Independents

but I can't think of any.  I'd feel cheated if somebody just had a case made, designed a face and had it made, then popped in an ETA movement totally unmodified and called it their own piece...now I can name some of those..!!

Cheers,

Andy.

when I see it."  I think that's the best I can do to define who falls into the "independent" and "mainstream" categories.

At one end of the spectrum you have watchmakers such as Christian Klings, are are independent in every sense of the word.  He makes pretty much everything with his own 2 hands.  The very definition of independent.

At the other end of the spectrum you have companies like Frank Muller, Roger Dubuis, Daniel Roth, etc.  All likely started as independents, but somewhere along the way clearly morphed into mainstream businesses - in particular when the independent founder parted ways with the company.

Then there's the vast middle.  Journe probably fits here.  So does Richard Mille.  Clearly independents at launch, but quite a bit larger now, with boutiques, distribution, etc.  Owners are still rather involved, but maybe too large with too many folks on staff to retain the "independent" label.

I suppose for me, to be an independent, the enterprise should be small, with limited production each year and with significant participation from the watchmaker founder of the marque.  Smaller watchmakers such as DeWitt (founded by a collector I believe), Louise Moniet (sp?), etc.  are not independents in my view .... just smaller, targeted watch makers.

Anyways, just my 2 cents.  Fun topic to ponder.

Darren

everybody seems to have similar but subtly different reasons and I think everybody is correct....then when all those criteria are met then you are truly mainstream as everybody agrees.

Cheers,

Andy.

- SJX

Lets not go there..!

I'm beginning to think everybody here is correct then when all the above criteria are met then the independant has truly become mainstream in everybody's eye's....the final cherry on the cake is, as you say, when a forum is dedicated to them somewhere.

Is Speake Marin getting there now..? In house movements, marketing, specific design...etc.

Yours,

Andy.

It is next to impossible to be truly independent. Even speaking with AHCI candidate Eva Leube, who works from a small room in her house, she commented on how ‘dependent’ she is on suppliers of raw materials. There are some things, such as crystals, that she cannot make herself and these manufactures charge more for unique components or small production runs.

Many of the independents started off producing their own watches one at a time, but subsequently added watchmakers to help them. Do you think Kari or PSM or even FPJ assemble all their watches? Of course not. As to how much day-to-day, hands-on, involvement they have, I think that varies a lot. And that is the key for me. Once the company gets so large that the ‘stamp’ of the original independent watchmaker is diluted, then they become a manufacture in my eyes.

Now that ‘stamp’ is a bit hard to define. I would expect Kari and PD to closely examine every single piece that another watchmaker worked on in their Atelier – much like an Executive Chef would tweak flavours or the appearance of a dish before it is served to a customer.

But some of the Independents are outgrowing this as well. I don’t believe or expect PSM or FPJ to handle every watch, but I do expect their ideas and designs to be apparent in their products, and that they have done all the trouble-shooting required to deliver a watch to market.

I think F.P.Journe is an interesting example here, whether you like his watches or not. He is clearly an AHCI member, and the company remains independently owned, but we post Journe topics on HoMe and consider him a small mainstream Manufacture of 700-900 pieces annually. I agree with this, but it’s a fine line and François-Paul, the man, still manages to put his design ‘stamp’ on each watch, even if 25 watchmakers build the pieces.

The other extreme, where the name on the watch is just a brand, is easy to spot as well. There are reasons for this, such as the watchmaker not being involved in all the products (Franck Muller), the watchmaker retiring (Gerald Genta), or even dying (Breguet and many other large Swiss Manufactures). And there is a lot of grey in the middle.

And finally, we seem to value independence more than we used to. I am quite happy that PD sources his cases and dials form the best manufactures, and inspects all of them for the level of quality he desires. This leaves him to work on what he does best - the finishing and movement design. I am also reminded of Seth Brundle, the brilliant scientist in Dave Cronenberg's 1986 remake of The Fly. Brundle ousourced all the components of  his matter transfer machine to specialists manufactures. In fact he didn't really understand the details of each component, but he brought them all together into a functioning machine that no one had ever seen the likes of. Sound familiar?

Very interesting discussion, Andy, and as you mention, all the perspectives are correct, particularly when taken at a personal level.

Regards

Andrew

when I first posted the question to be honest I was expecting a reply which indicated when an independant had achieved A), B), and C) then the independant had become mainstream.

This thread seems to have proved the opposite in that nobody seems to agree on what criteria makes you mainstream.  In fact I'd go further and say that I am surprised to read that most people do see FPJourne as an independant and Urwerk as mainstream..!!  These two I would definately have put the other way around.

But I do think it is safe to say that an independant from 50-100 years ago is very different to one from today.

I don't think I have a conclusion to this....if anything it has raised more questions than it has answered but very interesting none the less.  Even my own criteria have been blown away so I'm at a loss too

Yours,

Andy.

Being independant and mainstream are not mutually exclusive. Rolex is as mainstream a watch company as you will ever find as they are a household name the world over, even to people who wouldn't know the difference between a quartz or automatic watch if their life depended on it, but they are still independant as they are not a publicly listed company and have no external shareholders.

Breguet is not mainstream (outside of watch fans) but they are not independant either as they're owned by Swatch.

'Independant' in this respect is merely a catch all term that includes smaller brands who are owned by the company founders - small enough to retain a personal and individual touch for each watch and customer dealt with. Rolex might be 99-100% in-house manufactured but if you email them and request a manual wind Submariner with a red dial you're unlikely to get a response, let alone the watch you want. If you email Habring requesting one of their watches with variations of their standard spec you are likely to get the watch you want, even if the base movement is bought in (albeit heavily modified)

The personal touch is what makes 'independant' different from 'mainstream' IMO