# Your views on Bremont as a brand



## Rafa ZC

I started to get to know this brand given the Wright flyer model (fantastic case back). However it all got muddy with the claims of the "in-house" movement... which feels all weird given that they are pricing the piece at Patek prices! What is more I would like to quote the review about the brand that is in "the watch enthusiast" app (in apple store).

I quote: "Well, nice story behind these watches, but the result is really deceiving: nothing at all comes to save the soldier Bremont. The design is common to so many brands, movements come from the same Swiss (or not so Swiss) mass movement producers, dials have nothing special. Cases are nice, and some homework has been done to present something a little bit different, but that's it. Of course, there is a good bunch of "ambassadors", mostly known by their friends and families. Why entering the watch industry to do this?" (end of quote)



What are your views on the brand? Any brand owner with good insights?

Cheers!


----------



## TimelessFan

*WHAT?!? THIS IS A CORPORATE SABOTAGE!!! 
IT WILL NOT STAND!!!!!* *
OBVIOUSLY THIS PERSON HAS AN AXE TO GRIND!!* *
WAH WAH WAH!*

On a less ridiculous note...

The brand itself was on the cusp of being cool. Or maybe it is. But this whole "In House" lie has definitely tarnished whatever cred they had. And their retailers who, without concrete evidence, came out in defense of Bremont, too, IMO. Like, would you buy something from someone who defends liars to make a buck? I know I wouldn't. They should've just kept their mouth shut and sat on the sidelines until the dust settled.

Now the real test begins for Bremont and their partners.

WHAT will they do to ameliorate this situation? WHAT will they do to restore faith and confidence in their brand? Because right now, I wouldn't dismiss it if someone told me that all their watches are made with Chinese parts by Chinese watchmakers...in London.

What's up with London, by the way? It's emerged as the capitol of financial crimes and now _this_? Can we trust anything coming out of that city?

Such a shame.


----------



## samanator

I am a Bremont Fan and I really believe this is just blowing thing well out of proportion. It really does not affect my opinion of the brand just like the Tag situation does not discourage my opinion of their brand. Tag legally purchased IP, which happens in every industry. They changed it some to meet their needs and launched a movement that they are manufacture in their facilities mostly (equal to 90% of other companies that claim in-house). Arnold and Son has used LJP movements for years and is a sister company to them to the point that the were purchased together a few years ago by Citizen. Do you really believe this tiny company developed a tourbillion movement inhouse in a year by themselves or did their partner assist(no one cried foul then, that I'm aware of)? Partners in development, contractual development, and buying IP have been a way of life for many years. No other industry lists these things? Do you think Porsche or Apple developed every part or bit of software in their products? If we truly held every watch brand accountable for developing everything themselves, or not sourcing some things from other sources until it is technically possible or fiscally viable we would only have a hand full of in-house brands (if that many). 

Just like Tag I don't see this information as relevant to brand perception. I don't expect Jaguar to tell me where they source every part in my cars, or where they licensed technology from, or who they use as consultants. Even if they did I would still consider it a Jaguar manufactured in-house by them in their Coventry facility. While you are entitled to your opinion, I don't need to share it. I'll close noting that the 1887 movement has been a market success for Tag to the point that they continue to expand the models with it. Their sales have increased significantly due to this movement. Outside of our watch forum community all that people care about is that Tag has a new accurate movement that has high end feature (like the O and R brand) that make it noticeably better at a price more reasonable than brands like Omega and Rolex. Who cares where the IP came from?


----------



## geezerbutler

Unfortunately for Bremont they've jumped the gun on the 'in-house' and kicked the WIS hornet's nest. An ideal opportunity for the Bremont haters (and there seem to more than for any other brand I know of) to kick them and accuse them of being a marketing company with no watchmaking credentials at all. The vitriol spouted on TZ-UK is quite shocking - with some even calling in to question the story of Bremont's foundation and some even accusing them of not using genuine heritage materials in the Flyer - a suggestion that seems to be throwing mud in the direction of the Wright family as well as Bremont. Both accusations totally unacceptable in my opinion. Bremont have made a costly error of judgement here and I hope it doesn't damage the business as I think their claimed objective of reviving British watchmaking is a genuine one - the B-1 marine clock shows their commitment (though I'm sure the WIS haters will say they didn't make that either). Why would they bother with a project like the B-1 or even bother to COSC certify their whole mainstream range if they're only interested in selling fashion watches with marketing gimmicks?

