5 ms·

It feels like there's an impending crunch in the luxury dumb watch industry. When there is productivity to be had by buying a smart watch, how can expensive dum

It feels like there's an impending crunch in the luxury dumb watch industry. When there is productivity to be had by buying a smart watch, how can expensive dumb watches compete?

Mikeb85 12y ago
High end watches are about either status, or bought because they're mechanical art. That's why some cost more than your house or car... Its not about 'function'. A Picasso doesn't compete with your TV, nor does Viannay Halter or Felix Baumgartner compete with Apple.
robotresearcher 12y ago
Expensive watches are not about productivity or any technical functionality. They are a signal of wealth to others. A $30 Casio keeps better time than a handmade mechanical watch at 1,000 times the price.
- count 12y ago
  They're no different than earrings or bracelets for women (generally). I keep time accurately with my GPS time synchronized cell phone. The watch is for show, literally. Some of them are amazing.
count 12y ago
Because some people buy the luxury dumb watches because they're amazing mechanical engineering. I don't WANT a 'smart watch' at all, but I love my TAG that has no battery or other electrical components as a piece of engineering jewelry.
- jjoonathan 12y ago
  Out of curiosity (not hostility or snark, I swear) what is it about mechanical engineering of watches that draws such admiration? Is it because the components are large enough to see but small enough to look complicated? Is it a symbol of an idealized past? It seems quite difficult to make the case that the mechanical watch is superior in terms of human ingenuity, manufacturing / supply chain sophistication, or sheer number of "clever tricks," but I'm not entirely comfortable with the explanation that it's just a status symbol that gains its value from exclusivity or brand.
  - ericd 12y ago
    Have you ever seen a naked mechanical watch? It's wonderful to watch it work, with continuously moving/oscillating pieces driving discrete mechanics, all of it tightly packed, all of it delicate, with some pieces apparently the width of a hair, flexing this way and that. Watching a nice mechanical watch is like watching a tiny ballet of parts. Your microprocessor is obviously much more complex, but there's no observable operation to marvel at. There's no visceral awe component.
    - lmm 12y ago
      You might like http://techno-logic-art.com/tower.htm http://techno-logic-art.com/tower.htm .
      - ericd 12y ago
        That's pretty amazing looking :-) I wish he had a video of it in motion, though!
  - 2muchcoffeeman 12y ago
    I always saw mechanical watch collecting more like art collecting.
  - kaolinite 12y ago
    I too am a watch enthusiast and thought I'd give my take in case count doesn't respond with his. There are a few reasons for me. First, check out this video. Personally I think the watch is ugly as hell, but if anything shows you some of the craftsmanship that goes into a watch, this would be it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIXPplShtg0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIXPplShtg0 Another reason is that I'm a programmer and clockwork is a form of programming. I don't know much about watchmaking (I'm hoping to eventually go to watchmaking school - not for many years though I imagine) but I read quite a bit about it and it fascinates me. It's similar to how the idea of programming on an incredibly old computer with practically no resources fascinates me. Complaining about only having 2K of memory? At least you've got electricity! There's a hell of a lot of invention and, well, hacking that goes into watchmaking too. Take the perpetual calendar, for example - a type of watch that only needs to be adjusted once every 100 years because it tracks leap years. Moon phases that are accurate for 5400 years[1]. Planetariums on your wrist, all powered by clockwork[2]. Dials that take a century to complete a rotation. I also love the human aspect of watchmaking. The level of craftsmanship in a high end watch, such as the Patek Philippe you saw in the video, is incredible. I love the attention to detail and the care that goes into every single component: even components that are buried deep inside the watch are still polished and decorated by hand. Pointless? Yes! But I can't help but love it. You mention supply chain sophistication and you might be right - but don't think that the supply chains for watches aren't sophisticated. If you're interested, Hodinkee.com recently published an article about their tour around the Rolex