# Patek Philippe: Does the Emperor have no clothes?



## metallic

Let me start off by saying I greatly admire many Patek watches. Many of the chronographs, perpetual calendars, and grand complications are just gorgeous, albeit extraordinarily expensive. Few will argue about Patek's position as numero uno amongst elite mainstream watchmakers.

I have recently been contemplating a new watch in the $20-50K range. As I look at the various options, Patek is in the mix as well as some of the usual suspects like ALS, FPJ, Breguet, VC, etc. The more I investigate Patek in this price range, the more I am dismayed however.

*Positive points for Patek:*

1. Extremely well branded watch with terrific resale value.

2. Extraordinary history and independence.

3. Beautiful timepieces, particularly at the elite end ($75K and up).

*Negative points for Patek:*

1. Numerous reports of mechanical problems and issues. The mainstream caliber 324 has known issues with "sticking" dates requiring aftermarket repair. I have had 2 friends with brand new Pateks that required return for repair for different issues (one was a sticking date).

2. Extraordinarily long repair times as well as long basic service times (6 months or more is not unusual)

3. Extremely high pricing for basic simple watches. A simple steel Nautilus 5711 goes for about $26,000. A simple precious metal Calatrava can retail for more than $30K. I believe the new Calatrava 5227 retails for about $37K, a basic time and date watch with a Hunter case.

4. Patek has no qualms about putting old design small movements in bigger cases. Screams of laziness to me. ALS routinely invents new movements for its newer, larger watches.

5. The audacity of putting quartz movements in the Ladies watches and charging an arm and a leg for them. I know, it's all about profit.

So, maybe I should just forget about it and not buy a Patek. I have to admit that I am attracted to the allure of the brand though and I like the resale values if I tire of the watch. The resale values do seem to be slipping though in the current soft watch market.

I really prefer to buy a watch though for its intrinsic qualities, and not be hypnotized by the branding. So what say you about Patek. Is this a brand that does not try very hard and just rests on its laurels and charges exorbitant prices just for the Patek name on its more economical watches (Calatrava, Nautilus, under $50K)?

Does the Emperor have no clothes?


----------



## mark1958

I am so glad you posted these comments. I have been having similar thoughts. I have been pondering the PP 5164 and just cannot pull the plug... because of what you get for the money... I had not heard of the mechanical problems you mentioned but I would expect good QC for the price. PP admits that they control the release of some models to maintain a favorable (e.g. low) supply/demand ratio-- keeping resale prices higher.

Will be interested to see what others have to say !!!


----------



## MarkingTime

It's no different than most luxury brands. Think my wife's Louis Vuitton purse is made up of $2000.00 worth of materials? Nope. That's why high value, low costs brands like Frederique Constant, Bremont, Ball, Christopher Ward and others have found a nice niche market.


----------



## Okapi001

metallic said:


> Is this a brand that does not try very hard and just rests on its laurels and charges exorbitant prices just for the Patek name on its more economical watches


And how is that different from any other hi-end brand?;-)


----------



## GlenRoiland

Okapi001 said:


> And how is that different from any other hi-end brand?;-)


My thoughts exactly. The one issue I have personally had is protracted repair times-if I recall correctly I was without it for 4 months, or so. That kills me. Other than that, I don't think any watch is worth (intrinsically) what we pay for it. Essentially, you are mostly buying brand name/recognition/prestige. Of course fit and finish are always superb, but there are many watches below $5,000 with superb fit and finish.


----------



## GlenRoiland

MarkingTime said:


> It's no different than most luxury brands. Think my wife's Louis Vuiton purse is made up of $2000.00 worth of materials? Nope. That's why high value, low costs brands like Frederique Constant, Bremont, Ball, Christopher Ward and others have found a nice niche market.


They do have some nice watches, huh?


----------



## metallic

MarkingTime said:


> It's no different than most luxury brands. Think my wife's Louis Vuitton purse is made up of $2000.00 worth of materials? Nope. That's why high value, low costs brands like Frederique Constant, Bremont, Ball, Christopher Ward and others have found a nice niche market.


I understand luxury brand pricing. Nobody expects to pay the price of the cost of the materials.

We can certainly however compare similar brands. Obviously, you cannot compare Patek to Frederique Constant or Bremont. You cannot compare Patek to JLC or GO. You can however compare Patek to ALS, AP, VC. Those comparisons do demonstrate some different price/value ratios. Compare a Patek Nautilus 5711 to an AP RO 15400 for example. Pretty similar "intrinsic value" watches IMHO. The Patek is about $26K, the AP can be had for about 1/2 that price. Look at a white gold Calatrava for about $28-30K vs a similar Lange 1815 for about $18-20K. My point and my question is, does Patek offer anything more than those other fine manufacturers offer at a much different price point, other than the name on the dial?

Of course, resale is also sometimes an important factor. To consider resale, you have to figure in your starting price point. Patek discounts are often minimal while many other high end manufacturers can be gotten for 25% off without even trying hard.


----------



## mark1958

If i were to choose between your two examples-- I would go with the Lange... and save a lot of money..



metallic said:


> I understand luxury brand pricing. Nobody expects to pay the price of the cost of the materials.
> 
> We can certainly however compare similar brands. Obviously, you cannot compare Patek to Frederique Constant or Bremont. You cannot compare Patek to JLC or GO. You can however compare Patek to ALS, AP, VC. Those comparisons do demonstrate some different price/value ratios. Compare a Patek Nautilus 5711 to an AP RO 15400 for example. Pretty similar "intrinsic value" watches IMHO. The Patek is about $26K, the AP can be had for about 1/2 that price. Look at a white gold Calatrava for about $28-30K vs a similar Lange 1815 for about $18-20K. My point and my question is, does Patek offer anything more than those other fine manufacturers offer at a much different price point, other than the name on the dial?
> 
> Of course, resale is also sometimes an important factor. To consider resale, you have to figure in your starting price point. Patek discounts are often minimal while many other high end manufacturers can be gotten for 25% off without even trying hard.


----------



## shnjb

Interesting points.

I have a 324 caliber watch and I agree with you that it is a bit underwhelming.
That big ugly rotor with little decoration does not compare to rotors on much less expensive watches from other high end brands.

I guess patek has essentially become the Rolex of high end brands.


----------



## entropy96

Okapi001 said:


> And how is that different from any other hi-end brand?;-)


In case of ALS, yes there is a difference.

With ALS coming up with so many technical innovations in such a short timespan, it's mind-boggling how older establishments like VC and PP came up with so little innovations as compared to ALS.

PS:
It's not just ALS.
Very young hi-end brands like Romain Jerome, Harry Winston, Richard Mille, MBnF, Maitres du Temps, etc. have come up with complications that the Big 3 could only dream of.


----------



## Crunchy

I agree that much of patek's premium can be due to it's branding and recognition, just like rolex. But don't forget where that recognition comes from in the first place. Just like rolex, it had the consistent quality, craftsmanship, and aesthetics to become as famous and command such a high price for many many years. 

For educated consumers, you are able to discern what you consider quality vs value in other brands, less so than uneducated rich consumers who depend on branding to ensure they can get the quality they want skipping the time and effort to learn much about watches. Many rich people would rather pay a premium rather than bother to understand why the brand was good. Hence the high premiums for the world's best brands. True, many new brands have a lot more modern and innovative complications, but they have yet to prove that they can consistently deliver the creativity and expectations of their creations.

After collecting for 15 years and handled most of the high end brands, I can appreciate how patek's attention to detail and comprehensive design makes it a stable go to brand for high end watches. Just like how many people come back to rolex after buying 20 different watches. These details are too numerous to point out here, perhaps a different post. Is this worth a premium over JLC or lange? Perhaps not, but people buy things for different reasons. Rolex is not anymore value for money than a seiko, and patek not value for money than rolex, and so on. My point is that consistency is important along with being proven over time. This and the attention to the important details of fuclnctionalty is what I pay for.


----------



## iim7v7im7

A couple thoughts:

- you make some fair points that the Sterns should take note of
- PP's premium pricing and control of discounting is intentional brand strategy
- slow service is the bane of the industry, and not unique to PP
- non-robust base auto movements are an issue shared by other luxury makers (e.g. AP 3120)
- Over the longer term, pressure from Richemont and Swatchgroup will continue to force the Sterns to step up their game (good thing)

In the end, get the watch that YOU like. 

When I wanted a rose gold dress watch a few years ago, I looked at Calatravas and all of the "usual suspect" luxury watch brands. I ended up with a Breguet because I felt it was the best watch. My more recent purchase of a PP Gondolo was similar in that I wanted a rectangular watch and in this case the PP was the best in its category and came home. 

PP does not always have the superior product offering. I agree in basic dress watches, ALS 1815/Saxony, Breguet Classique and VC Patrimony offer stiff competition and in my opinion better watches (forgetting price) than Calatrava.


----------



## sheon

I agree with you, OP. 

Putting the Nautilus 5711 and the Royal Oak 15202 side by side, it's clear to me the AP's the better watch, and it costs less.


----------



## heuerolexomega

We all have those glimpses of reality, here a couple of thoughts: 
-Yes they are overpriced but no company stay on business unless they have demand and quality to offer
- To an extent the higher prices that we complain about are the same reason we want the watch


----------



## Okapi001

shoen said:


> Putting the Nautilus 5711 and the Royal Oak 15202 side by side, it's clear to me the AP's the better watch, and it costs less.


Following that logic you should put Royal Oak and Grand Seiko side by side and decide that GS is a better watch and it costs less.


----------



## metallic

heuerolexomega said:


> - To an extent the higher prices that we complain about are the same reason we want the watch


Classic Veblen goods concept. I remember an episode of the show "Weeds" where the characters were trying to sell their product (marijuana) to a town loaded with extremely wealthy people. They were having no success selling their product until they dreamed up the idea of creating rarity and exclusivity. They simply convinced (marketed) the rich folks in the town (it may have been a country club) that this particular weed was the best weed they would ever have and it is extremely rare and difficult to grow. They then jacked up the price ten fold and put the product in beautiful boxes with pretty ribbons and suddenly they were selling this product as fast as they could bring it while making certain to control quantities and availability and maintain the exclusivity. I love watches but I try to avoid becoming one of those Weeds town folk that are buying the story, the pretty box and the contrived rarity.


----------



## heuerolexomega

metallic said:


> Classic Veblen goods concept. I remember an episode of the show "Weeds" where the characters were trying to sell their product (marijuana) to a town loaded with extremely wealthy people. They were having no success selling their product until they dreamed up the idea of creating rarity and exclusivity. They simply convinced (marketed) the rich folks in the town (it may have been a country club) that this particular weed was the best weed they would ever have and it is extremely rare and difficult to grow. They then jacked up the price ten fold and put the product in beautiful boxes with pretty ribbons and suddenly they were selling this product as fast as they could bring it while making certain to control quantities and availability and maintain the exclusivity. I love watches but I try to avoid becoming one of those Weeds town folk that are buying the story, the pretty box and the contrived rarity.


That's exactly why I said to _*an extent*_. Because the main reason I pick the watch is esthetics and quality of the movement but nobody can deny that there is a component of the "Veblen goods" imbedded on it. If when you buy your watch there is not even 10% of that and you don't care that every other guy has the same watch; then All I can do is "applause" hard and loud to you!:-!