So, yes I think they've screwed up here and should have been completely up front about the Flyer movement. I think simply stating a joint effort with LJP leading to a Bremont exclusive movement with some components made in the UK would have been a decent enough story anyway. I just think the mud slinging (particularlry at TZ-UK) is totally over the top. I've even seen a post challenging Bremont to post pictures of ANY watchmaking going on at Bremont HQ! Have they forgotten that Peter Roberts used to work there? Would they be making such accusations if he was still there?

Anyway - I'll be keeping my MBII and it's ETA movement...it's still probably the best built and finished watch I own. That build quality and Bremont's customer service puts many of the WIS' darling brands to shame.

I hope Nick and Giles learn from this and are more careful in future.


----------



## G-F

The problem is two fold. First, they lied about their in-house movement. They can play dumb if they want, but those guys know what in-house means. They wanted this so bad, they bent the truth way too much on this one. First in-house for the first plane ever built, great story. Only problem, it isn't in-house.

The second problem is Bremont crying wolf about someone with an agenda trying to make them look bad. Sorry but you did that yourself and trying to save face actually did the opposite. 

As a brand, they still have great designs, great level of finish, lots of value for the money (for the normal models). But this is a major screw up and they need to carefully plan their next move. I believe they will learn from this and move on. As others pointed out, they still are the same company that do many things right.

That Wright LE just came about too soon. Their in-house is not ready and their name is not strong enough (yet) for the asking price (imho). They apparently sold all of them, but I suspect retailers are gonna sit on them for a while.

I used to be a great supporter of the brand. But that last screw up left a bitter taste...


----------



## TimelessFan

geezerbutler said:


> Unfortunately for Bremont they've jumped the gun on the 'in-house' and kicked the WIS hornet's nest. An ideal opportunity for the Bremont haters (and there seem to more than for any other brand I know of) to kick them and accuse them of being a marketing company with no watchmaking credentials at all. The vitriol spouted on TZ-UK is quite shocking - with some even calling in to question the story of Bremont's foundation and some even accusing them of not using genuine heritage materials in the Flyer - a suggestion that seems to be throwing mud in the direction of the Wright family as well as Bremont. Both accusations totally unacceptable in my opinion. Bremont have made a costly error of judgement here and I hope it doesn't damage the business as I think their claimed objective of reviving British watchmaking is a genuine one - the B-1 marine clock shows their commitment (though I'm sure the WIS haters will say they didn't make that either). Why would they bother with a project like the B-1 or even bother to COSC certify their whole mainstream range if they're only interested in selling fashion watches with marketing gimmicks?
> 
> So, yes I think they've screwed up here and should have been completely up front about the Flyer movement. I think simply stating a joint effort with LJP leading to a Bremont exclusive movement with some components made in the UK would have been a decent enough story anyway. I just think the mud slinging (particularlry at TZ-UK) is totally over the top. I've even seen a post challenging Bremont to post pictures of ANY watchmaking going on at Bremont HQ! Have they forgotten that Peter Roberts used to work there? Would they be making such accusations if he was still there?
> 
> Anyway - I'll be keeping my MBII and it's ETA movement...it's still probably the best built and finished watch I own. That build quality and Bremont's customer service puts many of the WIS' darling brands to shame.
> 
> I hope Nick and Giles learn from this and are more careful in future.


Not a hater here. I just picked one up in fact.

But if you're gonna claim that your burgers are homemade fresh gourmet and charge accordingly, don't serve up pink slime and then impugn your customers character when they call you out on it. That's all I'm saying.


----------



## PJ S

geezerbutler said:


> Unfortunately for Bremont they've jumped the gun on the 'in-house' and kicked the WIS hornet's nest. An ideal opportunity for the Bremont haters (and there seem to more than for any other brand I know of) to kick them and accuse them of being a marketing company with no watchmaking credentials at all. The vitriol spouted on TZ-UK is quite shocking - with some even *calling in to question the story of Bremont's foundation* and some even accusing them of not using genuine heritage materials in the Flyer - a suggestion that seems to be throwing mud in the direction of the Wright family as well as Bremont. Both accusations totally unacceptable in my opinion. Bremont have made a costly error of judgement here and I hope it doesn't damage the business as I think their claimed objective of reviving British watchmaking is a genuine one - the B-1 marine clock shows their commitment (though I'm sure the WIS haters will say they didn't make that either). Why would they bother with a project like the B-1 or even bother to *COSC certify their whole mainstream range* if they're only interested in selling fashion watches with marketing gimmicks?
> 
> So, yes I think they've screwed up here and should have been completely up front about the Flyer movement. I think simply stating a joint effort with LJP leading to a Bremont exclusive movement *with some components made in the UK* would have been a decent enough story anyway. I just think the mud slinging (particularlry at TZ-UK) is totally over the top. I've even seen a post challenging Bremont to post pictures of ANY watchmaking going on at Bremont HQ! Have they forgotten that Peter Roberts used to work there? Would they be making such accusations if he was still there?


