Let's have some fun: Do you always prefer In house movement or not in house?

[Godzillaz]

Recently I have found out using in house movement as a criteria for watch purchase is not very practical.

The more I read about the industry the more I'm convince that even buying a watch with in house movement doesn't guarantee you get what you pay for.

Do others feel the same or is just me being tired of all the lies from these so call in house movement talk. 

Hope to hear more all of you.

Regard
Tyler

[hanz079]

For me, the question is more on proven reliability.
Brands are now churning out "in-house" movements at record speed.
I am sure most would prefer to go with a reliable movement be it in house or not.
I would be damn to spend huge amounts of money just to buy the "in house" exclusivity while having the watch suffer breakdowns every now and then.
About all the lies about "in house"ness.... I would have to sadly agree...
The use of the term "in house" and "manufacture" movement can be really misleading.
But with that being said, how many of the consumers really took the extra trouble to find out more? Not many I am afraid.

[Yikkie]

IMHO, it is always an advantage for a watch company to produce its own movement.  They could then be a regarded as a true watchmaker rather than a company that makes nice cases for movements made by other companies (eta, etc).  Brands like Patek, JLC and AP will always be held in high regards because they are a true manufacture and of course a great history and legacy to go with it.  However, it is most definitely not practical to only have one criteria when deciding to buy a watch.  You must first like the design of the watch, the finishing, heritage, etc...and of course the BUDGET!   If budget is not a problem, I would say that it is a no brainer to go for Manufactures.  If the budget is limited, you would need to prioritize on what is important to you. 

Just my few cents on the topic. Cheers!          

[davidtth]

in house would be def a preferable and desire, but depend on which model especially the reliability of the movement. for some brand who were still young in in-house moment i'd still go for their ETA movement, reason why is try to reduce unnecessary frustration on a hard earn $ goes into a watch that gives problem.

rolex movement is one of best in-house known in reliability IMO, higher end would be those AP and PP etc

altho i still have a lil doubt with GS spring drive, but i do have faint on their quality control assurance, mindset 

[roystock]

I much prefer watches with in house movement.
This criteria has helped to narrow my selections tremendously.
For me, in house movement and brand heritage are two of the key guides in my purchases
 

[terrenceterrence]

eh... PP & AP and their "inhouse". Ironically the one that fetches the highest prices in auctions and in terms of "collectibility" are not completely "inhouse"

for me i second Hanz' view. Reliability tops my list and if inhouse+reliability+easy access to local servicing points/agents, now that would be perfect 

so for me... now you might understand, that is why I and such a boring modest collection. No point being inhouse while having to spend 6 months to a year away everytime it needs servicing.

IMHO, it is always an advantage for a watch company to produce its own movement.  They could then be a regarded as a true watchmaker rather than a company that makes nice cases for movements made by other companies (eta, etc).  Brands like Patek, JLC and AP will always be held in high regards because they are a true manufacture and of course a great history and legacy to go with it.  However, it is most definitely not practical to only have one criteria when deciding to buy a watch.  You must first like the design of the watch, the finishing, heritage, etc...and of course the BUDGET!   If budget is not a problem, I would say that it is a no brainer to go for Manufactures.  If the budget is limited, you would need to prioritize on what is important to you. 

Just my few cents on the topic. Cheers!          

[hanz079]

I believe in a similar thread here somewhere (could not dig it up)
Someone mention how do you consider a movement "in-house"?
Do they mine their own ore? Make every single part? Down to the spring bars and leather straps? As in grow their own herd of cows to get the leather to make the straps? You get the idea... the whole "in house" argument becomes pointless.
I remember Tag Heuer Mr.Babin mentioned that even their caliber 1887 is "in-house" even when they based the movement off a Seiko IP.
Tyler is correct in mentioning about all the marketing lies... I feel that way too...
It's misleading.
Sometimes it's frustrating when misinformation gets passed around by sales agents to consumers where in turn passed the misinformation to other consumers.
I have a friend that kept telling me his Oris is on an in house movement because it has a red rotor... a sign of an Oris movement.
I asked him who said so, he said the saleman said so.
Juan Carlos Torres, the CEO of one of the big three (VC) openly said in an interview that Lemania is still the best chrono movement out there and they are still using it as a base movement and do not have any plans of stopping.

