Horological Meandering

Hi, Gary,

The lugs; the hands; the multi-pattern guillochage on the dials; the sensuously rounded case band...but from my comments in an above post, I see them as being sufficiently easily distinguishable that I have absolutely NO problems with "inspiration" issues of one to or from the other.

If I were the sort to see disparate "elements" and had the arrogance to force my perceived "pattern" and conclude them as fact, it would all too easy to point out the hands; the lugs; the dials; the case style; the fact that UJ and the Jurgensen family (Jules, Urban, et al) hail from Denmark; Kari from Finland (both Scandinavian countries) as proof positive...

But knowing Kari the way I do, even if he got inspiration from somewhere else, his work is original enough, and his integrity high enough, that I would have a very hard time reaching that conclusion...

Not to mention, the modern day UJS has very little to do with the original Urban Jurgensen company under the eponymous founder, no more than Blancpain today has anything to do with JJ Blancpain, Breguet has anything to do with good old AL, or DJR has anything to do with the young blacksmith who fixed a timekeeper of a passing Englishman in the mid-17th century. To my knowledge, Peter Baumberger is not Scandinavian, nor are any of his primary watchmakers or investors/business associates, nor do any of them have any ties to the family or the original companies.

Please NOTE: none of this has anything to do with anything, other than to point out that my own "silly counter-example" is just that, a silly devil's advocate counter example of imagination and pattern seeing as conclusive fact run amok.

Cheers,

TM

I am appreciated VH and Kari very much , they are great watchmaker and their watches are real fine watch , in my view VH bring interesting design of Mr.Jeff Barnes into life . As painting artis , the "inspiration " and "influence " are common , Picasso, Van Gogh created new school . We can say RM created the new trend in watchmaking : hi-tech skeleton , and there are some other manufactures in same trend ( or influenced, inspire ) such as : Hautlence , Urwerk , MCT , HD3.. .Of course each mentioned brand have its originality , Urwerk : new way of telling time , Hautlence : using rods instead of wheel  ...

The question of Orginality is big and very interesting question . I think the exact definement of what brand is orginal or not is the hard task , but we can see who has better originality .

Thank you , SJX , Thomas M, GEO and other members for opening the interesting, helpful discussion, our forum need more discussion like this .

Regards,

LVT

That is an even bigger can of worms TM.

Genta designed the RO, Ingenieur, Nautilus and 222, the RO was launched first but is it truly the original? I don't know, but Genta could have well penned the Nautilus a few years before. Of course this is random speculation but I am sure there is a truth behind it, though I doubt anyone will ever uncover it.

To take things even further, what if a copycat once worked for the "originator" of the design? For example if Antonio Terranova once worked for Richard Mille, would that make it any different?

- SJX

What you have mentioned are really iconic wtaches and will be remembered for a long,

long time.

Cvstos watches really have a lot of 'oomph' with their striking designs and innovative

features.

Thanks for a most interesting writeup.

you throw out speculation that "speculates" with real world examples.

Hi, SJX,

I'm not sure this is a "fair" thing to throw out there into the world, sorta like yelling "fire" in a crowded theater.

If you have even an inkling of seriousness about the Nautilus being penned before the RO, do share, even if only unsubstantiated rumour (present it as such) - thrown out the way you did, it has the very real risk of becoming the origins of yet another internet myth.

I'm not addressing the broader issue of "real" inspiration, which at the end of the day no one can really, really suss out (or only very, very rarely) - only the the "random speculation" statement. I myself don't know, even if my interest in watches did see, real time and contemporaneously, the original introduction of each of those lines you mention specifically by name. Is it possible the Nautilus was penned before the RO? Sure, it is possible, but this falls into the "who was first, the AP 2001, or the VC 1001?" category of marketing hyperbole the Swiss high end industry is so famous for. What is KNOWN is that the RO really ignited (some would argue "created" as being the first really successful model in the category) the high end steel "sporty watch" category (there were precedent successful steel "sporty" (read: casual) watches like the Rolex models, but at that time, Rolex really wasn't part of the "luxury haute luxe" segment of the market yet...some would argue they aren't today...) and the PP Nautilus followed.

Also, again, historical but probably little known fact, the RO market success was really "made" by the Italian market almost single handedly; other markets didn't get it at first, and only later "caught up."

PP's Nautilus did achieve some modicum of market success when introduced (riding the momentum for a "new" market segment started by the AP RO? This is purely a question, not an implied statement) but it petered out fairly quickly, certainly didn't sustain momentum nearly as long nor as successfully as the RO. It's recent resurgence as a result of a. marketing by PP for its 30th annivesary makeover; b. market manipulations by "market makers"; is already petering out again, as seen by steeply dropping demand and secondary market prices (from their ridiculously over-priced and speculatively hoarded levels of the last several months)

Yes, I suppose one could argue that the RO (and ROOS evolution) has gone through similar market cycles, and I wouldn't argue with you...

As to your last comment regarding someone working for a "copycat" now who might have worked previously for a copied 'nother brand or house, I'm not sure how serious you were with that comment, but I'll treat is seriously and here are a few PERSONAL thoughts (I myself already see it is fraught with thousands, if not millions, of shades of possibilities)

If the person worked for the other brand being "copied" (or "faithfully inspired") and was one of the "designers" then I can see some legitimacy. If they were "only" in the marketing department and secondarily or even more removed from the original design conception and development, then it can be, at best, an "homage" and at worst, a blatant rip off.

Some have levied some of the above positions to certain Roger Dubuis models vis a vis Frank Muller, with similar complicated historical personal relationships.

