IWC

IWC Galapagos Aquatimer poorly constructed
I purchased the IWC Galapagos Aquatimer in March 2010 and was happy with until approximately 9 months later when the rubber edge of the crown began to become frayed at the edges. The fraying of the rubber has happened all the way around the crown and I therefore decided to have the crown repaired assuming the warranty would cover this. To my astonishment IWC refused to repair the crown under warranty claiming that the rubber was damaged due to the watch having suffered some sort of severe impact. I work in an office environment and have not had the chance to take the watch diving yet. The fraying is taking place all around the crown and the watch has not had any severe impact -- it has only been subject to normal wear and tear.

It is very disappointing that a reputable watch company like IWC will not honor their warranty. As an amateur collector of high end watches it has been an expensive learning experience but I will clearly not buy another IWC watch. This message has been edited by dxboon on 2011-05-23 11:21:55

Just add my comments to the IWC website -- will be interesting to see how they react.

check out

Dear TGehrke, I edited your message to remove the external link.

Fx

 
This message has been edited by foversta on 2011-05-21 11:04:31

IWC have removed my post without comment from their forum -- I think that says everything you need to know about the company. I didn't violate the terms of the forum and merely posted my experience with the IWC Aquatimer Galapagos and the company decided to remove the post without comment. I have for the fun of it re-posted my comments -- let's see how long they stay up this time.

This message has been edited by cazalea on 2011-05-21 10:33:49

It is always difficult to discuss about this kind of topic because it is always a "your word against his" situation.

I understand your disappointment.

But you have a AD I suppose.

The role of an AD is not only to sell watches but  also to be a link betwen the customers and the brand. In this context, the AD has to clearly explain the situation to IWC.

I hope he will help you.

Fx

Thank you for the suggestion. I will contact the AD as I have so far only dealt directly with IWC.

By the way IWC run a customer forum on their website but apparently they only want positive feedback as I have posted to comments about this issue on the web site that both have been removed. I would have expected IWC to respond to my post rather than just deleting the posts. Clearly not the mark of a great company.

If you use these tolls they can not always censor you and will get you a response. If that does not work that start a Facebook page explaining your problems and invite all your friends.

I hope that helps and good luck getting your issue fixed.

As a Galapagos owner, I am not seeing any issues on mine.  The crown on my watch had in the past a little tough to pull out to adjust date and time after unscrewing from the lock position, but now it is working fine and other than that the watch has performed well and I'm not seeing any rubber coating issues at all.

I received my watch from one of the boutique shops in US in the same month as yours, your AD must be treating you well when the watch at that time could only be found at some boutique shops.  I hope IWC will resolve the problem for you.

Good luck.

Blue 

Apologies -- I am not a native english speaker and when I wrote crown I actually meant bezel. The problem is with the bezel (face of the watch). This message has been edited by TGehrke on 2011-05-21 16:23:30

...why the rubber coating around the bezel would wear out that fast.

My watch still looks brand new and I have been most impressed by the rubber coating. 

Now I can understand why IWC is suspicious and refused to repair your watch under warranty.  Unless you are constantly rubbing or dragging the edge of the bezel against something, normal usage of the watch or the rotating bezel simply will not wear the rubber out.  I use the bezel often to time the parking of my car.

Of course, it is always possible to receive a lemon from the factory when you bought the watch brand new, but you would have noticed the failing of the rubber in the first few days or weeks, rather than after 14 months.    

I still suggest you post a pic, so more Galapagos owners can see and share with you if they are seeing the same on theirs too.  It is possible I'm too gentle to my watches, and I'm just one Galapagos owner.

Good luck.

Regards,

Blue

 

 

... in warranty issues is generally a problematic issue. The criticized brand normally has not an equal position there, even if it chooses to answer the accusations. As a community, we strongly encourage  the owners of the watches to first make use of the possibilities at hand: In the first place, this is the dealer the watch was puchased from. He is the contracting partner, and not the manufacturer. Accordingly, he is the first addressee for warranty issues.

Additionally, the information given by you could be a bit more complete. Did you send the watch to IWC in Schaffhausen? And it has been returned to you without repair?

Regards,
Marcus

I haven't addressed the issue with my AD but will given your feedback and others. I used another AD (also zurich based) to send the watch for repair at IWC in Switzerland. It took IWC 2 months to decide not to repair my watch under warranty. I have subsequently written to IWC without getting a response. I have therefore decided to warn other people who may want to purchase the Aquatimer Galapagos.

Thank you for your suggestion. This message has been edited by TGehrke on 2011-05-21 16:23:43

It is the edge of the bezel where the rubber is cracking/coming off (not the crown - apologies for my poor english)
This message has been edited by TGehrke on 2011-05-21 16:23:17

First, the watch part is made of rubber. There was no way it was going to be as durable as metal.

Second, IWC runs its website for the purpose of helping it to make money. Why should it provide you a platform for negative comments?

It is to the credit of this website that you are able to comment here without censorship as long as you keep your comments civil. It is to the credit of the other members of the website that we sympathize with you but are aware that we have heard only one side of the story.