Second one first:
Because COSC allows Bremont to sell them for more money. It works for Rolex, Omega, and many others.
Strangely though, Patek Philippe doesn't brother with certifying theirs, saving themselves $80-100 (from what I understand to be the associated cost) in the process - doesn't seem to do their sales any harm.
In other words, it's meaningless to the WIS community as we're all well aware many a non-certified ETA 2824, etc can be regulated to run within COSC specs.

First one next:
There is a doubt now, over the validity of the brothers' story about crash landing in a French farmer's field in 1996. Said farmer, a retired aeronautical engineer, and with many half-repaired clocks about the place, was called Antoine Bremont - the surname they choose to use as a mark of gratitude for him fixing their plane and putting them up at his home.
There's a phrase we all know - if it sounds too good to be true, then it probably isn't. Or equally, the story of the boy who cried "Wolf!".
As a result of their actions and words, they've dug themselves into a deeper hole, which is exactly as anyone with an ounce of savvy would've expected to happen - everything else they've said and done is now being scrutinised to see if this is a one-off error in judgement or if there are other embellished tales being told.

Last one last:
Bremont's website now states "_A number of the key constituent movement parts are also *planned* to be manufactured at the company's workshops in Henley-on-Thames,_" - my bolding, not theirs.
Having tried to spin their way out of it by using emotive language such as espionage, and deflecting the focus onto the "whistleblower", they've now even retracted the previous statement given via telephone to ABTW, to that quoted above.
So from claiming they make some parts in-house (I still hope the rotor is - it's superb), it actually transpires they're only at the planning stage!

If this was a reality TV show episode, you'd be forgiven for thinking it was all a set up - that it couldn't possibly have happened like that - except it did, and this is no reality TV show in which they reshoot the scene until they get it right.
They had one take, and they managed to blow it, spectacularly.

And not that any more fuel needs adding to the fire, but&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.






Skip to 3:14 and listen to 3:24


----------



## mattjmcd

PJ S said:


> Second one first:
> Because COSC allows Bremont to sell them for more money. It works for Rolex, Omega, and many others.
> Strangely though, Patek Philippe doesn't brother with certifying theirs, saving themselves $80-100 (from what I understand to be the associated cost) in the process - doesn't seem to do their sales any harm.
> In other words, it's meaningless to the WIS community as we're all well aware many a non-certified ETA 2824, etc can be regulated to run within COSC specs.
> 
> First one next:
> There is a doubt now, over the validity of the brothers' story about crash landing in a French farmer's field in 1996. Said farmer, a retired aeronautical engineer, and with many half-repaired clocks about the place, was called Antoine Bremont - the surname they choose to use as a mark of gratitude for him fixing their plane and putting them up at his home.
> There's a phrase we all know - if it sounds too good to be true, then it probably isn't. Or equally, the story of the boy who cried "Wolf!".
> As a result of their actions and words, they've dug themselves into a deeper hole, which is exactly as anyone with an ounce of savvy would've expected to happen - everything else they've said and done is now being scrutinised to see if this is a one-off error in judgement or not.
> 
> Last one last:
> Bremont's website now states "_A number of the key constituent movement parts are also *planned* to be manufactured at the company's workshops in Henley-on-Thames,_" - my bolding, not theirs.
> Having tried to spin their way out of it by using emotive language such as espionage, and deflecting the focus onto the "whistleblower", they've now even retracted the previous statement given via telephone to ABTW, to that quoted above.
> So from claiming they make some parts in-house (I still hope the rotor is - it's superb), it actually transpires they're only at the planning stage!
> 
> If this was a reality TV show episode, you'd be forgiven for thinking it was all a set up - that it couldn't possibly have happened like that - except it did, and this is no reality TV show in which they reshoot the scene until they get it right.
> They had one take, and they managed to blow it, spectacularly.
> 
> And not that any more fuel needs adding to the fire, but&#8230;&#8230;&#8230;.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Skip to 3:14 and listen to 3:24


I've heard a lot of skepticism over the years about the story behind the origin if the brand. But I have never anything even remotely substantive. Can you elaborate more on the issue of the validity if the story behind the crash landing in France, etc?


