Tariffs Overturned: Relief or False Hope? – Plus Rolex & AP Grow on Scarcity – Episode 69

Summary

Openwork: Inside the Watch Industry – Episode 69 Tariffs Overturned: Relief or False Hope? – Plus Rolex & AP Grow on Scarcity

Podcast Date: February 23, 2026 Hosts: Asher Rapkin & Gabe Reilly (Collective Horology)

---

Episode Overview

This episode opens with in-depth analysis of the U.S. Supreme Court's February 2026 decision overturning Trump-era tariffs on Swiss watches, exploring what this means for the watch industry and watch prices, as well as likely next moves from the administration. The conversation then transitions to recent changes in COSC chronometer standards, offering insight into the culture of watch accuracy and collector expectations. The episode concludes with discussions of Audemars Piguet and Rolex’s financial growth strategies in a shrinking industry and debates about scarcity, customer experience, and what separates microbrands from independents.

---

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Breaking News: U.S. Supreme Court Strikes Down Swiss Watch Tariffs

[00:55–07:56]

• Summary of the Ruling:

  • Trump administration’s emergency tariffs (15–39% on Swiss watches, also EU/UK) declared illegal under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEPA).
  • Supreme Court’s 6–3 decision effective immediately, no wind-down period.
  • "Every reciprocal tariff...are now illegal, and that's effective immediately." – Asher Rapkin [03:01]

• Government Response:

  • Plans to reintroduce global tariffs under Section 122—capped at 15%, max duration of 150 days without Congressional extension.
  • Election-year timing complicates political calculus.

• Refunds for Past Tariffs:

  • No clarity on refunds for ~$200 billion paid; Supreme Court remained silent on this aspect.
  • Likely to involve further litigation and administrative complexity around customs law.

• Immediate Impact on Watch Prices:

  • Unlikely any immediate relief; administration expected to quickly impose new tariffs.
  • Currency weakness, especially the dollar’s decline vs. Swiss franc, remains a bigger driver of price increases.
  • "The thing really driving up watch prices hasn't actually been tariffs, it's been currency exchange. The dollar has fallen dramatically..." – Gabe Riley [07:14]

---

2. Watch Accuracy, Certification, and COSC’s Excellence Standard

[08:05–22:13]

• Watch Accuracy in Culture:

  • Listeners often inquire about watch accuracy; most issues stem from misunderstanding how tested accuracy translates into real-world performance.
  • Brands like COSC, METAS, and in-house standards (Rolex’s Superlative) each define differing benchmarks.

• Introduction of COSC's New ‘Excellence Chronometer’ Standard:

  • New standard falls between current COSC and METAS; -2/+4 seconds/day (METAS is 0/+5).
  • Tests are performed on cased watches, include anti-magnetism (200 gauss vs. METAS’s 15,000 gauss).
  • "It feels to me like a half measure unless there's something I'm missing here." – Gabe Riley [15:47]
  • Business logic: COSC wants to defend market position, but avoids setting standards so tight that brands risk costly warranty claims from collectors.

• Collector Behavior & Expectations:

  • Largely, collectors misunderstand how much real-world performance will diverge from factory certification. Most client returns over ‘accuracy’ are actually performing within specification.
  • "The idea that we're now issuing an even higher standard...just sets bad expectations with collectors and bad expectations around accuracy." – Gabe Riley [16:43]
  • Many indie brands skip formal chronometer certification to keep costs down; most mass-market movements are reliable enough for fair expectations.

---

3. Audemars Piguet’s Growth: Revenue, Scarcity & Client Experience

[22:23–37:35]

• Financial Results:

  • AP up 10% revenue in a tough 2025, to $2.6B—tripling in 10 years.
  • Growth attributed to price increases, a focus on complications/high-end pieces, and shifting distribution (now 90% via AP-owned boutiques).

• Strategic & Leadership Dynamics:

  • Current growth largely attributed to outgoing CEO’s strategy (“Benhama’s strategy”). New CEO, Ilaria Resta, will increasingly put her stamp on the brand.
  • Background in consumer packaged goods; focus expected on marketing and customer experience.

• AP’s Customer Experience Critiqued:

  • AP’s high barriers to purchase (boutique only, vetting process) create “mystique” but alienate some buyers.
  • "They wanted me to get on an airplane to go get it, and I respectfully declined because I don't have the time for that. I have a family." – Asher Rapkin [35:57]
  • Brand values additional effort as value creation through exclusivity, even if it means losing some clients.

