victor marks
- 34 comments
- 3 likes given
- 3 likes received
Bio not provided
I have Pebble, MetaWatch, Nike Fuelband, and Fitbit. I've owned Jawbone UP and Fitbit Ultra in the past.
I also worked on Renew SleepClock (which uses radar to detect sleep cycle rather than something you have to wear like UP.)
The main thing to remember with any of these Quantified Self devices is where your data goes and how useful it is to you.
That is, if you use Fitbit, your data is in Fitbit and maybe Loseit.com. If your data is in Runkeeper, that's it. Similarly for Basis or UP. The most meaningful use of data is when it can be correlated with other data. If your food data that's automatically scanning barcodes is in Loseit, your weight info is in withings and runkeeper, your activity is in Nike or fitbit, then it's hard to really get a sense of what you're actually accomplishing or monitoring.
Note: Renew, the one I worked on, allows you to export to Runkeeper and CSV files readable by Excel and google docs. The point being, we have all these great devices, but your data has to be yours, not trapped in a silo, and especially not trapped in silos that don't talk to each other.
Where's the rotor? How does this differ technically from the 2842 used in the 1990s-present Swatch automatics?
The car comparison is worth looking at.
Maserati uses Ferrari engines.
The MINI started its rebirth in the early 2000s using Chrysler engines rather than BMW (family) ones.
The legendary DeLorean used a Peugeot-Renault-Volvo joint concern motor.
Lotus cars ship in America with Toyota motors installed.
Ariel Atom ships in its original form with a Honda motor installed.
This sort of companies-buying-motors-from-competitor marques is pretty analogous to the ETA situation. But there are other variations on this theme:
Tesla shipped initially using their own motor, but the body and suspension of Lotus.
Chevrolet Cavalier was sold and branded as Toyota Cavalier for the Japanese market.
And there was the NUMMI, which produced the same car labeled as both a Toyota and Geo (first) and Chevrolet (later, when the Geo brand was eliminated.) Pontiac Vibe = Toyota Matrix. Geo Prizm = Toyota Corolla.
Porsche produced the Boxster both in Germany and outsourced to a non-Porsche-owned factory in Uusikaupunki, Finland (Valmet) - Is a Porsche made outside of Zuffenhausen really a Porsche? Yes, but somehow one contracted out feels similar to watch houses contracting out to buy ebauches.
Toyota and Subaru currently have this relationship. When you buy a Toyota GT86, you're getting the Subaru flat 4 boxer engine.
Conclusion: Car companies will sometimes source powertrains from their erst-while competitors just as Swiss Made watch houses will source ebauches from ETA, or perhaps Sellita when SWATCH group decide to cease all external movement sales.
It's not just ETA. JLC has sold movements to other brands for ages.
What I wonder is, does the impending restrictions on ETA movements lend itself to an opening in the market? Should a manufacture exist solely to produce ebauches and sell them to those who currently rely on ETA-Valjoux? Produce a clone or new design that happens to maintain the ligne, dial feet locations, stem height and canon pinion diameters, and you'd have drop in replacements. I think Hublot has already done this as an in-house for their chronograph, but no provider that I know of exists solely to produce replacement ebauches other than Sellita.
I was surprised by the DateJust II recommendation - it's too large and the proportions look wrong, especially when compared with the classic DateJust.
There's nothing wrong with the original DateJust size. If you want the bigger watch, Submariner, Milgauss GV or Explorer II with the large orange GMT hand are all better choices.
This and it's grandfather, the 6541 Milgauss, are among my favorites.
@geoffbot I hope you enjoy your new watch.
Manufacturing costs are not increasing, or not increasing dramatically. The BRAND that I had in mind when I wrote my comment has increased prices by 2000 USD since I began watching a specific timepiece at the local AD counter. It debuted at 6250 USD and is now at 8200 USD. For exactly the same watch that has been sitting below the glass counter.
Costs increase for a few reasons:
1) company needs increased margins to please shareholders/fill owners pockets/fund future development/marketing needs
2) company needs to increase costs to cover increasing replacement costs - this is why gasoline/petrol prices go up. The replacement cost for materials/labor is higher than the cost of what it was to produce the unit on sale today.
3) company raises prices to create a worth that isn't present or wasn't present in their initial go-to-market strategy.
I'll elaborate a little on (3). A 1950 Bulova Director (10K case, 15 jewel swiss manual wind) cost $33.75 when new. Adjusting for inflation, that's 288.27 USD in 2011 money. A watch that cost $950 in 1980 should cost $2,795.16 today. Instead, the price for that model's replacement costs $7,500.
A common practice in non-watch industries is to price goods at a price 80% of the target consumers can bear. This strikes a balance between selling enough and leaving some demand that people can strive for. In luxury goods I can see charging a higher price and setting that ratio so that less of the potential consumers are able to afford the product.