----------



## PJ S

No, can't add any revelation or anything – it was news to me when I read it earlier, but then my interest in Bremont up until this debacle/snafu was strictly limited to the white Solo in 43mm, and how I wished it was more sensibly priced.
The backstory and whatnot, I took at their word – had no reason to scrutinise it to see if it was plausible or too coincidental to be likely – but now with it being suggested there's no reference online to this Antoine Bremont chap, apart from Bremont's mention of him.
If this is also wholly untrue, I genuinely don't know where that'll leave them – very possibly up the creek without a paddle and the canoe.


----------



## Noodlefish

The individual who revealed the name of the watch, photos of it, and the original shot of a different, though similar-looking, movement from the LJP "catalogue", breached the embargo. Whether this is "whistle-blowing" is debatable. To release this info on the morning of a launch seems uncharitable at best.

It is interesting to note that there is still no further detail on that LJP movement. What size is it? How many jewels? Is it even an automatic? Doesn't that seem odd to anyone? If it really is that easy to get this info - why hasn't it been made available?

Can someone please provide the info - my GoogleFu has failed me.


----------



## geezerbutler

PJ S said:


> No, can't add any revelation or anything - it was news to me when I read it earlier, but then my interest in Bremont up until this debacle/snafu was strictly limited to the white Solo in 43mm, and how I wished it was more sensibly priced.
> The backstory and whatnot, I took at their word - had no reason to scrutinise it to see if it was plausible or too coincidental to be likely - but now with it being suggested there's no reference online to this Antoine Bremont chap, apart from Bremont's mention of him.
> If this is also wholly untrue, I genuinely don't know where that'll leave them - very possibly up the creek without a paddle and the canoe.


I just googled myself - apparently I don't exist either.


----------



## PJ S

Noodlefish said:


> The individual who revealed the name of the watch, photos of it, and the original shot of a different, though similar-looking, movement from the LJP "catalogue", breached the embargo. Whether this is "whistle-blowing" is debatable. To release this info on the morning of a launch seems uncharitable at best.
> 
> It is interesting to note that there is still no further detail on that LJP movement. What size is it? How many jewels? Is it even an automatic? Doesn't that seem odd to anyone? If it really is that easy to get this info - why hasn't it been made available?
> 
> Can someone please provide the info - my GoogleFu has failed me.


There is no info on 'that' LJP movement, as you put it - it's probably an internal reference.
It's the same base as the A&S 6003, which has a few alterations and a lower jewel count - but none of this actually matters, since it's not who else shares the movement, but that Bremont have made themselves look like a right pair of tits, and done damage to whatever credibility they'd managed to build up since their inception.



geezerbutler said:


> I just googled myself - apparently I don't exist either.


Oh great, I'm communicating with a ghost!
Look, I've no idea who's done what, just merely mentioning it.
I've no interest in finding out if farmer Bremont is as the brothers have claimed, a complete fabrication, or somewhere between the two - but for others, as a result of Bremont's original grandiose statements, this has given them the impetus to go digging for evidence that either proves or disproves the whole background story.


----------



## gagnello

After reading about this, my thoughts are that they should have been more forthcoming in their press release. What I think makes it especially brazen is the fact that these guys are charging PP or ALS money for this watch. In this price bracket, consumers are going to demand something truly unique and exclusive with nothing but the absolute highest quality achievable in every aspect of the watchmaking process. This isn't like Nomos or FC offering an in house movement at affordable prices. I think if they were asking under 5k for this watch, the reaction would be much less venomous, like it seemed to be with the tag 1887 (if my memory serves me correctly). But at 25K?!?!? It had better be a totally in house produced and developed movement OR there is 100% transparency as to where it's origins are (and at this price it had better be the crème of movement makers i.e. JLC, ect.). To not offer this information is pretty piss poor in my opinion, and the price point makes it worse.


----------



## dimman

I'm learning about this brand just after the false claims on the movement fiasco. What my situation is is that I'm making enough money recently to step up a bunch of watch 'classes' (I'm normally over in f410) and have started researching for a sporty/tool/dive watch. Aviation watches seem to fall into that group, though I have no flight background/family pilot/aspirations. 

So far it's been a few Germans that have caught my attention Sinn, Damasko and Muehle Glashutte. But in searches of comparisons (especially Sinn) Bremont's name comes up. Currently the center minutes chronos from Sinn and Damasko (awfully similar to each other...) and M-H's SAR chrono and Seebataillon GMT are what I've looked at. They are all pretty straightforward with their mechanisms. All based of someone else, modified for themselves. The Sinn and Damasko chronos are a very functional mod based on a current VJ, and an old chrono that had the center minutes hand. They are doing advanced technical coatings and Damasko is getting into Silicon. M-H's chrono is a minimally functionally modded 7750, but with Glashuette produced components, assembly and decoration. The M-H GMT is a Glashuette decorated ETA 2893-2.