• Boutique Model Pros/Cons:

  • Boutique-only approach allows for high margins (full retail vs. wholesale) but means limited access and strong gatekeeping.

• Growth in Women Buyers:

  • AP reports women now 25% of clients, aiming for 30% in two years.

---

4. Rolex: Market Share, Production Cuts & Manufactured Scarcity

[37:35–50:14]

• Production & Scarcity:

  • Industry analysis suggests Rolex has cut production two years in a row while increasing market share—rose from 57% (2023) to 61%.
  • Indicates the broader market is shrinking and Rolex is not chasing volume growth.

• Rolex CPO Program:

  • Certified Pre-Owned program not just a revenue stream (estimated CHF 0.5B) but sets a price floor for secondhand market, supporting brand perception and residuals.
  • "What it really is...which is a method of price control in the secondary market." – Asher Rapkin [40:41]
  • Exceptional reliability/QC lets Rolex back up CPO watches confidently.

• Strategic Mindset:

  • As a charity-owned company, Rolex can think long-term and focus on protecting equity and relevance, prioritizing steadiness over innovation.

• Artificial Scarcity Debate:

  • Some criticize Rolex for “manufactured scarcity”; hosts clarify this is about brand management and sustaining value, not simply limiting supply.
  • "If you say, sure, like release the constraints on demand so that everyone can get the watch they want...we'll hear complaints about...secondary value...depressed." – Asher Rapkin [47:12]
  • For the hobby, Rolex’s success and ubiquity help sustain global interest in watches.

---

5. Independent Watch Brands: ‘Value Trap’ and Defining Maturity

[50:14–56:59]

• Microbrands vs. Independents:

  • Microbrands often get stuck in a “value proposition” trap—hard to gain prestige or pricing power if value is the primary selling point.
  • Ming is cited as a brand that avoided the value trap by focusing on design, not on price.
  • "When you position yourself around value, it becomes impossible to get out of that trap." – Gabe Riley [51:43].

• Graduating to Independent Status:

  • Real marker is maturity: distinct, consistent design language and commitment to an identity (not erratically shifting products, not constant discounting).
  • "I think the difference between a micro brand and an independent is maturity." – Asher Rapkin [53:02]
  • Brands like Brew achieve “independent” status for this reason, as opposed to purely value- or trend-driven brands.

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On Tariffs & Refunds:
  "Nobody knows how, if or when that's going to happen." – Asher Rapkin on tariff refunds [06:01]
• On Chronometer Certification:
  "It feels to me like a half measure unless there's something I'm missing here." – Gabe Riley on COSC’s Excellence Standard [15:47]
• On AP’s Customer Policy:
  "They wanted me to get on an airplane to go get it, and I respectfully declined because I don't have the time for that. I have a family." – Asher Rapkin [35:57]
• On Rolex Scarcity:
  "Rolex is like the beachhead of watch enthusiasm... It keeps watchmaking relevant." – Gabe Riley [49:34]
• On Moving Beyond Microbrand Status:
  "If it's a fast growing micro brand, how will I know it's become a cemented and trusted independent? Because it's got a distinct point of view that continues to execute and fire on all cylinders." – Asher Rapkin [54:17]

---

Important Timestamps

• 00:55–07:56: Supreme Court strikes down tariffs – background, industry implications, and likely next moves
• 08:05–22:13: Watch accuracy, COSC’s Excellence Standard, and collector expectations
• 22:23–37:35: Audemars Piguet’s growth, client experience, and boutique strategy
• 37:35–50:14: Rolex’s market share, production cuts, CPO program, and scarcity debate
• 50:14–56:59: Microbrands vs. independents, value trap, and what defines brand maturity

---

Conclusion

This episode of Openwork delivers a nuanced view of big industry shifts—from regulatory changes affecting Swiss watches to the evolving standards of timekeeping accuracy and the basket of strategies deployed by AP and Rolex to not only survive, but thrive. The hosts challenge conventional wisdom on scarcity and microbrands, with candid stories and industry-insider analysis that offer actionable insights for collectors and watch insiders alike.

Transcript

[Asher Rapkin]

A beautiful watch. It was a code 1159 with the red dial. And I bought it from a boutique that was an AP boutique that wasn't local to me. And they, they wanted me to get on an airplane to go get it, and I respectfully declined because I don't have the time for that. I have a family. Yeah, and they were very confused. I mean, look, I just found that fascinating. Like, that was just their expectation.

