. You can view Sales Corner if your post count is 50 or more and you have been registered as a member for 60 days or more. You can post in Sales Corner if your post count is 250 or more and you have been registered as a member for 180 days or more.
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the by clicking the link above. You may have to before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. Can I suggest you visit DP and ask for suggestions for tripod recommendations?Thanks for your suggestion but, for now, I'll get by without it. I'm not that into DP to be interested. Actual photography was taken to show letter 'T' above number 6 on the dial (Heuer Bund variant identifier), nothing more and nothing less. Anyway, sorry for the photo quality, if this is something that bothers you, or anyone else in this topic.
For you and anyone interested, here is the better picture of the same watch (also taken without tripod). Can I suggest you visit DP and ask for suggestions for tripod recommendations?Thanks for your suggestion but, for now, I'll get by without it.
I'm not that into DP to be interested. Actual photography was taken to show letter 'T' above number 6 on the dial (Heuer Bund variant identifier), nothing more and nothing less. Anyway, sorry for the photo quality, if this is something that bothers you, or anyone else in this topic. For you and anyone interested, here is the better picture of the same watch (also taken without tripod).
On January 1, 2017, a new regulation will go into place concerning what qualifies a watch as “Swiss Made.” You see, in the eyes of Swiss regulators and many consumers, previous regulations, which required at least 50% of a watch’s value to be realized in Switzerland have been abused by lower-cost manufacturers who have been producing watches that are, legally-speaking, “Swiss Made” without upholding the implicit manufacturing standards expected to go with it. The new regulation comes at a time when the Swiss luxury watch industry finds itself at a critical impasse due to dynamically changing consumer demands in Asia and a volatile global economy, so the impact of any change to this industry will be felt more keenly than in a period of relative calm.
Heuer Bund Serial Numbers
Previous Regulation Currently, for a watch to be considered “Swiss Made,” all of the following must be true:. Its movement is Swiss. Its movement is cased up in Switzerland.
The manufacturer carries out the final inspection in Switzerland A full report of the previous regulations can be found by downloading (PDF) from the Federation of the Swiss Watch Industry, but the major focus of this regulation is on the first bullet point. What makes a movement Swiss?
The Swiss Federal Council defines a movement as Swiss if all of the following are true. It has been assembled in Switzerland,. It has been inspected by the manufacturer in Switzerland,. The movement’s (not the entire watch’s) components of Swiss manufacture must make up for at least 50% of its value.
As David pointed out in on the new regulation back in late 2014, it is the third bullet point that is the most contentious. Lower cost manufacturers will purchase movement kits and key components from generally lower quality Asian manufacturers, then buy higher priced items in Switzerland (balance wheel, springs, mainspring, and jewels are most common), hitting the 50% mark for value of components of Swiss manufacture. New “Swissness” Regulation The new “Swiss Made,” or “Swissness” regulation was adopted by parliament back on June 21, 2013 – following some six years of discussions and debates – and changes the third bullet point about the Swiss movement to the following:. A t least 60% of the production costs of a watch taken as a whole must be Swiss-based. The movement must still contain at least 50% Swiss-made components in value (not in quantity) and at least 60% of the movement’s production must be generated in Switzerland. Last but not least, it also specifies that the technical development of a “Swiss Made” watch and movement must be carried out in Switzerland.
Smart watches are also included for the first time. As was mentioned in the beginning of the article, the new regulations will be in effect from January 1, 2017, but that doesn’t mean that starting in the new year every watch at your local retailer will abide by these regulations. All watches produced until the end of this year will be allowed to be distributed until December 31, 2018. Cases and crystals in stock at the end of this year will be allowed to be used in production until the end of 2018, without having to be included in “The 60% Rule.” Watches and movements not developed in Switzerland and produced until the end of 2018 can remain in circulation until the end of 2020.
Economic Impact The economic impact of the new regulation is unclear. According to, “consumers are willing to pay up to 20% more for Swiss watches in general, and up to 50% more for certain mechanical watches” which could be interpreted as some flexibility on the customers’ side when it comes to paying a premium for a Swiss made product. The thing is though this new regulation should mostly affect watch brands in the sub-$1,000 market where there has traditionally been more of a balancing game when it came to managing Swiss made and “overseas sourced” parts used to make up a watch. Thus far it had been entirely possible to produce a watch with an Asian case, dial, hands, crystals and strap, have the movement come from a Swiss supplier (or just modify an Asian movement with some Swiss parts in Switzerland) case said movement up and still get to put a Swiss Made stamp on the dial.