I think the big watch story of the next five years is what happens when a bunch of expensive watches that were not designed to last very long start to require expensive and time-consuming maintenance. Rubber is only the beginning of that story.

It is an interesting question with the IWC collectors forum: my two favourite brands are IWC and Breitling (and a lot of others...)

I used to be an active member on the IWC site forum, mainly the English one. I happened to write once that IWC should upgrade its folding clasps and the way to follow is that of the Breitling clasp made for their rubber strap, with the double push-button and quick length adjust system (I have switched for this clasp both my Breitling bracelets too, the Pro II. for the CS and the Pilot for the Chrono Cockpit - scans to come sooner or later). It was an advice with good will only but Mr. Friedberg, the moderator of the English forum found this soooooooo offensive that deleted my post and we got into a bitter debate via e-mails so I decided to withdraw from the English forum. Since that (and that was 1-2 years ago, maybe even more) I post very, very rarely there and post to the German forum only where Mr. Linz is a nice guy. I think that some extent of egative input might contribute to the good feeling of the posters that eyes and ears are open to hear your voice even if you are writing some negatives (of course extremities should be avoided and extremely negative posts are just fine to be deleted).

In the meantime I'm in very good relation with some nice guys at IWC and want to keep that good relation. Only Mr. Friedberg has to be by-passed until he realizes that he does not has to be "over-servile" to his employer.

Now writing these words with my beautiful daily wearer, the AT Cousteau Chrono 2010 ref. 376706 and woning two other beautiful IWC-s, the 3706 and 3705, now my point of view hasn't changed but I read and post their not independent forum less and less: there are other nice fora for IWC: TZ, WUS and WT in English, WL in German - BTW why doesn't watchposite have a separate IWC forum???

Best regards:
Robert

It can be difficult and expensive getting a simple, classic watch fixed, $DEITY knows what it will be like with exotic materials, especilaly if they're limited production runs (I do wonder if limited production runs will have sufficent stocks of perishable or "soft" parts to replace them).

nick

The other thing is that being technically able to re-produce the rubber coating does not necessary mean that IWC wants to do it even a few decades from now. We can only hope the best - at least the Galapagos owners.
Best, Robert

MKVC,

Given the watch is sold as a diving watch I did expect it to be fairly durable. This has turned out not to be the case and I should probably have done some research with regards to vulcanized rubber watches.

I am not surprised that IWC doesn't want my critical feedback on its web site but find it a little hypocritical for IWC to host a forum which is supposed to promote meaningful discussion and exchange of information about IWC products in a collegial atmosphere and then censure comments that highlight potential issues with IWC products. Clearly the forum rules allow for IWC to act in this manner but it is not really a forum when comments get censured only because it may not be beneficial for sales of IWC products -- in any case that is my opinion.

"The purpose of the forum is to promote meaningful discussion and exchange information about IWC products in a collegial atmosphere. All Member postings shall be relevant and of an informational nature and for informational purposes only. Inappropriate or disruptive posts, as determined at IWC’s and/or the Moderator sole discretion, may be blocked or removed with or without notice."

T Gehrke

for a day....

All your posts in this forum are directed against a watch company....
Moreover you do not provide any photos for your claim....

I used to own some IWC (one with rubber parts) and was never faced with any issues...

Some of us have had some issues with watch companies (and/or direct or indirect representatives)....
Personally I choose not to buy from that company again (unless there is a significance change from their part)
and choose to direct my funds elsewhere....

However, and this is personal, I regard as poor taste to accuse a company with no proof, under the cloak of anonymity....
(by the latter I do not refer only to a name but also under an unknown alias that as not contributed or been a part of
this wonderful community)

PinkPanther,

I totally agree with you that the best course of action if you are not happy with a company's products is not to buy them again -- this is indeed my plan with regards to watches from IWC. That said I thought this type of forum was meant for watch enthusiasts to share experiences and opinions -- good or bad?

Not sure what you mean with the cloak of anonymity as I am posting using my first initial and last name (T Gehrke) unlike yourself posting under the name of pinkpanther. I am not sure why this being my first post makes me less a worthy contributor than yourself? I assume everyone is welcome to contribute and all have an equal voice?

I will post photos as soon as I have access to a good camera that can capture the issue with rubber fraying at the edges. Not sure why it is poor taste to mention the issue as I have nothing to gain other than warning potential buyers of the watch to be aware of my issue. I guess that is just a difference in opinion and why these types of forums exist.

T Gehrke

read my comment more carefully about the anonymity....

Also, you have mentioned that you have yet to address this issue with your AD.
Shouldn't that have been your first action- that would have been mine...
I hope that you will have access to a camera soon so we could see the damage of your watch...

And you are right, this forum is meant for watch enthusiasts to share their experiences and opinions...
I look forward to you doing so in the future in the same intensity....

Again my advice would be to contact your AD.....

ps. If I am not mistaken there is a similar thread in the JLC forum by another new member....