----------



## sheon

Okapi001 said:


> Following that logic you should put Royal Oak and Grand Seiko side by side and decide that GS is a better watch and it costs less.


But the GS is _not_ the better watch.;-)


----------



## shnjb

Lol grand seiko.
Watch forums just love the grand seiko, jlc, and speedmasters.


----------



## metallic

heuerolexomega said:


> That's exactly why I said to _*an extent*_. Because the main reason I pick the watch is esthetics and quality of the movement but nobody can deny that there is a component of the "Veblen goods" imbedded on it. If when you buy your watch there is not even 10% of that and you don't care that every other guy has the same watch; then All I can do is "applause" hard and loud to you!:-!


I would like to think I am immune to the Veblen goods marketing but I know that I am not immune. I do try to recognize the influence when shopping though. I do believe I am immune to the brand ambassadors, I hate those.


Okapi001 said:


> Following that logic you should put Royal Oak and Grand Seiko side by side and decide that GS is a better watch and it costs less.


I currently own a Grand Seiko and I used to own an AP 15300. The Grand Seiko is nice but clearly not better.


----------



## MarkingTime

What do we look for in a watch? In the luxury brand market, it's quite different from the lower-end market. When looking for a luxury good, we want to feel positive about the purchase and feeling positive about the purchase is very, very complicated and somewhat different for each person. Some of us like to see our watches in magazines, on celebrities, as official timing devices at sporting events, etc. It shows that the brand is committed to the product and is willing to spend quite a lot of marketing and placement money to ensure everyone knows this. Over time, it becomes part of an emotional association with a brand/product.

Look at all the questions in this forum around "which watch should I buy"? We all want our purchases to be validated to some extent. Great marketing, exclusivity, price and other factors help us feel we are making the right decision.

Most of us also want to feel we are getting something for our money. No matter how much disposable income we might have, no one likes to feel they were ripped off or that they received something that represents a lesser value than what they traded for (in our case cash, which is really just a substitute barter item for cows, or sheep, or real estate, or whatever).

In the luxury goods market your trade of cash for a product can get you exclusivity, fine workmanship, a feeling of belonging to a special club and much, much more. If you take apart a PP, you are going to find the highest quality materials that are available to the manufacture. How much of a technological/longevity advantage is this? Probably not a whole lot. Today's production techniques and material qualities are good enough for having a long lasting product in just about any price range (speaking of watches here, not appliances or clothing, etc). But, just the fact that you know that the materials are better, that the craftsmanship is superior, that your watch was not produced by robots can mean it's something special.

To me it's like a work of art. Not one of a kind necessarily but still a relative rarity in the world of horology. I still stick by my earlier comment that value is taking on a new context in the Swiss luxury market and that rarity and exclusivity are gradually being replaced by value for money and "better than average but not too expensive craftsmanship". George Daniels would be appalled


----------



## Okapi001

metallic said:


> I currently own a Grand Seiko and I used to own an AP 15300. The Grand Seiko is nice but clearly not better.


It's off topic, but anyway - how is AP better that GS? More accurate? More reliable? More precisely manufactured?


----------



## metallic

Okapi001 said:


> It's off topic, but anyway - how is AP better that GS? More accurate? More reliable? More precisely manufactured?


That is a good and fair question.

Accuracy: No way. My GS is a Spring Drive so wins accuracy hands down. Not a fair comparison though since it is a pseudo quartz watch.

Reliability: Equal. Both are and were 100% reliable.

So what's the difference? 1. Finishing. The AP movement and movement finishing is gorgeous. Artwork. The GS is utilitarian, rather boring to look at. 2. Case and bracelet finishing. Both are good, the AP is better, more refined. 3. Brand prestige and pride of ownership. OK, it's a Veblen thing but wearing the AP gave me more satisfaction than wearing the Seiko.


----------



## iim7v7im7

That's the great thing about watches and collecting. I would look at those two watches and arrive at the opposite conclusion. 



shoen said:


> I agree with you, OP.
> 
> Putting the Nautilus 5711 and the Royal Oak 15202 side by side, it's clear to me the AP's the better watch, and it costs less.


----------



## heuerolexomega

iim7v7im7 said:


> That's the great thing about watches and collecting. I would look at those two watches and arrive at the opposite conclusion.


Although I believe the OP was comparing the AP 15400 to the PP 5711 and probably shoen meant 15400 and not 15202.
And in that comparison I totally agree that 5711 is a better choice.


----------



## Crunchy

metallic said:


> Classic Veblen goods concept. I remember an episode of the show "Weeds" where the characters were trying to sell their product (marijuana) to a town loaded with extremely wealthy people. They were having no success selling their product until they dreamed up the idea of creating rarity and exclusivity. They simply convinced (marketed) the rich folks in the town (it may have been a country club) that this particular weed was the best weed they would ever have and it is extremely rare and difficult to grow. They then jacked up the price ten fold and put the product in beautiful boxes with pretty ribbons and suddenly they were selling this product as fast as they could bring it while making certain to control quantities and availability and maintain the exclusivity. I love watches but I try to avoid becoming one of those Weeds town folk that are buying the story, the pretty box and the contrived rarity.


Sounds like hublot. And they are VERY succesful.


----------



## sheon

heuerolexomega said:


> Although I believe the OP was comparing the AP 15400 to the PP 5711 and probably shoen meant 15400 and not 15202.
> And in that comparison I totally agree that 5711 is a better choice.


Well, I haven't held a 15400, so I can't comment. I'm comparing the 15202 with the 5711.

The bracelet is the most glaringly obvious difference; the RO's bracelet is better finished than the Nautilus'. I might even go as far as to say the 5711's bracelet feels cheap, compared to the RO.



Okapi001 said:


> It's off topic, but anyway - how is AP better that GS? More accurate? More reliable? More precisely manufactured?


I have the SBGM029 and everything about the watch, apart from stability of rate and accuracy, which I couldn't test for the 15202 as I saw it at an AD, is worse compared to the 15202. Finishing of case and bracelet, dial work, movement decoration and finishing.



iim7v7im7 said:


> That's the great thing about watches and collecting. I would look at those two watches and arrive at the opposite conclusion.


I must say I felt the Nautilus fit my wrist better but that was the only plus point for it. For me._ Chacun a son gout.

EDIT: added 'compared to the RO' to my comment about the 5711's bracelet feeling cheap. _


----------



## shnjb

shoen said:


> Well, I haven't held a 15400, so I can't comment. I'm comparing the 15202 with the 5711.
> 
> The bracelet is the most glaringly obvious difference; the RO's bracelet is better finished than the Nautilus'. I might even go as far as to say the 5711's bracelet feels cheap.
> 
> I have the SBGM029 and everything about the watch, apart from stability of rate and accuracy, which I couldn't test for the 15202 as I saw it at an AD, is worse compared to the 15202. Finishing of case and bracelet, dial work, movement decoration and finishing.
> 
> I must say I felt the Nautilus fit my wrist better but that was the only plus point for it. For me._ Chacun a son gout._


Yeah 5711 fit my wrist better as well, which is why I prefer the 5711 although the ROs are beautiful


----------



## drhr

shoen said:


> Well, I haven't held a 15400, so I can't comment. I'm comparing the 15202 with the 5711.
> 
> *The bracelet is the most glaringly obvious difference; the RO's bracelet is better finished than the Nautilus'. I might even go as far as to say the 5711's bracelet feels cheap.
> *


Interesting, thought I was just imagining things. Been thinking 'bout a Patek, liked the 5711 but not 5167 from pics. Handled both at our local AD (Ben Bridge) just a week ago. The 5711 was nice, but I wouldn't swap my 15202 for it. The piece was lighter than I would have thought, and the bracelet did indeed, seem to be of lesser quality when compared to the AP's (to me). To my surprise, I was actually more impressed with the Aquanaut on strap. I will have to go back to handle both again for sure . . . .


----------



## heuerolexomega

shoen said:


> Well, I haven't held a 15400, so I can't comment. I'm comparing the 15202 with the 5711.
> 
> The bracelet is the most glaringly obvious difference; the RO's bracelet is better finished than the Nautilus'. I might even go as far as to say the 5711's bracelet feels cheap.
> 
> I have the SBGM029 and everything about the watch, apart from stability of rate and accuracy, which I couldn't test for the 15202 as I saw it at an AD, is worse compared to the 15202. Finishing of case and bracelet, dial work, movement decoration and finishing.
> 
> I must say I felt the Nautilus fit my wrist better but that was the only plus point for it. For me._ Chacun a son gout._


I have the PP 5712 and the AP15300, and based on my experience with them I wouldn't say that the 5712 bracelet is cheap compared to the AP. I would say it like this: the AP has a more industrial bracelet tougher than the PP. The PP bracelet has more finesse and is more delicate. AP is more sport watch than the PP but PP dress up better.
I love both for different reasons, to each is own. Both are Genta's designs but behave different on the wrist.


----------



## lmcgbaj

shnjb said:


> Lol grand seiko.
> Watch forums just love the grand seiko, jlc, and speedmasters.


What's wrong with JLC. The are the engine makers for lots of those high end brands.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2


----------



## entropy96

lmcgbaj said:


> What's wrong with JLC. The are the engine makers for lots of those high end brands.
> 
> Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk 2


I think he means that in the real world outside of these forums, most of these brands are obscure to the public.

Most of the non-WIS don't care about the movements, accuracy, or build quality.
They look at the brand first and foremost.


----------



## shnjb

entropy96 said:


> I think he means that in the real world outside of these forums, most of these brands are obscure to the public.
> 
> Most of the non-WIS don't care about the movements, accuracy, or build quality.
> They look at the brand first and foremost.


Thank you for the explanation.

That's exactly what I meant.

JLC is not exactly the hottest brand to most watch buyers.


----------



## monsieurxu

OP, I completely agree with you. You seem to have a more sophisticated understanding of the high-end watch market than the average punter.

Patek has certainly compromised on its quality and finishing since the 1960s, post-quartz. Cf the descent of the 23-300 to the 215 PS - the latter has a dumbed down architecture, uses chemical polishing, inferior anglage, and lost the Breguet overcoil, and went from 8 adjustments to 5 (a big cost saving though most punters overlook this).

It's the same with Vacheron although they at least put a little more pride in their basic watches, and have relatively consistent quality. And their service experience is the best among the top-tier brands.

