Independent watch brand or not - does it matter?

[pegasi]

Already too many factors to consider when buying a watch? Well, I am throwing another into the mix.

What do Ball, Bell & Ross, Breitling, Chopard, Oris and Ulysse Nardin have in common? There are all independent watch brands, besides the very well-known independent brands PP and AP.

Most of the other luxury watch brands that you can and cannot recount belong to a certain “group”, a looser and easier understood term for the word conglomerate. Of the 10 or so groups, some 30 over watch brands, including some that top the list of prestige and heritage, belong to 3 groups – Swatch, Richemont and LVMH.

Apart from the business setup, is there any significant difference between watches from an independent brand and a brand belongs to a group? Generally speaking, no, although brands under a group have the advantage of sharing resources with other brands (or even other businesses) within the same group. However, the development of a brand could be limited by the group’s strategy to position and differentiate among the different brands owned by the same group. Simply put, a Longines, for as long as it remains as part of the Swatch group, will never grow into a Breguet or Blancpain for they are positioned at different ranges. Will Ball grow into a bigger and more sought-after brand? No one knows for sure, but I personally think Ball being an Independent brand has a better chance than Longines in growing its brand. There again, it is also fair to say that independent brands face a bigger challenge to be/stay profitable and successful.

How could I not mention Rolex when talking about being profitable and successful? You might think otherwise but Rolex is not considered independent but part of the Rolex SA group which also owns Tudor.

To some, independent is equivalent to unique.

So, the next time you want another reason to press the go/no-go button, this could be it

[pegasi]

Just to clarify, there are of course some more other luxury and non-luxury independent brands, other than those that I have mentioned.

[Ed.YEO]

When we have a particular label linked to a group... there will be some chance that a produce made by that label will have the same movement which is used in the other label which is slightly or in someway lower class than the initial label.

An example...
Muhle Glasschutte, is under the SWATCH umbrella. And their watches have SWATCH/ETA DNA in them. However, the brand commands a higher price tag than any other using the same heart, of perhaps a different grade, just to mention, TISSOT/HAMILTON.
If this is happening to MG, it happens to other label that may be classed above MG. So... no matter high end, mid end, low end... we're paying for the same hearts, but different price on the brands.

Under a group have its pros and cons. On the pro side, costs of maintenance can be budget friendly no matter on which class the timepiece brand is from. Parts are unified, prices are almost close.
The negative part about housing under one roof, when looking back into the histories of the respective brands, in comparison to their pasts, they tend to be lacking when it comes to innovation ties to particular brand.

How about those that are independent? They use movements produce by the groups as well...
In contrast, the independents have the choice to modify on the movements they sourced and produce niche works that cannot be found on other labels from the groups. Prices are more competitive as well... here i'm referring to ORIS.

Watches made in current days, may i say, is not comparable to watches made in the past, where it's about competition on the internal specs as well as on the price. In contrast to today's world of watches, it's about how the brand was sold.

[pegasi]

Under a group have its pros and cons. On the pro side, costs of maintenance can be budget friendly no matter on which class the timepiece brand is from. Parts are unified, prices are almost close.
The negative part about housing under one roof, when looking back into the histories of the respective brands, in comparison to their pasts, they tend to be lacking when it comes to innovation ties to particular brand.

How about those that are independent? They use movements produce by the groups as well...
In contrast, the independents have the choice to modify on the movements they sourced and produce niche works that cannot be found on other labels from the groups. Prices are more competitive as well... here i'm referring to ORIS.

Ed, thanks for sharing your view on this topic. I see some very valid points and examples, but feel you have over generalized things when talked about the pros and cons of group and independent.

First, on watches belong to group...

Some groups, for example Swatch, have many different ranges of brands at very different price segments. Some of those brands use in-house movements, some use ETA, some both. So how could "costs of maintenance be budget friendly no matter on which class the timepiece brand is from" and "parts are unified, prices are almost close"?? As for the said "negative part", I am not sure the group business model should be blamed for the perceived lack of innovation as there are many internal and external factors that can influence the innovation of a product, not to mention there are many aspects of innovation of a product like watch. I know I have cited the example of Longines being limited by the group's strategy but that is not the same as saying all the respective brands under a group "tend to be lacking when it comes to innovation ties to particular brand". JLC is an example of a brand belonging to a group that is able to carry on and build on its identity of being an innovative manufacturer.

As for the comments on the capability of independent brand to modify movement sourced elsewhere, and then sell the watches at more competitive prices...

Brands belong to group should be in an even better position to do that. For example, Omega using ETA-based movement with co-axial escapement, and now in-house movement said to be produced at ETA production facilities. Even Longines now has it own calibre on some models, so I read. Prices wise, for luxury watches/items it is always tied more to the brand premium than the production cost.

