ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

C. Davidson · 21 May 2009, 07:04 PM

Did Patek Philippe make the right choice when they recently decided to abandon the Geneva Seal?

I'm interested in hearing all thoughts.

Mosco · 21 May 2009, 10:16 PM

If it ain't broke, don't fix it, IMO. Patek should have left years of tradition alone.

Trurolexer · 21 May 2009, 10:40 PM

I don't really care about Patek, I never ever buy one of that. The price is too much for Farmer like me...

But I think Patek is Patek, whatever they did, that's good for 'em IMHO.

WatchTimes · 21 May 2009, 10:54 PM

I think Patek is well enough known and they decided to take it to the next level.
I think their new standards are higher than what the Geneva seal required? If
so they made a good move as they are showing they have taken it to the next
level, what was the best is no longer enough for them.
IF the standards are the same as the Geneva seal then it is a joke.

Mosco · 21 May 2009, 11:08 PM

Jeremy, it is simple - Geneva Seal stood for 3rd party quality control. Now, Patek is doing it in-house. They can tweak and adjust the standards as they go, which is a terrible thing. I vote BAD IDEA.

DAVIDSW · 21 May 2009, 11:33 PM

IMO Patek did the best thing by abandoning the Geneva Seal. For many years Patek boasted that 100% of their Mechanical watches carried the Geneva Seal and there was no other company that could claim this.

As years passed by more and more companies started having Geneva Sealed Pieces (Roger Dubuis, Cartier) I believe is what put them over the edge.

Hence adopting this new Patek Seal.... It will be marketed well and in the end will be a good thing...

Best
DavidSW

boa2 · 21 May 2009, 11:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mosco

Jeremy, it is simple - Geneva Seal stood for 3rd party quality control. Now, Patek is doing it in-house. They can tweak and adjust the standards as they go, which is a terrible thing. I vote BAD IDEA.

Agreed. It's a silly marketing tool whereby they approve of their own standards.

Numismatist · 22 May 2009, 12:39 AM

EXCLUSIVITIY! That is what they are after, too many 'others' do the Geneva seal now, not 'special' anymore to them or their market.

It will work, so long as they raise the bar and not lower it.

boa2 · 22 May 2009, 02:21 AM

Info regarding this, and a slew of negative responses from Patek collectors:
http://forums.timezone.com/index.php...2&rev=&reveal=

iwantagmt · 22 May 2009, 02:42 AM

I agree that as a collectors item a Geneva seal Patek might be worth more than a later patek seal model. However, as a watch, I believe that Pateks will continue their level of quality, and that this is merely a way of separating themselves from VC etc. in the minds of customers. But, because Patek's rep is based on its history, and the Geneva seal was a part of that, I wish they would have kept it so i voted bad idea.

I just read through Patek's site, and I must say that many of the wording seems too vague to be considered a real "standard" such as the rule that all hands must be gold...unless another metal is deemed better for that watch.

unknown · 22 May 2009, 10:07 PM

to be honest, I don't care.
Those seals, COSC certificates and other marketing gimmicks are not important to me.
If I buy a Patek I know I buy top quality, I don't need an extra seal to confirm this

BigHat · 23 May 2009, 06:46 AM

I read both stories regarding the decision in WatchTime and I'm in agreement that it was a wise decision for them to leave. They weren't separating themselves from VC, but from folks with no history and little interest in accuracy, simply moving to the Canton, dressing up mediocre movements and getting a GS for them.

There was NO requirement for accuracy in the GS. As many have said, GS is in more trouble w/o PP than PP is in trouble w/o GS.

ocwatching · 23 May 2009, 02:51 PM

I love Pateks but its just odd that creating their own standard and then putting their OWN seal to "certify" that its meets that standard..its just weird...

I doubt it really makes any difference to Patek buyers...but it is a curious marketing decision...

so...are there going to be two different grades of Pateks now? one with their own seal..another without?..just weird...

C. Davidson · 23 May 2009, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BigHat

I read both stories regarding the decision in WatchTime and I'm in agreement that it was a wise decision for them to leave. They weren't separating themselves from VC, but from folks with no history and little interest in accuracy, simply moving to the Canton, dressing up mediocre movements and getting a GS for them.

There was NO requirement for accuracy in the GS. As many have said, GS is in more trouble w/o PP than PP is in trouble w/o GS.

Agree.

Mikimoto is another company that sets their own standard and it works great for them. So well in fact, that many non-Mikimoto brands use Mikimoto terms to describe their products..."Like a Mikimoto AAA..."

Un-biased, third party "seals of approval" are highly sought out for various products in the marketplace. COSC, Geneva Seal, JD Power and Associates, etc. are just some examples. Customers view products with these "seals of approval" as being of good quality, and that they don't have to take the brands word for it, they have an un-biased third partys word on it.

This way of doing business works great for many companies and for many products. It also makes researching the quality of a product much easier for a consumer.