I have read your post again about the anonymity but still don't get your point other than this is my first post to this forum -- must be missing something else??

I don't have a particular relationship with the AD that I used to buy the watch and I don't live in Zurich where the AD is located. I therefore decided to contact IWC directly.

Given the feedback from you and others I should have contacted the AD first and will do this if a situation like this should arise in the future.

I am not familiar with the JLC forum but I have posted similar comments on the Watchuseek forum. As I have pointed out in another post I have written about the issue to warn other owners and potential buyers of my issue. There is no suspect agenda behind my posts if that is what you are trying to infer?

Hi TGehrke,

1) PinkPather is a long time forum member...look at his post counts. He is also known to some of the moderators and members, so I don't think it's fair to say he is "hiding" behind that forum nick. Surely you can appreciate, whilst this is an open forum,and accepts members that observe the rules and decorum, and is generally quite "free and easy" with minimal censorship, there always exists some in the watch cum Internet community that MIGHT( I am NOT saying you are one) be using this medium for reasons that are not complementary to that of this community and forum, as such, whilst building up your own network and friends here, with an opening post of rubbishing a brand, without any documentary evidence in form of photos and correspondence, there MAY be some who are skeptical, naturally.

2) whilst your attempt to inform this forum of your experience, you could also be open to others experiences, ranging from good to bad. The way I see it, your post is in effect a mixture raison d'être, namely a) to " warn" others about the poor quality experienced by you of a certain IWC watch and your subsequent exchange with them that did not lead to a satisfactory outcome for you b) grouse and seek comfort amongst other watch enthusiasts c) seek advice from those with either similar experience or have contacts within IWC or Richemont, d) PERHAPS attempts to pressure IWC into some form of compensatory action(I am NOT saying you are, I am merely stating a possibility, either conscious or consequential)

3) I have the greatest sympathy for you, it riles me no end to see watch companies, especially one from a big conglomerate, treat their customers with such wanton disregard. I can only wish you the best, and hope all works out in the end if and when you contact your AD, and if and when they initiate action and appeal for you with IWC. If anything, this is one opportunity for a AD to demonstrate their "worth" and value add.

4) I have 6 IWC watches, but not the one you have, and I have some experience with their servicing departments, and boutique and PR staffs, and I can say their service is top notch, both lip service and watch service! I have even gotten a free leather strap from them, not to mention some of the more generic marketing freebies. The watches themselves are all robust affairs and well built, from 1992 to 2008 models, but then again, I do not own the watch in contention.

5) if you read the IWC forum terms and conditions for membership, they reserve the right to amend anyone's postings, and when you sign up, you agreed to it. I have signed up but I have never posted, nor am I a frequent visitor, though Mr Michael Friedberg, whatever one's feelings about him are, is a respectable authority in all matters IWC. I personally remember it was some of his earlier articles from the 90s that prompted my early interest in IWCs, even though I am no a big fan of the newer ranges and of the way Mr Kern is running IWC and his marketing driven approach, which IMHO, has lowered the brand equity for serious WIS. Anyway, their forum, their rules, no point being unhappy with it.

6) I look forward to your future contribution, and communication to other members here of any resolutions, if any. Good luck!!!

Best,

Horo

PM sent, for something different though....

Cheers.

First off, you purchased an expensive item and are now disappointed that now either has a quality defect or has been damaged.  For that I am sorry.

In general, in these situations you should utilize  your AD to assist you in resolving the matter. They have much more leverage than you with the manufacturer (at least they should).  As an engineer who has designed and manufacturered many rubber (and other elastomer) parts there are many ways for a part to fail from a process related manufacturing defect, so I would try to give this genetlemen the benefit of the doubt. IWC has a fairly low production process for this and may not have yet encountered too many of these or do not have the expertise in these processes to recognize it as a defect vs. customer abuse.  Making rubber parts is not a core compitency and it is likely sub-contracted.

I agree that this is best done privately at first with a company.  Going public with a luxury brand like IWC will not get you very far. Honestly, i would only do this once I had exhausted all avenues of communication with the manufacturer. Let us know how you make out with your AD.

Bob

Bob,

Thank you for your comments.

I have tried repeatedly to escalate the issue with IWC but without success. I should have addressed this issue with my AD and will should this happen to me another time.

I am not expecting IWC to fix the issue at this point but merely raising the issue for other owners and potential buyers. The biggest disappointment has been the way my issue has been dealt with at IWC (very slow initial response, 2mths, and thereafter no reply what so ever to my subsequent communications).

T Gehrke

I view my Galapagos as my beater and I, for one, have found the vulcanized rubber to be far, far, far more durable than any metal would be. I know because I can be pretty tough with a watch. I use my Galapagos for any physical situation -- from hard skiing to wood chopping to baseball to yard work to (yes) scuba --and after a year of (at least somewhat) punishment, the crown (including the bezel) pretty much looks like new. The dealer I got it from (in London) was a major high end store and pretty much said that if I had any problems, they had found IWC to be great and better than other of major brands they sell. So, altogether, interesting.

Given your experience it appears I have a lemon