[Gabe Riley]

This is openwork, a look inside the Watch podcast from Collective Horology. I'm Gabe Riley, co founder of Collective.

[Asher Rapkin]

And I'm Asher Rapkin, co founder of Collective. Collective Horology is an independent watch retailer based in Southern California. We carry a wide range of independent brands, including Speak, Marine, sitewinkle, Garrick, and more. To learn more about us and check out our available inventory, visit collective horology.com hey, it's Gabe.

[Gabe Riley]

So after we recorded this week's episode, we got big news from the Supreme Court. They struck down the Trump administration's reciprocal tariffs, which of course, have had a huge impact on the watch industry. So Asher and I put together a short segment which we'll play now, getting into the details and discussing specifically what this means for the industry and what it means for watch prices. All right, well, we've got some breaking news this morning, which is that the Supreme Court, the United States Supreme Court, that is, has overturned the Trump administration's emergency tariffs, which were used, among other things, to impose lately, a 15% tariff on Swiss goods, including Swiss watches. The number had been as high as 39%. Of course, the Swiss and American trade delegations negotiated that down. But today, the Supreme Court says no more tariffs, at least not tariffs imposed under IPA, which is an Emergency Powers act from 1977. So tell us what's going on here and how this affects the watch market.

[Asher Rapkin]

Right. So as some background, IPA was originally created to give the executive of the United States a toolkit to deal with national emergencies that could only really be addressed through potentially economic sanctions and methods. The Trump administration interpreted that as a broad privilege where they could impose tariffs at any point for any reason that they deemed to be a national emergency. They were sued by many, many people. That was consolidated into a lawsuit, and they were shot down at every court that they went to. And now in a 6 to 3 decision, which is notable here in the United States, a 6 to 3 decision is a pretty strong rebuke from the Supreme Court and a clear statement that tariffs imposed under IPA were not and have never been legal. So what that means is that Every reciprocal tariff which is different than some of the tariffs that have been imposed, for example, on aluminum or on or on steel, for example, or even on

[Gabe Riley]

other manufactured goods like cars and clothes washers, those are still covered by tariffs that are more targeted in nature and didn't use that broad IPA act.

[Asher Rapkin]

But the blanket tariffs, the 15% on the EU, the 15, the 10% on England, the 15% on Switzerland, are now

[Gabe Riley]

illegal, and that's effective immediately. This is what you know, in the past, when this case started working its way through the federal legal system, initially it went to the Court of International Trade and they had given, and they struck it down and they had given the government some time to unwind it. And the Supreme Court said, no, these are illegal, effective immediately. So as of today, 20th February 2026, these tariffs aren't in place. But that doesn't mean the Trump administration isn't making other plans or pursuing other avenues for tariff. This challenge around tariffs hasn't gone away. So what's the Trump administration saying they're going to do about this now?

[Asher Rapkin]

Yeah, so they've responded. They don't like this. And their interest.

[Gabe Riley]

Shocking.

[Asher Rapkin]

And their interest in preserving these tariffs is actually quite limited right now in terms of the options that they have. So they plan to lean on something called section 122, which is another path that they have to implement tariffs on the scale that they want. So they're. So we're looking at about a 10% global tariff being implemented as soon as Donald Trump issues an executive order under that particular legal structure. But it's not the same as iepa. It does not give him the same level of control. For one thing, tariffs are capped at a maximum of 15%. So no more, you know, 200%, 300% insanity like that. And perhaps more notably, they're also capped in their duration. So these tariffs can only sit in place for 150 days unless Congress votes to extend them. And he can't keep renewing them when they expire. So when they get to the end there, if Congress doesn't vote on IT, which is about 4ish months from now, then they're gone. And I think it's notable he can't invoke them again.

[Gabe Riley]

From what I understand, this is a one and done sort of thing.

[Asher Rapkin]

Yeah. And if we look at the timing here in the United States, that's only a few months away from when people go to the polls to vote in the midterm elections. So that adds an additional wrinkle to whatever pressure the administration may want to

[Gabe Riley]

put Republicans want to vote for, for taxes.

[Asher Rapkin]

Yeah.

[Gabe Riley]

So this leaves I think two unopened or two open questions here. A question number one is, well, what about refunds? If the Supreme Court said these are illegal and they have to stop now, what happens to the hundreds of billions of dollars that have already been paid in by citizens, businesses, foreign entities, things like that. And then of course, the other question is what about watch prices? Are watch prices going to come down? So let's take these one at a time. What does happen for all of these tariffs that have already been paid? Are people going to be getting checks in the mail with refund?

