Interesting Frank Muller Interview

[Dimitris]

http://www.horomundi.com/forum/showthread.php?t=116


Are there brands that make high end products but have successfully gone mass?

A good example is Rolex. Now, a Rolex watch has enormous value relative to its price. It is really excellent value. It is the accessibility of its price that allows Rolex to sell 1 million watches a year. But have you ever looked at a Rolex movement? These are incredibly high end movements. They are high end in the manner they are made, in the way they are decorated in the way that they are designed, and they are in-house. I look at Rolex objectively I would say they are incredible because you have tremendous value. The same thing goes for an Omega Constellation chronograph. You look at the price and then you realize for this relatively low price you are getting a high end movement.

[mikey]

The Rolex movement alone is worth $1100-1500 without the case!

[nko51]

Simply put, In my opinion, you get the best bang for the buck with Rolex.

[tonelar]

I've seen far prettier movements than on my Rolex... however pretty, rugged and accurate don't often go hand in hand (in hand?).

Originally Posted by tonelar

I've seen far prettier movements than on my Rolex... however pretty, rugged and accurate don't often go hand in hand (in hand?).

They are certainly not exclusive of each other either.....

On the interview, reading a lot of his comments I have a hard time taking them or him seriously. Too many contradictions there, and it sounds like his sole purpose is protecting the profitability of certain brands and complications.

To basically degrade JLC (who he admits makes fanstatic "top" quality) because they offer watches with great complications and workmanship at a lower price is pretty self serving IMO. He then turns around and praises Rolex for esentially the same thing (IMO Rolex is not in the same league as JLC on many fronts......I personally consider Rolex at least 1 step down, if not 2 from makers like JLC). I think it's pretty obvious that if he considers you competition, you will be in his sights.

Sounds like a lot of sour grapes to me.

[Dimitris]

JLC 2 steps down from rolex? they make totaly different watches that can hardly be compared, but rolexes movements have nothing less than the JLC ones but a lot more.

Originally Posted by Dimitris

JLC 2 steps down from rolex? they make totaly different watches that can hardly be compared, but rolexes movements have nothing less than the JLC ones but a lot more.

I think you misunderstood. I consider Rolex to be 2 steps below JLC. And you are right, they make totally different watches, and can't be compared....

[Dimitris]

Yes sorry, rolex 2 steps below, but which are those steps?

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by Dimitris

Yes sorry, rolex 2 steps below, but which are those steps?

His backyard!!

Originally Posted by Dimitris

Yes sorry, rolex 2 steps below, but which are those steps?

Sorry, didn't realize you were asking why I thought that way. Well again, this is just my opinion, but I believe that JLC is one of the most innovative watch companies around. They make a lot of different movements and complications, where Rolex really only makes a very few. JLC is constantly innovating with new movements, case, design, complications, etc., where Rolex tends to stagnate in my view.

Mr. Muller suggests that Rolex is good value for the money, but then says that JLC makes high quality watches and sells tham at mid-quality prices (to paraphrase). Isn't that great value? Then he says Rolex is good value for the money - sorry that doesn't make sense to me, as in my opinion Rolex makes mid-quality watches, and sells them a mid-quality prices.

If we are comparing what you get for your dollar, I don't think there are many watch companies out there that compare with JLC. I have owned both JLC and Rolex, and although the Rolex cost more it was much less of a watch from just about any way I look at it. I realize many here will not see this the same way I do, and that's fine - everyone can have their opinion.

Rolex has it's place and I don't fault anyone for liking or collecting them, but honestly I feel there are better values out there (not just JLC, but more comparable brands in style such as Omega).

[Dimitris]

Rolex continious to make what they self created, Oysters, Chronometers, Subs etc. They are concentrated to make their movements as better as they get to the fields of precision, durability, longlivity etc.
A rolex with complications and tourbillon it just would be a rolex.
About the field of innovation at movements just have a look at the years rolex been having the level bridge, or the anodized rotor wheels or more recently the parachrome blu spiral. If something in the movement it just going to be different without giving something at it, it then doesnt belong to a rolex movement.

Originally Posted by Dimitris

Rolex continious to make what they self created, Oysters, Chronometers, Subs etc. They are concentrated to make their movements as better as they get to the fields of precision, durability, longlivity etc.
A rolex with complications and tourbillon it just would be a rolex.
About the field of innovation at movements just have a look at the years rolex been having the level bridge, or the anodized rotor wheels or more recently the parachrome blu spiral. If something in the movement it just going to be different without giving something at it, it then doesnt belong to a rolex movement.

Well then, we will agree to disagree!