Supply and Demand: Contemplating Idealism
Hello friends,
What a time. If you’re remotely as interested in the watch industry as I, you’ve surely thought that exact phrase to yourself.
How did we get to this point? It’s worth considering the longer timeline of where the historical and root context of our industry lies. One must go back to early days of when science and necessity, promulgated increasingly with promotion by royalty (and challenging the citizenry to step up and try their hand), was compelled by the purest of drivers - an ideal. A time in which, personally, I believe was the Golden Era in watchmaking’s history. The marine chronometer. Humanity’s first GPS system. The sheer ingenuity and brilliance of Harrison. That and the ornate nature of his inventions. Necessity took form as an ideal and used innovation as its means of moving humanity forward.
Breguet introduced guilloche into his designs and added yet another dynamic into what we eventually came to know, and still to this day, our industry’s ‘raison d'être’. Rather, he induced the transition in our focus from necessity to desirability. A vital distinction and, more importantly, a trophy moment to be cherished by all. If without the ornate nature of our draw towards these mechanical wonders, then technology would’ve directly made obsolete any sort of future for mechanical timekeepers. During this time, the great masters simultaneously invented the majority of what is still considered and used as today’s fundamental basis for technical watchmaking (i.e. lever escapement, constant force mechanisms, development of mainsprings, etc). In other words, they gave us the subject, and our duty became, and continues increasingly, to provide the context.
The octagonal icon was a later chapter in which the mechanical watch industry further (and yet again) insisted advances in technology have no effect on its future. The industry, for better or worse, finally shifted into the paradigm we’ve experienced for the last 50 years. There on, we’ve gone smaller, bigger, rounder, louder, brighter. Collectors became more refined, brands understood and realized design was, if not more, important than iterative technological advances. An analogue may be drawn by considering the shared innovation of the late 19th century through the 1970’s. A time, similar to that of the Golden Era and it’s great masters’ contributions to our industry, in which human ingenuity, innovation, invention was soaring. It used to be we invented world-changing technologies, focused on solving humanity’s greatest challenges, and such. Now, we can order cheeseburgers through our phones while we “Netflix and Chill”.
And now we are here. In a sort of Twilight Zone. Retail prices being rendered irrelevant as secondary and grey market prices insure values for a number of “hype pieces”. There’s a trickling down from those who cannot participate in the…’competition’ of it all. All tides rise evidently. Bundle deals, purchase plans, background checks.
Perhaps the most troubling dynamic we’ve induced is perceived value being considered before individualistic value. The uncomfortable truth, and one that we all need to realize soon, is that we - the consumer, the collector, the enthusiast, the teenager who aspires to one day own his/her grail piece - are the ones responsible for where our industry is directed. We vote with our likes, shares, story posts, conversations, collector meetups, and ultimately, our dollars.
This isn’t meant as a critique, if anything, I, as an enthusiast and collector like the rest of you, wish to face this phenomenal truth - a majority of the watch buying our community is doing currently is not collecting. I won’t get into what all of this frenzy might be considered as it is merely opinion but what is inarguable is we have arrived at a sort of fork in the road. I wouldn’t liken the choices collectors are faced with as the brands are faced with but one way or another, we are embarking on a path that has and will continue to set the new paradigm.
Brands are faced with unprecedented demand for their pieces at each and every single price point or niche. The choice they must make is either keep to their ideals, the same ideals that have led them to their respective successes but have also cultivated a subcommunity of the disenfranchised. Or, acclimate – by way of production, outreach, organization, etc. – to the new paradigm we have entered.
As Dorothy would say, we are most certainly not in Kansas anymore.
Talk soon,
Aren J BAZERKANIAN