Comments:
I propose that to settle the controversy about Laurent Ferrier's characterization of movements as being in-house, we go straight to the source
I'm sure LF knows that the WIS audience for haute horlogerie timepieces is a very demanding, high-maintenance, ruthlessly perfectionist crowd. The targeted buyers of their products are not superficial collectors who are looking for various dial and bezel combinations or Rolex Submariners. There is no point in creating what is arguably one of the finest automatic movements in the world unless you are going after buyers who purchase an LF watch specifically for that reason.
And so now there is a movement in the new minute repeater which appears to be the work of Barsini and Navas. Given the history of collaboration between LF and Barsini and Navas, I dont see that as an in validation of their in-house claim, if Barsini and Navas are executing a design on behalf of LF.
It appears, however, that a very similar movement has appeared in a Girard-Perregaux 1966 repeater. Given the audience that LF caters to, I can't imagine that this is something nefarious that they hoped would escape notice. My guess is that there is an explanation or rationale, but no platform for articulating that explanation. After all, when introducing the Minute Repeater, it's not as if they could have included a paragraph in the press release that said "now some of you might notice that this movement is similar to the one recently used by GP. Here is an explanation for that..."
I suspect if asked about this specifically, we will get the response that they have prepared for this. If they don't bother to explain and just hope nobody will notice or care, that would be a big mistake. But I think there is an explanation.
Would anyone who has previous corresponded with LF volunteer to solicit LF's thoughts on this matter on behalf of the WIS community?
Enrico Barbasini đ
To what extent do we, watch enthusiasts, collectors, etc, accept outsourcing of design,parts, if not of the whole movement?
There is nothing wrong when it is clearly reported in capital letters, but what does in-house stand for?
I recently discovered that LF is an assembler; i've always seen some nice calibers, with great finishing, no real innovations, but liked them all, until i discovered the truth.
We buy what we like, but the microrotor movement by LF has apparently nothing more than those ones by Roger Dubuis or Chopard LUC, in terms of quality.
This new, in-house (?) minute repeater is likely a movement already used by L. Vuitton, with some differencies in base plates and bridges, made by Navas & Barbasini aka LFDT.
I've read of collectors who don't care much about it, because they like their LF watches and the quality isn't affected by a third part manufacturer; sometimes is better to get outsourced parts and have it finished at the top level, but IMHO any external supply should be openly declared.
I don't like misty behaviour, especially when a manufacturer (of anything) is not completely honest to his customers.
In digital era there is no chance to hide anything
"until I discovered the truth"
I don't think LF actually ever hid the facts. LF is a lot more than an assembler.
Of course one can choose one's own definition of in-house and where to play on the spectrum of value. In the end, it's your money and choice to consider the intrinsic value involved.
If one pays a designer to follow a brief or vision and create IP for me, is that in-house or outsourced?
Is it ok if one sells rights to it to another party to help fund one's own business?
Do they have to do every process in manufacture including commodity parts of the value chain that make no sense for a small business to own the capital equipment for?
Rolex go as far as to have their own foundry, but do they own the mines the metals come out of?
Honestly, in the grand world of smoke and mirrors of the *massively* overpriced opaque Swiss watch industry we live with in 2018 I think LF are doing a good job within the constraints they have.
Velociphile
Of course one can choose one's own definition of in-house and where to play on the spectrum of value. In the end, it's your money and choice to consider the intrinsic value involved.
If one pays a designer to follow a brief or vision and create IP for me, is that in-house or outsourced?
Is it ok if one sells rights to it to another party to help fund one's own business?
Do they have to do every process in manufacture including commodity parts of the value chain that make no sense for a small business to own the capital equipment for?
Rolex go as far as to have their own foundry, but do they own the mines the metals come out of?
Honestly, in the grand world of smoke and mirrors of the *massively* overpriced opaque Swiss watch industry we live with in 2018 I think LF are doing a good job within the constraints they have.
Velociphile
I like LF watches
But if i had the money, i would never buy any of them.
For me, being independent is much more.
Unfortunately, he's not the only one, there's also another famous watchmaker who's turbo cage comes from ...outside.
Journe embodies the achetype of independent watchmaker, he should be taken as THE stantard!
+1
We have indeed seen true horological innovation from FPJ and Iâve heard other AHCI members grudgingly acknowledge that. As much as LFs watches are nicely finished and well designed, I personally would not see them as adding much in terms of horological innovation. To each his own, of course. At least for me, I will be holding back on any LF purchase to focus on other independents.
To be fair, Velociphile
It was a few months back that you were ready to believe FPJ used ETA movements (or had movements based on ETA), when even a cursory glance at FPJ's movements would completely disprove that. It seemed a little weird that you even were willing to entertain such a preposterous and easily disproven idea. Of course, I'm sure you are a busy person, etc. But, why not take a look at Journe's watches a little more?