So, the new regulations will certainly go far in strengthening the Swiss brand and keeping the value of a “Swiss Made” watch high, but it will also drive out certain lower cost manufacturers from the country and may discourage entrepreneurs from starting watch companies in Switzerland as they will face a higher barrier to entry. The new regulation could also mean that lower cost watch manufacturers will abandon the “Swiss Made” label entirely and instead opt for a cheaper movement paired with a higher advertising budget. The “Swiss Made” label is a stamp of authenticity (and, to some extent, of quality), but it is just one point in a sales pitch to consumers, not the entire value proposition of the watch.
Also consider that over time manufacturing standards and abilities will improve in countries where cheaper components are currently being made and you might in the foreseeable future have a situation where “imported” quality will be high enough in some cases to put up an honorable fight against products labeled as “Swiss Made.” Personally, I would say it could have been interesting to see a grading system for the “Swiss Made” label. Watches that meet the current criteria could be “Swiss Made: Grade A” for example and those that meet the previous criteria could be “Swiss Made: Grade B,” with descending or ascending levels on either side. For collectors who care about the quality of the movement and sourcing of the materials, the information would be clearly listed and yet entrepreneurs would not be totally frozen out of the Swiss manufacturing market.
This would prevent the “Swiss Made” stamp from being so binding while also giving consumers the information they desire about the manufacturing of the watch. As Ariel discussed in an he did for Forbes, the issues with Swiss luxury watch manufacturers are not that their reputations are being diminished by cheaper quality movements, but rather archaic business practices and outdated marketing. These new regulations to the “Swiss Made” tag will, in the short-term, force some of the manufacturers of more affordably priced watches out, but in the long-term may do little to address the issues that are at the root cause of the industry’s current. Perhaps this change in regulation will be the impetus for change, but only time will tell the true impact of this new regulation.
Glad to see them ramping up the requirements, but I guess the real question is: will the market of tomorrow place as much emphasis on ‘Swiss Made’ as they did yesterday? My guess is that the market already places less emphasis on that label than they did 20 years ago.
I think the more important thing is to develop objective standards of quality that go beyond accuracy or a single segment of the market. I understand perfectly why the Swiss industry would not champion something like that. But it’s coming. Your guess would be wrong. And it’s going to get more and more important as the Trump era takes hold and the EU crumbles and China loses its steam. There is a new wave of nationalism and globalists are going to diminish in power. The origins of a watch and the parts inside are, like all products in general — but especially luxury products like mechanical watches — will become more and more important.
I don’t know anything about you but I will guess that you work for a company or perhaps have a business of you own that is focused on a globalist perspective, perhaps with manufacturing, likely with China as part of the picture. Whenever I read opinions like you’ve expressed and I learn something about the person who wrote them, that’s what’s going on with them. I agree in a big part for the average consumer, who is not too much into watches.
WIth the globalisation of everything and the computerisation of everything, the importance of how well made things are is becoming less important. Technology is changing so fast there has been a fundamental change in what is deemed acceptable most consumer items, if it is phones, tv’s, washing machines, beds etc. For example my parents have an AEG (German) fridge freezer that is still going strong after 30 years.
Ten years ago I spent £800 on on AEG fridge freezer and it lasted all of 7 years. Every day people specially the people bone in the 80’s and afterwards are not as concerned about quality and longevity as before. Bringing it back to watches I think that has an impact, especially with smart watches (even though i don’t like them) will further make a difference as smart watches are not Swiss. They are Chinese, Korean, Japan and American.
Also for people who are into watches with quite a lot of German and British brands and companies (even if they use Swiss movements) it shows there are alternatives out there. You don’t have to buy pure Swiss. The only people wear the impotance of Swiss made is very important is for the people who have so much money that this change will make zero difference to them.
This “New Swiss Made Regulation” is nothing else but a Lex Hayek: The goal of this regulation is not to strengthen the label, but to crowd out competitors of the Swatch Group in particular fashion brands like Mondaine, Lagerfeld etc. And with Burberry it already worked. Most fashion brands like Fossil etc. Are not able to produce at such low costs as the SG is due to it`s size and industrial monopoly. So our Swiss president J.S. Ammann (known from John Oliver videos) has strong ties to the SG as former member of the board of directors and SG is also known to influence Swiss politics to protect their interests against competition. After the regulation went through parliament, the daughter of J.S.
