New North America IWC President

I only wish the best to Edouard- welcome to North America!
And to Gianfranco, safe travels and good wishes.

Nelson

???

I thought this was another Kevin Spacey thread.

Oh well.

Good luck Gianfranco (who I had the pleasure of meeting last year). And I look forward to meeting Edouard in due course.

Dear Paul,
If my post has disturbed you, I am sorry.
If you don't like the "joke" about the top gun watch, I am sorry again.
My reply to your post, if I may, is not only my personal opnion, but covers for a great part the thoughts of several regular posters on our Forum, who unfortunately left during the past 5 years.
Your opinion is very understandable and it fits, I guess, in the philosophy of what IWC thinks the Forum should predominantly be about. The contribution of IWC itself on the forum is overwhelmingly directed to the new developed and produced watches. Again understandable.
As you ask : "what is the problem?". My answer is that there is (fortunately) no problem. Several times, as a vintage collector, I have stated on this Forum that IWC, being a modern company, employing hundreds of co-workers, has to produce watches that will be sold on the current market. The fact of how these watches should look like in the opinion of collectors is irrelevant and unrealistic. Besides, in 1970 there was also not one "collector" who was asked for his opinion. On the other hand, there is no watch company in the world that uses its rich and spectacular history and achievements more to advertise their new watches . A new watch issued in 2014, is announced by calling its predecessors one by one, starting half a century or more back. This is the case in every IWC catalogue (white book) since 30 years. How strange is it than to discover that the newly designed watches are predominantly not derived from the time pieces to which is referred, but that they have little in common.

Is this a call for nostalgic contemplation : no.
Does it mean that the collectors of IWC vintage watches have lost track : yes. Could it explain why so many "old guy's" have left the Forum : yes.
Is this a disaster: no.
Taking in consideration aging, Alzheimer disease and human mortality statistics, it will last about 5 years before the oldies are gone.
But with them, maybe the revenu of this magnificent Forum since it exists : excellent friendship, knowledge, communication, collectors meetings, scientific and historical articles etc. will be devaluated too for a part.
And you have to realise that not all IWC collectors are interested in wristshots only or in : "what are you wearing today?"
And maybe, with the exception of David Seyffer, there will be no IWC officer for a collector to contact in the near future. Or would you think that a new Kurt Klaus or a new Hannes Pantli will stand up ? In fact the attitude and feeling of many vintage collectors is best stated by you in the last sentence of your post, referring to vintage IWC collectors :
quote - "I have the feeling most of the time they are no prospect customers, as they live in the past instead of the challenging present when it comes to watches"-unquote.
How true!
Kind regards,
Adrian.
(alwaysiwc).

Adrian,
You bring up some interesting points. My observation is that this Forum need not be an either/or proposition. Those like you with great knowledge of vintage watches provide a valuable resource for all of us, even if we do not collect vintage watches. And others who show what they are wearing from the new collection propagate the species.
Some here may castigate others for accumulating fashion watches (and they know who they are) but this is at best counterproductive since, after all, IWC wishes to sell more watches.
This hobby, or interest, in collecting watches is supposed to be fun. The people I have met on this forum (with one exception) have been amazing and opened my eyes to all kinds of horological experiences I would have otherwise missed.
So back to the topic at hand... I welcome the new North America President. I look forward to meeting him in the near future.

Hi Adrian,

Your answer made me think quite a bit, thank you! What happened, is that the two worlds we both see, came together is an unexpected way, thereby making themselves more visible.

I am sure some nostalgic feelings are involved here, not a bad thing, maybe very good to address them explicitly. The "old guys", those who started this forum together, the way they looked at watches, were interested in specific aspects: after more than ten years the forum exists, some changes, shifts are to be expected. I don't think the interest in vintage watches will go away, some younger collectors will come, with their own expertise, partly built on the expertise of the older collectors. Some knowledge will fade away, but not all: that's life.

Those interested in the new watches, the way a company like IWC handles them, they are interested in other things maybe. I see that the way the watches look is considered more important than the technical issues, they are taken for granted: once explained that they are special and top notch, that is just it. When a forum member showed a schema of the UTC mechanism, most people, I, looked at it for a short while without understanding anything of it, I am sure, but because of it we may like the watch more for it. Free sprung balance: the same story, nobody talks about it here. So you have a point: what to write about, just showing the watches?