However, companies such as Patek, who have outstanding reputations and an incredibly powerful brand name, can afford to give their own seal of approval. Their reputation in the horological world is superb and many view them as the standard of fine quality in Swiss watchmaking.

Chris/Numistatist made a great point on exclusivity. No other brand out there will have the Patek Philippe Seal.

Also, with brands such as Cartier and Roger Dubuis saying that their watch is comparable in quality to a Patek because they also have the Geneva Seal, is just plain misleading to all parties concerned.

I believe that this is a great move for Patek.

iwantagmt · 24 May 2009, 01:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by C. Davidson

Also, with brands such as Cartier and Roger Dubuis saying that their watch is comparable in quality to a Patek because they also have the Geneva Seal, is just plain misleading to all parties concerned.

Good point!

topcat30093 · 25 May 2009, 05:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by unknown

to be honest, I don't care.
Those seals, COSC certificates and other marketing gimmicks are not important to me.
If I buy a Patek I know I buy top quality, I don't need an extra seal to confirm this

Excellent point Bruno.

Although I do believe that the GS had lost some of its creditabilty. Due to the fact that some other brands had been able to use the the seal via the "Back Door": even though they were not totally entitled to use it. thumbsdow

beshannon · 11 June 2009, 03:12 AM

Based on what I read in Watch Time about Roger Dubuis it was the right thing to do.

Madhatter · 16 June 2009, 09:54 AM

JLC does it with their watches with the 1000 hours test and I don't think anyone can fault their movements. So I don't really think Patek has much to worry about.

GMTJOHNNY · 16 June 2009, 10:48 AM

I agree with that Watchtime article, Dubuis etc., and think this was a good thing. Seal or not, if I buy Patek it had better be perfect. Period.

cody p · 16 June 2009, 01:15 PM

unfortunately i can't vote because i do not agree with either option. imo, they were right to abandon the seal, but wrong to create their own. it's like being the best at something, but still feeling the need to justify yourself to gain approval. show me don't tell me!

eric23 · 16 June 2009, 01:15 PM

I think Patek should have kept the seal, but I don't think people will stop buying there watches, they are the best.

View Poll Results: Did Patek make the right choice when they decided to abandon the Geneva Seal?
Yes, Patek made the correct choice by creating their own Patek Philippe Seal.	22	61.11%
No, Patek made the wrong choice by abandoning the Geneva Seal.	14	38.89%
Voters: 36. You may not vote on this poll

21 May 2009, 07:04 PM	#1
C. Davidson "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2008 Real Name: Chris Location: WXSW Watch: GMT (116710) Posts: 2,723	Did Patek make the right choice when they decided to abandon the Geneva Seal? Did Patek Philippe make the right choice when they recently decided to abandon the Geneva Seal? I'm interested in hearing all thoughts. __________________ -Cheers, Chris #15,634 "The heart of the discerning acquires knowledge; the ears of the wise seek it out."

21 May 2009, 10:16 PM	#2
Mosco "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: Greg Location: Cincinnati Watch: I like to... Posts: 18,567	If it ain't broke, don't fix it, IMO. Patek should have left years of tradition alone. __________________ Instagram - @CaliberSwiss *“A man who procrastinates in his choosing will inevitably have his choice made for him by circumstance.” - Hunter S. Thompson*

21 May 2009, 10:54 PM	#4
WatchTimes 2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Real Name: JYogi/Jeremy Location: Metro Detroit USA Watch: It's a Rolex! Posts: 5,468	I think Patek is well enough known and they decided to take it to the next level. I think their new standards are higher than what the Geneva seal required? If so they made a good move as they are showing they have taken it to the next level, what was the best is no longer enough for them. IF the standards are the same as the Geneva seal then it is a joke. __________________ "You won't rise to the occasion - you'll default to your level of training." Barrett Tillman Kentucky Colonel, Tennessee Squire & Combat Leprechaun

21 May 2009, 11:08 PM	#5
Mosco "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: Greg Location: Cincinnati Watch: I like to... Posts: 18,567	Jeremy, it is simple - Geneva Seal stood for 3rd party quality control. Now, Patek is doing it in-house. They can tweak and adjust the standards as they go, which is a terrible thing. I vote BAD IDEA. __________________ Instagram - @CaliberSwiss *“A man who procrastinates in his choosing will inevitably have his choice made for him by circumstance.” - Hunter S. Thompson*

21 May 2009, 10:40 PM	#3
Trurolexer Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: USA Watch: 5513MaxiI+PreComex Posts: 18,421	I don't really care about Patek, I never ever buy one of that. The price is too much for Farmer like me... But I think Patek is Patek, whatever they did, that's good for 'em IMHO.

