Richard Mille

Elbow
86

• Show profile
• Show other posts

Perspective

As some have said, some perspective is called for here IMO. My one surprise is that RM is expecting a payment to be made in order to retify the problem. If the corrosion has been caused by a defective seal in the crown, you'd have to bet that it was defective from the start, so the problem will have existed while the watch was still under warranty. Ergo, fix the watch but don't quibble about doing it for free on a $35K watch. Exactly how the watch is fixed has to be left up to RM. I would agree that the labor costs and potential for upsetting the fine tolerances of the watch are increased greatly by polishing out the corrosion rather than replacing the parts, but you'd have to credit RM with enough good sense to do it the right way rather than risk getting the watch back in another year with the same problem.

As for the mounting number of RM critics on the forum. I think it's only fair for them to have a voice, but individuals have to retain some perspective. If RM is taking care of the customer, only that customer his or herself is in a position to really judge how fairly they've been treated. My RM010 has worked fine for well over a year. It's accurate, beautiful and reliable. I have owned two Pateks that were back at HSWA within a month of getting them home and Patek is not as new or progressive with new designs and materials. When they have a new model out things can and do go wrong...remember the saga of the second hand on the 5960. A flat out design fault from the worlds leading house on a $78 grand watch!