In-house is overrated
You know, lately, many brands have gone "in-house" with some dubious credibility, *cough* Panerai and tag *cough* and many brands are trying to justify the increased price due to the movement being all "in-house" and what not, HOWEVER when you really think about it, Seiko 5, which is everyone's and their neighbors favorite gateway watch for this WIS insanity, it's all in-house, in the truest sense. They even grow their own rubies. Do seiko try to flex it being all in-house? Not at all! If the movement works well without any notable problems and has a decent accuracy, I will take a generic movement (Like ETA 2892-A2 or NH35) any day of the week before any fancy pants "in-house" movement that works only Tuesdays to Thursdays between 7AM to 9PM when the wind is blowing from North-West
Ḯ̵̧̢̙̝̪̪̮̘̤͚͉̭̗͚̬̱͔͍̺̦͊́̇̂̽͜ ̸̢̨̧̢̛̻͇͎̱̮̲̲̲͍̼͇͚̳̮̯̣̼̥̘͉͎̼̠̫̝̹̳̩̰̭̗͚̰͕̞͙͚̾̎̈́̑̉͋̈́̀̈̾̂̀̈́̉̋̒́̽̅̚͜͠ͅl̸̡̨̨̧̡̟͖̱̙̠͉̤̝̬͚͖̮͖͓̞͇̯͉̲̬̩̹̼̮̻̘̬̫̳͍̟̙̹͇̣͎̥̜̺̪̥̻̮̀̒̊͛̓̾͋̌̈́̃͒̉͆̏͂̑̇̅͆̓͂̿͋̿͘͘̚͜͝͠͠͝͝ͅį̶̨̨̦̺̊̅͛̀̓̂̽͋͑̃͆̈̕...
Yup, or taking an older, and patent expired ETA movement and modding it, and call it "in-house" I hear that IWC is guilty of this
And so is tag, building upon seiko movement iirc?
This is why I don't put much credit on "in-house" claims, and don't want to pay premium for the "privilege"
Watch collecting revelation most of us come to: there's a lot to be said for any watch with an off-the-shelf ETA, Sellita or even Miyota etc. Any competent watch repairer anywhere in the world can likely get that watch serviced with ease, likely with the parts the materials they have on-hand. That presumptive longevity counts for a lot, especially if you really love your watches like so many of us do.
Watch collecting revelation most of us come to: there's a lot to be said for any watch with an off-the-shelf ETA, Sellita or even Miyota etc. Any competent watch repairer anywhere in the world can likely get that watch serviced with ease, likely with the parts the materials they have on-hand. That presumptive longevity counts for a lot, especially if you really love your watches like so many of us do.
Yeah, every watchmaker worth his/her salt can service those movements, more brand specific movements, not so much
Also, there's the fact that some of these "in-house" movements may be supported for service or have parts availability for only a limited amount of time. Add to that you may be required to use the brand's service department to have any work done on your watch. In that case you are held hostage to whatever pricing model they choose to implement (ram down your helpless throat).
Also, there's the fact that some of these "in-house" movements may be supported for service or have parts availability for only a limited amount of time. Add to that you may be required to use the brand's service department to have any work done on your watch. In that case you are held hostage to whatever pricing model they choose to implement (ram down your helpless throat).
Yup, and be without your watch for like 6 months
I find it annoying when brands use the whole "in-house" shtick to bump up the price because of perceived prestige - even more infuriating is when companies go with an in-house movement which may cost them more yet there might be a 3rd party movement which could be cheaper to buy(and sometimes have better specifications)
I find it annoying when brands use the whole "in-house" shtick to bump up the price because of perceived prestige - even more infuriating is when companies go with an in-house movement which may cost them more yet there might be a 3rd party movement which could be cheaper to buy(and sometimes have better specifications)
Which also result in a bigger movement and thicker watch, this is the reason why I was turned away from Breitling for a good while
That whole confusion about what is in-house (the Longines L990 movement mentioned by @Heretic found its way into the Ebel on my profile pic likely because Ebel and Lemania, who bought the movement rights, were owned by Investcorp. So, is it now in house 😂?) probably why the term in-house isn't used by the brands anymore... they themselves got confused.
We now have manufacture movements. Which is even more ridiculous 🫠 ETA movements are not manufacture movements apparently. They are probably born out of exploding stars or something...
That whole confusion about what is in-house (the Longines L990 movement mentioned by @Heretic found its way into the Ebel on my profile pic likely because Ebel and Lemania, who bought the movement rights, were owned by Investcorp. So, is it now in house 😂?) probably why the term in-house isn't used by the brands anymore... they themselves got confused.
We now have manufacture movements. Which is even more ridiculous 🫠 ETA movements are not manufacture movements apparently. They are probably born out of exploding stars or something...
