Patek Philippe

Is every Patek released for only a certain number of years before it is discontinued ?
Is there a regular Patek that exist since it was introduced and always in production as long as there is a demand ?

Suppose every Patek is only released for a couple of years and then discontinued, then isn't every Patek considered a limited edition ?
Reading the many post that are recently written and commented on, (Eg, how many 2499 in series 1, 2... ,  the soon discontinuation of 5960, 5270 etc, the limited edition of 5270G etc.), the above questions sort of dawn on me.

Of course, some are mentioned to be limited to XXX pieces. (Eg, the 300 pieces of 5550P, the 100 pieces of 5396G LE) 
Those are legitimately LEs.

But what are those that are not mentioned to be in LE ?
What are your thoughts ?

No message body

if there is a defined amount of watches from the beginning. Even when some brands increase it afterwards, but that is another story ;-)

Oliver

... about the 5270G i cannot believe that what was mentioned here about the new dial will be a limited edition. For the simple reason that Patek never makes limited editions except for commemorations of an AD, or for some anniversary.

As an attorney who represents many reputable and well-known clients in the art world, I must tell you that at least in the United States the term "limited edition" is essentially meaningless.  I had the unfortunate experience of representing an art collector who purchased many expensive works of a famous artist, who denominated these works as "limited editions".  The artist later decided, however, to make additional prints of these so-called "limited editions", infuriating my client, who had paid a premium for what he believed would be works limited in number.  A federal court ruled against my client, holding that a "limited edition" simply means an edition of works limited at the point in time in which they were created; in theory, one could produce a second limited edition of the same work the very next day.

Je pense que c'est la meme histoire, malheureusement, cher confrere (?).

Limited editions, however they usually won't disclose how many

....... in my own interpretation, limited edition suppose to mean a small amount in a short time.

because the label "Limited Edition" is gradually losing its meaning. Not like it had a great deal of meaning to begin with.

Through the responses, the LE tag is open to perceptions and interpretation. And watch collectors inevitably gets attracted to watches that come as "Limited edition" don't we ? Since companies make watches that are limited edition and then impose a premium on these watches. I think ethically, it should not produce more copies of it. If they do, it's like a company dividing amongst itself, overriding their previous decisions to make a piece exclusive.

Thus the emphasis is more on what follows after a "discontinuation".
It's brought up that companies are not legally bounded by anything that prohibits them from producing watches they previously called limited edition.
I do notice this with Swatch, having paid attention to these plastic pieces in the past. Their model "Jellyfish" saw a few series.

Is discontinuation PERMANENT for pieces like Ref 2499 Series, 5055, 5054 and the soon to be discontinued watches like 5960 etc ?, just to name a few.
I hope so for Patek.

For myself, I would not be happy to see new release of discontinued watches. At least not with exactly the same features because it reeks fickle-mindedness on the company's part. Not to mention that it also causes confusion.

Casio did that with their calculator watch CA-53W and CA-53 which has its roots in CA-50. (These watches are now common.)
If they had not done so, technically the CA-50 (1984) would have been a very collectible vintage digital. The re-releases ruined it. It is not wrong, just distasteful.
Apologies for lack of a better example to express my thoughts but I think the Casio example sufficiently illustrates; albeit being a company that produces mass market timepieces.








How many of us here can say that we can always be emotionally detached from this phase "Limited Edition" that comes with a watch ? That for a release of a watch reference, we do not place a greater value at versions labelled "Limited Edition" and the regular versions? The recent MB&F LM2 is a relevant example. The platinum and the WG versions. It is a mixed feeling that I grapple with. Is the blue dial platinum more appealing than the other 2 versions because of how it looks or because it is more exclusive (limited to 18 pieces) ? Sometimes it's hard to tell. Even if they are equally appealing, a "break-tie" factor may many a times be how exclusive the version is. Yet, whether we like it, one cost a premium over the other, and to some, the rational mind finds it hard to make sense whether it's worth paying the premium.  (especially when you like both equally well and it's just the LE issue)  
  Regards.

 

would be the only way to ensure that what is denominated a "limited edition" is indeed limited to the numbers made at the time of production.  In the case of sculpture, for example, destruction of the casts used to make bronzes achieves this goal.  The only time I have seen this similarly done at Patek was when it created the "Pagoda" (ref. 5500) in 1997 to commemorate the opening of the Manufacture in Geneva.  Patek represented that it destroyed all of the tools and dies used in the manufacturing process, so presumably no more can ever be made.  Of course, I assume Patek still has the means to recreate the same tools and dies, but I find it hard to believe it would do so given the lengths to which it has already gone in making certain representations to the world as to this particular reference.

to PP) so limited edition.