Ammann became member of the board of directors of the SG, due to her qualification (board of director of daddys Ammann Group, Bachelor in economics, 30 years old). Good for SG, bad for anyone else. Finally, some sources for my points.
Posted this over and over again. Can`t be overestimated. By the way: THANKS FOR THAT ARTICLE. You should try STINKING BISHOP/OLD STINKER Cheese, from UK.
Its served with the live maggots still living in it, and is famous as the strongest smelling cheese in the world. Oh, and your meant to eat the maggots as well, apparently they take on the flavour(?) of the cheese. I’m lead to believe it tastes of rotten eggs, sh.t, and an overpowering stench of ammonia. It’s illegal to sell with the maggots in it, so its only sold with maggots in the underground cheese market. A small part of Somerset is famous for a few farms that produce it. This makes a lot of sense.
It should have been a lot higher earlier on. I think that every country that manufactures watches should have at least the same level of requirements or they can’t put: “Made in Germany” or “Made in Japan” or England or United States or whatever on the watch. Origins of a luxury product like mechanical watches is very important. When you’re spending thousands of dollars on a small mechanical machine on your wrist and buying into the whole fascination and history and image, it should be what you think you’re getting — not some Frankenstein with half the parts secretly imported from some sweatshop who knows where. And what do you label a watch with 55% Swiss-ness? What country of origin should be stated for export/import?
![Heuer bund serial numbers Heuer bund serial numbers](/uploads/1/2/4/1/124128660/714952661.jpg)
The real issue here is that “Swiss Made” in an international trademark. So it’s clearly about the Swiss watch industry having the Swiss government play ball and enact the content requirement that the industry wants. And it really is to protect the perception of “Swiss quality” in the consumer’s mind rather than being a country of origin issue. What’ sort of ironic is that a Swatch quartz watch gets the “Swiss Made” notation while something really nice which also has mostly Swiss content but is not cased up nor regulated in Switzerland can’t be called “Swiss Made” (but then the Gronefeld brothers don’t want their watches to say “Swiss Made” even though they have higher Swiss content than a lot of Swiss watches).
I basically agree with Ryan. For brands sub-$1000, they’re better off using miyota 9015’s, or the better Seiko Nh movements anyway. They’re excellent for what they are. I don’t have any Hangzhou or Seagull movements; but I believe they’re making some excellent quality movements in their AAA category. It also means when you buy swiss, you’re not questioning how watered down ‘swiss’ it actually is. You can buy Sweiss with more confidence, which surely is a good thing. Specially as you’re paying a premium for the name/brand of ‘Swiss’.
Not sure I like the idea of A or B grade Swiss, who’d want to buy a Swiss B grade watch. According to this article: “previous regulations, which required at least 50% of a watch’s value to be realized in Switzerland have been abused by lower-cost manufacturers who have been producing watches that are, legally-speaking, “Swiss Made.” I’m very sorry, but I have bad news for you.
Really bad news. Do you honestly think that only lower-cost manufacturers are using non-Swiss parts? Do you really think that Rolex, Omega, Patek, or Blancpain use 100% Swiss made parts, and that these watches are 100% made in Switzerland?
If you look above and beyond the history and heritage fairy tale, then you will quickly notice that all prestigious watch brands have one thing in common — make as much money as possible. If lower-cost manufacturers abused the law to their advantage, do you think that prestigious brands didn’t do the same. Patek, for instance, could have easily used the 50% law to their advantage, and the reality is that it’s virtually impossible for the consumer to check the facts.
The ONLY way to make sure that a high-end brand is exclusively Swiss made is to have full access to its order books and see exactly who the suppliers are, and how these suppliers are manufacturing said parts. You have interviewed multiple CEO`s? Just because multiple CEO`s said on record that their watches are 100% Swiss made doesn`t mean anything.
Bremont oficially stated that their movement was in-house, but surprise, surprise, it turned out that it was actually outsourced and that they manufactured only ONE component in-house. Tag Heuer oficially stated that their chronograph caliber was in-house, but surprise, surprise, it was actually a Seiko caliber. I don`t have to show any contrary evidence. Rather, these brands have to make their order books public and demonstrate that everything is Swiss made.
How many of the higher end brands are completely transparent about their parts and suppliers? Probably none. So, yes, I would say that the people who really believe that high-end watches are completely Swiss made are rather naive.
