jiggerly-cool
144
A couple (actually, several) replies...
Apr 03, 2022,08:19 AM
Removing a function is a spec downgrade. Stop-seconds is a function, and the direction is to add hacking, not remove. The latest PP Calatravas add it. Brands highlight when their tourbillons have it. One can go on.
Thus far, I'm not into Omega, so I can't comment about its caliber renaming except to say that it sounds like marketing gymnastics, which I've already addressed. I do know that it isn't unusual; all the conglomerates are big on this. Example, the TH Calibre 16 I noted previously. Incidentally, Rolex is the undisputed king of watch marketing; do something well enough you are lionized for it. Otherwise (like Panerai?), poor execution gets derided and is deemed an insult to the community.
Perhaps your Omega incident happened years ago, like other perceived Panerai transgressions? As in, before social media became the pervasive outing and amplification tool it now is.
It is traditional, i.e., customary, to move forward, to evolve and progress. Not only in watchmaking (anywhere), but everywhere; that's part of being human (yes, despite our failings). It would be more interesting and instructive if one found evidence that an industry's practice is retrogression.
Ebauches are fine, all part of watchmaking (was even the Swiss rule, once upon a time). It's not outsourcing and renaming that draw watch aficionados' ire. It's the sense of betrayal when they feel cheated. Like when a brand claims something's executed entirely by themselves when in fact it's from a supplier. Like when a brand sells customers on a particular standard of spec, then lowers it on the downlow.
There's luck, too. TH got pilloried after claiming the Cal. 1887 was its own idea but got away with the Cal. 16 switch to Sellita (of course, it didn't help that the former was trumpeted while the latter happened with no fanfare). So why Panerai, and why now? Maybe it did something more egregiously, then got found out, at a time when people have a greater inclination and more tools for calling failures out? Or just plain misfortune; who knows, does it matter?
At any rate, let's be clear: outsourcing and/or renaming on one hand, and downgrading on the other, are different concepts--though one can be done as a cover for the other--and should not be confused or conflated.
Reiterate away but with all due respect, I won't oblige your ask to come up with ten "completely trustworthy" watch brands. Heck, I can't even think of half that number that I know and like very much -- and I doubt I can trust any of that handful to the absolutist degree you specify 😅 (I doubt there's anything one should trust absolutely and completely, certainly not a watch brand).