[Asher Rapkin]

Yeah, probably not that we don't yet know. The amount of money that has been

[Gabe Riley]

collected here is it's nearly 200 billion. And just to be clear, the Supreme Court didn't actually address refunds at all. So there's they didn't elaborate on any sort of process or even frankly a mandate around refunding.

[Asher Rapkin]

But they also didn't say that the refunds were not going to happen, which is something that a lot of Supreme Court watchers were looking for. Which this idea that, well, IEPA tariffs are not legal, but we're just going to leave it as is, they didn't do that. And that's actually a massive amount of money, paperwork and operational effort that's going to need to go in to figuring out what the next step is here. So it is highly likely that we'll see further litigation. It's highly likely that the government may take a significant amount of time to figure out a process for these refunds. So I think at this particular juncture, nobody knows how, if or when that's going to happen. And there's other challenges to tied to customs law, for example, a set period of statutory time at which point you can no longer dispute a particular import. So lots of open questions there. We're not sure where we're headed.

[Gabe Riley]

So unclear. The next question is will do watch prices come down? Probably not. I mean, the Trump administration is saying they're going to put in effect this, this new executive order with a 10% across the board global tariffs, that tariffs will remain in effect, at least it looks like for another well, presumably, I

[Asher Rapkin]

mean, we don't know what Congress is going to do when and if that happens.

[Gabe Riley]

Sure. But let's say they do nothing. We may have more tariffs a b the dollar also weakened, further weakened on this news. And we've talked a lot on the podcast about the fact that the thing really driving up watch prices hasn't actually been tariffs, it's been currency exchange. The dollar has fallen dramatically, particularly relative to the Swiss franc. At least as of this morning. That seems to continue to be an issue. So don't expect any relief, at least in the meantime, from tariffs, don't expect any relief from foreign currency exchange rates and expect a period of continued volatility. All of those things point to watch prices, most likely staying where they are, if not continuing to move up, unfortunately. So that's where we are as of February 20th. We'll continue to watch this at noon. At noon. We'll continue to watch this, of course, and keep you guys updated.

[Asher Rapkin]

Gabe, do we ever get asked about watch accuracy?

[Gabe Riley]

We have a lot I want. There's a lot to talk about with watch accuracy. So we've got a bunch to chat about today. We will chat about Kosk's new excellence chronometer standard and then some news out of both AP and Rolex in terms of sales growth and constraining production. But let's start with accuracy. So what's going on over at Kosk?

[Asher Rapkin]

So, as some folks may be familiar about five or six years ago, the new kid on the block, Metas, which I can't. I can't get past the fact that just sounds like what's the thing in the Avenger SHIELD Sounds like SHIELD Metas.

[Gabe Riley]

Sounds.

[Asher Rapkin]

It was like metas. It's like five letters that.

[Gabe Riley]

Whatever.

[Asher Rapkin]

So to me I'm just like SHIELD has five letters. M, E, T A M, E, T A, S S H I E L, D. Okay, well, you know, there you go. Theater, nature, whatever. So SHIELD Anyway, so Metas was the new kid on the block and they came on board with a much higher chronometric standard for testing than what we had previously seen more than five years ago.

[Gabe Riley]

This is 11 years ago, because I

[Asher Rapkin]

think the first metas, it was the Omega that. The PI, the.

[Gabe Riley]

The Pipe hand constellation. Yeah, that by the watch you lusted after.

[Asher Rapkin]

It was a beautiful, very handsome watch. Yeah. Anyway, it was this quite significant change, and to be clear, not necessarily in the technology that makes a watch more accurate, of which there are a multitude, but the standards by which we test for that accuracy. So as everyone who is listening to this podcast likely knows, a chronometer in its most official definition is a watch that has met specific testing requirements to be considered a high level, high accuracy mechanical timepiece. Thus a chronometer. And of course there are cost is

[Gabe Riley]

one observatory or institution who can certify chronometers. There are others horological Society of New York, I believe, here in the United States, has their own chronometer. They do standard and testing. So just because something is a chronometer doesn't necessarily mean it's certified specifically by cost. But of course, in the minds of many people, cost is. It's anonymous. With chronometers, usually that's what we.

[Asher Rapkin]

It was the benchmark.

[Gabe Riley]

Yeah.