The problem is two-fold. 1) It's really disheartening to see a product that was within budget and reach get re-priced out of reach. Instead of making the consumer aspire to ownership, it makes the consumer turn away. 2) Especially when there's no apparent justification, such as the replacement cost mentioned above.
It's possible to say, "sure, you're just not their target customer." And I could live with that, although I would suggest that they're shrinking their market drastically.
Another user pointed out that buying used was a good solution. And it is, but it does nothing for the manufacturer who has essentially lost a sale. You could argue that they never would have made that sale anyway, but I think they would have had they not raised prices each year, widening the disparity between used and new. You can also say that they'll get service fees. Even if there's huge margin in service, it's not as high a profit as they make on the initial purchase.
Another interesting part of the "luxury AD experience" is the experience of going to the counter and being told "you should really buy now, BRANDNAME is raising the prices in the near future and we'll have to charge you $1000 more next month."
Contrary to pressuring ADs to not discount, they're pressuring dealers to raise prices so that even fewer in the market can consider their products an option.
I understand that ADs are at the mercy of their contracts with the brands, but the brands should understand that having their representatives have to say this doesn't make them look good. It makes them look like they view sales as an unwanted unnecessary evil they have to engage in.
That experience doesn't increase desirability of their products, it's off-putting. It increases pricing, but not necessarily the value.
If manufacturers don't like customers, and they don't like service, and they regularly anger consumers by changing parts at service that consumers prefer to have been left well enough alone, it's a wonder they're in business at all.
What's so amazing about the Worldtimer is that all of the functions can be operated by the crown. There aren't any pushers or bezels to twist, and no secondary crowns to turn parts of the face. It's really quite an achievement. The incredible thing about this opportunity is that it's a dream come true for so many of us timepiece fans.
The very idea that a person would be sent to Switzerland, work alongside craftsman, getting their assistance and assembling a watch would be enough for many of us. The idea that you get to keep the watch is almost an unexpected bonus. See, it depends where you place the value - on the education or on owning the timepiece.
@MORGENWERK @nateb123 can you tell more information about the source of the movement? About product support and servicing? I'd like to be sure that any watch I own can be supported or serviced for years to come.
@nateb123 What a great reply. What product categories do you normally produce products for? What do you think the FOB cost for a movement like this is, as opposed to the msrp they're asking?
@nateb123 The band detail between the lugs isn't great, but the dials and hands aren't bad at all. They're certainly not the retro or minimalist style I usually look for, but the M2 dial is just about my speed. If the band antennae detail gets better since these are pre-production, I'd be even happier.
Where is the contact information for Morgenwerk? If I wanted to buy, how would I go about this?
A product like this is really about a few things: preservation of a company's history, honor and respect for great craftsmanship, and the thing which attracts us to mechanical watch-works in the first place - the ingenuity that goes into making an intricate piece of machinery accomplish a task beautifully. It's in line with the same reason watchmakers used to make automatons.
Preservation of company history is so important. Even in a short period like 4 decades so much information can be lost, especially as a company changes owners (not talking about G-P here) - whole company archives can just vanish if great care isn't taken to preserve records, documentation and past products.
Congratulations!
Classic watches like this are beautiful.
I'm waiting for the politician that wears a Nike+ type device (bracelet, etc.) and talks about personal fitness. Hey, it could happen.
The Nixon isn't a bad choice.
I think one of the hallmarks of Harry Winston timepieces is that each one is unique, has luxury finishes, and a different designer each time. If I were the owner of the brand, I would capitalize on pushing the names of the designers to the front. A brand like Bell&Ross (commented on this yesterday) exists to make vintage inspired, aviation inspired watches. Winston exists to make unique timepieces with the best materials and tasteful design, changing designs and complications frequently. They should spend their efforts talking about finishes, materials, complications, and designers.
The most important thing for any business is to know why they exist, and from that everything they make becomes obvious. If they exist to make vintage aircraft instrument inspired timepieces from high quality parts, this watch makes sense - but it makes ones like BR01-92 Airborne 415 "Skull & Crossbones" not make sense. It looks as if the playful skull and crossbones have fallen out of the lineup, so the marine, instrument and vintage lines make coherent sense. If they try and do more playful ones, I'll have a harder time taking them seriously.
@PhilMaurer I've bought individual parts and done my own assembly, and I've also bought directly from yobokies, a seiko parts provider and modder.
Thank you all for reading. I'm enjoying the watch immensely. I appreciate Ariel's editor's notes: This is the first exhibition backed watch I've had for longer than a few minutes at the AD's counter so noise is something I should probably have found some other watches to hear and measure decibels for comparison.
The quick releases on the strap are new to me. Perhaps if a manual had been included this feature would have been documented. I do have a spring bar tool but it will be nice to not have to use it.