Lange as well maintains quality, but I am not really a fan of their designs.



metallic said:


> Let me start off by saying I greatly admire many Patek watches. Many of the chronographs, perpetual calendars, and grand complications are just gorgeous, albeit extraordinarily expensive. Few will argue about Patek's position as numero uno amongst elite mainstream watchmakers.
> 
> I have recently been contemplating a new watch in the $20-50K range. As I look at the various options, Patek is in the mix as well as some of the usual suspects like ALS, FPJ, Breguet, VC, etc. The more I investigate Patek in this price range, the more I am dismayed however.
> 
> *Positive points for Patek:*
> 
> 1. Extremely well branded watch with terrific resale value.
> 
> 2. Extraordinary history and independence.
> 
> 3. Beautiful timepieces, particularly at the elite end ($75K and up).
> 
> *Negative points for Patek:*
> 
> 1. Numerous reports of mechanical problems and issues. The mainstream caliber 324 has known issues with "sticking" dates requiring aftermarket repair. I have had 2 friends with brand new Pateks that required return for repair for different issues (one was a sticking date).
> 
> 2. Extraordinarily long repair times as well as long basic service times (6 months or more is not unusual)
> 
> 3. Extremely high pricing for basic simple watches. A simple steel Nautilus 5711 goes for about $26,000. A simple precious metal Calatrava can retail for more than $30K. I believe the new Calatrava 5227 retails for about $37K, a basic time and date watch with a Hunter case.
> 
> 4. Patek has no qualms about putting old design small movements in bigger cases. Screams of laziness to me. ALS routinely invents new movements for its newer, larger watches.
> 
> 5. The audacity of putting quartz movements in the Ladies watches and charging an arm and a leg for them. I know, it's all about profit.
> 
> So, maybe I should just forget about it and not buy a Patek. I have to admit that I am attracted to the allure of the brand though and I like the resale values if I tire of the watch. The resale values do seem to be slipping though in the current soft watch market.
> 
> I really prefer to buy a watch though for its intrinsic qualities, and not be hypnotized by the branding. So what say you about Patek. Is this a brand that does not try very hard and just rests on its laurels and charges exorbitant prices just for the Patek name on its more economical watches (Calatrava, Nautilus, under $50K)?
> 
> Does the Emperor have no clothes?


----------



## Imni

Interesting thread. Especially the problems with the movements is new to me. I've always wondered how PP can charge so much for SS watches.


----------



## The Naf

What a breath if fresh air...I honestly expected the OP to cop a fair bit of flak for this thread but it appears many of us (even those who are merely window shopping :-D) feel that Patek is somewhat overpriced for people who really know watches and place greater value in technical refinement than your average consumer. 

Agree that for your average buyer there's a reason why Patek can command the prices is does (much like Rolex) and these things include history, reliability, longevity, brand image and reputation...simply put you cannot buy that sort of credibility nor achieve it over night. So yea for your average person there's good reason to pay the premiums Patek charges and there's assurance of quality simply by virtues of being a Patek. 
But for those of us who know watches (I should say those YOU as still a relative noon) we know that better value for money at a similar level of quality can be had else where...of course there are other reasons to buy a Patek. I mean if you love the calatrava for example which is simply an icon than a saxonia wont satisfy our lust. There's only one Patek & Lange is not it 

Anyway to wind up my long winded echoeing of thoughts I would like to say thanks to all for what is an excellent debate 

The Naf


----------



## Fi33pop

Nekked as charged!


----------



## iim7v7im7

*Rope a Dope*

Most definitely PP is "resting a bit on its laurels" in many (not all) of its basic dress and sports line-up in terms of _design_ and not _quality_.

*Strategy & Tactics:*
PP = Less new design, high quality, and tight control of distribution channel (availability & pricing)
ALS, AP, Breguet & VC = More new design, similar high quality, lower pricing and steep discounting

It's a bit like the old Mohammed Ali vs. George Foreman _"rope a dope"_ tactic, where PP doesn't invest, but tightly controls the distribution channel to bolster brand equity. PP's competitors are forced to heavily invest and intentionally do not control their distribution channels so tightly in order to compete. As a result, they never are able obtain PP's brand equity, but produce some very nice product offerings. In the end, if PP's market share begins to erode by means of these tactics you will see the _HMS Stern _respond in force. In the meantime, I suspect the past is a good predictor of the future.

My $.02


----------



## GETS

*Re: Rope a Dope*

I am in agreement with a lot of things that have been said on this thread but I'm not sure one could say that PP is COMPLETELY resting on its laurels. Whilst I don't have all the details to hand they have got some new innovations within their recent watch movements that are worth reading about (a new Chrono movement and their innovations around silicon etc).

In terms of style they do seem to be a little bit 'conservative' though. Even when they did something new with an Annual Calendar shape (my 5135G for example) they discontinued it for some reason. And this really stood out as being a bit more modern and large then their normal offerings.

I do think that (as does the OP) that re-sale value must be considered. Whilst I have no intention of selling my watches, residual value in anything I buy is always the way I justify the 'part' sense in buying something I don't really NEED. I do get discount on PP (about 10% to 15%) and this, with the way I look after my watches, and with the resale value, still makes PP a better FINANCIAL buy than a Breguet with 30% off (for example).

I do think that I have had my last PP for a long time though. But this is more down to a desire to diversify into other brands (GO, VC & JLC all come to mind) more than anything I have against PP.

Great thread.


----------



## metallic

*Re: Rope a Dope*



iim7v7im7 said:


> Most definitely PP is "resting a bit on its laurels" in many (not all) of its basic dress and sports line-up in terms of _design_ and not _quality_.
> 
> *Strategy & Tactics:*
> PP = Less new design, high quality, and tight control of distribution channel (availability & pricing)
> ALS, AP, Breguet & VC = More new design, similar high quality, lower pricing and steep discounting
> 
> It's a bit like the old Mohammed Ali vs. George Foreman _"rope a dope"_ tactic, where PP doesn't invest, but tightly controls the distribution channel to bolster brand equity. PP's competitors are forced to heavily invest and intentionally do not control their distribution channels so tightly in order to compete. As a result, they never are able obtain PP's brand equity, but produce some very nice product offerings. In the end, if PP's market share begins to erode by means of these tactics you will see the _HMS Stern _respond in force. In the meantime, I suspect the past is a good predictor of the future.
> 
> My $.02


Outstanding synopsis.

I think in many ways Patek and Rolex are very similar companies at different price points. Both are inarguably excellent from a value retention standpoint. Both are very conservative and slow to innovate from a design standpoint. Both are extraordinarily well branded. They vary in that Rolex is known as a tough, bulletproof product while Patek is known as a more delicate, finely crafted product.

I own a Sub C which I will likely keep forever. I may purchase a Patek some day as well.

I do think Patek is resting on its laurels to an extent. I suppose they have the luxury of doing this as they are still successfuly selling a good amount of product. As Bob says, some day Patek might be pushed hard enough that they may need to innovate more at more comfortable price points. The watch buying public is dynamically changing and they cannot rely on China anymore.

I may buy a Patek. If I do however, it will be carefully scrutinized and evaluated and not just bought because of the name on the dial.


----------



## shnjb

As a first time entry level high end buyer I recently went through this dilemma as I had to pay more for less watch with a new Calatrava than similar offerings from Lange or VC.
Saxonia or Patrimony were both significantly cheaper than Calatrava even without discounts.

In addition, Lange at same price I could have had some basic complication, hacking function, better movement decoration, and even dial design for many (VC at a lower price also had some of these).

However in the end I went with the brand because I thought it was quite appealing to own a Patek, true haute horlogerie or not.

I suspect this is the reason why Patek is able to rest on their laurels a little; since a lot of people (perhaps especially first timers in this entry level) are influenced by the brand image and the reputation as "number one."

Although I love all kinds of watches, including those from manufacturers who may be obscure to the general public such as Zenith, JLC, Lange etc, when I actually had to pay, I've only paid for PP, Rolex and Panerai so I guess I'm a bit easily swayed by brand image more than I would like to admit.


----------



## ConElPueblo

metallic said:


> 3. Brand prestige and pride of ownership. OK, it's a Veblen thing but wearing the AP gave me more satisfaction than wearing the Seiko.


Surely it would have to motivated by the cost of the product to be Veblen-motivated? This sounds more like the Snob Effect, which is somewhat different. Have noticed that "Veblen" gets used a fair bit around here, often wrongly. Or, it might just be my academic credentials that are outdated!


----------



## heuerolexomega

shnjb said:


> As a first time entry level high end buyer I recently went through this dilemma as I had to pay more for less watch with a new Calatrava than similar offerings from Lange or VC.
> Saxonia or Patrimony were both significantly cheaper than Calatrava even without discounts.
> 
> In addition, Lange at same price I could have had some basic complication, hacking function, better movement decoration, and even dial design for many (VC at a lower price also had some of these).
> 
> However in the end I went with the brand because I thought it was quite appealing to own a Patek, true haute horlogerie or not.
> 
> I suspect this is the reason why Patek is able to rest on their laurels a little; since a lot of people (perhaps especially first timers in this entry level) are influenced by the brand image and the reputation as "number one."
> 
> Although I love all kinds of watches, including those from manufacturers who may be obscure to the general public such as Zenith, JLC, Lange etc, when I actually had to pay, I've only paid for PP, Rolex and Panerai so I guess I'm a bit easily swayed by brand image more than I would like to admit.


I think everything is important, but I did the same with when I choose my Annual Calendar, I had options but in my struggle between choices Somebody told me this (I think it was GETS, could be wrong, don't remember): If one day you look back and think "what I was thinking, How did I get in this watches craziness" and you want to get some of your money back what brand is a safer choice: "Patek" So I did that one first...


----------



## entropy96

shnjb said:


> Although I love all kinds of watches, including those from manufacturers who may be obscure to the general public such as Zenith, JLC, Lange etc, when I actually had to pay, I've only paid for PP, Rolex and Panerai so I guess I'm a bit easily swayed by brand image more than I would like to admit.


Perhaps subconsciously, you were also factoring in the RoI for the watch.

I know that happens to some WIS, especially when it's time to lay down your hard-earned cash on a high-end piece.


----------



## shnjb

entropy96 said:


> Perhaps subconsciously, you were also factoring in the RoI for the watch.
> 
> I know that happens to some WIS, especially when it's time to lay down your hard-earned cash on a high-end piece.


Yeah perhaps.

I certainly would rather get a preowned from VC, AP, and Lange, rather than new considering the supposed hit on resale value.

AP RO is my next piece planned and I imagine it will be a preowned piece.


----------



## GETS

shnjb said:


> AP RO is my next piece planned and I imagine it will be a preowned piece.


I strongly recommend the AP RO 15300 which a few of us own on this forum. Heuerolexomega, Amine and I own this model with no complaints.


----------



## shnjb

GETS said:


> I strongly recommend the AP RO 15300 which a few of us own on this forum. Heuerolexomega, Amine and I own this model with no complaints.


How does it wear compare to the 202?
I tried the 202 and it was a little large looking on me because of the way Royal Oak lugs are shaped


----------



## GETS

Well both are 39mm but it is reported that the 202 'wears bigger'. I have seen this on the internet a few times but cannot validate how true this is or why.


----------



## Omjlc

shnjb said:


> How does it wear compare to the 202?
> I tried the 202 and it was a little large looking on me because of the way Royal Oak lugs are shaped


I second the 15300 recommendation (as a new owner).

I tried the 15202 and I think the bezel might be slightly thinner which makes the dial appear larger (the thinner hour markers also make a difference). However, the 15202 bracelet has move give/flexibility at the lugs than the 15300 which makes it sit closer to the wrist. A couple of wrist shots for comparison:


----------



## shnjb

I might go for the 15300 or the 14790.... unless I get swayed by the lure of an ROO (forged carbon divers are on one hand like G-Shocks but on the other hand so bad ass).


----------



## ilikebigbutts

Omjlc said:


> I second the 15300 recommendation (as a new owner).
> 
> I tried the 15202 and I think the bezel might be slightly thinner which makes the dial appear larger (the thinner hour markers also make a difference). However, the 15202 bracelet has move give/flexibility at the lugs than the 15300 which makes it sit closer to the wrist. A couple of wrist shots for comparison:
> 
> View attachment 1231770
> 
> View attachment 1231772


If dark dial, I would go with the 15202 purely to avoid the white date aperture.


