Swatch group bugs me

[twll]

For those of us who left their ego at the login page, this statement is immediately ridiculous.

I can afford to pay what Swatch wants, that isn't even close to the point. The point is monopolistic business practices and the companies disregard for their customers. If I had bought A Swatch watch and was then confronted with these decisions later I would be very frustrated. Their attitude of recent times is why I have no Swatch watches in my current collection and no intention of buying any. Even having an ETA movement in a watch is increasingly a reason for me to look at something else these days. The Japanese movements, Selitta and Soprod are looking better every day.

Ridiculous to some and not others. I get the statement. MKII - you can buy parts from them? No you cannot without sending in your watch.

It's the way of the world. Get over it. Are you expecting the referee to change his mind when you vociferously complain and fuss and cuss at him - he doesn't and neither will Swatch.

But then again Kobold didn't used to sell parts without you sending in your watch, but they do now.

[bedlam]

Ridiculous to some and not others. I get the statement.

You missed my point. I was challenging arutlosjr's claim that if you can't afford it then move on. Its not just about cost, and to pretend with full-caps swagger that it comes down to who has a big wallet and who doesn't is ridiculous. For me and many others its about business practices and respect for the customer.

[bakuma]

Yes, that was my point. It's like taking your car to the dealer for an air filter and being told "We'll sell you one, but only if you pay us $50 to install it" when I can and want to do it myself. Or going to the grocery store for a gallon of milk and being told I can buy it but only if I agree to pay to have them deliver it. This totally undercuts the free market. Even if Swatch charges less than one of the watchmakers I use I wouldn't want them to do it, because I don't know if it's someone experienced working on my watch, a trainee, or someone who has to get through a dozen watches that day and doesn't really give a damn about mine. Just like my mechanic, the doctor I see, etc, the watchmaker I use should be my choice. This is nothing but market control.

I'm surprised this move gets support from anyone on WUS. It makes it harder for those of us who like to work on their own watches and it's a very bad move for the future of independent watchmakers.

For those of us who left their ego at the login page, this statement is immediately ridiculous.

I can afford to pay what Swatch wants, that isn't even close to the point. The point is monopolistic business practices and the companies disregard for their customers. If I had bought A Swatch watch and was then confronted with these decisions later I would be very frustrated. Their attitude of recent times is why I have no Swatch watches in my current collection and no intention of buying any. Even having an ETA movement in a watch is increasingly a reason for me to look at something else these days. The Japanese movements, Selitta and Soprod are looking better every day.

[Heilong]

...... has hit this spot-on. It's one thing to buy something you can't afford to maintain from the beginning, it's quite another to have circumstances change well after the purchase. I'm sure Swatch did polling & research on whether driving off new purchases would be offset by the increased revenue of their new policies & obviously concluded they would.

[clonetrooper]

Last year, before SG started to have there own SG boutiques in larger cities, one high end jwtach and jewelry store in Germany, WEMPE, stopped selling Omega watches, because of the way they forced the shops to display their watches. SG made rules on where in the window the watches have to be, how big the display has to be and so on, and the shops had to buy ALL their products, not only the ones that would sell good. So after some intense negotiations, WEMPE just stopped selling them, even if that would hurt them probably more then SG in the long run.
This monopolistic behavior is pretty despicable and the only way to show your disgust is, don't buy SG. But I guess that a lot of people who wear these watches have no clue what's going on. They see Daniel Craig or some other celeb and just follow the crowd. SG is not to blame, they do it because they can. And I seriously doubt that this will change....ever!!!

[Perseus]

Most watch companies are this way. Not just Swatch.

[clouser]

It doesn't stop with just parts and movement services...these stories are plastered all over the internet. If you send your watch to a SG company, they'll tell you what needs to be done, and they won't let your watch leave their shop until it looks new again. This means you'll also be paying for a case refinish, even if you don't want one. So, you'll likely end up paying much more than what you bargained for. Does your sapphire crystal have a small scratch in it? Well, they'll have to replace that too, even if you don't want it. IMO, if they want to set rule that says only they can work on my watch, I should be able to tell them exactly what I want and don't want done to MY watch.

[wirelessness]

Are you expecting the referee to change his mind when you vociferously complain and fuss and cuss at him - he doesn't and neither will Swatch.

It's funny that you would use a 'Referee' analogy to make your point. Especially when you failed to grasp the true analogy. The fact is the 'Referee' changed the rules in the middle of the match.
That is not fair. Master Watch Makers who were certified to work on Swatch products just a year ago have now been deemed unworthy because they don't wish to partake these required 'training'
sessions that they must pay for out of pocket. Nor do they wish to buy expensive tools from Swatch that they never needed before but suddenly are required to purchase.

End result, even if an independent watch maker does jump through all of these hoops to maintain a relationship with Swatch these extra costs are going to be passed on to the consumer one way or another.

[ronsabbagh]

Look at this a different way.......

OK ...you finally saved up enough scratch to buy your grail...a SG product...or whatever luxury brand....

Now that you've made the investment, you most likely want that piece to be trustworthy, and to hold it's value.

The best way to achieve these goals (from the COMPANY'S standpoint) is to do all repairs yourself. That is....to only have the manufacture handle it's own watches. There is so much fraud/counterfeit watch traffic nowadays that it's frightening. Also, it is much more consistent for the company to use it's own trained watchmakers than to keep track of independents that may or may not have proper training. In other words, the best way for the company to guarantee authenticity and proper functioning is to do it themselves.

Why does a Rolex hold it's value so well? You know that only genuine Rolex parts are in there and that only Rolex watchmakers have serviced that watch. And because Rolex guarantees that repair.

Sure, it costs more. But in the end, I think the consumer comes out ahead because you know your watch parts are genuine, that they have been installed by properly trained watchmakers, and that they are guaranteed by the company following repairs/servicing.

While the OP's watchmaking friends might be top notch, they are the exception rather than the rule. Most watchmakers 'round my parts will scratch up the caseback just opening the watch, and scratch up your bracelet too!

[ManMachine]

Watch enthusiasts need to take actions and tell their family and friends about this. Bank of America decided to charge debit card users for using their cards - and guess what happened.