manufacture. You might be interested in the level of complexity: http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/inside-rolex http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/inside-rolex It's a long article but if you search for "Parachrom Hairspring", that section will give you a bit of insight into the kind of invention that goes into modern watchmaking. However, after all of that justification, I'll fully admit that it's pointless. A $100 quartz watch is typically more accurate than a $10,000 mechanical. It's pretty much all about emotion, similar to how some people can become attached to paintings where all others see is paint on canvas. [1] http://monochrome-watches.com/a-worlds-first-christiaan-van-der-klaauw-real-moon-tides-indicates-the-sea-level-tides/ http://monochrome-watches.com/a-worlds-first-christiaan-van-... [2] http://www.vancleefarpels.com/us/en/article/10935/midnight-planetarium-timepiece http://www.vancleefarpels.com/us/en/article/10935/midnight-p... (Hm, I wrote quite a bit more than I intended to and must have given you at least an hours worth of reading/watching material! Perhaps I should write this up as a blog post sometime.)
manicdee 12y ago
Battery life. Aesthetics. Heirloom status vs planned obsolescence. That's three right off the bat, and I haven't worn a watch for 20 years. I am sure an actual watch owner will have more. To paraphrase Darth Vader: Do not be too proud of this battery powered wonder you have rented. The ability to diagnose medical conditions is insignificant next to the dark side of a month-long international trip.
Liuser 12y ago
There is no crunch. People who buy watches buy them for their own aesthetic appeal, fashion, and analog engineering. They are also pieces of jewelry that can be passed from generation to generation.
throwawaymsft 12y ago
Are luxury watches about productivity? Are expensive restaurants about nutrition?
- flinty 12y ago
  They are not, but technology gadgets are driven to improvement with speeds and design, a luxury smartwatch will be just as prone to being out of date a year later as an entry level smartwatch
charlesdm 12y ago
Expensive watches are indicators of wealth. As are boats/jets/sports cars/etc. Tech might be a bit of an outlier, but non tech entrepreneurs/executives/businessmen often wear good watches. They're like hidden handshakes, in a way. They close deals (or at least get the conversation started). I doubt existing "dumb" watch buyers will switch over to a smart watch. All smart watches I've seen so far look horrible (incl. the Apple one), in comparison to properly constructed mechanical watches. They also don't act as a status indicator. (Not that I care much about watches. I do however appreciate the craftsmanship that goes into building a proper mechanical watch.)
- Spearchucker 12y ago
  They're an indicator of wealth, yes. That is not (always) why people buy them. Some (like you, and I) like the craftsmanship, and the quality that comes from it. Nobody sees my hand-woven Egyptian cotton sheets, but I have them. The watch, because of how it was made, and because I like to look at it. The bed linen because of how it feels. I drive a 1972 BMW 3.0CSL because (no particular order) of how it looks, how it drives, because it doesn't have a single chip in it, and because of how it sounds. Not because it turns heads (which it certainly does). All of this leads to expensive smart watches - I have a Microsoft Band for the SDK (I want to try multi-factor authN with it, based on this - https://www.wittenburg.co.uk/Entry.aspx?id=69e92695-f6eb-42ed-9258-dc4443493059 https://www.wittenburg.co.uk/Entry.aspx?id=69e92695-f6eb-42e...). Beyond that, nothing. The (few) nice things I have are because they please me - not for their ability to impress others. But then, I'm not wealthy. Maybe when you get there, the outlook changes.
kendranash 12y ago
Everyone is worried that this will be the next iPhone, and do not want to be left behind this time. So they are exploring projects at this stage. Not a bad thing. The same thing happened with the plethora of tablets a few years ago.
bri3d 12y ago
With the productivity / efficiency to be had by buying a quartz watch, how can mechanical watches compete? This question was answered in the 1970s "Quartz Crisis" : watches aren't about functionality.
ForHackernews 12y ago
Here's an interesting article discussing the high-end watch market: http://www.theverge.com/2015/3/9/8176049/apple-watch-edition-vs-rolex-benjamin-clymer-interview http://www.theverge.com/2015/3/9/8176049/apple-watch-edition... The point is nobody buys a $176,000 watch for "productivity" reasons.

