1,590 Discussions and CommentsMember since May 16, 2002
When you look at the price of the Portuguese Chrono versus Portuguese YC then the price differential is quite large for the gain of the date. That is how a novice would see it. The latter having an in house movement is not a deal maker or breaker for a novice. Here comes the £10k entry models sooner rather than later?!
138 Discussions and CommentsMember since Jan. 6, 2013
I'm a big fun of 100% manufacture movements from Scahffhausen! Maybe in the future they will trying to get The Geneva Seal...it would be great achievement!
525 Discussions and CommentsMember since Jan. 29, 2003
Michael Friedberg Wrote:Far be it from me to tell anyone how to run their business, but to me the trick would be to replace the entry level segment with a new in-house movement that could be slightly more, but not say almost double in price. That may not be possible, however, without compromising quality.
I agree, and who would be unhappy if they simply put the 8541 back in production, with a few modernization tweaks? 40+ years on, mine are all still keeping excellent time. It's not the thinnest movement out there, but still significantly thinner than the 80000 series.
Would that really be so expensive?
The alternative would be to reverse engineer the 2892, with similar 'hardpoints' so that existing add-on modules could still be used, with a Pellaton winding mechanism.
1,590 Discussions and CommentsMember since May 16, 2002
To qualify for Geneva Seal over 50% of the cost of production would have to be done in the Canton of Geneva plus other manufacturing criteria which I am sure IWC could comply with. So in short it will not happen until IWC relocates to the Canton of Geneva.
288 Discussions and CommentsMember since March 14, 2012Western,
Slovakia
Well, for me not having the Geneve seal simply belong to the the qoute "IWC is different". I like it the way without it, similarly to the fact of not having the chronometer seal. Because "we" go further than that :o) And for Geneve also geographically ;o)
138 Discussions and CommentsMember since Jan. 6, 2013
The UK Greg Wrote:To qualify for Geneva Seal over 50% of the cost of production would have to be done in the Canton of Geneva plus other manufacturing criteria which I am sure IWC could comply with. So in short it will not happen until IWC relocates to the Canton of Geneva.
Ye, I know it, that it's impossible, but in near future it wouldn't happend. You know, it's only my product of my imagination
138 Discussions and CommentsMember since Jan. 6, 2013
MARIAN42 Wrote:Well, for me not having the Geneve seal simply belong to the the qoute "IWC is different". I like it the way without it, similarly to the fact of not having the chronometer seal. Because "we" go further than that :o) And for Geneve also geographically ;o)
I agree with You Marian that chronometre certificate isn't needful in watches from Schaffhausen. I only was imagine about "what will be if...". Because for me there are some strange facts in watchmaking..for expamle we can buy JLC for 10.000 Euros with the same movement which we can find in Ralph Lauren for 5.000 Euros, only for that they are both in Richemont Group. But back to Geneva Steal...JLC hasn't it and they don't do anything to get it, but Vacheron Constantin has Geneva Steal with movements which take by all of time from...JLC. You know, I'm monothematic and for me in watchmaking exist only one brand, one manufacture- IWC SCHAFFHAUSEN, so inspired facts which was happend in watchmaking I was thinking what else could happend in our Great Manufacture from Schaffhausen. It's only product of my imagination. About 100% in-house in IWC-I say definitely YES!!!! But of course slowly and with thought strategy.
196 Discussions and CommentsMember since Sept. 1, 2011
Australia
Personally I think it would be a mistake to move away from the entry level models with the non in house (ETA) movements, as I think it will stop a lot of novices from falling in love with IWC in the first place and therefore affect their long term viability. My first IWC was a Portofino with an ETA movement, I now own 17 IWC's with a mix of in house and outsourced movements, if it wasn't for my first Portofino I might never have purchased an IWC ( but then again I have wanted a Da Vinci PPC since I was a kid) so I might still be an IWCAHOLIC.
2,248 Discussions and CommentsMember since Aug. 2, 2001
ShaneIwc Wrote:Personally I think it would be a mistake to move away from the entry level models with the non in house (ETA) movements, as I think it will stop a lot of novices from falling in love with IWC in the first place and therefore affect their long term viability. My first IWC was a Portofino with an ETA movement, I now own 17 IWC's with a mix of in house and outsourced movements, if it wasn't for my first Portofino I might never have purchased an IWC ( but then again I have wanted a Da Vinci PPC since I was a kid) so I might still be an IWCAHOLIC.
2,910 Discussions and CommentsMember since Nov. 14, 2008Taylor, TX,
United States
I have the "unfortunate" circumstance of being a working class consumer with a more than healthy affection for IWC watches...actually a virulent case of the dreaded uhrenvirus. I traveled the road from my first Mark XVI to the CFDV carefully balancing my financial resources with my desire for the watches. I truly regret any move toward less and less accessable price points within the IWC line. I may never have the income to be able to afford the PPC of my dreams...but I would like to have some choices that I could afford. What I really suspect is that I'm just not part of the 'target audience' for the IWC of the future. I can still look at the pictures!!! LOL!
Best regards, Jim
"We are the other people, we are the other people...you're the other people too!" Frank Zappa
Here comes the £10k entry models sooner rather than later?!
Cheers Greg Chalk
Cvanwhite at aol dot com
Last edited: 21 February, 2013 - 13:47
Last edited: 1 February, 2013 - 17:28
I agree, and who would be unhappy if they simply put the 8541 back in production, with a few modernization tweaks? 40+ years on, mine are all still keeping excellent time. It's not the thinnest movement out there, but still significantly thinner than the 80000 series.
Would that really be so expensive?
The alternative would be to reverse engineer the 2892, with similar 'hardpoints' so that existing add-on modules could still be used, with a Pellaton winding mechanism.
Regards,
Cliff
Cheers Greg Chalk
Cvanwhite at aol dot com
Last edited: 21 February, 2013 - 13:47
Last edited: 30 January, 2013 - 10:19
Ye, I know it, that it's impossible, but in near future it wouldn't happend. You know, it's only my product of my imagination
Last edited: 1 February, 2013 - 17:28
I agree with You Marian that chronometre certificate isn't needful in watches from Schaffhausen. I only was imagine about "what will be if...". Because for me there are some strange facts in watchmaking..for expamle we can buy JLC for 10.000 Euros with the same movement which we can find in Ralph Lauren for 5.000 Euros, only for that they are both in Richemont Group. But back to Geneva Steal...JLC hasn't it and they don't do anything to get it, but Vacheron Constantin has Geneva Steal with movements which take by all of time from...JLC. You know, I'm monothematic and for me in watchmaking exist only one brand, one manufacture- IWC SCHAFFHAUSEN, so inspired facts which was happend in watchmaking I was thinking what else could happend in our Great Manufacture from Schaffhausen. It's only product of my imagination. About 100% in-house in IWC-I say definitely YES!!!! But of course slowly and with thought strategy.
Last edited: 1 February, 2013 - 17:28
Well said. I rest my case.
Dick L.
whichwatch at roadrunner dot com
Best regards,
Jim
"We are the other people, we are the other people...you're the other people too!"
Frank Zappa