Isn`t the movement a component of the watch? Do you know exactly how Rolex manufactures its watches? I doubt that you have 100% access to the Rolex facilities so that you can inspect everything. My point was about the “honesty” of these brands.
Just because they say that everything is Swiss doesn`t actually mean that everthing is Swiss. Even Jack Forster from Hodinkee argued that you cannot be 100% certain that all parts are Swiss made. As Jack Forster argued, the reality is extremely simple: brands should be completely transparent about their suppliers and parts-providers. That way it would be extremely simple to check the facts. I am a huge supporter of lifting the lid on Watchmaking, and there is plenty of evidence that companies as a whole can be untruthful unless compelled. But to just extrapolate that out to assume that everything is BS is very niaive.
I am absolutely talking about the movement, which is comprised of wheels, springs, arbors, bridges – all of which in the case of Rolex are made in Bienne, including paraflex and parachrom. In fact, they build many of the machines that make these components. Dials are made in Chene-Bourg and the cases and links are made in Plan-les-Ouates.
I am sure Jack Forster would agree that it doesn’t get more in house than Rolex, and their house is in Switzerland. Perhaps they get their sparkling wine from France – is that what you are getting? “After all, if they advertise their watches as Swiss, they should also prove it.” Well, they actually do it exactly with this “Swiss Made” label. There is an independent authoritity that controls the books. It is not you, but they are there.
I am working for one of the top 10 Swiss watch brands and I can tell you that almost all our components are Swiss made. There are some exceptions such as alligator straps and some (not all) sapphire glasses.
I agree with you that it would be nice for the consumer to look into the books of every company. But I guess there is no industry branch (beside nutrition) that does that You call people “naive” who believe that “Swiss Made” watches are actually Swiss made. I would call people naive that only believe what they can see/touch themselves (see Burkina Faso example below). With the advent of 3D printing ( currently in its absolute infancy ), the whole concept of manufacturing is on the verge of a paradigm shift.
Place of manufacture will become meaningless. The equivalent of the StarTrek replicator will exist within the life time of the child born today. When this happens, discussions of the relative merits of Swiss, German, Italian or Japanese manufacture will be as relevant as arguments as to who breeds the best draught horses or who designs the best water wheels. Artisan watch makers producing genuinely hand made trinkets for the ultra-rich will still exist, but most mass market products will be untouched by human hands before they are finally un-boxed.
Wouldn’t it be such a refreshing idea if one of these prestigious companies came out and listed the country of origin for all the parts they use? It would be great to say we respect our customers so we want to let them know exactly what they are buying. Or maybe if they have nothing to hide and are proud with all components made in Switzerland? On the flip side I should have the right to know what I am buying and attempts to finds out have all been met with vague or standardized answers that are equivalent to “go away” But I am sure if I kept on asking the final answer will be you don’t have to buy it so buzz off.
I agree that no Swiss nor Japanese nor Germans can be 100% open about every single jewel or screw in their watches. But some time ago I had a long email conversation with Stowa (I wanted some customization) and they surprised me to be so open about many many details they use and how they are assembled.
I hardly believe that any Swiss in their range would do the same, but (!) we may consider Stowa on a smaller side, more like a microbrand – maybe this is the reason of being closer to their customers. I have gotten more questions answered, even asked who makes your rubber straps and they actually told me the company name, I asked what your cost is and they gave me a pretty good ball park which I thought to myself surely they will tell me the conversation is over but they continued to accommodate me. I like the attitude of I’m the customer, I’m paying so my satisfaction is their paramount concern. Of course I don’t abuse this nor expect to ask specific sales data or how many they made per model but for the watch I bought I can know everything about it if I wish. I have since bought 10 of their watches because I like the way they do business. I have never had that kind of transparency from the Swiss.
When Swatch / ETA limited supply, it was to promote true manufacturers but instead it accelerated the development of movement suppliers. The real goal was to control competition but the market dropped out and there was an over supply of movements. They lost market share as a movement manufacturer while their watch brands started to slump and at the same time created a much more robust competition.
Now they want to reverse that decision to supply movements again, perhaps they can produce movements cheaper to help watch companies compete to “Help” the industry. But we all know they just want to salvage a bad bet. The current climate serves as a “stress test” for their business model / mindset. The current traditional transaction mindset where retailers own what they buy might look good on paper but they miss out on vital pulse. Other industries sell products to retailers but they are not truly realized until the end customer takes delivery, so they offer financial and logistical support to help retailers sell through, stock rotate and promotional efforts to flush products out. In turn these retailer report what they sell or can’t sell.
