WatchProSite|Market|Digest

Girard Perregaux

part 2

 


Would Rolex and Patek be the brands that caught the demand wave if they didn't have their reputation for quality and innovation across their whole range? If Rolex spent money on stock buybacks instead of developing their own balances or the chronergy escapement and fitting them to everything they sell, if Patek bought back all those cheap Nautiluses instead of making sure all their movements were free sprung, silicon, and Geneva sealed?
Another one of the things that impresses me about both brands (as the owner of neither) is their remarkable commitment to thinness and wearability across their whole range.
Marc-GP is older than PP. Rolex is a "teenager" in the horology space. 1904. And they didnt make anything themsleves. Majorty casing what their supplier made for them. Then they bought the suppliers. Aegler, Gay Feres etc etc.
Reputation and savvy marketing is what Rolex has. And that is what GP does not have. It is not that Rolex are high-end watch makers. They are high-end business people.
Who do you think buys back a daytona at 17 million? We have already heard about the debaucle with Omega recently on buying back their own "rare" franken watch. If it wasnt for @perezscope uncovering it all.
My point is this, being is the watch business is NOT about making watches alone. That is important but (sadly perhaps) the reality is that it is about good old fashioned business sense and a whole ton of understanding of behaviorial economics. This is why we no longer see movement makers as indpendents (GP being one of the few left and they too have $$ backers ... private equity perhaps). Minerva? gone. Lemania? Gone. Excelsier Park? Gone. Venus? gone the list goes one.

  login to reply
💰1877 Marketplace Listings for Rolex