[triton]

yes and no. it depends on the type of movement used and the complexity of the movement.

when an independent brand S uses basic ETA movement. i wont be that worried if brand S decides to cease operation because there are many watch technicians who can service a basic ETA movement. i would be worried if independent brand U uses complex in-house movement decides to cease operation because there could be no watch technician outside the brand who can properly service the watch.

when i buy a watch, the brand of the watch is not the sole deciding factor but it is part of the minor influence decision making. when i buy say brand L, it is nothing to do if the watch brand is going to grow huge. when i was looking to buy a watch brand H many years back, it was still lesser known. i settled for one of the watch because it was something unique and i like. however this brand was acquired and due to the introduction of limited edition of each of the series, everyone starts to see this brand in a different perspective. now this brand went back to its basics of producing interesting complication. i admire the CEO vision who came in and turn this independent brand around and bring it to newer heights thus enabled to come under a larger corporation.

[pegasi]

yes and no. it depends on the type of movement used and the complexity of the movement.

when an independent brand S uses basic ETA movement. i wont be that worried if brand S decides to cease operation because there are many watch technicians who can service a basic ETA movement. i would be worried if independent brand U uses complex in-house movement decides to cease operation because there could be no watch technician outside the brand who can properly service the watch.

when i buy a watch, the brand of the watch is not the sole deciding factor but it is part of the minor influence decision making. when i buy say brand L, it is nothing to do if the watch brand is going to grow huge. when i was looking to buy a watch brand H many years back, it was still lesser known. i settled for one of the watch because it was something unique and i like. however this brand was acquired and due to the introduction of limited edition of each of the series, everyone starts to see this brand in a different perspective. now this brand went back to its basics of producing interesting complication. i admire the CEO vision who came in and turn this independent brand around and bring it to newer heights thus enabled to come under a larger corporation.

Is this another brand guessing post or what? No worries, I understand why you avoid naming brands.

The worry of independent brand using complex in-house movement ceasing operation is indeed a very valid one.

[Ed.YEO]

Is this another brand guessing post or what? No worries, I understand why you avoid naming brands...

If i'm allow to guess...

S for Steinhart, user of mostly common ETA movements, high percentage of basics. So far the company into it's 10yrs of operation, still considerably young, and subjected to be wipe out by the big groups or should they fail to attract more fans to their produce.

L for LONGINES, been around with a long history tracing back for more than 50yrs. Falls under the umbrella of the SWATCH group, uses mostly ETA+Valjoux+Unitas movement variants in their produce. In history, made their own movements but in the later years, shares same movements with other labels under the SWATCH Group. The only calibre that they made and used in their produce in recent years, goes to the retrograde chrono, and the more complex one with moonphase function.

H for Hamilton, barely little known until the recent years, when they fall under SWATCH Group. Like Longines, most of their watches utilize ETA/Valjoux/Unitas variants like any other brands under the Swatch Group. Hamilton had made their calibre in their historical pieces as well, but not today and recent years. Even with their recent release of calibre H31, ETA/Valjoux 7753 DNA is still strong and hard to deny.

U for Ulysees Nardin. Known for their niche in-house movements, as well as expensive price tagging. UN, together with other independents such as GO, PP, ALS...even a much "entry" level NOMOS fits this...

...The worry of independent brand using complex in-house movement ceasing operation is indeed a very valid one

...jolly well...

[pegasi]

I also play...

S = Sinn
U = Urwerk
L = Longines
H = Hublot

[Oceanklassik]

I am not as knowledgeable, intelligent and analytical as you gurus. I have learnt more by reading your posts. Tx for sharing such wonderful insights. But one thing I can do is to answer TS' question..

"Independent watch brand or not - does it matter?"

No it does not matter to me as long as:
1. I like/love the watch.
2. I feel safe to be owning it (ie after-sales services, parts availability, etc)
3. I can afford to buy it.

[Watcha]

It does not matter if its independent.

More important is:
1. Design I like
2. Quality I like
3. Price reasonable
4. Resale value acceptable
5. The brand will not close shop.

Even if the small independent uses eta. There may not be parts available for replacement if they closed for good. Eg case parts.

[clocking]

I just do it as long my budget is Steady I am okey . I am totally not knowledgeable I am happy okey.

Design & Quality that I like, Reasonable price with acceptable resale value. Confidence with the brand will not easily close shop, acceptable cost for servicing, I strongly go with In-House.

If the small independent uses eta or miyota, as long cheap with all packages, why not I just hantam bola.

[pegasi]

So far all said doesn't matter or depends.

Close shop/cease business seem to be a major concern, and rightly so