That's why I still believe the most reliable and bullet proof movement that can give the owner years of problem free ownership is better than dropping serious moolah for an "in house" movement that needed to be away every couple of months in a year due to unreliability and teething pains.

Watch manufacturers are selling the "idea" that in house is better which is hardly the case.
Status wise, it offers some intangible value, but ownership experience and peace of mind is the real criteria.

[euclidorus]

I agree that to the non-sophisticated buyer, one can be overwhelmed by marketing speak and pay a premium just because it happens to be in-house movement. Not all in-house movements have proven reliability, while others have bullet-proof credentials. Perhaps this forum can enlighten as to which specific brands fall into either category.

[ck77]

I agree that to the non-sophisticated buyer, one can be overwhelmed by marketing speak and pay a premium just because it happens to be in-house movement. Not all in-house movements have proven reliability, while others have bullet-proof credentials. Perhaps this forum can enlighten as to which specific brands fall into either category.

Proven reliable in-house movement, easy access to local service, parts availability, resonable service cost?
(Ordinary) Seikos, nuff said.

[chrisyen]

i m going for reliability....
dont care is in house or not....
so end up alot of eta / eta modified...

it is easier for maintenance as well.... no part issue!
in house if not accurate and not reliable + expensive.... then basically u r paying premium for testing....
now adays can a watch company afford to design, build and test it for 10 yrs b4 selling it?

[Godzillaz]

..... mentioning about all the marketing lies... I feel that way too...
It's misleading.
Sometimes it's frustrating when misinformation gets passed around by sales agents to consumers where in turn passed the misinformation to other consumers......

That's why I still believe the most reliable and bullet proof movement that can give the owner years of problem free ownership is better than dropping serious moolah for an "in house" movement that needed to be away every couple of months in a year due to unreliability and teething pains.

Watch manufacturers are selling the "idea" that in house is better which is hardly the case.
Status wise, it offers some intangible value, but ownership experience and peace of mind is the real criteria.

My point exactly, of course as we spend more time in this hobby, the reading and sharing among friends. Ultimately we will be able to tell the poser from the authentic.   

However my dilemma is ...

In house (Spring Drive)


Not in house(ETA)



Here's the close up
Comparing the two you can see which one has "watchmaking" than the other. Even to an untrained eye it's easy to spot the different level of finishing and care on these two watch.



All photos by Steve G

Not only that, I don't think seiko can guarantee the repair of the spring drive movement for more than 15 years because not all part are mechanical. While on the other hand the ETA can be service and maintain by any master watchmaker for a long long time.

In this case the in house is a complete no go for me.

Is a tricky subject for sure.

Regard
Tyler

[Yikkie]

Hmm...like almost everything in life, there are always bad apples out there.  I do agree that there are many unreliable so called "in house" movements around (especially from those companies that have just started to make their own movements) but there are also proven in house manufactures such as JLC, Patek, AP, Rolex, Zenith, etc that have very reliable movements.  It goes without saying that reliability is key and it will be silly to go for in house just for the sake of it.  Like I said earlier, all things being equal, it is always better to go for a manufacture rather than one that uses standard ebauches.  A watch company is not really a watch company if they do not make their own movements.  Might be harsh but it is true. 

[Yikkie]

I do not know the reliability of Seiko's hybrid spring drive movement but finishing is just one aspect of watchmaking.  It is unfair to say that the modified ETA have more "watchmaking" than the Credor based solely on finishing.  The Dufour only needs to modify a standard ebauche and place great care in finishing.  The Seiko on the other hand created their own movement and own hybrid technology from scratch that is unique to them.  Now ask yourself the question again as to which company have more "watchmaking" credentials?     

