Quote:
Originally Posted by Lausanne
AP is very different from Rolex even in the way they share a common sports heritage. At the risk of sounding pedantic to the many who are initiated to both brands, it is important to remember what makes AP so unlike Rolex (both brands being superbly outstanding in their own rights). The uniqueness of AP can be traced to the marriage of high-level complications with the very concept of a sports watch. Prior to the launching of the ROO, haute horlogerie had not traditionally mixed with everyday activity watches. As their current advertising campaign says, AP did in fact break the rules with the Offshore. You simply didn't put a haute horlogerie movement in an (grossly at the time) oversized waterproof chronograph! Now Richard Mille is probably the other famous brand that has taken the idea and is running with it to a place no-one would have dreamed even only a few years ago. Hublot (I hesitate to bring up the name in this forum), and to a lesser degree GP are playing precisely out of the same playbook of tradition, high-tech materials and complications. In sharp contrast, Rolex has remained content to keep the complications to a minimum (even the Skydweller) and the materials have remained pretty much the traditional metals (cerachrom and their own gold foundry notwithstanding). Finally, as mentioned already in this thread and in many other places (see the 1993 book "Audemars Piguet"), in the world of haute horlogerie, AP is the only brand that remains in the hands of the descendants of the eponymous founding members in the 19th century. Yves Piaget, PP, VC, Rolex have all been taken over by other interests, and most would say, with extremely successful results.
|
Great well thought out post!
Obviously room for both brands in any collection as they fill different roles. I find ap more interesting and a step above rolex for many reasons, but I'll always own a rolex, and I can't say that about ap... (I'm very new to owning the brand, but have been studying them for years)