I guess I'm asking, with respect, what's your deal with FPJ, so I can understand better your take on the brand. Thanks and appreciations for your time.
I guess I'm asking, with respect, what's your deal with FPJ, so I can understand better your take on the brand. Thanks and appreciations for your time.
ETA has always been known as an excellent gold movement supplier đđđđđđ [nt]
No message body
Perhaps I didnât make myself clear
I never said Journe used ETA movements. That would be idiotic to suggest. Not quite sure of your reason for that obfuscation.
But Re FPJ - The question unanswered remains. Did Journe especially in their early days, use some base components from out of house specifically for example the going train.
Is LF a fully integrated manufacturer? Well, weâve been told all along what they do.
Velociphile
Thanks for clarifying
It did seem odd! Truly!
Please let us know if you discover something about early FPJ (or are you talking about Mr. Journe's work prior to "FPJ" the company existing?).
I doubt finding the use of a standardized size gear or whatever will be a smoking gun, but everything furthers, as they say.
Please let us know if you discover something about early FPJ (or are you talking about Mr. Journe's work prior to "FPJ" the company existing?).
I doubt finding the use of a standardized size gear or whatever will be a smoking gun, but everything furthers, as they say.
The early Resonance models used Peseaux 7001 gear trains but
Is this really important considering the singularity of this piece?
Not necessarily, but the question would be what was said of it at the time......
I can't remember back that far,
probably "in house"
probably "in house"
The same movement has been used in at least four other watches
Girard Perreguax, Louis Vuitton, Ralph Lauren and Speake-Marin. Personally, I would be upset if I spent US$345k on a watch with the same movement as two fashion brands. Nevermind whether the movement is âin houseâ - that just doesnât seem right to me. At that price, I would expect serious innovation - or at least I would at least expect the brand to acknowledge the provenance of the movement clearly on their website/press release. But I understand that others may think differently, and are happy for brands to act in this way.
bLF charges 350k for their MR ?Man can buy a PP MR for that kind of money. [nt]
No message body
Thanks for all the details provided !
Interesting to see how the same basis "ebauche" is treated and worked differently depending on the brands. Very personally I like the GP well, using the "Pont d'Or" to sustain the balance wheel.
I agree anyway that now with large groups (e.g. LVMH) holding a handfull of different brands, the R&D made on movements is usually done by the most specialized branch / brand and then can be easily spread to other brands.
The whole in-house movement is a far from obvious definition, but what about the "Swiss Made", movements assembled in China, box and most of the components coming from China, then, a Swiss employee puts everything together and you are "Swiss Made".
In this case most probably all the brands worked on a common ebauche and designed as per their ideas / wishes. Does it make them not "in-house" I would tend to say so, does it diminish the value of their watch, certainly not.
I agree anyway that now with large groups (e.g. LVMH) holding a handfull of different brands, the R&D made on movements is usually done by the most specialized branch / brand and then can be easily spread to other brands.
The whole in-house movement is a far from obvious definition, but what about the "Swiss Made", movements assembled in China, box and most of the components coming from China, then, a Swiss employee puts everything together and you are "Swiss Made".
In this case most probably all the brands worked on a common ebauche and designed as per their ideas / wishes. Does it make them not "in-house" I would tend to say so, does it diminish the value of their watch, certainly not.
Did you spend 345k on the LF minute repeater??
If so, then complain to LF and please report back to us on how you get on.
If not, then leave it to those people to complain if they wish. I agree the statements are a little misleading, but I have seen these images several times now and am starting to feel as if you have an axe to grind against LF.
Cheers
Andrew
If not, then leave it to those people to complain if they wish. I agree the statements are a little misleading, but I have seen these images several times now and am starting to feel as if you have an axe to grind against LF.
Cheers
Andrew
Hmmm ...
Do you think that a collector only has a ârightâ to post a critique of a watch if he has already purchased the watch? That doesnât sound like a sensible view to me.
(FYI, I own a number of high-value independent watches, and would actually consider buying this watch.)
I donât have any grudge against LF and I support the brand. I have posted the images repeatedly because people have repeatedly challenged me. In the previous thread, Gerald Donavan even accused me of defamation and insulted me!
No offence intended, but transparency is surely a good thing. Would this forum really be better place if I had never made this post?
(FYI, I own a number of high-value independent watches, and would actually consider buying this watch.)
I donât have any grudge against LF and I support the brand. I have posted the images repeatedly because people have repeatedly challenged me. In the previous thread, Gerald Donavan even accused me of defamation and insulted me!
No offence intended, but transparency is surely a good thing. Would this forum really be better place if I had never made this post?