----------



## heuerolexomega

Omjlc said:


> I second the 15300 recommendation (as a new owner).
> 
> I tried the 15202 and I think the bezel might be slightly thinner which makes the dial appear larger (the thinner hour markers also make a difference). However, the 15202 bracelet has move give/flexibility at the lugs than the 15300 which makes it sit closer to the wrist. A couple of wrist shots for comparison:
> 
> View attachment 1231770
> 
> View attachment 1231772


There are subtle differences and people can argue I prefer this or that from 15202 but at end of the day the real question is can you justify the 7k difference in price? I couldn't and even if they cost the same can you live without a second hand on a sport watch?
just food for thought


----------



## Orex

PP has the advantage of the champion - the challengers have to work harder to get the crown.


----------



## entropy96

Orex said:


> PP has the advantage of the champion - the challengers have to work harder to get the crown.


Yes, challengers like George Daniels, Roger Smith, Philippe Dufour, and Laurent Ferrier have to work harder.
Everything they've created are inferior to the Big 3 and ALS.


----------



## GETS

entropy96 said:


> Yes, challengers like George Daniels, Roger Smith, Philippe Dufour, and Laurent Ferrier have to work harder.
> Everything they've created are inferior to the Big 3 and ALS.


I'm assuming that was very much tongue in cheek!

I think it is unfair to compare the true independents to the Holy Trinity, ALS, Breguet, JLC and other top manufacturers. They are playing in a different arena and often at much higher prices (unless you go right to the top 15% of the High St, High End, brand range). Add to this - who is going to maintain your George Daniels piece that you sold a kidney for in 50 years? That's a headache I wouldn't want.


----------



## jforozco

Okapi001 said:


> Following that logic you should put Royal Oak and Grand Seiko side by side and decide that GS is a better watch and it costs less.


I fully 100% disagree with this statement. respectfully off course.


----------



## bsodmike

Hi all,

I thought I'd share my views on Patek, but first I'd like to respond to the OP's post



metallic said:


> 1. Numerous reports of mechanical problems and issues. The mainstream caliber 324 has known issues with "sticking" dates requiring aftermarket repair. I have had 2 friends with brand new Pateks that required return for repair for different issues (one was a sticking date).


It's strange that a Patek would require aftermarket repair; personally, I would only allow Patek Genève touch my pieces, and having met some of their Horolorgers (one gentleman is trained to work on their minute repeaters and pretty much everything that comes into the Salon) I am confident my pieces would be well looked after.

I've had issues with two APs I purchased in 2012, both 15300 Royal Oaks, one in Rose Gold and the other in Steel. They both developed issues; the RG died with the date half-way through a transition, the steel piece simply stopped. Both were of course serviced under warranty, albeit taking ~6-8 weeks.

At this level of watchmaking, problems can happen. If you plan to own any of the high-end pieces you should be aware that you will most likely have to pay to preserve your timepieces, at least more so than more rugged watches (say Rolex).



metallic said:


> 3. Extremely high pricing for basic simple watches. A simple steel Nautilus 5711 goes for about $26,000. A simple precious metal Calatrava can retail for more than $30K. I believe the new Calatrava 5227 retails for about $37K, a basic time and date watch with a Hunter case.


Simply put, Patek have the history and are in a league of their own. Pretty much every piece they manufacture, or to be more precise, all the watches they keep in stock - ensuring the 'market' is always running at a deficit - are highly sought after by new owners. If you want a new Patek, that's the price of admission.



metallic said:


> 4. Patek has no qualms about putting old design small movements in bigger cases. Screams of laziness to me. ALS routinely invents new movements for its newer, larger watches.


Yes and no; I personally like the 324 calibre (both my Pateks have it) and have also personally worn a 5227; it's a watch that you should try on and take the time to open that caseback. The way they've managed to make the half-hunt caseback fit so discretely into the watch is just incredible.

As for the price of the 5227, it costs almost as much as my 5146 Annual Calendar! So in my opinion, it's not worth it, but that's because for me, I'm more interested in a mechanical complication rather than a case-complication.

Also for Patek, the 5127 line probably moved a bit too slowly and they wanted a more aggressive Calatrava. The 5127 is not much more expensive than an Aquanaut and therefore represents a fairly 'low' entry-barrier into an 18k Calatrava. Hence, larger Calatrava with it's concave case highlights (on the lugs/bezel) with an appropriate price-hike; my assumption is they are hoping the 5227 would appeal more to the 'younger' crowd.

From the Swiss manufactures, at least in my opinion, Patek have some of the most meticulously finished thin movements. I absolutely love the case styling of their Calatrava line up, and the number of complications to choose from is just wonderful. I intend to add 5130, 5712, 5960 and 5140 to my small collection and with this range, I would pretty much cover most of the various in-house Patek movements, and complications.

Perhaps I do not meet the standard 'demographic' of watch buyers, one looking for a bargain whichever way he can get it. I take my time, doing my research, and ultimately buy the pieces that sing to me the most, brand new. This is how I have enjoyed my passion for the better portion of almost a decade, and that's how I will be continuing into the future as well.

As 'The Naf' pointed out, the pieces I want are by Patek, not simply because they are by Patek but because they 'sing' to me at every horological level - from the movement, finishing, case design and finish, detail on their dials to the leather straps/buckles. Of course, there are some pieces that have also caught my eye from A. Lange, Rolex, Vacheron and I plan to 'get around' to them all in good time. At least for now, my focus is on Patek & AP.


----------



## bsodmike

shnjb said:


> Yeah perhaps.
> 
> I certainly would rather get a preowned from VC, AP, and Lange, rather than new considering the supposed hit on resale value.
> 
> AP RO is my next piece planned and I imagine it will be a preowned piece.


It works buying new if you plan to 'never' let go of a piece, i.e. it's a keeper from the get go.


----------



## Dancing Fire

GETS said:


> I'm assuming that was very much tongue in cheek!
> 
> I think it is unfair to compare the true independents to the Holy Trinity, ALS, Breguet, JLC and other top manufacturers. They are playing in a different arena and often at much higher prices (unless you go right to the top 15% of the High St, High End, brand range). Add to this - who is going to maintain your George Daniels piece that you sold a kidney for in 50 years? That's a headache I wouldn't want.


Ex post!!..|>


----------



## shnjb

bsodmike said:


> It works buying new if you plan to 'never' let go of a piece, i.e. it's a keeper from the get go.


I don't plan to sell any of my watches but you never know!


----------



## Omjlc

I've been following this thread for a while now and I think it's one of the best reads on WUS. Respectful comments, reasoned arguments and thought provoking points of view. Keep it up guys.


----------



## seanwontreturn

It's a price u have to pay for an indenpendant watch brand like PP/AP/GP. The G&A cost and overhead of the independant is much higher due to the lack of synergy among their counterparts owned by consortium. To put it simple, at same price point, you expect less quality piece from PP/AP/GP, especially when you look at their entry level offerings, which is where revenue comes from. This is above all and regardless of difference in distribution strategy.


Few know how many entry level pateks are being sold every year out of its total volume of some 50k pieces, my guess is 45k pieces are non-complication collections. Some high end Patek timepieces are handmade, but 49k out of 50k are just auto product like Rolex, though not in a same automatism level. Imagine how many people should it have had to train to "Patek level" and employ for 50k handmade timepieces, just impossible. In this way, people getting entry-level pateks are just sponsoring the brand for few hundred high end patek that they can only admire.

Indenpendant brand cannot just calm down to do what we think it should do. Richemont can say "ok ALS, revenue i am getting from you is not good this year, will not be either next year and the same the year after, just be there, do your high end work wowing people with the innovation". Patek cannot say the same to itself, it has to buy in the innocence with its low end timepieces that dont procedue quality for its price tag.


----------



## metallic

seanwontreturn said:


> It's a price u have to pay for an indenpendant watch brand like PP/AP/GP. The G&A cost and overhead of the independant is much higher due to the lack of synergy among their counterparts owned by consortium. To put it simple, at same price point, you expect less quality piece from PP/AP/GP, especially when you look at their entry level offerings, which is where revenue comes from. This is above all and regardless of difference in distribution strategy.
> 
> Few know how many entry level pateks are being sold every year out of its total volume of some 50k pieces, my guess is 45k pieces are non-complication collections. Some high end Patek timepieces are handmade, but 49k out of 50k are just auto product like Rolex, though not in a same automatism level. Imagine how many people should it have had to train to "Patek level" and employ for 50k handmade timepieces, just impossible. In this way, people getting entry-level pateks are just sponsoring the brand for few hundred high end patek that they can only admire.
> 
> Indenpendant brand cannot just calm down to do what we think it should do. Richemont can say "ok ALS, revenue i am getting from you is not good this year, will not be either next year and the same the year after, just be there, do your high end work wowing people with the innovation". Patek cannot say the same to itself, it has to buy in the innocence with its low end timepieces that dont procedue quality for its price tag.


Excellent post. Very true about the independents, they are in a more complex position than the conglomerates as they have to produce revenue from their individual brand only and cannot accept slow years from particular divisions.

Patek, just like a conglomerate however, has different "divisions" of watch production. Richemont has ALS and VC at the high end; JLC, Panerai and IWC at the mid end; and Baume & Mercier at the low end. Similar story for Swatch. Patek however also has its "divisions" with Ladies quartz (think 24) at the low end, Calatrava and Nautilus and some annual calendars at the mid end, and the grand complications at the high end. The low end and the mid point must finance the high end and produce the real profits.

I don't know the exact numbers for certain. I have read various sources stating that Patek's annual production is currently 53,000 watches of which they make 12,000 quartz women's watches. That leaves 41,000 mechanical watches. 5% of these are "investment grade" grand complications, or only about 2000 really high end watches per year.

So Patek sells 51,000 "regular" large production watches per year. These are the watches that truly drive their business model. Just like BMW selling 1 series and 3 series, that is where the money is made. The 2000 Grand complication "investment pieces" is what gives Patek its name and prestige however. Those grand complications is what you think of when you think Patek, not a base Nautilus "mass" production piece. But those grand complications, the ones you cannot afford or don't want to afford, are the driving force behind you buying that Nautilus or base Calatrava. The Grand complications are probably unnecessary from a cash flow standpoint, but those Grand complications absolutely drive the viability and desirability of the brand.

It's an interesting business model.


----------



## iim7v7im7

seanwontreturn said:


> It's a price u have to pay for an indenpendant watch brand like PP/AP/GP. The G&A cost and overhead of the independant is much higher due to the lack of synergy among their counterparts owned by consortium. To put it simple, at same price point, you expect less quality piece from PP/AP/GP, especially when you look at their entry level offerings, which is where revenue comes from. This is above all and regardless of difference in distribution strategy.
> 
> Few know how many entry level pateks are being sold every year out of its total volume of some 50k pieces, my guess is 45k pieces are non-complication collections. Some high end Patek timepieces are handmade, but 49k out of 50k are just auto product like Rolex, though not in a same automatism level. Imagine how many people should it have had to train to "Patek level" and employ for 50k handmade timepieces, just impossible. In this way, people getting entry-level pateks are just sponsoring the brand for few hundred high end patek that they can only admire.
> 
> Indenpendant brand cannot just calm down to do what we think it should do. Richemont can say "ok ALS, revenue i am getting from you is not good this year, will not be either next year and the same the year after, just be there, do your high end work wowing people with the innovation". Patek cannot say the same to itself, it has to buy in the innocence with its low end timepieces that dont procedue quality for its price tag.