When I got to Bremont, this deliberately misleading movement release was just starting to be scrutinised on the blogs. I basically first laid eyes on the Emperor as the kid was pointing out that he's naked.

And that has coloured my perception of everything I've since read about them. They seem like the 'tailors' from the Emperors new clothes story. A couple of bogus wannabes making up BS history, and complicated explanations of fluff to sell what is fundamentally nothing (horologicaly speaking) for ludicrous money.

The limited editions with historical 'stuff' in them just adds to the Emperor's new clothes feel of money for nothing.

And it's still not exactly crystal clear what movements (besides the easily identified VJ7750 variants layout) are in their other watches.

I have an idea of what stock movements cost, and what CNC machining, industrial materials and processes cost. And I don't see these clowns adding any more value to these things than any other $1000 range micro-brand.


----------



## geezerbutler

Dimman said:


> I'm learning about this brand just after the false claims on the movement fiasco. What my situation is is that I'm making enough money recently to step up a bunch of watch 'classes' (I'm normally over in f410) and have started researching for a sporty/tool/dive watch. Aviation watches seem to fall into that group, though I have no flight background/family pilot/aspirations.
> 
> So far it's been a few Germans that have caught my attention Sinn, Damasko and Muehle Glashutte. But in searches of comparisons (especially Sinn) Bremont's name comes up. Currently the center minutes chronos from Sinn and Damasko (awfully similar to each other...) and M-H's SAR chrono and Seebataillon GMT are what I've looked at. They are all pretty straightforward with their mechanisms. All based of someone else, modified for themselves. The Sinn and Damasko chronos are a very functional mod based on a current VJ, and an old chrono that had the center minutes hand. They are doing advanced technical coatings and Damasko is getting into Silicon. M-H's chrono is a minimally functionally modded 7750, but with Glashuette produced components, assembly and decoration. The M-H GMT is a Glashuette decorated ETA 2893-2.
> 
> When I got to Bremont, this deliberately misleading movement release was just starting to be scrutinised on the blogs. I basically first laid eyes on the Emperor as the kid was pointing out that he's naked.
> 
> And that has coloured my perception of everything I've since read about them. They seem like the 'tailors' from the Emperors new clothes story. A couple of bogus wannabes making up BS history, and complicated explanations of fluff to sell what is fundamentally nothing (horologicaly speaking) for ludicrous money.
> 
> The limited editions with historical 'stuff' in them just adds to the Emperor's new clothes feel of money for nothing.
> 
> And it's still not exactly crystal clear what movements (besides the easily identified VJ7750 variants layout) are in their other watches.
> 
> I have an idea of what stock movements cost, and what CNC machining, industrial materials and processes cost. And I don't see these clowns adding any more value to these things than any other $1000 range micro-brand.


Not sure why you're here? If you hate the brand so much then show your disgust in the only way that matters - don't buy from them. If you want a tough watch with an in house movement go buy a Damasko DK10 and be happy.


----------



## PJ S

geezerbutler said:


> Not sure why you're here?


Perhaps a reading of the thread title again may reveal the answer to that question.


----------



## Godan

geezerbutler said:


> Not sure why you're here? If you hate the brand so much then show your disgust in the only way that matters - don't buy from them. If you want a tough watch with an in house movement go buy a Damasko DK10 and be happy.


I'm glad he is here. Posts of this type are valid, revealing and useful. Bremont asked for it, and here it is.


----------



## PJ S

Dimman said:


> I have an idea of what stock movements cost, and what CNC machining, industrial materials and processes cost. And I don't see these clowns adding any more value to these things than any other $1000 range micro-brand.


Associated costs of operating a business in England, especially the lower ¼ of the country concentrated around London and the South East, are stupidly expensive.
It certainly doesn't explain all of the price for their watches, but it goes someway, since their cases are not the cheapest of profiles to make, as well as the additional cost of hardening the material.


----------



## Rallyfan13

In our times, in organized countries, aircraft incidents are treated differently to automobile incidents. They are catalogued. 

Is there no record of a plane wreck in FR?

Anyway, COSC is in itself a marketing gimmick. It has been for decades.


----------



## StefB

I'm a long-time Bremont fan and collector, from their first production run actually, almost a decade ago.

What they have created resuscitated my watch collecting in a way that still lasts and keeps me thrilled to own military/aviation/dive pieces. While they are consummate marketers, their product has consistently held-up to horological scrutiny. Even if their LEs with discretely used, historic, non horological materials have no meaning to most watch guys, they hold enormous meaning to aviation and history buffs, which gives these pieces an allure that few other young watch makers can beat.

