Vacheron Constantin

anon438
429

• Show profile
• Show other posts

Next the fact check - final

Since (in my opinion) it's obvious you are comparing different complexity movements, with different functions and different architecture and detail concepts and even with different targeted customer groups and probably, due to design language (sporty/classic), intended different use cases, I would like to go further with remind you where the products came from.

Please have a look at this interview on youtube, Stephen Forsey stating they start with the GF Sonnerie design on a blank sheet of paper and with an own set of target specifications.
Don't you think he would honestly mention a collaboration – or did he sign a secrecy agreement, not to talk about collaborations?

Vacheron Constantin itself has a vast history and therefore a vast source of inspiration for this time indication complications. This is mentioned on their homepage as well it was displayed in former exhibitions.

Furthermore we have seen VC introducing a product portfolio enhancement of seven at the SIHH 2017:
Les Cabinotiers Celestia Astronomical Grand Complication 3600
Caliber 3600
Les Cabinotiers Symphonia Grande Sonnerie 1860
Caliber 1860
Métiers d'Art Copernicus Celestial Spheres 2460 RT (with three significant variants)
Caliber 2460 RT
Patrimony Moon Phase and Retrograde Date
Caliber 2460 R31L
Patrimony Patrimony Perpetual Calendar
Caliber 1120 QP
Traditionnelle Chronograph Perpetual Calendar
Caliber 1142 QP
Traditionnelle Minute Repeater Tourbillon
Caliber 2755 TMR

This product portfolio enhancement is a result of highly intensive development activities, and I wouldn't question if they sourced certain engineering capacities with other specialists engineering companies. This is state of the art execution of the development process, nothing new by the way in haute horlogerie (e.g. remember Cottiers beneficial work).

We heard VC and GF work together until ~2012 and then V&C proceed, I guess, with series development of the 1860 movement. I would question the word 'cooperation' in this circumstances, because I think a cooperation is a partnership between equal stake holders with a benefiting result for both. But in this collaboration (or cooperation) who has defined the development targets, the characteristic's of the design tasks for the 1860, and who pay for the development hours – don't you think it was VC?

So in the end you comparing the product of a long established horological power house (~400 employees) with a product of an relatively new highly specialist horological niche producer (~120 employees).