3,732 Discussions and CommentsMember since March 28, 2001
Hi Lisalpha,
You put it in a harsh way, I feel there is no need for it. In-house movements are expensive. The 30110 is one of the best movements around, and it has IWC history. Furthermore the Mark XVI has unique looks, making it about the best, and best looking proposition for its price segment. When I look at the Japanese competition I am impressed by their technical prowess, if at all I can. When I look at their watches, I think there is no soul in them. But that is ME, making that connection or not. However, there are a lot of people being very happy with their Grand S. I think there is place for both types of watches. And if you like in-house and like to pay the price, try the Ingenieur Mission Earth, if you like its shape, or the Portuguese Automatic, or the Big Pilot.
Kind regards, Paul
What you do may not be so important, but it is very important that you do it well. (my variation of a saying by Gandhi)
An interesting first post by a new member here. It's especially interesting when I'm told to "get real" (that's close to Valleyspeak, if our non-US friends know what I mean), when IWCers are called "snobs", and when the brand is accused of "prostitution".
I will add that IWC's Grand Complication for more than 20 years has had an ETA-Valjoux base, as have many other significant models.
I won't further comment directly except to say that name calling, etc., aren't appropriate ways of expression here.
2,908 Discussions and CommentsMember since Nov. 14, 2008Taylor, TX,
United States
Lisalpha, I take umbrage to your characterizations of what motivates me (and other members of this forum) to buy IWC watches ("snobs"), your description of the brand and its business practices ("prostitutes") and the impolite way you address our moderator ("Get real"). There is always room for debate and discussion here...but with a propriety that calls for some mutual respect. To get real Texas blunt about it, that dog don't hunt!
Best regards, Jim
"We are the other people, we are the other people...you're the other people too!" Frank Zappa
2 Discussions and CommentsMember since Dec. 29, 2010
Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea culpa No personal offense was intended, just a wake up call to us all including me. Marketing 101 dictates that a brand’s image suffers irreparable damage when it’s diluted. The analogy with the automobile industry is both interesting and valid. Mercedes, Rolls Royce, Aston Martin to name a few, rely on outside suppliers for componentry; none of them make alternators, for example, they source them from OE manufacturers such as Bosch but not from Lucas (“the Prince of Darkness”). In today’s world it would be completely unrealistic to expect a company to manufacture in house all the component parts of the product they manufacture and market – there is, however, a difference between sourcing components and an entire engine (read movement). No reasonable person would object to IWC sourcing Nivarox hairsprings from Swatch (Patek does too). Several years ago GM was successfully sued in a class action suit by unhappy upscale (Buick / Oldsmobile) customers who discovered Chevy engines under the hood. It’s really quite simple, if IWC needed the volume to offset overhead that only entry level product could provide and which didn’t merit the cost of a proprietary movement, then IWC should have created a different label to protect the real McCoy, just as Rolex did with Tudor. Seiko has the reverse problem. The Grand Seiko will never garner the following it deserves; Seiko should have rebranded the line – instead the Grand Seiko will forever be associated with SFr25 supermarket checkout watches – may be unfair but reality. Honda, Toyota and Nisan got it right with Acura, Lexus and Infiniti. In the final analysis, all the players are losers, whether the buyer of the Calibre 5000 or the entry level Pilot Chronograph – the former because the IWC image has been eroded and the latter for paying too much to say nothing of IWC who have, forever, compromised their own brand. In valleyspeak – get your head around it.
5,023 Discussions and CommentsMember since May 29, 2003Sarasota, FL,
United States
dzul Wrote:Lisalpha, I take umbrage to your characterizations of what motivates me (and other members of this forum) to buy IWC watches ("snobs"), your description of the brand and its business practices ("prostitutes") and the impolite way you address our moderator ("Get real"). There is always room for debate and discussion here...but with a propriety that calls for some mutual respect. To get real Texas blunt about it, that dog don't hunt!
Jim, you are correct. I cannot understand the need to question the luxury watch making market. Of course we all recognize what we are purchasing. If I just wanted an accurate watch I'd buy a quartz Timex or Casio for thirty bucks.
16 Discussions and CommentsMember since Nov. 21, 2010
Belgium
Lisalpha,
although the Mark XVI does not feature an in-house movement (but a very reliable ETA movement), it still is a watch filled with history since IWC makes pilot watches for over 5 decades, and I am willing to pay for that (as wel as for the design and the excellent finish of the watch).
