Inhouse
#1
Found this on the net . A interview with master watchmaker Frank Muller .
Willy


ently, so is Franck Muller, according to the interview referenced in abraxas's latest Roundup.





What do you think of the use of the term ?in-house movement? today?

I think the whole obsession with in-house movements is completely a marketing tactic and largely ridiculous. When the Swiss watch industry started all movements were in-house in that they were created by farmers who needed something to do during the winter months. They fabricated these movements in-house. After this they came down from the mountains and they sold these movements to brands like Vacheron Constantin or Patek Philippe. These brands would take these movements case them up and put a dial on them with their brand name on it. So even at this period you were getting in-house movements in their watches but the house they were made in was not Patek Philippe of Vacheron Constantin. In fact Patek Philippe never made their own movements before 1933, and this is something they have openly expressed in their own history. But these brands would create the perception that every thing was done by them.

Can you elaborate on how they create the perception of being in-house?

It is something of a paradox and it is for this reason I said that you have to pay attention to the dreams expressed by high Swiss watchmaking. Patek Philippe for example would have you believe that they are a predominately mechanical brand but they are one of the largest producers of quartz movements (for their ladies watches) in Switzerland. Further this isn?t even an in-house quartz movement they buy it from the Swatch Group and modify it.

Another marketing tactic is to make you believe that an in-house manufactured watch is somehow better than the one that uses out sourced parts. But how can a manufacture perfect every single one of the crafts needed to create a watch because there are well over 100 of these. Are they saying they can do each of these crafts better than everyone else? The watch industry was one that from the beginning outsourced parts such as screws, wheels and other components from specialty suppliers.
- Jeg er engelsk - bor i Danmark, forstår dansk - men foretrækker at skrive på engelsk Icon_smil
Svar
#2
willy Skrev:Found this on the net . A interview with master watchmaker Frank Muller .
Willy

Jeg syntes nu at der er noget cool over inhouse værker frem for et modificeret Valjoux 7750 eller noget...
Problemet er jo blot at man ikke kan være sikker på hvor meget af værket der i virkeligheden er lavet inhouse.
Hvis f.eks. 40% af delene til værket er lavet af andre leverandører så kan det jo være et fedt...
Men generelt syntes jeg at mange inhouse værker signalerer noget cool, de ligner jo ofte kun "sig selv" og har ofte en flot finish.
Men egentlig er det vel bare smag og behag...
Venligst
Henry Lerche Rasmussen
Icon_violin

Vulcain Owners Group
https://www.facebook.com/groups/326314512747838/
Svar
#3
Jeg er ikke helt med her men jeg ved at GP har leveret til PP. Primært kvarts værker til deres dame ur.

For mig er det vigtigste at det fungere. Manufacture spiller først ind når det bliver mere komplicerede værker med innovative løsninger og opfindelser...

Manufacture er ikke ens med høj kvalitet men mere et spørgsmål om prestige generelt i de højere rangerede mærkers filosofi/branding/historie/salgstale osv.

Det ville være det samme hvis Ferrari brugte modificerede FIAT motore.

Husk på at der ikke er nogen producenter der ønsker at lave noget dårligere end konkurrenterne men priserne kan man altid diskutere om de er berettiget..
Svar




Brugere der kigge i denne tråd: 1 gæst(er)