It feels like there's an impending crunch in the luxury dumb watch industry. When there is productivity to be had by buying a smart watch, how can expensive dumb watches compete?

Mikeb85 12y ago

High end watches are about either status, or bought because they're mechanical art. That's why some cost more than your house or car... Its not about 'function'. A Picasso doesn't compete with your TV, nor does Viannay Halter or Felix Baumgartner compete with Apple.

robotresearcher 12y ago

Expensive watches are not about productivity or any technical functionality. They are a signal of wealth to others. A $30 Casio keeps better time than a handmade mechanical watch at 1,000 times the price.

count 12y ago
They're no different than earrings or bracelets for women (generally). I keep time accurately with my GPS time synchronized cell phone. The watch is for show, literally. Some of them are amazing.

count 12y ago

Because some people buy the luxury dumb watches because they're amazing mechanical engineering. I don't WANT a 'smart watch' at all, but I love my TAG that has no battery or other electrical components as a piece of engineering jewelry.

jjoonathan 12y ago
Out of curiosity (not hostility or snark, I swear) what is it about mechanical engineering of watches that draws such admiration? Is it because the components are large enough to see but small enough to look complicated? Is it a symbol of an idealized past? It seems quite difficult to make the case that the mechanical watch is superior in terms of human ingenuity, manufacturing / supply chain sophistication, or sheer number of "clever tricks," but I'm not entirely comfortable with the explanation that it's just a status symbol that gains its value from exclusivity or brand.
- ericd 12y ago
  Have you ever seen a naked mechanical watch? It's wonderful to watch it work, with continuously moving/oscillating pieces driving discrete mechanics, all of it tightly packed, all of it delicate, with some pieces apparently the width of a hair, flexing this way and that. Watching a nice mechanical watch is like watching a tiny ballet of parts. Your microprocessor is obviously much more complex, but there's no observable operation to marvel at. There's no visceral awe component.
  - lmm 12y ago
    You might like http://techno-logic-art.com/tower.htm http://techno-logic-art.com/tower.htm .
    - ericd 12y ago
      That's pretty amazing looking :-) I wish he had a video of it in motion, though!
- 2muchcoffeeman 12y ago
  I always saw mechanical watch collecting more like art collecting.
- kaolinite 12y ago
  I too am a watch enthusiast and thought I'd give my take in case count doesn't respond with his. There are a few reasons for me. First, check out this video. Personally I think the watch is ugly as hell, but if anything shows you some of the craftsmanship that goes into a watch, this would be it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIXPplShtg0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yIXPplShtg0 Another reason is that I'm a programmer and clockwork is a form of programming. I don't know much about watchmaking (I'm hoping to eventually go to watchmaking school - not for many years though I imagine) but I read quite a bit about it and it fascinates me. It's similar to how the idea of programming on an incredibly old computer with practically no resources fascinates me. Complaining about only having 2K of memory? At least you've got electricity! There's a hell of a lot of invention and, well, hacking that goes into watchmaking too. Take the perpetual calendar, for example - a type of watch that only needs to be adjusted once every 100 years because it tracks leap years. Moon phases that are accurate for 5400 years[1]. Planetariums on your wrist, all powered by clockwork[2]. Dials that take a century to complete a rotation. I also love the human aspect of watchmaking. The level of craftsmanship in a high end watch, such as the Patek Philippe you saw in the video, is incredible. I love the attention to detail and the care that goes into every single component: even components that are buried deep inside the watch are still polished and decorated by hand. Pointless? Yes! But I can't help but love it. You mention supply chain sophistication and you might be right - but don't think that the supply chains for watches aren't sophisticated. If you're interested, Hodinkee.com recently published an article about their tour around the Rolex manufacture. You might be interested in the level of complexity: http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/inside-rolex http://www.hodinkee.com/blog/inside-rolex It's a long article but if you search for "Parachrom Hairspring", that section will give you a bit of insight into the kind of invention that goes into modern watchmaking. However, after all of that justification, I'll fully admit that it's pointless. A $100 quartz watch is typically more accurate than a $10,000 mechanical. It's pretty much all about emotion, similar to how some people can become attached to paintings where all others see is paint on canvas. [1] http://monochrome-watches.com/a-worlds-first-christiaan-van-der-klaauw-real-moon-tides-indicates-the-sea-level-tides/ http://monochrome-watches.com/a-worlds-first-christiaan-van-... [2] http://www.vancleefarpels.com/us/en/article/10935/midnight-planetarium-timepiece http://www.vancleefarpels.com/us/en/article/10935/midnight-p... (Hm, I wrote quite a bit more than I intended to and must have given you at least an hours worth of reading/watching material! Perhaps I should write this up as a blog post sometime.)