A couple of points:


GP is no longer independent but is part of Kering, a large luxury conglomerate. I do believe that LVMH, Richmont and Swatchgroup assign fixed and variable overheads to individual brands/ateliers.
The most recent estimate that I saw was 53,000 watches per year. An interview with Philippe Stern back in 2007 he revealed that about 25% of their volume then was in women's quartz watches. If we assume a similar ratio still exists it means PP makes about 40,000 mechanical watches a year. I would agree that simple aquanaut, calatrava and nautilus are a significant proportion of their production (30-35,000 per/annum)
I disagree, there is significantly more hand finishing in a basic PP than in a Rolex. Rolex makes about 30x the number we are discussing with Patek with about 3x the employees
Independent companies like Patek (and Rolex) have established superlative brand equity, premier distribution channels and robust pricing models. This is why they are more expensive. While I agree that a premium is paid by entry level buyers and that their competitors have invested more into their luxury line ups. This is not about quality but design having mostly newer calibres size appropriate. PP's base model line-up is still comprised of excellent quality products.


----------



## uscmatt99

Excellent thread. I have only limited experience with the high end, i.e. trying pieces on. Patek's finishing is excellent, and I personally prefer the aesthetics of the Nautilus line. The killer for me is the turnaround time on servicing, where Patek falls behind AP, VC, ALS and so on. 6 months is not uncommon. I understand that the thinner and more complicated the movement, the longer the servicing time and the higher likelihood of an issue developing that requires service. But they really need to get their act together on this relative to the competition. It would do no damage to the brand to train more watchmakers and improve this aspect of their business. I just can't see purchasing a watch at this pricepoint and being without it for 6 months every 3-4 years. If anything, they could just charge more for the service to get the pieces back to customers in a more timely fashion, across the board.


----------



## AbuKalb93

I havent had the time to read anything after OP but i must say, i COMPLETELY AGREE!

When comparing Patek to brands like ALS and FP Journe i really look down at Patek. They are sooo overpriced and they kind of share the whole "im rolex...im #1...so im expensive" ideology. You could tell by the interviews with Mr. Stern that he is so full of himself and Patek. Its so annoying. I realize theres brand history and i completely respect it...but it doesnt mean you can market your history and charge extra just because of it. 

I don't even get the whole "Patek Philippe Seal". I think its all marketing gimmick. You are supposed to have your own set of quality standards and thats it. There is no need to say "we exceeded Geneva Seal so now we are more expensive". Oh PLZ!!
I believe every brand in the world is capable of inventing a stamp to put on all their plates...

From what i can tell...its kinda like Rolex...almost all watch fanatics get one/need one simply to fulfill that marketing trend of "Patek is #1". They are mistaken.

Im not saying its a bad brand...i honestly think they have exquisite products and they have amazing quality timepieces that will look great down the road even..but i argue with the idea that its the best. I definitly think that there are other brands which are on par or even better than Patek...they just simply dont have the history or marketing to support them (i like that about other brands).

My .2 cents so please dont kill me


----------



## iim7v7im7

*Indeed, some marketing but there was a real reason to leave the Geneva Seal*

Patek Philippe had to stop using the Geneva Seal because it has two workshops in Vaud and Neuchatel cantons. These workshops are in Le Brassus and La Chaux-de-Fonds because these places are the best ones to find highy skilled watch makers, that are not that many in Geneva. In fact, most complications consisting in tourbillon and/or minute repeaters of the Geneva brand are produced in their workshops outside Geneva.


----------



## AbuKalb93

*Re: Indeed, some marketing but there was a real reason to leave the Geneva Seal*



iim7v7im7 said:


> Patek Philippe had to stop using the Geneva Seal because it has two workshops in Vaud and Neuchatel cantons. These workshops are in Le Brassus and La Chaux-de-Fonds because these places are the best ones to find highy skilled watch makers, that are not that many in Geneva. In fact, most complications consisting in tourbillon and/or minute repeaters of the Geneva brand are produced in their workshops outside Geneva.


if only everyone else knew about this....instead of the whole exceeding geneva standards ***


----------



## entropy96

*Re: Indeed, some marketing but there was a real reason to leave the Geneva Seal*

Here is an interesting interview by Ariel Adams (of ABlogToWatch.com) to Daniel Roth:

Jean Daniel Nicolas Watches: The Real Daniel Roth Brand | aBlogtoWatch

Apparently, Daniel Roth recommended Patek Philippe as a "good lower cost brand that makes good movements." :-d


----------



## HRC-E.B.

seanwontreturn said:


> It's a price u have to pay for an indenpendant watch brand like PP/AP/GP. The G&A cost and overhead of the independant is much higher due to the lack of synergy among their counterparts owned by consortium. To put it simple, at same price point, you expect less quality piece from PP/AP/GP, especially when you look at their entry level offerings, which is where revenue comes from. This is above all and regardless of difference in distribution strategy.
> 
> Few know how many entry level pateks are being sold every year out of its total volume of some 50k pieces, my guess is 45k pieces are non-complication collections. Some high end Patek timepieces are handmade, but 49k out of 50k are just auto product like Rolex, though not in a same automatism level. Imagine how many people should it have had to train to "Patek level" and employ for 50k handmade timepieces, just impossible. In this way, people getting entry-level pateks are just sponsoring the brand for few hundred high end patek that they can only admire.
> 
> Indenpendant brand cannot just calm down to do what we think it should do. Richemont can say "ok ALS, revenue i am getting from you is not good this year, will not be either next year and the same the year after, just be there, do your high end work wowing people with the innovation". Patek cannot say the same to itself, it has to buy in the innocence with its low end timepieces that dont procedue quality for its price tag.


This seems to make a lot of sense and is exactly why I am inclined to think I'll consider an ALS instead of an entry-level Patek when I decide to fork over the amount necessary to buy a true premium product. I feel I will get more watch, more high-end handwork with an ALS than with an entry-level Patek for that very reason.


----------



## shartouh

metallic said:


> Let me start off by saying I greatly admire many Patek watches. Many of the chronographs, perpetual calendars, and grand complications are just gorgeous, albeit extraordinarily expensive. Few will argue about Patek's position as numero uno amongst elite mainstream watchmakers.
> 
> I have recently been contemplating a new watch in the $20-50K range. As I look at the various options, Patek is in the mix as well as some of the usual suspects like ALS, FPJ, Breguet, VC, etc. The more I investigate Patek in this price range, the more I am dismayed however.
> 
> *Positive points for Patek:*
> 
> 1. Extremely well branded watch with terrific resale value.
> 
> 2. Extraordinary history and independence.
> 
> 3. Beautiful timepieces, particularly at the elite end ($75K and up).
> 
> *Negative points for Patek:*
> 
> 1. Numerous reports of mechanical problems and issues. The mainstream caliber 324 has known issues with "sticking" dates requiring aftermarket repair. I have had 2 friends with brand new Pateks that required return for repair for different issues (one was a sticking date).
> 
> 2. Extraordinarily long repair times as well as long basic service times (6 months or more is not unusual)
> 
> 3. Extremely high pricing for basic simple watches. A simple steel Nautilus 5711 goes for about $26,000. A simple precious metal Calatrava can retail for more than $30K. I believe the new Calatrava 5227 retails for about $37K, a basic time and date watch with a Hunter case.
> 
> 4. Patek has no qualms about putting old design small movements in bigger cases. Screams of laziness to me. ALS routinely invents new movements for its newer, larger watches.
> 
> 5. The audacity of putting quartz movements in the Ladies watches and charging an arm and a leg for them. I know, it's all about profit.
> 
> So, maybe I should just forget about it and not buy a Patek. I have to admit that I am attracted to the allure of the brand though and I like the resale values if I tire of the watch. The resale values do seem to be slipping though in the current soft watch market.
> 
> I really prefer to buy a watch though for its intrinsic qualities, and not be hypnotized by the branding. So what say you about Patek. Is this a brand that does not try very hard and just rests on its laurels and charges exorbitant prices just for the Patek name on its more economical watches (Calatrava, Nautilus, under $50K)?
> 
> Does the Emperor have no clothes?


And more one Negative point they have just three boutiques :1) In Geneva 2) In Paris 3) In London, No other boutique in the world just retail sellers with anotheres Brands, Then you can go to Lange&Söhne then you will be Happy, I hope


----------



## ilikebigbutts

had a bit of a google re: issues with the 324 movement, but not come up with much (at least nothing that appears like more than a few isolated incidents). Anyone got some further reading on this?


----------



## not12bhere

HRC-E.B. said:


> This seems to make a lot of sense and is exactly why I am inclined to think I'll consider an ALS instead of an entry-level Patek when I decide to fork over the amount necessary to buy a true premium product. I feel I will get more watch, more high-end handwork with an ALS than with an entry-level Patek for that very reason.


I spent the better part of a year researching the two brands and specific models, trying them on and following these forums before I made a decision. In the end, for the reasons you noted, plus servicing times, aesthetics and features for the dollar, I chose ALS.


----------



## hydrocarbon

Still a very relevant thread. Given Thierry Stern's recent comments attempting to blame TAG Heuer (of all companies) for their problems, I think it's fair to say that the supposed emperor is starting to feel rather exposed these days.

"Stern was also skeptical with regard to the TAG Heuer Carrera Heuer-02T chronograph tourbillon, priced at $15,950, saying (in the same interview) that the watch is ""nearly a joke to me . . . if they're willing to try to kill the quality of the Swiss product, I think they're on a very good track."

from Hodinkee: Patek's Stern Warns Against Erosion Of Watchmaking Values

Right, it's some trendy company that nobody takes seriously that's eroding Patek's percieved value, not their own ham-fisted designs, quality control problems, and general complacency.


----------



## nilfire77

seanwontreturn said:


> It's a price u have to pay for an indenpendant watch brand like PP/AP/GP. The G&A cost and overhead of the independant is much higher due to the lack of synergy among their counterparts owned by consortium. To put it simple, *at same price point, you expect less quality piece from PP/AP/GP, especially when you look at their entry level offerings, which is where revenue comes from.* This is above all and regardless of difference in distribution strategy.
> 
> Few know how many entry level pateks are being sold every year out of its total volume of some 50k pieces, my guess is 45k pieces are non-complication collections. Some high end Patek timepieces are handmade, but 49k out of 50k are just auto product like Rolex, though not in a same automatism level. *Imagine how many people should it have had to train to "Patek level" and employ for 50k handmade timepieces, just impossible.* *In this way, people getting entry-level pateks are just sponsoring the brand for few hundred high end patek that they can only admire.*
> 
> Indenpendant brand cannot just calm down to do what we think it should do. Richemont can say "ok ALS, revenue i am getting from you is not good this year, will not be either next year and the same the year after, just be there, do your high end work wowing people with the innovation". Patek cannot say the same to itself, it has to buy in the innocence with its low end timepieces that dont procedue quality for its price tag.


This really makes a lot of sense! In a nutshell, to get what you are really paying for in a Patek, you'll need to reach for the sky, think tourbillons and minute repeaters. Sad but true..


