ripwatch
865
What a wonderful conversation starter!!
Thanks for a terrific post! I think you've touched on several very important issues, at least "important" in the context of fine watches. One is the definition of entry level, and the other is the whole issue of what we would like to see companies do versus what it is more likely that they will do or perhaps even can do. In the end, you and I come out in somewhat different places, I think, although my heart certainly lies in roughly the same place yours does.
Before I go any further, please understand that all of what follows is IMO, not "fact"--I just don't want to keep typing "IMO" all the time.
To me, "entry level" is relatively simple to define, if we stick to denotation rather than connotation. Entry level, for any given brand, denotes simply the least expensive product they make. For a very high-end brand, "entry level" is very expensive indeed. To your example, yes indeed, the Simplicity is the "entry level" Dufour, just as a $150K Ferrari (whatever it is) is the "entry level" Ferrari, or the $10K Wilson Audio Watt is Wilson's entry level speaker. By this definition, certainly it is possible for an entry level PP, let's say, to be maybe five times more expensive than the most expensive Seiko you can buy. And there is no reason to think that any of these products, "entry level" though they be, are anything other than superb.
Once we bring connotation into the picture, though, the issue is much more complex, because "entry level" often connotes shoddy or cheaply made. If one thinks in those terms, then calling the Dufour Simplicity "entry level" is a gross insult to the product, because it clearly is not shoddy by anyone's definition. So we must be careful when using the term "entry level", that the person we are talking to realizes which sense we are using it in, denotation or connotation.
So, when I call a PP 5026 Calatrava an "entry level" PP, all I mean is that it is one of the least expensive PPs made.
Which brings me to the next level: what kind of quality should I expect from that product, and what level of quality can I expect from it? Very different questions, those. What I personally think that I should be able to expect for my $10K, which to me is a very large sum, is the same thing you seek, based on your post: an absolutely superb product, finished to the finest standards in the watch industry. But what I am coming to believe that I can expect is not quite that high, sadly. I suspect that PP operates under the same kinds of constraints that almost any other company operates under: there is tremendous pressure to cut corners on their less expensive products because the profits on them are nowhere near as high as on the more expensive products.
I think this is true in many many cases across many companies. Entry level Mercedes come standard with relatively cheap-looking cloth seats, not the fine leather that comes on the S-Class. Entry-level PPs, at least the movement John reviewed, come with cost cutting levels of finish on the underside of the plates. Entry-level Toyota Corollas, as opposed to loaded Camrys, come with less-powerful engines and fewer amenities. I wish it were otherwise, but I suspect that to seek that is to be like Diogenes, wandering around in his barrel seeking an honest man...it's going to be a long, lonely search.
So...I sympathize completely with your sense that it is somehow fundamentally wrong for PP to sell compromised products, made with corner-cutting. I'm not happy about it at all, especially for $10K, which to me is a huge amount to spend for a simple hours and minutes watch. But given that the company as far as I know sells every single one of the Calatravas they make, at their present finish level, I don't expect anything different, much as that disappoints me--from their perspective, the market is clearly quite happy with their offerings. And every single one of the watches they sell still manages to qualify for the Geneva Seal, so there must be something pretty darn good about them.
-Rip