In the end, it is a spectrum, and speaking only for myself, I see no clear and obvious delineating point of where inspiration ends, and copying begins...sorta like what constitutes pornography vs erotica.

I say nothing, I'm just enjoying a lot your conversation with Geo and SJX, and all our other Purists Fellows...

Really enjoyable, rich ,and captivating discussion, here.

I'm really impressed, Thomas, and this makes me regret you live so far from France!

We would have endless nights speaking, speaking ...and speaking.

Very best.

Nicolas

and hopefully, we can realize that dream for both of us soon, hopefully accompanied by a nice Chablis or Quart de Charmes (well, maybe not, too sweet...okay, certain vintages only...) with a nice overflowing Plat du Roi of seafood...

;-)

I really miss these engaging discussions, but alas, I seem only up for it in medicine induced fever states these days...

:-(

Cheers,

TM

As I will organize myself to not have to work the day after! ROFL.

Hope we'll be able to d it soon.

And hope thzat you will recover from this bad fever very soon, although it inspires you a lot! LOL

Best, Scholar Killer and Rich Eater ..I loved that! LOL

Nicolas

I threw up the Nautilus being penned first as pure speculation, only as an example. That of course is a gigantic, flaming can of worms but this is Christmas after all.  That being said, I do agree with you that the RO created a new segment in the luxury watch market that is still lucrative till today. 

As for Terranova working as a designer for Richard Mille - who knows? Even if I knew I'm not allowed to say.

- SJX

This message has been edited by SJX on 2008-12-25 02:32:35

Hi Art,

As I wrote in my original post, significance and copycats and not mutually exclusive. There are hordes of folk who will insist the Nautilus and Ingenieur are significant watches, although it can be argued that both are copycats of the Royal Oak. But because both were so successful in their own right, they have gone on to be significant watches in themselves and become copied by others.

- SJX

. . . and I have little doubt that Cvstos will emerge as a significant player in the marketplace; it's just that I have a high level of doubt that they will ever be considered as significant in historical terms, or more to the point, esteemed by aficionados, connoisseurs, and collectors. Please don't get me wrong . . . I actually like the aesthetics, and certainly have no compunctions about buying a watch for the sheer joy of ownership without having to justify the selection on the basis of any criteria other than affection - after all, I acquired an RGM 222 recently simply because I was ga-ga over the movement, and you know how that turned out. Best regards, Art

It is a very interesting discussion about imitation/copy versus original design. Typical thought on this matter is that a copy is not as good as the original. But several people have posted excellent examples where the copy (Hublot) has become as iconic as the original (RO). Truly there are very things that are really original. A quote comes to mind "Confound the ancients! They have thought of all my good ideas".  Why is Cvstos wrong in copying RM if they do it "originally" - meaning that they didnt steal the engineering but actually designed (or re-engineered) or whatever? As long as they can provide good performance, acceptable levels of finish and provide value to the customer, they have the right to do it. RM cant do much since what is being copied is not patented.

J.

If you take away the "superficial similarities", what are you left with? Looking at the cvstos beyond its stylistic similarities (or blatant knocking off- w/e you feel it should be described as), I dont see a particularly compelling watch. I dont know enough about the company and its movements, but are you basically left with a franck muller? better? worse? Why do they exist? can they justify their existance? Well, if they find a market then they will continue to be around- thats the best you can ask for. I think, given the economy we are entering into, this type of watch will have trouble, and many of the people that would be interested in this type of watch are already in trouble financially.

Perhaps the argument supporting it would be that entry level RMs are completely overpriced and not worth it, but their design is great, so why dont I just buy a cvstos?

. . . to all of them can be summarized by my favored analogy of Cvstos to the remora fish, which might seem unflattering, but isn't meant to be . . . after all, the remora fish performs an important function in the great scheme of nature, too . . . cordially, Art

it would take a rather narrow perspective to argue that the Ingenieur was derivative of the Royal Oak, given that the original – and deservedly iconic – models pre-dated the first Royal Oak by around 15 years. I understand that you are referring specifically to the Ingenieur models which were designed by Genta, but that really is a very thin slice of an otherwise rich, innovative, successful, and obviously important model line.

Regards,

Tony C.

I really don't understand most part of the discussion here... let me explain why... the first time i saw a Cvstos i immediately thought of Richard Mille. When i look at most Cvstos models this thought comes up again... so IMHO Cvstos just makes name and fame because of the RM copied design.

I know all brands during history have pne or two models that have a resemblance of another famous watch, but nothing like Cvstos is doing. That's why i completely don't understand the name of Kari in this discussion....

I with you on this.    My vocabulary has improved but I still don't see an advancement in the discussion unless I missed it.  I am heating the pop corn as I type this.  Glad my mother in law gave me a thesaurus for Christmas. 

But from a horological layman with a poor command of English - its a copy! And a cheap looking one at that.  

My humble 2 cents.

Gaz

I too sometimes want to kill the scholars and eat the rich!



TM

As an owner of a RM watch, I always feel disgusted whenever I see a picture of a Cvstos watch.  It's a pure knock-off - same case, styling, and crown.  Simple as that, and I have nothing else to say on this subject.

As Gaz says above, if it smells like a RM, walks like a RM, it must be a RM knock off.  Even the Romain Jerome Titanic DNA watches have more originality than Cvstos watches.  That's just how I feel.

- Anthony

No message body

Wow.. your article sure generated a lotta comments..

Anyways.. just wanna wish ya a Happy New Year :o)