manicdee 12y ago

Battery life. Aesthetics. Heirloom status vs planned obsolescence. That's three right off the bat, and I haven't worn a watch for 20 years. I am sure an actual watch owner will have more. To paraphrase Darth Vader: Do not be too proud of this battery powered wonder you have rented. The ability to diagnose medical conditions is insignificant next to the dark side of a month-long international trip.

Liuser 12y ago

There is no crunch. People who buy watches buy them for their own aesthetic appeal, fashion, and analog engineering. They are also pieces of jewelry that can be passed from generation to generation.

throwawaymsft 12y ago

Are luxury watches about productivity? Are expensive restaurants about nutrition?

flinty 12y ago
They are not, but technology gadgets are driven to improvement with speeds and design, a luxury smartwatch will be just as prone to being out of date a year later as an entry level smartwatch

charlesdm 12y ago

Expensive watches are indicators of wealth. As are boats/jets/sports cars/etc. Tech might be a bit of an outlier, but non tech entrepreneurs/executives/businessmen often wear good watches. They're like hidden handshakes, in a way. They close deals (or at least get the conversation started). I doubt existing "dumb" watch buyers will switch over to a smart watch. All smart watches I've seen so far look horrible (incl. the Apple one), in comparison to properly constructed mechanical watches. They also don't act as a status indicator. (Not that I care much about watches. I do however appreciate the craftsmanship that goes into building a proper mechanical watch.)

Spearchucker 12y ago
They're an indicator of wealth, yes. That is not (always) why people buy them. Some (like you, and I) like the craftsmanship, and the quality that comes from it. Nobody sees my hand-woven Egyptian cotton sheets, but I have them. The watch, because of how it was made, and because I like to look at it. The bed linen because of how it feels. I drive a 1972 BMW 3.0CSL because (no particular order) of how it looks, how it drives, because it doesn't have a single chip in it, and because of how it sounds. Not because it turns heads (which it certainly does). All of this leads to expensive smart watches - I have a Microsoft Band for the SDK (I want to try multi-factor authN with it, based on this - https://www.wittenburg.co.uk/Entry.aspx?id=69e92695-f6eb-42ed-9258-dc4443493059 https://www.wittenburg.co.uk/Entry.aspx?id=69e92695-f6eb-42e...). Beyond that, nothing. The (few) nice things I have are because they please me - not for their ability to impress others. But then, I'm not wealthy. Maybe when you get there, the outlook changes.

kendranash 12y ago

Everyone is worried that this will be the next iPhone, and do not want to be left behind this time. So they are exploring projects at this stage. Not a bad thing. The same thing happened with the plethora of tablets a few years ago.

bri3d 12y ago

With the productivity / efficiency to be had by buying a quartz watch, how can mechanical watches compete? This question was answered in the 1970s "Quartz Crisis" : watches aren't about functionality.

ForHackernews 12y ago

Here's an interesting article discussing the high-end watch market: http://www.theverge.com/2015/3/9/8176049/apple-watch-edition-vs-rolex-benjamin-clymer-interview http://www.theverge.com/2015/3/9/8176049/apple-watch-edition... The point is nobody buys a $176,000 watch for "productivity" reasons.