I expect that many participants in this forum are not sufficiently interested in the watch to go to the effort to read my posting; at 4,179 words, it's a shade on the long side. If the discussion is about the choice of nicknames or quick reactions to the look of the watch, then my posting is only minimally relevant in any event. It's written for people who enjoy learning about TAG Heuer's brand history and the development of their current watches; those topics are not often discussed here.
So let the discussion roll on, but by all means don't waste the time to read by posting.
Jeff
Largely due to the amount of PM's I had to send and receive yesterday I haven't read your post yet Jeff, but I will - no doubt shortly before I write my own 'First Impressions' blogpost. I hope very much to learn why the watch is so expensive; I have watched Time & Tide's video and that didn't really explain, though I guess the four pieces of sapphire glass must cost a few bob. Unfortunately I am not in the privileged position of having TAG Heuer send me pre-release info, or flying me to Switzerland to show me the watch and explain. I guess that's fair enough, my blog is pretty inconsequential in the scheme of things, and I'm sure you've never looked at it as it's far too light hearted and I don't list the power reserve in every article. In fact, most of the people who read my blog are probably the sort of people who buy quartz watches and auto Aquaracers in 'malls'... I know, pretty horrifying, I believe the common term for these people is 'customers'.
One good thing about my blog though, is I have assembled a 'council' of people (28 at present) who assist me by giving me their views and helping me understand how each new release is perceived in the world. Ok 28 is a small sample, and it's still rather skewed to the sort of watches which you probably like (vintage inspired), but it's a better gauge than just my own thoughts. This is called the COCO, the Council of Considered Opinion. And yes, it's a bit of a jokey name. What am I like? I'm only telling you this to give the next bit some context.
Perhaps TAG Heuer's experience with the Carrera Tourbillons is instructive. When you strip out every dollar of production cost to democratize the watch, and disrupt the market, it becomes difficult to then move the watch "up market". When people are seeing the entry-level tourbillon in the $15K to $25K range, TAG Heuer can't then upgrade the watch to hit the $30K to $50K market. The less expensive models create a cloud, rather than a halo.
But perhaps you can start with the $140K Rattrapante (and it's massive halo) and then find ways to introduce some more affordable models.
Of course, these kinds of moves take a lot of time.
Jeff
Yes I can see that. In the realm of luxury watches price always factors in exclusivity and rarity, and yes it's true that perhaps JCB did pitch the tourbillon a bit low initially. Indeed I heard a YouTube watch guru criticising the TH tourbillon as pointless the other day, because the whole point of a tourbillon is to show people how rich you are, if it's a cheap tourbillon what's the point. I don't quite agree with this guy, but since he is in charge of a watch company turning over 100s of millions of dollars a year I guess I ought to defer to his view point on this matter.
Anyway, the point is it's kinda hard to convince the public that a rattrapante is
difficult and expensive to make when Breitling offer one for under £10,000 and 'better' brands like IWC can also supply one at a much more affordable price (okay, let's assume the TH81-00 is higher end, in which case that's what I need to know). And let's not forget, the public are already skeptical of the brand and the £3000
premium they've placed on the Monaco skeletons, the same brand which offered skeletonised Carreras for £4000 only 8 years ago.
I am also a little confused about the whole movement thing, did TAG make the movement or did they buy it? Maybe once I've read your article this will become clear. I rather presumed they had made it from scratch if it's so difficult and expensive, but if they've bought or piggybacked off an existing movement then that's less understandable.
Honestly Jeff, I think a lot of the 'offensive banter' here is born of absolute
frustration. Unlike you, we didn't really know what we were waking up to yesterday and we were excited to see what TAG Heuer were bringing to the table this year. I think (judging by the feedback I'm getting) most of us are extremely disappointed with what was presented. Indeed yesterday I had one one COCO member tell me that they no longer wanted to take part in the council as he wanted to score 'everything' 1/10 as the watches presented were so bad and he thought it better if he stood down instead. Also I have another member who needs a few days to calm down before he can even talk about this year's releases and a third who is happy that his wallet isn't going to be troubled in the foreseeable future.
The scores and feedback I'm getting are also extremely low, for example the Monacos are both currently sitting under 4/10 at the moment, which is the sort of score a brown dial Aquaracer gets, not a £120,000 halo product. Surely a Halo product is one we should aspire to 'if only we had the money', but these Monacos are not hitting that brief. They may be technically proficient, but like I said before a rattrapante isn't
that exciting when other brands already make them. Hence why I mentioned the V4, that was something to make us sit up and take notice, similarly with the Flying 1000 (a watch I
would actually buy if only I had the money). What are they gonna do next year a £50,000 Moonphase? Yeah, I mean why not... must be pretty hard and they haven't made one since the 1980s.
But the real problem with the Monacos is they are just not
attractive. Unlike most of this forum I'm all for avant garde, I've been moaning for years that TAG is too obsessed with vintage and vintage inspired, and clutching at any possible straw to connect new releases to the 'glorious' past. So if anything
I am the one who should be jumping for joy and championing these Richard Mille-esque pieces, but I can't because they are so aesthetically displeasing. Surely you as a champion for 'beautiful old watches' can see why looks are important? Okay maybe if the watch was genuinely groundbreaking in some way (again like the V4) it could be forgiven if it wasn't the most beautiful watch in the world, but serving up a fairly ugly watch with an underwhelming complication like it's something we've never seen before is just asking to be laughed at.
Incidentally, I just showed the Monaco to someone else and his first words were... 'It looks like that Russian watch with the Joker face on it'.
Says it all really doesn't it?
