting with the 1518 and then moving to 2499 to 3970 to 5970. Each of these models is highly coveted. 5270 is not.

This slippage makes me extremely sad and with love for the brand and with hope that this unfortunate trend can be reversed I present what I perceive to be some causes of this diminshment and suggestions for changes that might be helpful in rectifying the situation. Hopefully other forum members will add their constructive observations.

One of the great things I have noticed about Patek is their receptivity to and careful consideration of constructive criticisms of collectors. Examples include: (1) As much coveted as the 5131G and 5131J are, many collectors were disappointed that “Patek Philippe” was engraved on the bezel rather than printed on the dial and disliked the font. So on the spectacularly beautiful commemorative 5131G/175 (cloisonné dial with Lake Geneva scene), the bezel is no longer engraved and “Patek Philippe” is now on the dial and the traditional font is utilized for the cities. It will be interesting to see if this carried thru on the 5131R and 5131P if they are ever made. It has already been carried thru on the gorgeous and ground breaking commemorative 5575G; (2) Many collectors have complained that the type size utilized for “Patek Philippe” is sufficiently large to be in poor taste (contrary to Patek’s traditional understated elegance). So how has Patek reacted to this concern of collectors? – many new models have smaller type setting and Patek even changed the size mid run on existing models – compare the smaller size on 5205R black dial versus 5205G – also the size on the 5270G “chin” dials versus the original non-tachometer dial; and (3) Many people expressed their disappointment that not only was “Patek Philippe” too large on the original 5270G dial - even more important it was lacking a tachometer. So what did Patek do? It quickly tried to rectify the situation by reducing the print size and adding a tachometer. Unfortunately the “chin” dial has been almost universally rejected. So what did Patek do? Shortly thereafter it introduced the 5271P with the tachometer and no chin. This dial in IMHO is spectacularly beautiful in every way! I hope and anticipate that the layout of this dial will appear in future versions of the 5270.

In very recent years, Patek’s approach has been instead of retiring a model or totally revamping it, to just make it a bit bigger. The most egregious example is 3940/5140. For 20+ years the 3940 was in some sense the lifeblood of the brand. It represented Philippe Stern’s resistance to giving in to the quartz revolution. When it was time to retire it, Patek had 3 choices – abandon the 240Q movement totally and move on, create a totally different case and dial, e.g. a round case with classic fluted lugs and a Breguet dial, possibly 2 tone; or IMHO the worst choice - make it slightly bigger (1.2mm), utilize the same case style and keep the same baton numerals configuration. Well now neither the 3940 nor 5140 are coveted. 5140s are readily available at steep discounts. Instead of being a legendary and highly desired model, the 3940 is regarded by many as the lesser version of the 5140. Compare this to the highly desired 5970 which was nothing in appearance like the 3970 (despite the common movement caliber). Another example is the 5050 which was replaced by a watch with a totally different case and dial, the 5059. Both retained their esteemed position among collectors until Patek brought out the larger version of 5059, namely the 5159 and then the  larger version of the 5050, namely the 5496P. These latter two “retreads” have not been accepted the way a truly new model would be and 5050s and 5059s have plummeted in value. Pateks are not supposed to plummet in value and this obviously is noticed by collectors and affects their enthusiasm for the brand.

Compounding the problem is the issue of exclusivity. For example, IMHO what killed the 5960P in terms of value and desirability was that it was overproduced – several thousand within a few years of its introduction. The market place in a relatively short period was flooded with 5960Ps. The 5960P is a fantastic watch, but exclusivity and rarity are very important connected concepts to many Patek collectors.

Another problem has been that watches have been introduced at Basel, before all production issues were resolved, e.g. the 5200 8 day rectangular calendar watch introduced at Basel in 2013 but has yet to be distributed and no longer appears in the product line. The distribution of the groundbreaking 5235G was long delayed. This makes many collectors feel concerned about Patek’s Quality Control and hesitant to buy a new model, that if not working properly, might take months to fix.  

Another issue that I see is that designs of many models simply do no look like Pateks. Far from being classically elegant they look modernistic in what some might consider an offensive way. For example the 5175 is absolutely the most extraordinarily complex and innovative watch one could possibly conjure. The engravings on the case are beautiful and of the highest order. The concept of reversible lugs is brilliant, but aesthetically the execution of this watch falls short. It appears as a random combination of individually spectacular elements that in combination are so “unclassically” Patek that many find it aesthetically to be a major disappointment. The same basic comments apply to the 6002. Super complication and classical beauty are not mutually exclusive concepts – see the Caliber 89 and Star Caliber 2000. Then, there’s the 10 day tourbillion 5101, an exceptionally complicated, daring and classically beautiful watch, where Patek unlike all others resisted the temptation to show off and place the tourbillion on the dial side. So instead of ruining the dial, the dial is magnificent, the tourbillion is visible, yet protected by being on the reverse side.

Philippe Stern understood when he helped bring about a new Golden Age of watch making that innovation, complication and adherence to Patek’s traditional standards of understated elegance and beauty are not mutually exclusive qualities. And that, no matter how complex something is, it shouldn’t be made unless and until the presentation satisfies the requirements of ease of use, clarity and beauty to the person fortunate enough to be the owner. These are but a few (of many) examples:  3974, 5035, 5110, 5070, 5135, 5970, 5004, 5013 and 5016.

On a positive note, today there are many beautiful, current production models. A few  such examples include: 5098, 5131, 5196, 5205, 5227, 5296, 5396, 5575G, 5496P, 5213, and 5216. These models clearly demonstrate that Patek still has what it takes in spades to make the technologically best and most beautiful luxury watches out there.

I hope that this note will be read in the spirit intended, namely to offer some heart felt suggestions intended to create a vibrant, open minded discussion both among forum members and amongst the powers that be at Patek Philippe should they happen to read this thread. I welcome and look forward to reading the viewpoints of other forum members, including those viewpoints that offer a different and/or totally contradictory view to mine.

Notwithstanding my comments, Patek is for me by far still #1 and I will continue to buy vintage, modern and current production Pateks. I just would like to feel more of the passion I previously felt for current (and future) production models.

With happy New Year wishes and best regards to all,

Patekova