----------



## Pisquare

Excellent thread and thanks for reviving. I'm just few years into high end watches and this made for great reading. I spent about a year debating between entry level Calatravas vs Saxonias, but then stretched to a 5146 last month. I'll share a few thoughts which I had in the process. 

-Yes the resale value that matters a lot, especially for newbies like me. It is a lot of hard earned money and unless you've flipped a few times you never know if you'll get lucky if and when your turn comes. Thing is when I was considering ALS my very trusted dealer at one point offered me 38% off on a piece that I didn't really want and it left me wondering what is the true value of this watch? Does the dealer know something that I don't? In that respect PPs near consensus tight discount policy is preferable. I searched for prices in 16 different countries and they hardly vary. Some may call it a monopoly, I call it consistency. 

-It is a very personal choice. When I was choosing between the Saxonia or 5196, I knew at some level that for me both were a compromise. They are both excellent watches but did not sing to me. I was prepared to pay an obnoxious price, to me, for them, to begin with, so I was decided to get a bit more obnoxious within the realm of affordability. A high end watch is an intimate nod to an individual achievement in life, in my opinion and you know, may be it is marketing, but PP has it covered. Over a century. Period. 

-It is a bit like Avis and Hertz. #2 tries harder. Hence, technologically the other brands may be superior. But I have to say, even though it took me a long time to find the PP I liked, I just didn't have the slightest desire to explore AP or VC. Nothing wrong with those watches, they just didn't sing to me. And I really find the chest thumping of AP owners a tad annoying. I'm sure, it's a great watch, but respectfully, no, seriously?

- cannot comment on the service times since I am not there yet but sadly given the way the industry is at the moment I don't think that changes soon. But to expect that just because a PP (or for that matter any watch) costs so much, it shouldn't break down goes against the tenet of mechanical watch making.


----------



## nilfire77

Seems like this topic has been discussed for more than 10 years and from what I've witnessed now, the problem has gotten worse.. Too many watches to produce resulting in subpar quality, not enough watchmakers to carry out servicing, and obviously not enough QC to eyeball flaws and imperfections coming out from the production line..

This PuristS thread was from 2003: Patek Philippe Discussion Forum: I think it is unfair that the high end Pateks have a much better finishing than the

Does Patek give a hoot? I don't think so. Why? Because they are NUMERO UNO! Nuff said..


----------



## Spangles

I get the sense that FPJ and ALS are what PP used to be.


----------



## nilfire77

Spangles said:


> I get the sense that FPJ and ALS are what PP used to be.


A perennial brand name established through an illustrious history cannot be created overnight. That's what PP is banking on.


----------



## probep




----------



## hydrocarbon

nilfire77 said:


> A perennial brand name established through an illustrious history cannot be created overnight. That's what PP is banking on.


Yes, and they're hoping that there's enough new, uneducated money in the market that the decline in standards won't hurt them too much, at least not in the medium term. But sooner or later, even those who only know the name are going to start realizing that they're nothing special any more if things keep going the way they are.

Even in luxury goods (or especially in luxury goods, it could be argued), there has to be substance behind the hype. And you don't have to be a watch nerd to see it. I showed this to a friend who works in visual design, and she laughed out loud when I told her that it's from a watch that has an MSRP of $100K:










Work this sloppy is unacceptable at any price. They won't stay "numero uno" for long with that kind of incompetence.


----------



## Spangles

Looks like they are aiming to stay numero 311


----------



## noobwatchgirl

How do you post a new thread? Truly a noob here.


----------



## Pierre i am

This is why I would go look at FP Journe! One of the true remaining watchmakers who cares more about the craft than the profits.


----------



## AbuKalb93

Pierre i am said:


> This is why I would go look at FP Journe! One of the true remaining watchmakers who cares more about the craft than the profits.


I very much enjoy reading this thread because well...I am quite open with regards to how crappy I think Pateks are. In this age people have access to 175 years worth of information in a split second from just one small device. That said, we are smarter, and for people who are into watches for the watchmaking aspect, we quickly realize Patek is not the way to go.

Now, in terms of QC I must be fair and say every brand has its issues BUT, what is really interesting about FPJ is seeing how much he cares. I have seen on several occasions clients, including myself, who had some faulty concerns with their watches. FPJ doesn't take it lightly and I've seen him fidget away with watches in order to diagnose the problem, one occasion being as far as taking apart a client's tourbillon in one of his boutiques. The man is proud of his work and wants people to enjoy the timepieces.


----------



## Spangles

One thing I really like about FP Journe is that you get the strong sense of how Mr. Journe wants his watches to be worn. You have these watches with the movement itself made from solid 18k rose gold and yet they are completely designed to be everyday watches.


----------



## Pierre i am

Exactly. Don't waste your money on Patek and get FPJ!


----------



## EnderW

Very interesting thread. Thanks for reviving as I haven't seen it (thread being from 2013).

A lot of good points brought up and there are things to agree with on both sides of the argument. 
While I have not purchased any high-end watches yet, I have handled many and am contemplating getting some in the future. My thoughts to add to the thread:

- I can't view high pricing (or over-pricing as some put it) as a negative for a brand. The fact that you can get a better value for the money is true in every segment - that is why luxury is rarely priced around value. If PP can get $25K for a simple 3-hander - why on earth would they no capitalize on that demand. It just makes good business sense

- Being perceived (by many) as #1, does put different pressures on the brand - they have to invest heavily in marketing to maintain the image, they have to inflate prices to maintain perception, and they need to innovate cautiously to avoid any damage to brand or reputation. New comers like ALS, independents like Ferrier, and Journe - are all in a very different position as they have to innovate and push hard to establish a market position and develop the brand.

- Patek can to a degree rest on their laurels - their history has created enormous brand equity and they focus on maintaining it. While many a WIS around here can look at FP Journe and his personal involvement in design and creation of unique watches, or at ALS and their approach to innovation and appreciate it from horological perspective, a huge number of luxury watch buyers are obsessed with brand name\image. Few can rival Patek with that regard. I suspect PP is way more focused on keeping that customer demographic captivated, than impressing WIS demographic.

Ultimately, as has been said - PP can impress greatly in the upper range of their line-up, and their basic offerings are quite pricy (and not necessarily superior) to comparable watches from other brands. BUT.... the PP brand on the dial is sure worth a lot. And to be perfectly honest, pricing aside, their basic models (Calatrava, Nautilus) are among some of the most iconic and well-executed designs ever. That counts for something.


----------



## hydrocarbon

^
But that's the problem; they're too often not well-executed. I get the sense that some don't have much of an eye for detail, and just repeat other opinions they've read about Patek Philippe being the best so that other watch nerds don't think they're weird.

To those who know design, Patek's modern work can seem quite mediocre — and some of their watches include obvious blunders, such as the 5140 dial pictured above. It's reasonable to expect better, especially for the price.


----------



## drhr

EnderW said:


> Very interesting thread. Thanks for reviving as I haven't seen it (thread being from 2013).
> 
> A lot of good points brought up and there are things to agree with on both sides of the argument.
> While I have not purchased any high-end watches yet, I have handled many and am contemplating getting some in the future. My thoughts to add to the thread:
> 
> - I can't view high pricing (or over-pricing as some put it) as a negative for a brand. The fact that you can get a better value for the money is true in every segment - that is why luxury is rarely priced around value. If PP can get $25K for a simple 3-hander - why on earth would they no capitalize on that demand. It just makes good business sense
> 
> - Being perceived (by many) as #1, does put different pressures on the brand - they have to invest heavily in marketing to maintain the image, they have to inflate prices to maintain perception, and they need to innovate cautiously to avoid any damage to brand or reputation. New comers like ALS, independents like Ferrier, and Journe - are all in a very different position as they have to innovate and push hard to establish a market position and develop the brand.
> 
> - Patek can to a degree rest on their laurels - their history has created enormous brand equity and they focus on maintaining it. While many a WIS around here can look at FP Journe and his personal involvement in design and creation of unique watches, or at ALS and their approach to innovation and appreciate it from horological perspective, a huge number of luxury watch buyers are obsessed with brand name\image. Few can rival Patek with that regard. I suspect PP is way more focused on keeping that customer demographic captivated, than impressing WIS demographic.
> 
> Ultimately, as has been said - PP can impress greatly in the upper range of their line-up, and their basic offerings are quite pricy (and not necessarily superior) to comparable watches from other brands. BUT.... the PP brand on the dial is sure worth a lot. And to be perfectly honest, pricing aside, their basic models (Calatrava, Nautilus) are among some of the most iconic and well-executed designs ever. That counts for something.


Spot on sir!!!


----------



## ilitig8

hydrocarbon said:


> ^
> But that's the problem; they're too often not well-executed. I get the sense that some don't have much of an eye for detail, and just repeat other opinions they've read about Patek Philippe being the best so that other watch nerds don't think they're weird.
> 
> To those who know design, Patek's modern work can seem quite mediocre - and some of their watches include obvious blunders, such as the 5140 dial pictured above. It's reasonable to expect better, especially for the price.


I appreciate those who attempt to gauge design in objective terms but I have never found it to be useful.

The 5140 is lauded by many Patek fans and also loathed by many for the 5/27 issue. While I prefer the 3940 I don't see the 5140 as a design fail by a long shot, especially when the entire watch is viewed IN THE STEEL and not blown up internet images, we are talking about a classically sized watch. I see the design choices like I see FPJ hands, not for me but obviously they work for others. I see the newer Datographs as not being as visually stunning as the first ones, many disagree. Some of the FPJ's dials look like a ADD afflicted 2nd grader designed them with some weird watch Identi-Kit. The point being no manufacturer his all the right notes for everyone. Patek seems to keep their faithful happy and they tend to have the most loyal customers in that market.


----------



## arcade16

I had more interest in PP before visiting an AD to try one on. Discovering that they are not 100% handmade took away some of the magic for me. Not to mention the majority of their leather bands have that high gloss / greasy look that really does not appeal to me.


----------



## hydrocarbon

ilitig8 said:


> I appreciate those who attempt to gauge design in objective terms but I have never found it to be useful.
> 
> The 5140 is lauded by many Patek fans and also loathed by many for the 5/27 issue. While I prefer the 3940 I don't see the 5140 as a design fail by a long shot, especially when the entire watch is viewed IN THE STEEL and not blown up internet images, we are talking about a classically sized watch. I see the design choices like I see FPJ hands, not for me but obviously they work for others. I see the newer Datographs as not being as visually stunning as the first ones, many disagree. Some of the FPJ's dials look like a ADD afflicted 2nd grader designed them with some weird watch Identi-Kit. The point being no manufacturer his all the right notes for everyone. Patek seems to keep their faithful happy and they tend to have the most loyal customers in that market.


Though you may not see the utility of applying the well-developed disciplines of design and typography, it's far less subjective than most people realize. The 5140 has serious flaws - I'm not talking about the oddly-squished 5 and 27, unattractive though they are - that are immediately recognizable. It's not a case of subjective design choices, either, because it's obvious that they didn't really make many conscious choices here; they very obviously started with Windows default settings, and completely botched it.

The fundamental issue here is that Patek Philippe, a company owned by what was originally their dial maker, has shown a complete lack of expertise in what ought to be their core strength: dial work. The rank-beginner-level errors evident in the kerning, type distortion and alignment show that they're incompetent, in fact. Even the printing quality is rather poor. Far from keeping the faithful happy, they're getting a lot of justifiable criticism from those who are aware of these easy-to-spot blunders.

