Horological Meandering

rdenney
363

• Show profile
• Show other posts

Certifications are intended to demonstrate facts...

...and not judgments. They mean that the thing being certified has been specifically verified to be true by the certifier. As such, evidence is required to support the fact.

Thus, “our watches are great because we are great” certifications are rather vacuous. But “we subject our watches to a specific and identified protocol of adjustment, inspection, and testing over a 1000-hour period” means more, as long as we believe them.

Third-party certifications come in a couple of flavors—those where the third party established the test protocol and the standard and the certification is done by the manufacturer, and those where the certification is made by a third party after their own testing. There is a combination, where the product is type-tested—the third party tests one production example only. (Most product testing is type testing—UL for electrical products, Snell Memorial Foundation for helmets, etc.)

Chronometer certification is an example of full third-party certification. COSC is the third party, and they test every unit that receives the certification to a published standard. METAS, which I have not explored, seems to be a self-certification to a defined standard.

The Geneva Seal is a third-party standard, mostly for finishing, by the Canton of Geneva, but it is awarded based on self-certification. I do not know if the Cantonale government audits self-certifications, but I doubt they do so consistently if they do so at all. But it can only be applied to work done in Geneva.

Cartier, for example, built a workshop on the top floor of their Geneva boutique where they make their haute-horlogerie pieces receiving the Geneva Seal. Most Cartier watches don’t, and are made at their manufacture in La Chaux-de-Fonds.

Nobody really believes that Patek-Philippe is cheating on their Geneva Seal certification, of course, but it also suggests that Patek really doesn’t need it to bolster their reputation or support their price, in the way that Cartier might. Rather like Rolex and COSC and the somewhat derided self-applied term “superlative”, which was the motivation for Omega to establish their METAS certification—COSC was no longer sufficient to distinguish the product and justify its price.

I have not explored the Fleurier certification, but I suspect it is a self-certification limited to the Sandoz-owned companies clustered there, including Parmigiani and Vaucher.

Sellita subjects some of their movements to a special test protocol developed with Richemont (Cartier), and these are marked with the little-publicized Grandjean seal. I have seen that seal on Sellita movements used by IWC, and on Baume & Mercier Capeland models. The protocol itself is not disclosed that I’ve been able to find, but I think it’s much more than the Sellita worker looks out the window to the Cartier manufacture (which is just across the rail tracks) and bows.

I don’t think any of the Swiss industry self-certifications are vacuous—that just doesn’t fit with the Swiss sense of propriety. They mean something. But they don’t always disclose the details of what they mean, or whether they are individually or type-tested. So, they are not always effective in justifying a higher price point, which is their raison d’etre.

—Rick

Site Info.