Iâm amazed by how much aggression is directed towards people who do something more than post a wristshot or write âwear it in the best of health!â
Congratulations to you on your collection!
But we try to keep the tone of forum as we would as gentleman and friends sitting around a table. To mention repeatedly seems to be nothing more than grinding your axe against LF... we all already heard you and saw your pictures!
If LF as a brand does not do it for you, then simple don't buy one... you have made your point and we all heard you, thank you for the information. Perhaps someone was looking to drop 345k and now will think twice.
This is a place for constructive criticism too, we are not expecting everyone to like every watch or brand... we all have different tastes, budgets and preferences.
Cheers
Andrew
If LF as a brand does not do it for you, then simple don't buy one... you have made your point and we all heard you, thank you for the information. Perhaps someone was looking to drop 345k and now will think twice.
This is a place for constructive criticism too, we are not expecting everyone to like every watch or brand... we all have different tastes, budgets and preferences.
Cheers
Andrew
Thatâs because you did defame me
You accused me of having knowledge that I donât have.
When I said I didnât have that knowledge, you flat out accused me of lying.
Me - â3. Can't comment, don't know the business model.â
You - âSecond, I think you probably can comment on my third point above. But I wonât press the matter, and I accept that this is not the right forum to do so.â
For the record. I have ZERO knowlege of LFâs distribution model. And quite frankly, I have close to zero interest in the business side of the watch industry whatsoever.
Despite the fact that - or perhaps because of it - I have designed business models for $60B+ turnover corporations, I couldnât give a rats backside for the financial models of watch companies.
Oh. And Iâm not entirely sure why you saw fit to use my full name (although you misspelt my surname - itâs actually âDonovanâ) when you could have just used my forum handle.
Iâve a mind to do a search on the forum and see if you make a habit of doxing, or perhaps you just singled me out for special attention?
Regardless. Doesnât bother me from anything other than the âwhat a weird thing to doâ perspective.
I have no idea who you are, nor any desire to find out.
But clearly you value being able to hide behind a pseudonym for your keyboard warrioring when lauding about how you value âtransparencyâ.
Iâll let others draw their own conclusions from that.
When I said I didnât have that knowledge, you flat out accused me of lying.
Me - â3. Can't comment, don't know the business model.â
You - âSecond, I think you probably can comment on my third point above. But I wonât press the matter, and I accept that this is not the right forum to do so.â
For the record. I have ZERO knowlege of LFâs distribution model. And quite frankly, I have close to zero interest in the business side of the watch industry whatsoever.
Despite the fact that - or perhaps because of it - I have designed business models for $60B+ turnover corporations, I couldnât give a rats backside for the financial models of watch companies.
Oh. And Iâm not entirely sure why you saw fit to use my full name (although you misspelt my surname - itâs actually âDonovanâ) when you could have just used my forum handle.
Iâve a mind to do a search on the forum and see if you make a habit of doxing, or perhaps you just singled me out for special attention?
Regardless. Doesnât bother me from anything other than the âwhat a weird thing to doâ perspective.
I have no idea who you are, nor any desire to find out.
But clearly you value being able to hide behind a pseudonym for your keyboard warrioring when lauding about how you value âtransparencyâ.
Iâll let others draw their own conclusions from that.
Truth is a defence to defamation
Your full name is stated in bold font at the top of your public Instagram page. I would never reveal the name of someone who wanted to keep their name private.
On your IG page, you have expressly stated that you handled brand new LF watches from a well-known dealer (not an authorised dealer) at knock-down prices. I would prefer not to post the screenshot, but I have it. In the circumstances, I do not consider that your aggressive tone is appropriate. I will not be engaging with this matter any further.
And there you go again
Iâve handled, and photographed, watches from many sources.
Quite why you think this would mean I have deep knowlege of brandsâ business models is beyond me.
I have already stated it is of no interest to me. And yet AGAIN you accuse me of lying.
And my Instagram page?
My handle here, gerald.d; my Instagram handle, @watchdxb.
I donât hide who I am, but neither do I go out of my way here to state my full name. Now youâre coming across like a stalker.
Youâre half-threatening to post a screenshot here? Of an instagram post? Really?
Perhaps youâd like to share my email address, phone number, and home address with everyone too? With a bit of stalking none of them are impossible to dig up.
If this is what you do to some random dude on the Internet who doesnât even know who you are, and has no interest in finding out, god help you should you ever go after someone who took you more seriously.
But thank you for the promise to not engage further. I very much look forward to that.
Quite why you think this would mean I have deep knowlege of brandsâ business models is beyond me.
I have already stated it is of no interest to me. And yet AGAIN you accuse me of lying.
And my Instagram page?
My handle here, gerald.d; my Instagram handle, @watchdxb.
I donât hide who I am, but neither do I go out of my way here to state my full name. Now youâre coming across like a stalker.