..... mentioning about all the marketing lies... I feel that way too...
It's misleading.
Sometimes it's frustrating when misinformation gets passed around by sales agents to consumers where in turn passed the misinformation to other consumers......

That's why I still believe the most reliable and bullet proof movement that can give the owner years of problem free ownership is better than dropping serious moolah for an "in house" movement that needed to be away every couple of months in a year due to unreliability and teething pains.

Watch manufacturers are selling the "idea" that in house is better which is hardly the case.
Status wise, it offers some intangible value, but ownership experience and peace of mind is the real criteria.

My point exactly, of course as we spend more time in this hobby, the reading and sharing among friends. Ultimately we will be able to tell the poser from the authentic.   

However my dilemma is ...

In house (Spring Drive)


Not in house(ETA)



Here's the close up
Comparing the two you can see which one has "watchmaking" than the other. Even to an untrained eye it's easy to spot the different level of finishing and care on these two watch.



All photos by Steve G

Not only that, I don't think seiko can guarantee the repair of the spring drive movement for more than 15 years because not all part are mechanical. While on the other hand the ETA can be service and maintain by any master watchmaker for a long long time.

In this case the in house is a complete no go for me.

Is a tricky subject for sure.

Regard
Tyler

[Godzillaz]

Precisely. Which have more credentials? The old man who spend his entire life making fine watches using the tradition way or a big corporation who majority product are not serviceable.

By the way I don't know whether you aware that a few years ago Seiko invite Dufour over to Japan to seek his advice on how to improve their Grand Seiko line.

I know finishing is only part of it that's because the topic is center around movement. I didn't wanna go into the discussion of a whole watch simply due to the scope of the subject is too broad to reach an end.

Same thing could be say about movement. Just by developing its own movement doesn't automatically quality itself as a superior watchmaker.

Regard
Tyler

[Yikkie]

Dufour is indeed a very fine watchmaker and his services will indeed be valued by any watch companies out there.  As there are many variables in watchmaking like you so rightly mentioned, the question should really be condensed into a simple question.  With everything else being a constant (finishing, reliability, serviceablity,pricing, etc), would you not prefer to buy from a true Manufacture?  I know I would.     

Precisely. Which have more credentials? The old man who spend his entire life making fine watches using the tradition way or a big corporation who majority product are not serviceable.

By the way I don't know whether you aware that a few years ago Seiko invite Dufour over to Japan to seek his advice on how to improve their Grand Seiko line.

I know finishing is only part of it that's because the topic is center around movement. I didn't wanna go into the discussion of a whole watch simply due to the scope of the subject is too broad to reach an end.

Same thing could be say about movement. Just by developing its own movement doesn't automatically quality itself as a superior watchmaker.

Regard
Tyler

[Yikkie]

If other variables are taken into considerations, then there is ultimately no right or wrong answer since different people will value different aspects of the watchmaking process.  Dufour is a brilliant watchmaker with brilliant ideas but you would need the financial clout and technical know how of a respected Manufacture or a specialist movement company to convert ideas into reality.       

[hanz079]

If all things being equal?
Finishing could be equal, reliability could be equal, serviceability could never be equal taking into considerations of parts availability of an eta movement and an in house movement, pricing could never be equal as well since brands are charging a premium for in house.
So, if we were to gauge the situation based on "all things equal", that would be unrealistic.
Yeah, i guess there would be no right or wrong answer...
Best value overall in house? Seiko
Best value swiss in house? Rolex and Omega following closely behind.
That's what i think.

[rusminag]

Daylight robbery?
1. Brand X (Swiss Made SS) with ETAXXX movt = RRP RM5,000
2. Brand Y (Swiss Made SS) with ETAXXX movt = RRP RM15,000

Saint?
1. Brand Z (Swiss Made SS) with in-house movt = RRP RM15,000

[Yikkie]

That is a theoretical "equal" to take out the subjectivity of other influencing factors. After all, the question posted was "Do you always prefer in house movement or not in house?". It is of course unrealistic in the real world...but you would need to remove variables to answer a question directly.