Lisa -I respect your opinions but for several reasons I smell a troll here. I could be wrong, so kindly e-mail me and explain a little more about who you are. In the interim, I'm going to lock thus thread. If I've made an error, I would ask that you and others excuse me.
You put it in a harsh way, I feel there is no need for it. In-house movements are expensive. The 30110 is one of the best movements around, and it has IWC history. Furthermore the Mark XVI has unique looks, making it about the best, and best looking proposition for its price segment. When I look at the Japanese competition I am impressed by their technical prowess, if at all I can. When I look at their watches, I think there is no soul in them. But that is ME, making that connection or not. However, there are a lot of people being very happy with their Grand S. I think there is place for both types of watches. And if you like in-house and like to pay the price, try the Ingenieur Mission Earth, if you like its shape, or the Portuguese Automatic, or the Big Pilot.
Kind regards,
Paul
What you do may not be so important, but it is very important that you do it well. (my variation of a saying by Gandhi)
Last edited: 23 October, 2011 - 13:31
I will add that IWC's Grand Complication for more than 20 years has had an ETA-Valjoux base, as have many other significant models.
I won't further comment directly except to say that name calling, etc., aren't appropriate ways of expression here.
Regards, Michael
mfriedberg@iwcforum.com
Last edited: 5 April, 2012 - 19:53
I take umbrage to your characterizations of what motivates me (and other members of this forum) to buy IWC watches ("snobs"), your description of the brand and its business practices ("prostitutes") and the impolite way you address our moderator ("Get real"). There is always room for debate and discussion here...but with a propriety that calls for some mutual respect. To get real Texas blunt about it, that dog don't hunt!
Best regards,
Jim
"We are the other people, we are the other people...you're the other people too!"
Frank Zappa
Last edited: 13 March, 2012 - 15:03
No personal offense was intended, just a wake up call to us all including me.
Marketing 101 dictates that a brand’s image suffers irreparable damage when it’s diluted. The analogy with the automobile industry is both interesting and valid. Mercedes, Rolls Royce, Aston Martin to name a few, rely on outside suppliers for componentry; none of them make alternators, for example, they source them from OE manufacturers such as Bosch but not from Lucas (“the Prince of Darkness”).
In today’s world it would be completely unrealistic to expect a company to manufacture in house all the component parts of the product they manufacture and market – there is, however, a difference between sourcing components and an entire engine (read movement). No reasonable person would object to IWC sourcing Nivarox hairsprings from Swatch (Patek does too). Several years ago GM was successfully sued in a class action suit by unhappy upscale (Buick / Oldsmobile) customers who discovered Chevy engines under the hood.
It’s really quite simple, if IWC needed the volume to offset overhead that only entry level product could provide and which didn’t merit the cost of a proprietary movement, then IWC should have created a different label to protect the real McCoy, just as Rolex did with Tudor. Seiko has the reverse problem. The Grand Seiko will never garner the following it deserves; Seiko should have rebranded the line – instead the Grand Seiko will forever be associated with SFr25 supermarket checkout watches – may be unfair but reality. Honda, Toyota and Nisan got it right with Acura, Lexus and Infiniti.
In the final analysis, all the players are losers, whether the buyer of the Calibre 5000 or the entry level Pilot Chronograph – the former because the IWC image has been eroded and the latter for paying too much to say nothing of IWC who have, forever, compromised their own brand.
In valleyspeak – get your head around it.
Jim, you are correct. I cannot understand the need to question the luxury watch making market. Of course we all recognize what we are purchasing. If I just wanted an accurate watch I'd buy a quartz Timex or Casio for thirty bucks.
Last edited: 8 November, 2012 - 12:49
although the Mark XVI does not feature an in-house movement (but a very reliable ETA movement), it still is a watch filled with history since IWC makes pilot watches for over 5 decades, and I am willing to pay for that (as wel as for the design and the excellent finish of the watch).
Charles,
proud new owner of a Mark XVI
A thing of beauty is a joy for ever
Thank you.
mfriedberg@iwcforum.com
Regards, Michael
mfriedberg@iwcforum.com
Last edited: 5 April, 2012 - 19:53