Combined you now have much more visibility to what you should be producing while setting the correct outlook and expectation to your stakeholders. Every company faces economic challenges and there are indeed events you cannot account for but their current surplus in supply, a thriving grey market segment, lack of retailer support that leads to back door selling and discounting, retail price drops on current models that anger owners that bought prior, at the severity it is today all stems from not knowing your business. This change to define “Swiss Made” should be the last thing on their minds, what does this mean to the industry? Well, let’s try to save the industry first. Totally agree with your statement “This change to define “Swiss Made” should be the last thing on their minds”.
The excess inventory and losing sales in the affordable segment (. I have always had hard time to understand how crappy watches like Hanowa Swiss, Golana, Mathey Tissot, etc. Get “Swiss Made” logo? They feel and they are worse than Chinese watches like Parnis, Debert, etc. And this cheaply made quartz jokes get same fancy mark as Patek Philippe and co. Since then I couldn’t care less for “Swiss Made” – it became a joke, prostitution with%%, +10% – who cares? Give us quality products, not like Swatch Groups plasticy G10 calibers, which when any issue – go to the bin.
Even Philippe Dufour outsources parts – but who cares, since he is the King of finishing. Would it really bother you so much if your watch fits into 47%, 51%, 63%, 72%, etc? I was looking at some white dialed Orient Stars, as they do have beautiful dials and lovely polishing and brush work on the cases. You’re right about the movement, at this price they concentrate on the quality and not the finishing. I’ve always wondered why they put display backs on them.
I got the CT in the end because I got it for a really good black Friday deal. I still want to get an Orient Star, or maybe a Seiko Brightz. Or even just a sarb. Next year my resolution is to stop buying Divers, etc and save up and get a Grand Seiko. I strongly divide my preferences according to a type of the watch ? I can easily wear a 47 mm watch if it is 100% casual, like my Seiko Tron (pic attached), or a pilot/dive watch (they have a reason for being so). But I cannot understand why minimalistic or dress pieces are tending to be so big today.
My sweet spot for dress/simple is around 38 mm, and for vintage even less 35 mm is just great. I also have some trick to mask the size: bund strap:)) P.S. But I must say that not only diameter is what matters.
I sold my 45 mm Ancon diver since the lugs were protruding so far above my 7″ wrist. While some 47 mm pieces sit just fine thanks to right profile and shorter lugs. Partly agree. I love my Cocktail Time and don’t deny that the case, dial and hands finishing is better than anything swiss for the same price, but we seemed to be talking about movements and the 6R15 is rather inferior to ETA/Sellita 2824. In fact it is just a modified 7S. Seiko is the king of movements for. I still doubt how would Powermatic 80s behave in a long run.
They have some cheapening solutions like plastic escapement wheels and pallet forks, details from disposable System 51. I am not sure, but some consider them half-disposable and hardly serviceble as well. Some say it cannot be regulated, there are some threads at WUS. I won’t say that 6R15 is a great caliber and my main concern is its thickness which limits the ability to make beautiful thin cases. And I totally agree that Seiko has some gap between entry and luxury segments which was fitted some time ago with 4L25 and whole 4L line of movements. But then they sold the construction to Swiss (Soprod A10) and are now facing the situation of gap between 6R15 and high-lines 6S, 8S, 9S, etc. This is actually a very important topic.
Increasing the requirement by 10% isn’t just parts, it now applies to R&D, inspection costs, and parts outside the movement. I totally agree a machine doesn’t care where it makes its parts. This law risks making it impossible for brands producing watches. It’s a meaningless gesture. Most average people who buy Swiss don’t know the elaborate charade the industry participates in.
All they care about is that it says “Swiss Made” and that’s it. Personally I am resigned to the fact that the Swiss will continue as they have been, doing whatever it takes to maximise their profits even at the cost of their national dignity.
Are such wealthy companies really incapable of producing a complete watch all by themselves from start to finish? Of course they could if they wanted to, but there’s always a bigger yacht for some bigwig to drool over – have to maintain those profit margins. If someone offered you a sandwich with the selling point that there was now “ten percent less turd” in the filling, would you smile with joy?
I am not a nationalistic guy, but to me “Made in Britain/USA/Switzerland” has to mean something. If your product uses parts made in some factory in Asia, then YOU didn’t make it all, full stop. To say anything else, no matter which way you fudge it, is a lie.