From a pure horological perspective, the whole question of what is or is not "in-house" is so debatable, as to make this controversy a lot less meaningful than it has become. Ever since the beginning of the (especially Swiss) watch industry, few movements were actually 100% made "in-house", which to this day remains the case.

To that, I am happy to see Bremont providing more details about the Wright Flyer movement, which is in-fact a movement exclusive to Bremont, with key parts made in England.

The latest, well-detailed piece about the watch was just released from QP and deserves a read by all fans of Bremont and those new to the brand.

QP Magazine - Devoted to Fine Watches - News - Hands on with the Bremont Wright Flyer


----------



## geezerbutler

Regarding Dimman's post...I apologise - the post was informative. I now possess the valuable knowledge that he does not like the brand. But he does like other brands that re-case existing movements. The post seemed to say that by fitting mass produced movements into custom designed cases Bremont were not adding any value. But Sinn / Muhle Glashutte apparently are. Bremont may use OEM movements (though modified from stock) like the ETA 2836 in my MBII, but they do case them in some of the toughest cases in the industry (harder steel (2000hv) than Sinn), crystal with 9 layers of AR coating, custom designed anti-shock mount and Faraday cage. My MBII has had daily wear for two years and is completely unmarked. I also have another year of warranty left (all Bremonts have a 3 year warranty). The  fact it has a ETA movement is great as it means any watchmaker could fix it if required. Bremont are also known for some of the best customer service in the industry (not that I have needed to use it).

Sorry for the rant - I just find this accusation that Bremont are merely a marketing-led fashion brand to be completely false. I don't defend Bremont over the Flyer movement issue. I do defend them as a brand that delivers a solid high-quality product. And anyone who complains about value for money when discussing luxury watches is deluded. If you want value for money get a Casio or a Seiko. And WIS who complain about brands that don't use in-house movements should put their money where their mouth is and buy a Grand Seiko as it will more than likely be completely 100% in-house - I wonder why so many don't....brand image maybe?


----------



## PJ S

StefB said:


> To that, I am happy to see Bremont providing more details about the Wright Flyer movement, which is in-fact a movement exclusive to Bremont, with key parts made in England.


Sorry, but no "key parts" for the movement are made in England by Bremont. They acknowledge this on their website, which I've copied and pasted in my reply above (#7), which you've obviously not read or absorbed.

I'm not being cynical when I say this, but for what period of time have Bremont got exclusivity on the movement?
Is the nature of the movement exclusive - i.e. 3-hander with central seconds hand, or something else?
If the latter, then there's absolutely nothing stopping another company utilising the same gear train layout that is the basis of the movement.
If it's the former, then there is a finite period of time involved or they'll have had to pay LJP an absolute fortune to reserve the basic 3-hand central seconds design for just themselves.
If that happens to be the case, then credit where credit is due - that's quite a coup - but then why would you go down that route if the path you're ultimately travelling is one which has the movement(s) made under your own roof?


----------



## TimelessFan

SMFH @ Nick English. SMFH.


----------



## samanator

I think it's time for a moderator moment now since we let this go on probably more than it should. We have a few unsubstantiated things being said. The Bremont Story has been published in several publications with no retractions so for the sake of argument this has been validated by them. So believe what you want, I believe it.


----------



## dimman

geezerbutler said:


> Regarding Dimman's post...I apologise - the post was informative. I now possess the valuable knowledge that he does not like the brand. But he does like other brands that re-case existing movements. The post seemed to say that by fitting mass produced movements into custom designed cases Bremont were not adding any value. But Sinn / Muhle Glashutte apparently are. Bremont may use OEM movements (though modified from stock) like the ETA 2836 in my MBII, but they do case them in some of the toughest cases in the industry (harder steel (2000hv) than Sinn), crystal with 9 layers of AR coating, custom designed anti-shock mount and Faraday cage. My MBII has had daily wear for two years and is completely unmarked. I also have another year of warranty left (all Bremonts have a 3 year warranty). The fact it has a ETA movement is great as it means any watchmaker could fix it if required. Bremont are also known for some of the best customer service in the industry (not that I have needed to use it).
> 
> Sorry for the rant - I just find this accusation that Bremont are merely a marketing-led fashion brand to be completely false. I don't defend Bremont over the Flyer movement issue. I do defend them as a brand that delivers a solid high-quality product. And anyone who complains about value for money when discussing luxury watches is deluded. If you want value for money get a Casio or a Seiko. And WIS who complain about brands that don't use in-house movements should put their money where their mouth is and buy a Grand Seiko as it will more than likely be completely 100% in-house - I wonder why so many don't....brand image maybe?