Youâre half-threatening to post a screenshot here? Of an instagram post? Really?
Perhaps youâd like to share my email address, phone number, and home address with everyone too? With a bit of stalking none of them are impossible to dig up.
If this is what you do to some random dude on the Internet who doesnât even know who you are, and has no interest in finding out, god help you should you ever go after someone who took you more seriously.
But thank you for the promise to not engage further. I very much look forward to that.
I believe credibility and reputation are key success factors for luxury brands that aim at a conoisseurs' clientele.
LF website clearly reports Mr. LF himself words: "Each of our developments, from conception through assembly, is made in our geneva workshops."
Even though the notion of "in-house" is not well defined and I guess there is space to play, carefulness must be used when claiming.
That said, I applaud LF for the level of beauty and finishing of their pieces If such level of perfection is achievable from an on-design external production facility (or even an ebauche) and it is clearly stated, who am I to complain?
Best,
Max
i think "in house" means
developed in house then all the components are sent to fabrication to respective subcontractors, which is fair cause you don't need to buy all the cnc machines etc to produce 500 watches a year, and finally if you control all the process i don't see any problem here to get it outsourced. In the end all the components are gathered in the LF ateliers for control, decoration and assembly. To me, looks like in the end it is "in house"
Thanks Tyler for defining more clearly the meaning of in-house and I completely agree on all your subsequent points.
I am a fan of LF and expecially of the micro rotor movement and its finish is one of the best I've seen in reality. I actually hope to own one in the future.
I'm just wondering, since I'm not an expert, for the sake of knowledge, if your definition of "in-house" is the predomiant one or if there are other points of view.
In my really personal, amateurish and completely humble opinion, I would add to your definition that the majority of components be fabricated in house (but how many? By number or by value? ....)
Maybe, as "Swiss made" has a precise definition and coding, FH or similar institutions should supply a definition of in-house!
By the way, all this "in-house" mania of our times has little importance to me, just brands be clear on what they do.
If LF took and ETA movement and finished to its standards I'd be happy anyway! And many well know brands used outsourced movements with great results.
Best,
Max
I'm just wondering, since I'm not an expert, for the sake of knowledge, if your definition of "in-house" is the predomiant one or if there are other points of view.
In my really personal, amateurish and completely humble opinion, I would add to your definition that the majority of components be fabricated in house (but how many? By number or by value? ....)
Maybe, as "Swiss made" has a precise definition and coding, FH or similar institutions should supply a definition of in-house!
By the way, all this "in-house" mania of our times has little importance to me, just brands be clear on what they do.
If LF took and ETA movement and finished to its standards I'd be happy anyway! And many well know brands used outsourced movements with great results.
Best,
Max
first things first
in a watch there are 2 different things, one is the movement and the other one is the "habillage"(case, dials, straps, buckles etc)
for the movement serious swiss watchmakers are doing their components themselves or outsourced but in switzerland, to me, it does't make a difference in the end as long as they control the quality of those components and they apply their decoration and finishing level, a lot of them are doing this. All of them have the same problems with the spirals springs since it is very complicated to manage, means to have the same spirals of the same quality all the time. A lot of brands buys them directly from nivarox (eta) or so (they are not many factory which produce it). I don't know who except PP and RD are producing their own ones.
For the "habillage" that is a really different story. A lot of brands are buying their components directly in Asia. I won't tell you what i know but many brands people consider well are doing so BUT, sometimes you can't blame them cause for example for sapphire case (very very often) most of the cases you see on the market are produced in China, the price is better but that ain't the problem, the main issue is that swiss company just didn't wanted to make it or wouldn't dare at the time it started and now for what i know Chineses sapphire company can achive better and more advanced results in this domain.
for the movement serious swiss watchmakers are doing their components themselves or outsourced but in switzerland, to me, it does't make a difference in the end as long as they control the quality of those components and they apply their decoration and finishing level, a lot of them are doing this. All of them have the same problems with the spirals springs since it is very complicated to manage, means to have the same spirals of the same quality all the time. A lot of brands buys them directly from nivarox (eta) or so (they are not many factory which produce it). I don't know who except PP and RD are producing their own ones.
For the "habillage" that is a really different story. A lot of brands are buying their components directly in Asia. I won't tell you what i know but many brands people consider well are doing so BUT, sometimes you can't blame them cause for example for sapphire case (very very often) most of the cases you see on the market are produced in China, the price is better but that ain't the problem, the main issue is that swiss company just didn't wanted to make it or wouldn't dare at the time it started and now for what i know Chineses sapphire company can achive better and more advanced results in this domain.
Thanks again for your knowledge, I really love this community, we can learn a lot thru discussion and mutual exchange and I am certainly traesuring it!
Best,
Max