Everyone knows ETA movements are created by osmosis
Also, a favorite topic among Omega fanbois, if their Co-axial truly is "in-house" or not XDDDDDD
I find it annoying when brands use the whole "in-house" shtick to bump up the price because of perceived prestige - even more infuriating is when companies go with an in-house movement which may cost them more yet there might be a 3rd party movement which could be cheaper to buy(and sometimes have better specifications)
So few new in-house movements boast improved accuracy. At this point the USP from a practical standpoint seems to me to be longer power reserve (like Oris' 120 hours in their new movements). If you rotate a bunch of watches and really, really, really hate setting the time (and I would argue most WIS' enjoy interacting with their watches) then maybe a 120hr PR is a big selling point (?) but you're unlikely to be getting any improvement on accuracy or extra length between service intervals versus a properly regulated off-the-shelf movement from a reliable third party. Ultimately, unless you have an abiding love of the engineering side of watchmaking, combined with an aesthete's desire to admire a beautifully finished movement through a sapphire caseback, I'd question the material upside to in-house.
I think oris is doing a great job with the caliber 400
Yeah, I'm with you on this one. In-house is super overrated.
While I'm 100% fascinated about mechanical watches, I'd rather pick a reliable, widely known ETA than a very niche unique movement. Of course, when we're talking about mainstream watches like Rolex or Omega, it is basically the same, their calibers are pretty much clear to a lot of watchmakers, but the cost of service would be much higher.
I'm 100% okay with a Longines ordering movements from ETA. I don't think they are making lesser watches just because they are outsourcing a part of their manufacturing process.
And then, we have Grand Seiko, growing their own quartz crystals. While this is super cool and I completely respect this approach, if the movements were crap, it doesn't matter if those rubies or quartz crystals are in-house, or not.
A nice watch is a nice watch. It's a combination of design, reliability, serviceability and price. If you are not a fan of the design, chances are you won't buy a watch and it doesn't matter if the movement is in-house) If you can't afford the watch, you might as well don't care about it at all.
If I'm 100% honest, I'm not buying watches because of the movement or specs in general. I don't even care too much about the accuracy. I have a phone for a precise time tracking and my watches are always set 3-5 minutes fast anyway) I like the looks, the feel, the thought behind the product design. If I have a nice reliable movement along the way, it's just a pleasant bonus) Yeah, sure, there's some type of movements I won't usually consider, but it's about the vintage stuff and vintage is completely different topic
This again… so has anybody in this thread actually stopped and asked why many brands have had to shift certain aspects of their manufacture to in-house?
ETA are owned by… (google it)
If you are not a brand within said conglomerate where do you get your ETA-based ebauche from?
If you are tooled up for ETA and need to tinker, how do you expect to recoup costs? If you need to adjust ETA-esque movements where would be best to do this exercise? What actually constitutes “in-house”? Anyone in the 1940s could buy an ebauche, stick a custom branded bridge on it, adjust it a few times, and give it go-faster stripes and charge a premium for it, why is it so egregious to you all now in 2023?
Necessity is the mother of invention.
In between indecision for actually buying watches (the answer is (d) the one you actually like), moaning about choice, and a failure to understand how watches are actually made, sold, and marketed, it makes you wonder why we bother…
In house movements are a reaction to a change in the market, not a moment of change in the market.
Consumers sometimes look down the wrong end of the telescope.
Again - what did the Trinity do if they didn’t use JLC ebauches as a starting point? Please don’t tell me you want to call Vacheron Constantin low- to mid-tier now, please…
I mean, if you want the worst offender look at the Ressence Type 3, it’s an ETA 2824-2 inside 40k of watch and (pointless) “innovation” but when you bring that up on here it’s defended to the hilt. “I’d rather have a solid off the shelf movement” - in a 40k watch? Great… up is down, and black is white.
When Swatch throttled ETA supply, which it can do, the market needed to adapt. That’s why you have reworked Sellita, SOPROD, Seiko, Miyota, Ronda, JLC, Cartier, etc… in lots of different watches at different price points. They often form the base of the movement, be it then they are cosmetically altered, or have reworked parts, or go through numerous adjustments. Tag bought the patent for a Seiko to develop their Cal.1887 and the market sh*t itself because apparently that wasn’t the done thing, except it’s effectively what other movement makers have done, or at worse cannibalised old patents.
It’s very simple, and you don’t have to buy into it if you don’t want to. All a very large proportion of the watch market has ever been since the 1920s are a collection of ebauche, case, dial, hands, unlovingly pulled together in a factory somewhere in middle-Europe, and then sold via a jewellers or department store for profit. If you take out the middleman, and ignore the geography, you basically just describe every microbrand since 2006. What do you want then? Why are you railing against something that hasn’t changed in terms of process for over a hundred years? If you want a modern watch fuelled by a genuine ETA you might as well just buy a Mido, or give up and buy a Seiko or Citizen if you think a movement has to be made solely by the brand. The irony is, I bet half of you are on a waitlist for Tudor, or would buy an Oris given the chance.
Thanks for the info, So all the movements from the holy trinity (every single models) were based on existing ebauches? Nothing they created from ground up?
Thanks for the info, So all the movements from the holy trinity (every single models) were based on existing ebauches? Nothing they created from ground up?