It's not good enough to say "it looks fine to me at a distance"; they ought to be setting the standard when it comes to attention to detail. Watches at this price level are in many ways all about how superior attention to detail and craftsmanship are expressed. The complete lack of professionalism in something like the 5140's dial (and the new 5327 is equally unskilled) severely damages their credibility in the craft.

It's clearly a very unskilled attempt to replicate the lovely 3940's expertly hand-lettered dial on the cheap, and it's simply inexcusable.


----------



## GETS

Some of the replies, with their obvious bias and personal agenda, are why I rarely visit forums anymore. I used to enjoy interacting every day with fellow 'enthusiasts' but the constant mealy mouthed 'I have this brand so yours must be c**p' rhetoric just got boring.

Now this nonsense has seeped into the HE forum.


----------



## GETS

Duplicate post.


----------



## Spangles

GETS said:


> Some of the replies, with their obvious bias and personal agenda, are why I rarely visit forums anymore. I used to enjoy interacting every day with fellow 'enthusiasts' but the constant mealy mouthed 'I have this brand so yours must be c**p' rhetoric just got boring.
> 
> Now this nonsense has seeped into the HE forum.


"BIAS", you say? In an internet watch discussion forum? Why my monocle has just popped out!

Reginald, hand me the phone, I shall call the owner of this establishment and give them a piece of my mind!

In other news, it's ok to not be into a given brand or watch. I think when people articulate their preferences and the reasons behind them well, then that's sorta half of what an internet discussion forum is about.

Certainly, PP has gone through a big, big change in the number of watches it makes and that necessitates changes to how it makes watches, some or all, and to customer service as well. It's reasonable to discuss this and it is reasonable for some to prefer companies who do things in the way PP used to do it, or ones like Rolex, who are up-front about their union of mass-production and hand-assembly.

I started this post by teasing you a bit, GETS, but there's no ill intent. If the thread is bothersome, by all means avoid it. Otherwise, please articulate your own take on the changes at PP and your take on the brand currently.


----------



## ilitig8

hydrocarbon said:


> Far from keeping the faithful happy, they're getting a lot of justifiable criticism from those who are aware of these easy-to-spot blunders.


Where? It better be quite a few links otherwise I will not accept it as "a lot".


----------



## Spangles

Well, the watch snob has called PP out for losing its way and the standard of quality it once had, so maybe start the list there.


----------



## Rallyfan13

I can't imagine anyone would mind a quality mechanical but I really do need a rotating bezel, and PP don't offer one. Some of their stuff does look decent but it's got zero utility -- at least for my use patterns. Pass.


----------



## GETS

Spangles said:


> If the thread is bothersome, by all means avoid it. Otherwise, please articulate your own take on the changes at PP and your take on the brand currently.


With respect I'll do neither of the two limited options that you have offered me. I also mean no "ill intent".


----------



## Spangles

Suit yourself!

My monocle is ready!


----------



## Pierre i am

I don't understand the animosity. Your Patek is still a better investment than oil stocks. 

If you truly love the watch you should have a hard skin against people who don't share similar views.

the point of the thread was to talk about how certain aspects of PP has changed and how some other watch makers are on the rise.


----------



## ilitig8

Spangles said:


> Well, the watch snob has called PP out for losing its way and the standard of quality it once had, so maybe start the list there.


Do you consider the Watch Snob the PP faithful? While I haven't read TWS in years "his" stance used to be (prior to mid 2013 I'm guessing) very much on the PP bandwagon, to the point is was silly. like most of "his" other pontifications. BTW I view TWS's opinion right below Archie Luxury.


----------



## Spangles

ilitig8 said:


> Do you consider the Watch Snob the PP faithful? While I haven't read TWS in years "his" stance used to be (prior to mid 2013 I'm guessing) very much on the PP bandwagon, to the point is was silly. like most of "his" other pontifications. BTW I view TWS's opinion right below Archie Luxury.


Heh heh, this thread is really bringing out the hard statements and hairballs!

I'm sure whoever (or group of whoevers) is behind TWS would be every so slightly hurt by your unfavorable comparison to Archie. My heart goes out to Archie, I hope he finds his way. I do think that the folks behind TWS are unquestionably WISes through and through and their take on PP is reflective of some percentage of watch, er, snobs...

However, to your question about the "PP Faithful", I have to ask: Who? The "PP faithful"? Seriously? Are you saying that there are "PP Faithful" is a thing separate from people who like HE watches? I mean, even some hypothetical dimwit who buys a PP because he's been told it's the best is going to start to learn about his watch and appreciate it. You'll need to draw yourself a venn diagram or something, I don't see how having a PP wouldn't turn someone into a WIS over time.

Keep in mind that nobody is saying that PP is bad. Even if some people are grumpy about this thread, I think WISes talking about this sort of thing are really a kind of loyal opposition more than anything. There are many beautiful watches and I'm sure no one would turn down a watch like the gorgeous blue one Mlcor has and posted pictures of a little while back. But, again, there have been changes in the number of watches PP sells and that's completely a valid thing to talk about. Even the PP faithful are talking about it in their chapels.


----------



## hydrocarbon

GETS said:


> Some of the replies, with their obvious bias and personal agenda, are why I rarely visit forums anymore. I used to enjoy interacting every day with fellow 'enthusiasts' but the constant mealy mouthed 'I have this brand so yours must be c**p' rhetoric just got boring.
> 
> Now this nonsense has seeped into the HE forum.


I honestly don't see much unfounded sniping in this thread. It seems to me that the majority of the commentary and critique is meant to be constructive.

It's sure that keeping one's head in the sand won't solve any problems, though, and there have been faults with their recent production that I don't believe would have acceptable in the past, particularly the weak design on certain models. Personally, I believe this is a sign of a very complacent organization - which isn't the same as saying that they produce bad watches.

However, recent statements by Theirry Stern indicate that they're not quite as comfortable as they once were, and it's about time. I can only hope that they'll start to look at their own standards instead of unprofessionally blaming other companies (seriously, _TAG Heuer!?_) for what they perceive as a decline in the prestige of of high-end watchmaking.

By the way, one can be a watch enthusiast without unquestioningly accepting faults.



Spangles said:


> [...]There are many beautiful watches and I'm sure no one would turn down a watch like the gorgeous blue one Mlcor has and posted pictures of a little while back. But, again, there have been changes in the number of watches PP sells and that's completely a valid thing to talk about. Even the PP faithful are talking about it in their chapels.


Indeed, they're certainly not infallible - that's painfully obvious. It does neither the company nor their clients any favours to ignore deficiencies and avoid critique.

Jack Forster has written (at characteristic length) about this phenomenon previously, in fact:

"I'm thinking in particular of a watch I saw within the last six months, at a major industry trade show. [...] At a six-figure price tag, it deserves to be judged very critically -on both technical and aesthetic criteria, it had better measure up.

[...]

Virtually every other consumer product category has a far, far healthier collective critical voice than watch writing -in products ranging from cars, to clothes, to _perfume_. [...] Hand bags are handled with a better critical sensibility than watches, for crying out loud, which is saying something."
​
The article's worth reading in full, especially for anyone who thinks that a "hooray for everything" attitude is healthy for the industry in the long run.


----------



## DanteX

Patek Philippe is resting on their laurels, imo. Still a great brand with amazing watches, though.


----------



## hydrocarbon

ilitig8 said:


> Where? It better be quite a few links otherwise I will not accept it as "a lot".


While I'm not entirely going to do your research for you, here's one to get you started:

http://www.watchprosite.com/?page=wf.forumpost&fi=11&ti=1044878&pi=7494048

To say that reactions are mixed would be putting it mildly. A few quotes from the Patek faithful in that thread. Note that it's not only design professionals that can spot the new dials' deficiencies, either. 
"The new model is too big for the movement."

"I think the font they used in 5140 and 5327 are what results in the cluttery appearance."

"Patek ruined their flawless perpetual after the 3940. So cluttered! So un-Patek... it always left me baffled. The new one is even more cluttered with Breguet numerals... Another 'Modern Patek' strike out. [...] But I believe Patek is undergoing an identity crisis, with only an intellectual hold on its historical DNA--there does not seem to be a soul right now. Sorry!"
​
Plenty more out there if you look, too.


----------



## mlcor

Interesting conversation to be sure. My perspective? I wanted a PP to complete my "trilogy", one each from VC, AP and PP. I'm not into super complicated watches (except to admire the craftsmanship), so the only high end PP that really speaks to me is the 5170 series chronographs, which are far too expensive for me to consider. I know I'm in the minority, but I don't care for the Nautilus or Aquanaut families, never have. So for me, the only choice was a simpler model, and I don't feel the Calatravas are particularly special. I thought I would really like the 5196P, but in the flesh, I wasn't that impressed. The Gondolo, to me, had the right blend of design and quality. But if the 5124G hadn't come out, I might have concluded the trilogy would have remained incomplete.


----------



## Spangles

hydrocarbon said:


> Jack Forster has written (at characteristic length) about this phenomenon previously, in fact:
> "I'm thinking in particular of a watch I saw within the last six months, at a major industry trade show. [...] At a six-figure price tag, it deserves to be judged very critically -on both technical and aesthetic criteria, it had better measure up.
> ​


​
By the way, what do you (and everyone reading this) think is the watch Jack Forster alluded to?


----------



## hydrocarbon

Spangles said:


> [/INDENT]By the way, what do you (and everyone reading this) think is the watch Jack Forster alluded to?


There are so many that could fit these words..._
"Technical questions aside, it's one of the most depressing miscarriages of design I've seen in or out of the watch industry in a long time. The whole sensibility behind it - to the extent that there is one at all - is completely rote and unoriginal; it's a piece of unimaginative, brutalist design that listlessly mines a laundry list of predictable clichés of what constitutes masculinity and aggressivity. It does not appear to have been designed so much as executed (quite possibly at gunpoint) by a group of dispirited hirelings who were ordered to work to a set of criteria and expectations driven not by any real engagement with watchmaking, or design, but by a cynical perspective on what a relatively thoughtless, tasteless, nouveau-riche arriviste would consider cool; it is intended to be bought by the kind of person for whom the first and probably only talking point about the watch would be its cost, and whose engagement with its design would only extend so far as its ability - through sheer gaudy gaucherie - to start a conversation about the affluence of its owner."_​
...that I wouldn't know where to start. 

For all his lamentation about the toothless watch press in that article, JF is still a salesman who rarely writes anything remotely critical, even though he's reviewed some dogs since his articles started appearing on Hodinkee. With his convoluted, rambling sentences and breathless, undiscerning enthusiasm, he sometimes comes across as a wittier and more-literate version of Ariel Adams, I sometimes find.

So it must have been an especially bad watch, though that still doesn't narrow it down much. The quoted description is applicable to pretty much all of Richard Mille's and Hublot's production, just for a start.


----------



## friedricetheman

Patek Philippe was a brand that I have long admired. But I somewhat couldn't pull the trigger on one since once I start to save up enough for one, it was either discontinued or the price have increases exponentially and supply have dried up.

At present, I am in the hunt for a new watch in the $15,000-$25,000 price range and PP yet again appear on my shortlist. But a quick visit to the local PP boutique killed any desire in owning one. They told me that the waiting list for a brand new Aquanaut is long as there are 6-8 people in the queue.

