I would be interested to hear from more experience collectors to learn how the experience today has changed from the 1960s pre-quartz crisis and the 1990s dawn of this era.
I dislike long wait times and I dislike watches that come back from service with new or unfixed issues. Blaming the client for issues is a wash, as it would be human nature for clients to withhold important information when turning in damaged watches for repair. I only get turned off from the brand completely when these issues are coupled with high servicing costs.
When I visited another Glashutte watchmaker in 2010, one of the tour guides dropped the nugget that the watchmakers in the town of Glashutte earned a fraction of the average salary of a watchmaker in Geneva. I believe it was 1/4, but it's been a long time. The scarcity of watchmakers is a problem, but the wages are not astronomical.
When it comes to pricing the service of a luxury watch, a brand like Lange must be allocating a significant amount of the overhead (boutiques, marketing) to the cost.
My impression is that prestige brands like Lange charge prices that go above and beyond allocating overhead across a limited production volume, as the client is not going to balk at a high price.
If Lange can't provide a level of service and client care that matches the prestige price of the service, they are ripping off the client.
Most collectors rely on word-of-mouth and their own experiences to know whether a brand is good or bad with servicing. There is no Consumer Reports for luxury watch brands. The performance of the aftersales department has to be extremely poor before the greater market is going to clue in, as a successful service outcome produces silence. Even with this video, are we confident that the servicing department at Lange is significantly worse compared to Patek/AP/Vacheron?