21 May 2009, 11:33 PM	#6
DAVIDSW ⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ 2024 DATEJUST41 Sponsor & Boutique Seller Join Date: Oct 2008 Real Name: David Location: Orlando, Florida Watch: 1655 EXP Posts: 36,114	IMO Patek did the best thing by abandoning the Geneva Seal. For many years Patek boasted that 100% of their Mechanical watches carried the Geneva Seal and there was no other company that could claim this. As years passed by more and more companies started having Geneva Sealed Pieces (Roger Dubuis, Cartier) I believe is what put them over the edge. Hence adopting this new Patek Seal.... It will be marketed well and in the end will be a good thing... Best DavidSW

22 May 2009, 12:39 AM	#8
Numismatist "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Real Name: Chris Location: Camden ME & STT Watch: 116600 Posts: 6,350	EXCLUSIVITIY! That is what they are after, too many 'others' do the Geneva seal now, not 'special' anymore to them or their market. It will work, so long as they raise the bar and not lower it. __________________ Rolex 116600 Sea-dweller Montblanc Solitaire Doué Black & White Legrand FP Montblanc Solitaire Doué Black & White RB Montblanc Meisterstück Diamond Mozart BP Montblanc Meisterstück Mozart BP

22 May 2009, 02:21 AM	#9
boa2 "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Real Name: Howard Location: US Watch: Me Now Posts: 3,657	Info regarding this, and a slew of negative responses from Patek collectors: http://forums.timezone.com/index.php...2&rev=&reveal= __________________ "Facts and truth really don't have much to do with each other."

22 May 2009, 02:42 AM	#10
iwantagmt "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Real Name: Brandon Location: Indy: GO COLTS!!! Watch: Omega Seamaster PO Posts: 337	I agree that as a collectors item a Geneva seal Patek might be worth more than a later patek seal model. However, as a watch, I believe that Pateks will continue their level of quality, and that this is merely a way of separating themselves from VC etc. in the minds of customers. But, because Patek's rep is based on its history, and the Geneva seal was a part of that, I wish they would have kept it so i voted bad idea. I just read through Patek's site, and I must say that many of the wording seems too vague to be considered a real "standard" such as the rule that all hands must be gold...unless another metal is deemed better for that watch.

22 May 2009, 10:07 PM	#11
unknown "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Europe Posts: 2,809	to be honest, I don't care. Those seals, COSC certificates and other marketing gimmicks are not important to me. If I buy a Patek I know I buy top quality, I don't need an extra seal to confirm this __________________ Instagram : @collectible_watches

23 May 2009, 06:46 AM	#12
BigHat Banned Join Date: Sep 2007 Real Name: Matt Location: Arlington, VA Watch: Lange One MP Posts: 4,043	I read both stories regarding the decision in WatchTime and I'm in agreement that it was a wise decision for them to leave. They weren't separating themselves from VC, but from folks with no history and little interest in accuracy, simply moving to the Canton, dressing up mediocre movements and getting a GS for them. There was NO requirement for accuracy in the GS. As many have said, GS is in more trouble w/o PP than PP is in trouble w/o GS.

23 May 2009, 02:51 PM	#13
ocwatching "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Phil Location: CA Posts: 5,374	I love Pateks but its just odd that creating their own standard and then putting their OWN seal to "certify" that its meets that standard..its just weird... I doubt it really makes any difference to Patek buyers...but it is a curious marketing decision... so...are there going to be two different grades of Pateks now? one with their own seal..another without?..just weird... __________________ too much into watches...

11 June 2009, 03:12 AM	#17
beshannon "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Real Name: Brian Location: Northern Virginia Watch: One of Not Many Posts: 17,895	Based on what I read in Watch Time about Roger Dubuis it was the right thing to do.

16 June 2009, 09:54 AM	#18
Madhatter Member Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: earth Posts: 35	JLC does it with their watches with the 1000 hours test and I don't think anyone can fault their movements. So I don't really think Patek has much to worry about.

16 June 2009, 10:48 AM	#19
GMTJOHNNY "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Real Name: John Location: LONG ISLAND, NY Watch: 2007 DAY DATE 18KT Posts: 1,378	I agree with that Watchtime article, Dubuis etc., and think this was a good thing. Seal or not, if I buy Patek it had better be perfect. Period. __________________ ROLEX DAY DATE 118238 (2007) ROLEX DAY DATE 18238 (1997) ROLEX GMT 16750 PEPSI (1987) ROLEX AIR KING 14000 (1991) ROLEX GMTIIC TT 116713LN (2008)

16 June 2009, 01:15 PM	#20
cody p "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Canada Watch: Air-King 114200 Posts: 2,878	unfortunately i can't vote because i do not agree with either option. imo, they were right to abandon the seal, but wrong to create their own. it's like being the best at something, but still feeling the need to justify yourself to gain approval. show me don't tell me!

16 June 2009, 01:15 PM	#21
eric23 "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Real Name: Eric Location: Calgary Posts: 9,595	I think Patek should have kept the seal, but I don't think people will stop buying there watches, they are the best.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)