Muehle produces significant amounts of components, and all decoration in Glashuette. Most (all) movements they make have some level of work done by them, eg swan neck regulator, specific decoration. They are legally required to.

If you look at what Sinn and Damasko have done to enhance the chronos in their top level watches, it is impressive. DLC coating the escapement parts, the centre minutes or 60 hour totalizer, etc... They are real changes to the movements.

The cases, too. Remember that Sinn is one of the originators of the super tough case, and who cares if another company makes one marginally harder and the cost of that increase from a heat-treat or coatings. I mentioned that I was from f410 which is Orient. They have had the M-Force line for years that incorporates a multi level anti shock system. It's not rocket science.

The point is Bremont has done nothing innovative. Their case tech has decades old precedent with Sinn. I can spec a case that meets or exceeds theirs, and get it made in America. 11 layers of AR! No big deal. The movements they've done nothing to innovate. Purchased 7753, COSC. I can do better than. Sinn SZ01, admitted based on a 7750, extremely modified. I cannot do that.

So that leaves their 'history' to justify the high cost. And their history sounds like an awful lot of purchased BS.

They seem like they are a brand first, watchmaker maybe third?


----------



## geezerbutler

Again like I said before - you hate the brand. I never said anything about innovation - there's nothing innovative about an automatic movement in a steel case, regardless of the brand. My comments were to illustrate quality of build suggesting a level of workmanship somewhat higher than the fashion brand you seem to be suggesting they are.

I assume the list of brands in your sig are brands you own - I don't see any of the brands you are lauding in your list. I am a Bremont owner and can personally attest to the quality of their timepieces. Feel free to do likewise with your chosen brands.

Still, I see no need for further argument. You hate Bremont - thanks for the info.


----------



## dimman

geezerbutler said:


> Again like I said before - you hate the brand. I never said anything about innovation - there's nothing innovative about an automatic movement in a steel case, regardless of the brand. My comments were to illustrate quality of build suggesting a level of workmanship somewhat higher than the fashion brand you seem to be suggesting they are.
> 
> I assume the list of brands in your sig are brands you own - I don't see any of the brands you are lauding in your list. I am a Bremont owner and can personally attest to the quality of their timepieces. Feel free to do likewise with your chosen brands.
> 
> Still, I see no need for further argument. You hate Bremont - thanks for the info.


Read my post about how I ended up here.

I'm ready for a 'big boy' watch financially, end Bremont came up as a potential alternative to what I was looking at.

Hence the comparison and comments about the brand. In a thread asking for opinions on the brand. Reading the movement fiasco first has probably coloured how I read the rest of their marketing.

Funny how that works...


----------



## mattjmcd

PJ S said:


> No, can't add any revelation or anything - it was news to me when I read it earlier, but then my interest in Bremont up until this debacle/snafu was strictly limited to the white Solo in 43mm, and how I wished it was more sensibly priced.
> The backstory and whatnot, I took at their word - had no reason to scrutinise it to see if it was plausible or too coincidental to be likely - but now with it being suggested there's no reference online to this Antoine Bremont chap, apart from Bremont's mention of him.
> If this is also wholly untrue, I genuinely don't know where that'll leave them - very possibly up the creek without a paddle and the canoe.


It was news to you when you read it? Where did you read it? Please post a link, yeah?


----------



## ilitig8

PJ S said:


> Patek Philippe doesn't brother with certifying theirs, saving themselves $80-100 (from what I understand to be the associated cost) in the process - doesn't seem to do their sales any harm.


Thread jack:

Patek doesn't bother with COSC because they have an in-house testing program that results in the Patek Seal being placed on the watch. While it encompasses many other characteristics of the watch the accuracy portion is much more stringent and exhaustive than COSC and they certainly spend more than COSC cert even though the testing is done in-house.

As to my view of Bremont, it is much the same as a week ago, a brand with some interesting LEs and cool tech in their mainstream watches that is a blip on the very outside of my horological radar. My accumulation of watches originates mainly from brands that have been around for 100 years or more I suppose I find them "safer" and they don't fail to interest me. Again someday maybe a Supermarine or something new that catches my eye, though I will say that if it is an in-house movement they will have to show me the goods before I show them the money, but honestly I require no less from Patek, Vacheron, AP and Lange.


----------



## Rallyfan13

Could it be Patek don't bother with third party certs because people will buy the watches anyway, even though the watches are inaccurate, like Bremont or any other watch with outdated tech?....

My question still stands: was there a plane crash or not? Are there aviation records?