[Asher Rapkin]

And of course, other companies have different standards that are higher in some cases. Rolex, of course, famously has the master chronometer, a superlative, superlative chronometer, thank you very much. The superlative chronometer, which is supposedly even tighter than COSC certification. And then, of course, now we have metas.

[Gabe Riley]

But the fact that COSC itself is sort of synonymous with chronometer speaks to their position in the industry, the strength of the institution. And that's something that theoretically you want to defend while someone like Metas is coming after it. And brands are even setting their own chronometer standards, like Rolex with superlative. So clearly there is some work for COSC to do, and. And they've done it. So they've unveiled this new chronometer standard. They're calling it the Excellence Chronometer Standard. And truthfully, it falls somewhere between the current COSC chronometer standard and the METAS standard. It's not quite equivalent to Metas, but

[Asher Rapkin]

before we go there, I do think there is something culturally interesting about the idea of an observatory, which I find to be somewhat counterintuitive to the way a lot of the watch industry operates, which is. It's one of the few places that we ever really see a transparent third party evaluating another party's work. We've seen this with some other standards, like the Geneva seal, for example, and we've seen reactions to that where Patek Philippe, for example, famously stopped using the Geneva seal on their calibers in order to put the. Their own seal on it.

[Gabe Riley]

That's right. You know, we have our own seal.

[Asher Rapkin]

Yeah, exactly. So, but. And thus, if you think about it, what that also did is it pulled Patek Philippe more a bit further back into, like, their own, you know, cloud of mystique, which wasn't there when they had to conform to publicly the standards of finishing of the Geneva seal. Similarly, I find it fascinating that brands at all different price points will submit to testing by that third party, where some of those movements do get rejected and have to be retested. And that's just not something that we generally see in this industry. So that's one interesting thing. And then yeah, you pointed out the other one, which is after all of the hullabaloo of Metas, creating an even tighter standard for testing. Now we have Kosk's response to it half a decade later, plus and it's not as good.

[Gabe Riley]

Yeah, and that's where it's certainly a tighter standard than the COSC chronometer standard. So to, to break this all down here. So to be an excellence chronometer, there's a six second window. So minus two to plus four seconds a day, Metas is zero to plus five seconds a day. So it's a second tighter. But the watch can't, can't go below 0 seconds of accuracy. In Kosk's excellence, it can go to negative two seconds a day. Kosk, the watches are in the excellent standard, they are actually cased. So you're testing a cased watch which is similar to the, to the Meta standard. And the Metas standard, the movement gets tested for COSC chronometer standard, then it's cased and it's tested for accuracy, power reserve and water resistance. So there's some similarity there. Anti magnetism, this is probably the biggest difference. Metas is famously 15,000 gauss, so that's a pretty strong magnetic field. Kosk is 200 gauss for their excellence standard. So overall what I find fascinating is, look, Kosk has every ability, I would assume, to compete head to head with Metas. And to your point, one of the interesting differences between Kosk and Metas is presumably with Kosk, the movements go out to COSC to get certified and then sent back to the manufacturer. Metas has famously built labs within manufacturers. So Metas has a certification lab within say the TUDOR manufacturer. Yeah, and I would assume. I don't know the details here, but, but with this, the cased watch goes back out to Kosk. Unless they're going to be building these facilities within.

[Asher Rapkin]

Well, I mean just the partnership structure of being able to build a lab inside of someone's like actual production line has to be game changing for a watch manufacturer producing at scale, period.

[Gabe Riley]

Oh, and it's game changing for the certification organization because it literally embeds them within the company. It's harder.

[Asher Rapkin]

Much harder. Yeah, exactly. You can't just cancel that contract.

[Gabe Riley]

Yeah, exactly. You're sort of held, held captive. It's like, you know, buying snacks at the movie theater. Well, you pay the high prices because you kind of have to. And so Kosk has every ability to test at the same standard as Metas, yet they're not deciding to. And it Sort of feels like a, like a half measure to me. And I mean, it's sort of like, why bother? Unless you're going to basically say like, we're just as good as Metas or even better. And certainly Kosk has the capability, the recognition and the renown to be just as good in their, in their testing criteria and the standard they'll put on a watch than Meta. So I find this puzzling. This is one of those examples where it's obvious and it's clear to me why they're doing it from a business standpoint or an operational standpoint, which is like, look, COSC is synonymous with chronometer and they want to maintain and defend that position and they want to maintain and defend their testing as Metas seems to take more and more of the industry and manufacturer set their own standards. So I get why this is a defensive move. It feels to me like a half measure unless there's something I'm missing here.

