Independents

tony p
567

• Show profile
• Show other posts

I support the idea of a registry,

as long as we understand that it must necessarily be an incomplete one.

I think it unlikely that Kari himself would be in a position to share the information, as legally he would be obliged to directly seek the written consent of every client before doing so. Indeed, the task would be much more fraught for him than for you, Gary, who can simply appeal to Observatoire owners directly via this type of forum.

As an owner myself, I don't recall subscribing to this series on the basis that my watch would be number X of a limited edition of Y, where Y was a fixed number. Frankly, I'd rather own one of these "less than fifty" watches than number 1326 of an LE of precisely 1788, commemorating the number of degrees of freedom on the silicone printer they're using to manufacture its baseplate down at CERN.

In fact, ensuring such information remains incomplete adds a certain unique romance to the Observatoire series. One day, many years from now, perhaps doctoral theses will be compiled on this very subject. Numbers will be ascribed to each known piece, like the Koechel numbers on Mozart's compositions; perhaps some of the most outstanding pieces will be given names, like those bestowed on great Stradivari violins and celli. (I can imagine it now...the "Putin" Kari...etc etc) Stories will be told, like the time an eccentric Chinese trillionaire amassed some 75% of all known Observatoires for his private museum at astronomical expense, only to see the entire set swiped by a master cat-burglar from one of the moons of Neptune. Then, one day, a "new" Observatoire will be discovered by a Voutilainen scholar in the attic of a deceased wind-turbine heiress's Lagos apartment...only to have its authenticity subsequently impugned by the results of brand-DNA testing...

PM on its way.

Cheers
Tony P