If all things being equal?
Finishing could be equal, reliability could be equal, serviceability could never be equal taking into considerations of parts availability of an eta movement and an in house movement, pricing could never be equal as well since brands are charging a premium for in house.
So, if we were to gauge the situation based on "all things equal", that would be unrealistic.
Yeah, i guess there would be no right or wrong answer...
Best value overall in house? Seiko
Best value swiss in house? Rolex and Omega following closely behind.
That's what i think.

[Empty Tree 8]

I agree that to the non-sophisticated buyer, one can be overwhelmed by marketing speak and pay a premium just because it happens to be in-house movement. Not all in-house movements have proven reliability, while others have bullet-proof credentials. Perhaps this forum can enlighten as to which specific brands fall into either category.

I think Euclidorus summed it up very nicely on 2 points.

(1) It is marketing speak as this provides  an avenue for the more established players to drive a bigger gap between them and the lower liners. Getting "in-house" also justifies higher pricing...a much easier route to revenue growth than  volume expansion.... surely attractive to a growing brand.

(2) In-house does not equate to reliability. I am sure that many "in-house" can't hold a candle against  the likes of the 2824-2s and 2892s.

Interestingly, Nick Hayek said, in defending Swatch Group's move to limit/stop sales of ebauches to the independents as being driven by the need to see more players develop their  own...which in his mind is for the benefit of the whole industry.....my sense is that it is to the detriment of consumers as that would lead to higher pricing on the above rationale.
     

[rusminag]

Most reliable movt = quartz movt

PP complication movement = unreliable / prone to damage / high maintenance / high price

[hanz079]

That is a theoretical "equal" to take out the subjectivity of other influencing factors. After all, the question posted was "Do you always prefer in house movement or not in house?". It is of course unrealistic in the real world...but you would need to remove variables to answer a question directly.

If all things being equal?
Finishing could be equal, reliability could be equal, serviceability could never be equal taking into considerations of parts availability of an eta movement and an in house movement, pricing could never be equal as well since brands are charging a premium for in house.
So, if we were to gauge the situation based on "all things equal", that would be unrealistic.
Yeah, i guess there would be no right or wrong answer...
Best value overall in house? Seiko
Best value swiss in house? Rolex and Omega following closely behind.
That's what i think.

Difficult thing to do I would suspect in taking out variables.
The question wether or not in house is preferred? Yes, but not sacrificing reliability, robustness, ease of servicing, parts availability, cost so on and so forth.
I do believe it is interconnected somehow.
And if we were to summarize the answer to the title of this thread, it would be a "Yes" but with that answer also comes additional questions. Which is the main discussion in this thread I think.

[Godzillaz]

I'm confuse by your conflicting point.

If all things being equal then,YES one should choose an in house movement

but

Never a situation where all things can be equal, so YES we should still go for in house movement because is a manufacturer has more credentials?

Then the final point

There are many aspect to consider when buying a watch so the question "Do you always prefer in house movement or not in house?' is an unrealistic one and reliability is the key ....

and the answer is? 

That is a theoretical "equal" to take out the subjectivity of other influencing factors. After all, the question posted was "Do you always prefer in house movement or not in house?". It is of course unrealistic in the real world...but you would need to remove variables to answer a question directly.

[ck77]

Best value overall in house? Seiko - Yes!
Best value swiss in house? Rolex (Yes!) and Omega (eh .. really?)following closely behind.
That's what i think.

[hanz079]

Best value overall in house? Seiko - Yes!
Best value swiss in house? Rolex (Yes!) and Omega (eh .. really?)following closely behind.
That's what i think.

Omega ok bah... for the asking prices... I believe they are ok...