As to the "why don't the in-house fans buy a Grand Seiko" question: I don't have to. Less expensive Seikos are still in house. Is Bremont making everything in house after all, just for more money than Seiko?...


----------



## dimman

This is cute:
Shinola's Great Americans Series Debuts With Wright Brothers Limited Edition Watch & Bicycle - Forbes

Seems not even their marketing is original. I guess Shinola was too upfront with their dull quartz (although $1K for that is pretty rude, too), and didn't think grandiose enough with their piece of Wright fabric. Look at how many pieces they could've cut that square into and stuffed into watches!


----------



## samanator

Dimman said:


> This is cute:
> Shinola's Great Americans Series Debuts With Wright Brothers Limited Edition Watch & Bicycle - Forbes
> 
> Seems not even their marketing is original. I guess Shinola was too upfront with their dull quartz (although $1K for that is pretty rude, too), and didn't think grandiose enough with their piece of Wright fabric. Look at how many pieces they could've cut that square into and stuffed into watches!


As noted you have posted your opinion. Got it! Time to move on and let others opinions here since the above is of little relevance to what your opinion is and I believe we're more than clear on that.

Now back on topic....To add to what I've said prior to this before knowing much about the brand the barrel colors on the MBII and MBI made me take notice. This was very unique along with overall case shape and construction. I felt the same way when I saw the three hand Boeing watch. No one builds something like this case wise including other Bremonts.


----------



## Tseg

I've seen Chinese watches claim they have Swiss movements and charge a premium. I now respect Bremont equally. Brand=Reputation.


----------



## tinkero

To get back to the question of the forum....

I am a "pilot" watch kind of guy. I was one of the writers on "Band of Brothers", and am currently writing another mini-series about B-17 bomber crews and world war 2. All of my "good" watches are black faced, even my dressier watches. I wear a Glashutte Navigator Pano-date a lot, and a JLC Master Compressor GMT as a daily (which also has a military feel). In those examples, each are in house movements (cal 100 on the GO, cal 975 on the JLC).

I remember really liking the first Bremont I saw in an AD couple of years ago, and seriously considered it for awhile. Many of their models are quite aesthetically pleasing, but in the end I didn't purchase the Bremont.

For me, the price point is just not justified, despite how nice looking the watches are. I'd rather take that 5-7k (or more or the LEs!) and add a tad more to get a JLC (I'm looking at you, Geophysic).

Just my 2 cents

At the end of the day, buying a mechanical watch is almost always an emotional purchase, and we all succumb to the totality of a brand's story.


----------



## dimman

samanator said:


> As noted you have posted your opinion. Got it! Time to move on and let others opinions here since the above is of little relevance to what your opinion is and I believe we're more than clear on that.
> 
> Now back on topic....To add to what I've said prior to this before knowing much about the brand the barrel colors on the MBII and MBI made me take notice. This was very unique along with overall case shape and construction. I felt the same way when I saw the three hand Boeing watch. No one builds something like this case wise including other Bremonts.


It's relevant to what the brand does, marketing/promotion and whatnot, through comparison and/or contrast to others.

The Shinola post is more appropriate to this topic, than your response to it that is simply about the product.

Brand and product, especially in this case, are not the same thing.


----------



## PJ S

mattjmcd said:


> It was news to you when you read it? Where did you read it? Please post a link, yeah?


Not sure if the comment is trying to suggest it came from the comments section of ABTW or is his own thoughts, but like I said, I'd never paid the least bit of attention to Bremont's background/origins, and it doesn't necessarily prevent me from getting one of their 43mm Solos, if one were to come up at the right price for me.


----------



## TimelessFan

Dimman said:


> Read my post about how I ended up here.
> 
> I'm ready for a 'big boy' watch financially, end Bremont came up as a potential alternative to what I was looking at.
> 
> Hence the comparison and comments about the brand. In a thread asking for opinions on the brand. Reading the movement fiasco first has probably coloured how I read the rest of their marketing.
> 
> Funny how that works...


Dimman,
congratulations on your upcoming purchase. If you're ready for a "big boy" watch, forget these obscure, niche brands and go straight to Rolex. Yes, it's ubiquitous but there are only two top brands in the watch world: Patek & Rolex.


----------



## omeglycine

Might just be me, but they've always seemed pretentious, even by watch game standards. And because of this, I'm having a bit of schadenfreude over their latest incident. I know that isn't flattering on me, but at least it is the truth!


----------



## samanator

It appears this thread and the others here have run their course with no relevant new content. Given this, I am closing these threads now. I'm aware this has been done on many other forums and everyone is looking to move on now. It's time to get back to the watches.


----------