The tip of the iceberg amongst others, but you must realise that the Trinity build their movements from other companies parts. This is also not uncommon practice. You could genuinely call JLC a watchmaker, but then again, it’s a profitable company, and in no way shape or form the same company it was when it was founded. At one point they were even owned by Favre-Leuba. The modern watch industry is confusing and, in reality, fabricated from various different parts and names older on paper than in any actual operating capacity. It’s easy to fall for the marketing, but it’s designed to appeal to certain areas that you or I may think are overriding when it comes to watch choice, and therefore it’s easy to think that, for example, in-house movements, are (a) a new, or actual, “thing”, (b) desirable above all other factors, and (c) the future of the industry, and then you get varying hot-takes as to how they are evil, or are a rip-off. Follow the trail, read the backstory, understand the current market, and realise that it’s the same sh*t in 2023 as it was in 1983, 1973, and 1933.
Unless its a rolex or omega (both of which manufacture so many watches parts are easy to source) i dont see any point in "in house" movements.. just bumps up the price and makes servicing needlessly difficult and expensive
I think it was on this site once that I said in-house movements were not only overrated, but can also be a pain when it comes to servicing, depending on where you are in the world - something a lot of newcomers to watches don't seem to realise until they have to service one. The owner of a microbrand on here seemed shocked at this and couldn't believe I was saying it. But it's absolutely the reality of things, as I see it.
Selita movement’s are great ! My Sinn 104ST has an SW200 movement and it is nearly as accurate as the Kinnisi movement in my Tudor , so basically bloody good value in price comparison vs build & accuracy.
It's a 60-80 years from now problem for the most part; but yeah, essentially a red herring since almost all of us will be long gone before it is a possible issue
err… brand and watchmaker are different things completely. Define watchmaker - again, pre 1970 there were hundreds of brands who just grabbed an ebauche (AS, FHF, FEF, Peseux, ETA, Felsa, Citizen…), slapped on a custom bridge, grabbed a case and a dial, and sh*t them out onto the market en masse.
What do you think watchmakers are, wizards who live in the Swiss Alps? Successful watch brands were those who took the basic parts available and turned them into something of note. I mean Sicura bought Breitling when it was on its arse, and just flipped everything under that name because of the clout, and Sicura were pin-pallet pushers - this is business. What do you want from a watch exactly, because it’s not exactly different now from then. You do know that the Trinity used JLC ebauches to form their movements - so do we just sack them off now as they didn’t make their own base?
Also If Tag have to re-tool to adjust from ETA to Sellita as their base, who else is picking up the cost?
I’m really at a loss now…
Yes I'm fully aware, but then again they didn't tout them as "in-house"
Yeah they are wizards Arry Pottah. Yes I'm fully aware of holy trinity using JLC, but they can make their own stuffs as well, Like truly their own, what they did or didn't doesn't really matter TODAY, I'm just talking about the watch industry today, how they tout being in-house when those movements don't have in-house roots, it feels just wrong to me
Oh also, when ETA cut off supplies, it was up to brands themselves to find something else, it's about their own survival, why should we pick up their cost?
Ferrari sure looks nice, but I really don't want it even if I was Elon Musk rich, don't need a fickle car like Ferrari, a Honda or Toyota or BMW is good enough for me tbh, but then again, I have zero interest in cars...
Guess I prefer in-house. My collection consists of Omega's and Seiko's ,and microbrands don't appeal to me. 🤔
Guess I prefer in-house. My collection consists of Omega's and Seiko's ,and microbrands don't appeal to me. 🤔
Same here, basically, as long as I can avoid "in-house" premium, I'm happy lol
Yes I'm fully aware, but then again they didn't tout them as "in-house"
Yeah they are wizards Arry Pottah. Yes I'm fully aware of holy trinity using JLC, but they can make their own stuffs as well, Like truly their own, what they did or didn't doesn't really matter TODAY, I'm just talking about the watch industry today, how they tout being in-house when those movements don't have in-house roots, it feels just wrong to me
Oh also, when ETA cut off supplies, it was up to brands themselves to find something else, it's about their own survival, why should we pick up their cost?
I give up… (this is not even funny anymore, just folks railing against things that have always been the case, and just don’t get economics. Businesses are not charities and monopolies are just that - monopolies. Never-mind that going in-house is not always evil in terms of decision, and is a necessity rather than a diabolical scheme, but no, let’s just throw the baby out with the bath water).
Same here, basically, as long as I can avoid "in-house" premium, I'm happy lol
Wouldn't turn down a Daniels or Roger Smith as a gift tho 😉🤣
Wouldn't turn down a Daniels or Roger Smith as a gift tho 😉🤣
Imagine servicing them... the cost of it alone will ruin your bank account lol
Agreed. I’ll take a reworked ETA, etc over an in-house with only prestige going for it. Teddy Baldassarre says as much frequently. For one, maintenance costs are lower.
I don't think anyone is arguing a crappy in house movt would preferred over a reliable off the shelf option. The idea is the in house movt is actually good and it what separates some of the brands.