So, now my options only include a PM rolex, or an AP ROO.


----------



## hydrocarbon

^
Although I'm not a fan of ROOs, PM Rolex is great option to have. Aside from that, there are plenty of other appealing watches in the price range.

What about the classic 15202 Royal Oak? It's within budget and I'd say it's preferable to either the Aquanaut or the Nautilus.


----------



## Emospence

hydrocarbon said:


> ^
> Although I'm not a fan of ROOs, PM Rolex is great option to have. Aside from that, there are plenty of other appealing watches in the price range.
> 
> What about the classic 15202 Royal Oak? It's within budget and I'd say it's preferable to either the Aquanaut or the Nautilus.


Vs Nautilus, Arguable.

But vs Aquanaut, I agree!


----------



## Spangles

We'll need to see them on the wrist, but it seems like the new overseas line will compete well vs the aquanaut and nautilus as well.


----------



## friedricetheman

hydrocarbon said:


> ^
> Although I'm not a fan of ROOs, PM Rolex is great option to have. Aside from that, there are plenty of other appealing watches in the price range.
> 
> What about the classic 15202 Royal Oak? It's within budget and I'd say it's preferable to either the Aquanaut or the Nautilus.


I would consider a 15202 but I need a seconds hand on a mechanical.

I would love to own an Aquanaut but the waiting list is way too long for a "poor man's" Patek. I would imagine that these entry level Pateks are more accessible since it's their bread and butter model together with the PP 5116. There shouldn't be any air of exclusivity for these models.

By not making enough to meet demand really turns me off owning a Patek or any Patek in the future. Patek Philippe needs to take a good hard look at their business model if they think buyers would be in shock and awe in the way they artificially restrict their potential best seller.

Most other manufacturers out there would make their entry level model available and more accessible at anytime. The AP15450 and AP15400 are everywhere as it should be.

Patek Philippe is truly an emperor without clothes if they continue along this path.


----------



## shnjb

friedricetheman said:


> I would consider a 15202 but I need a seconds hand on a mechanical.
> 
> I would love to own an Aquanaut but the waiting list is way too long for a "poor man's" Patek. I would imagine that these entry level Pateks are more accessible since it's their bread and butter model together with the PP 5116. There shouldn't be any air of exclusivity for these models.
> 
> By not making enough to meet demand really turns me off owning a Patek or any Patek in the future. Patek Philippe needs to take a good hard look at their business model if they think buyers would be in shock and awe in the way they artificially restrict their potential best seller.
> 
> Most other manufacturers out there would make their entry level model available and more accessible at anytime. The AP15450 and AP15400 are everywhere as it should be.
> 
> Patek Philippe is truly an emperor without clothes if they continue along this path.


Exclusivity comes from restricted supply.
Hermes does this best.
It's obviously worked well for Patek, so I don't think they'll change this anytime soon.
Even as is, they already make something like 10x as many watches every year as Lange does.


----------



## friedricetheman

shnjb said:


> Exclusivity comes from restricted supply.
> Hermes does this best.
> It's obviously worked well for Patek, so I don't think they'll change this anytime soon.
> Even as is, they already make something like 10x as many watches every year as Lange does.


It had worked well for Patek in the past but now cracks are starting to appear. I see a general shift of preference to Audemars Piguet in buying patterns of high end buyers.

It may take AP many years to overtake Patek in terms of sales but I believe they are making progress. More and more mainstream articles are writing about Audemars Piguet in a positive light. More media exposure = more prestige.

If Patek is not careful, they may see a huge portion of their customer base trading in their Calatrava for a Royal Oak.


----------



## shnjb

friedricetheman said:


> It had worked well for Patek in the past but now cracks are starting to appear. I see a general shift of preference to Audemars Piguet in buying patterns of high end buyers.
> 
> It may take AP many years to overtake Patek in terms of sales but I believe they are making progress. More and more mainstream articles are writing about Audemars Piguet in a positive light. More media exposure = more prestige.
> 
> If Patek is not careful, they may see a huge portion of their customer base trading in their Calatrava for a Royal Oak.


AP definitely has a lot of cachet right now, I agree with you there.
But Royal Oak (and offshores) is mostly a sport watch.

I read recently that entry level Pateks still have long waiting lists, so I'm sure Patek is doing okay for now.
They're of course resting on their laurels a bit so that may change over time.


----------



## IWCOwner

friedricetheman said:


> More and more mainstream articles are writing about Audemars Piguet in a positive light. More media exposure = more prestige.
> 
> If Patek is not careful, they may see a huge portion of their customer base trading in their Calatrava for a Royal Oak.


Public info about privately-owned AP are difficult to come by often, but Barron's and WorldTempus had estimated their annual production at ~ 30k+ watches about 4 years ago. Additionally Barron's estimated that about 70% of their annual revenues came from the Royal Oak line (assume this includes Offshore). Let's say conservatively that's at least 15k Royal Oaks each year. The market has been flooded with Royal Oaks of every stripe. Is over-saturation good for prestige? Maybe. Is over-saturation good for value retention? Probably not. They are outstanding watches and they are relatively easy to find so it would not be a surprise to trade in your name-the-brand-whatever for any of the RO/ROO's. (And yes Calatravas are fairly over-saturated too.). My guess is in the long-term it is not a good play for a market that is dominated by the top concern of every serious collector: true rarity. But for all the regular watch blokes, it may not matter.


----------



## dimman

arcade16 said:


> I had more interest in PP before visiting an AD to try one on. Discovering that *they are not 100% handmade* took away some of the magic for me. Not to mention the majority of their leather bands have that high gloss / greasy look that really does not appeal to me.


It's quite apparent in their videos how totally not handmade they are. Multi-stage forging, then CNC finished machine cases. Manual polished though. But except where it's diamond cut. A video about their 'manual' movement finishing seems to stretch the meaning of the word to: the operator _ manually _ pressed the button to activate the CNC Côtes de Genève striping machine.

And for the price, maybe they could put some stop seconds devices in their movements...

(...still want one, though. Cloisonné world timer.)


----------



## tigerpac

Well if you want to get away from CNC machines you'll have to call Roger Smith and put down a deposit on a 200 or so K watch and wait a couple of years to get it!



Dimman said:


> It's quite apparent in their videos how totally not handmade they are. Multi-stage forging, then CNC finished machine cases. Manual polished though. But except where it's diamond cut. A video about their 'manual' movement finishing seems to stretch the meaning of the word to: the operator _ manually _ pressed the button to activate the CNC Côtes de Genève striping machine.
> 
> And for the price, maybe they could put some stop seconds devices in their movements...
> 
> (...still want one, though. Cloisonné world timer.)


----------



## Spangles

tigerpac said:


> Well if you want to get away from CNC machines you'll have to call Roger Smith and put down a deposit on a 200 or so K watch and wait a couple of years to get it!


And even RWSmith uses CNC machines on the case to make sure he gets a seal with the crystal for a 5atm WR. His youtube videos are really great, for anyone who hasn't checked them out.

...that's not to knock RWS or to imply his work is anything like a 50,000 watch a year operation!

I would love if anyone has insight into what the difference is in manufacturing between PP of a decade ago prior to greatly increasing the number of watches they make and now. Or, the difference between PP of today and ALS or FPJ. Besides QC and service, of course.


----------



## KtWUS

^+1. Always keen to hear about manufacturing insights


----------



## dimman

Check out their YouTube channel.






This 'manual' decoration video is annoying as it is about 2 and a half minutes long but you don't see any handwork until almost 2 minutes in (I don't count the brush). Outside bevel is automatically machined, stripes are CNC'd.

This isn't to say it's bad by any means, but it is hardly manual. Title it 'Fine' or 'Precision', but not 'Manual'.

There is a lot of handwork with the hinged dust cover, but the case itself is forged/CNC'd. And the hand polishing isn't unique to the industry.

Are they losing their lead because of this? Who can say?


----------



## KtWUS

That looks a lot less manual than:


----------



## Pierre i am

Highly recommend watching the 30 minute FP journe documentary on YouTube. It really shows you how much of the watch is completely made in house. Plus they only do about 800-900 watches a year which is nuts.


----------



## dimman

KtWUS said:


> That looks a lot less manual than:


It's going to depend on the movement/model too.

The handwork on the Breguet is an open-work/skeletonized movement. Patek will be the same. If we had a video of Breguet working on a more 'entry-level' movement it would be a better comparison. Something like their more industrial movement that was originally a Longines L990.

Check out Jochen Benzinger videos if you are interested in skeletonized and engine-turned movements and the work involved. Crazy. His work gives me the movement 'chubby' that Tony mentioned earlier.


----------



## srminimo

shnjb said:


> Interesting points.
> 
> I have a 324 caliber watch and I agree with you that it is a bit underwhelming.
> That big ugly rotor with little decoration does not compare to rotors on much less expensive watches from other high end brands.
> 
> I guess patek has essentially become the Rolex of high end brands.


Except that Rolex are still "reasonably" priced, their movements are basically bomb proof and, even though they are even more rigorous in terms of resisting change to models or adding complications complications, they still manage to improve upon their movements, materials and cases continually.


----------



## watch.the.gram

I'm not sure I would agree that Rolex is "reasonably" priced; there have been lots of studies of how much their prices have outpaced inflation, etc. I certainly believe that anyone buying one is certainly paying a premium for The Crown. 

As for the original theme of this thread, I certainly agree that Patek's in danger of losing some of its magic. As someone who is looking at making their first high-end purchase, I've put Patek at the bottom of the "big three" (and it's even still at the bottom of the "big five" if you add ALS and Breguet). Of course, all of this is highly personal.


----------



## AFinchMustang

I am by no means an expert with high-end watches and just purchased my first Patek. At the end of the day, Patek's finishing is still near the top of the heap for high-end brands. I think their QC is probably about the same as in the past, but the internet just allows more of the problems to surface to public eyes. The only real issue in my mind is their customer service as of late. It seems to me they don't have enough employees/watchmakers to handle the amount of watches they have in the wild now.


----------



## mlcor

AFinchMustang said:


> I am by no means an expert with high-end watches and just purchased my first Patek. At the end of the day, Patek's finishing is still near the top of the heap for high-end brands. I think their QC is probably about the same as in the past, but the internet just allows more of the problems to surface to public eyes. The only real issue in my mind is their customer service as of late. It seems to me they don't have enough employees/watchmakers to handle the amount of watches they have in the wild now.


The shortage is endemic, not limited to Patek--just look at the lengthy wait times to get a watch back from most of the big brands if it's anything more than a simple warranty issue or cleaning.

Oh, and welcome, watch.the.gram.


----------



## AFinchMustang

mlcor said:


> The shortage is endemic, not limited to Patek--just look at the lengthy wait times to get a watch back from most of the big brands if it's anything more than a simple warranty issue or cleaning.
> 
> Oh, and welcome, watch.the.gram.


Good point. I do think this is something that Patek is lagging behind the most in though. From what I've seen, Pateks are now ranging from 6-12 months (even for 314/324), whereas the industry as a whole at the high end tends more towards 3-6 months for non-grand complication movements. Again, not an expert in this range though; just my observation


----------



## tigerpac

^Yes that's the general consensus that I've been hearing over and over again in watch circles. Patek is supposed to be investing more heavily in service now to rectify this... hopefully it works out.


----------