As for the camaraderie, this is ageless. Sadly enough, some older members will inevitably become less active when it comes to meeting each other, but the younger will do so too, the forum community will evolve.

This forum community has a place for all types of collectors, as the different groups show: there is enough input in all groups. And then an announcement of the current exciting world meets a reaction from the older beautiful world...

Kind regards,
Paul

I love my new Ingenieur. I have seen people comment that it is not anti-magnetic therefore not a true Inge etc etc. But that doesn't really bother me. I appreciate it for what it is. Yes, the look of it played a large part in my decision to purchase. But I have to be honest, it wouldn't matter how clever or how much heritage a particular watch has, if it is ugly, I wouldn't buy it. I absolutely love the materials used and the sapphire case back of the 322504. I can just sit and stare at the movement. The design is brilliant and I just love the colours/materials used. Does that make me a collector of fashion pieces? I don't think so. I could be wrong.

I am relatively new to IWC. I became aware of them just over 3 years ago when I saw my first Da Vinci. I have been in love with the brand ever since. So I have come along at a time when lots of change was going on. Personally I love the re vamp of the Inge and the Aquatimer line. The new direction IWC are heading in excites me. I don't see that as a bad thing.

But, I also love the heritage/history etc of the brand. I have managed to pick up all the catalogues from the late 80's onwards and spend hours reading them. I have a solid list of older IWC's that, over time, I will add to the collection. When the time comes and money permits, I can't wait to start tracking down certain pieces.

I guess this has wandered off the thread topic of welcoming the new North American IWC president but there you go.

Surely there is room on this forum for the old collectors right down to the new fans like myself. I hope so anyway.

Cheers,

Jarrod

[QUOTE="waikato7"]

Surely there is room on this forum for the old collectors right down to the new fans like myself. I hope so anyway.

/QUOTE]

I hope so too. But certain attitudes need to change. Everyone should feel welcome here. Currently, there are a group of collectors from Asia who do not feel welcome. That needs to change.

Only asian collectors ?

WHY don't Asian collectors feel welcome? And who else doesn't? There are hardly any unfriendly voices that I've heard. A couple of critics of the brand itself, and that is all. No?

No offense but personally I would send Kern to sell perfumes for Richemont. He would be a great addition to their marketing team and can take all his celebrities with him. IWC cash cow works at the moment but there will be nothing left of the company heritage if it doesn't return back to the roots with a new leadership.

100% agree. I'm loving my small collection and participating on this forum. It is great fun. I learn new things every other day.

Dear Martin,
Being around from the start of the Forum I feel responsible and I urge you to respect the rules of this Forum.
There is no need to step over the red line.
The gap between critisism and offense should not be crossed.
Let us avoid by any price what did happen to the German IWC Forum.
Kind regards,
Adrian,
(alwaysiwc).

Why should, for instance I, be offended by what you write? Let's look at it in some detail.

Mr. Kern would problably be great in about any endeavour where marketing and consumers are important. As in watches, he would be successful in perfumes too. With or without the celebrities, I'm not sure, they seem to help IWC quite a bit to be successful. As for me, I am less affected by them.

IWC being a cash cow implies that a less than desirable effort is put into the company to renew, develop, invest. That these efforts were in the past, and that the revenues are enjoyed in a complacent way. As far as I know this is not true, quite some money and effort is spent to develop facilities, movements, models, quality control, you name it. I wonder what information you have to the contrary, my guess is you don't.

Nothing left of the company heritage if ... (see later). The first question of course is if that would be a bad thing, but let's say yes, and that it might lead to a company with huge problems, like a too small customer base, and therefore a sinking sales volume. Such a doomsday scenario cannot be taken seriously in the light of the efforts taken. One scenario to the worse is doing nothing, keeping things as they are, or were: a museum of a once successful factory. Another scenario, to take stupid decisions, like not looking at the customers, the market (those who buy, not those that talk), making stuff hardly anybody wants. I see no signs in these directions.

... if return to the roots. First, what do you mean by roots? Good quality watches: check. Recognisable watch families: check. Watches that look like fifty year ago: no check (probably they wouldn't sell enough). In my opinion roots weren't left, but were interpreted in a new way to fit the needs of now, and to stay successful. Does return to roots then mean to go back to a non-profitable situation? I cannot imagine that this is what you like, or?

New leadership: this of course will happen eventually, but it will be challenged to be as successful as the current one. But it will have a head start with a very strong company, unlike say 20 years ago, not a "nothing" company.

So, in my view, you are totally incorrect in your assumptions and conclusions. As the current state of affairs is not too difficult to see, the question is: why do you state what you state? In my opinion it can only be a not too benign emotion towards the brand and what it represents. That of course is quite OK, as long as we see it for what it is.

Kind regards,
Paul

You know, I'm looking at the new Aquatimer collection and I see plenty of the older Aquatimers present. Yes, there are some, too me, silly interpretations in the new watches, but they are clearly Aquatimers.
Similarly, the present Portugieser collection holds numerous design cues from its history, perhaps even moreso than the Aquatimers. Nothing silly about this line; perhaps an unnecessary piece here or there.
My point is that IWC IS attempting to reinterpret the old with the new renditions within each family. The thing is, when you try to refine, redefine, update the classic models to be contemporary and to house new technologies within the cases of those new watches, the changes you make will be hit or miss. Some will hit with everyone and some will miss with everyone and, more likely than not, most will hit with some and miss with some. But the brand cannot be condemned for mistakes; and it should not be condemned for remembering the bottom line, as all businesses (even historic watch companies) must. EVEN if the bottom line is the most important consideration. That's business.
I'm not fond of most Aquatimers presently, but I don't particularly like diving watches. For the most part I like the Pilots (I've come around) but I think there is some room for some different design cues in this line. Portugiesers I love but there are some models that are missing-I'm sure that didn't sell well-that could be added back to the line. But when I look at the present-day Aquatimers, Pilots and Portugiesers I can see the old ones reinterpreted. If all the reinterpretations are not to everyone's liking, look elsewhere. But don't condemn the brand because it doesn't get it right with "You". It's getting it right with a lot of people, who feel like "You" do about what is important. They just don't agree with "You" that IWC missed the boat with a particular watch "You" don't like.

Yes, thank you Mike. You understood very well where I was going when I posted my provocative comment earlier. I believe that if you are in a fashion industry, you can afford and even must experiment. There will be eventually more hits than misses especially if you back it up by healthy marketing budget. And if you miss, you can refresh the collection every season, every year or maybe every 5 years.
But I never considered IWC a fashion brand. Great brands look beyond of what is selling today and the best of the best in this business know that there is no room for such experiments. I guess I can summarize it by the following mission statement: Not slow, but unhurried. Thorough and painstaking. Perfection demands patience.

[b]I believe that if you are in a fashion industry, you can afford and even must experiment. There will be eventually more hits than misses especially if you back it up by healthy marketing budget. And if you miss, you can refresh the collection every season, every year or maybe every 5 years.
But I never considered IWC a fashion brand. Great brands look beyond of what is selling today and the best of the best in this business know that there is no room for such experiments. I guess I can summarize it by the following mission statement: Not slow, but unhurried. Thorough and painstaking. Perfection demands patience.

Martin[/b]

Martin, you hit the nail on the head. IWC talks the talk but does not walk the walk. There is a lot of talk about its rich heritage, but the Ingenieur and Pilot families have been trashed with their essence abandoned in favor of dubious cosmetic attributes, rendering most of them expensive fashion watches, with an august member of this forum describing a model he actually owns as "a Swatch on steroids".
The Portuguese, the Portofino, the da Vinci families have, so far and for the most part, escaped with minor damage. The Aquatimer family, however, although still waterproof, already shows signs of obesity.
I am obviously a "boring traditionalist" with an aversion to short term thinking, and the proclivity to look beyond the horizon, and reflect on the long term effects of his decisions.

I think IWC did a Sterling job of revamping the Inge line. I will wait until I see the AT's in the flesh but I like what I see. Time marches on.