[Asher Rapkin]

Yeah, I share your quizzical point of view on this one. I don't get it either. I mean, look, I get it in the sense that clearly cost had to do something. I'm sure there's a reason why this is where it is.

[Gabe Riley]

So I have one sort of theory to give them the benefit of the doubt. Yeah. So I think, I'll be honest, when I saw this headline, I shuddered a bit. And the reason why, and I think maybe a lot of brand executives and retailers shuddered a bit when it's like, oh, here's a new stricter chronometer certification, which is. I don't quite get the obsession of accuracy with mechanical watches. I understand, of course, stepping out and take a. Taking a big picture view of this. Of course people want their watches to be generally accurate.

[Asher Rapkin]

It.

[Gabe Riley]

Right, makes total sense. And I totally get people who are like, you know, I love Seiko watches, but it bothers me that they're not regulated. And I do like the idea of a cost chronometer watch where I know, like, it's going to be reasonably accurate. I get that. But one of the challenges is these watches are certified as, you know, like a METAS Master Chronometer or Cost Excellence Cost Excellence Standard. When the watch is made, cased and tested, then it goes out into the real world and lives a life. And I think one, one challenge we have is like, we'll sometimes hear from clients months or years into the life of the watch that it's not running accurately. And two things here, one, most of the time, when we get a watch back from A client who tells us the watch is not running accurately. And we test it on a proper time grapher, and we test it using proper settings on a time grapher. Because there are things like lift angle, for instance, that have to be adjusted for different movements on your time grapher to make sure you're measuring it properly. We'll find that actually the watch is running just fine. And so the customer has wrung their hands over this. They've wasted their time and money sending us the watch, and it turns out it's just fine. B, the watch is out there in the world living a life. You know, it's. It's an object that's mechanical, and it requires service and maintenance. And it's not going to be as good or as accurate wearing it on your wrist a year into ownership as it is the day, you know, it leaves the factory. And the idea that we're now issuing like an even higher standard, I think just sets bad expectations with collectors and bad expectations around, around accuracy. That creates problems for people. So my, my conspiracy theory here is cost can say to, to. To their clients, to the brands, look, we've got this new standard. It's better than a cost chronometer, gives you this marketing advantage. You know, it's a superior level of certification, all this kind of stuff. But it's not so insane that you're going to have people sending their watches back to you in droves because it's not, you know, within five seconds of accuracy per day. I don't know that that. That would be my one way of giving them the benefit of the doubt. I just find that a lot of these certification standards create unreasonable expectations for collectors.

[Asher Rapkin]

I, I see what you're saying. I would adjust that to say if they didn't want the trouble, then they wouldn't print superlative chronometer on the dial. I mean, look, you can't have it both ways, right? I mean, if you're selling a mechanical object and your justification for part of the cost of that luxury item is an insane level of accuracy mechanically delivered. Because we all know that for pennies on that dollar, you could have a more accurate electronic solution, the mechanical solution, like that pursuit of that level of accuracy. I mean, you've got Lederer out there selling an almost $200,000 watch. It's been triple certified. The point of the cost of that watch, finishing design aside, is that it

[Gabe Riley]

means, I think there are edge cases. I think that the challenge is more, more general. And I think. What.

[Asher Rapkin]

Well, another thing. I think you look at a more mass produced object. Like if you look at a solita driven movement, it's going to operate within a reasonable, you know, a reasonable variance.

[Gabe Riley]

Oh, if it's, if it's a minute slow a day or 30 seconds or whatever it is, like of course.

[Asher Rapkin]

Well, I would say there's a big difference between that.

[Gabe Riley]

Yeah, yeah. But you know, if it's like, you know, if you know, you're checking on your phone and it's 10 seconds fast today. I'm sorry, but that's not running fast. I think so. I think you could debate that because you're right. Even if you're paying $1,000, $2,000 for a cost chronometer watch, you're right. It's sold to you and marketed to you in that way and it comes with that expectation. Yeah. Regardless of whether it would, you know, that and I.

[Asher Rapkin]

That you walk through magnetic fields, you bang your watch. Like all sorts of things happen to it in the day to day.

[Gabe Riley]

That's my point. The watch is out there, it lives a life and just like everything else, it's not going to be as good as the day it was, you know, it was not as accurate as the

[Asher Rapkin]

day I was born.

[Gabe Riley]

Exactly. I think what ends up happening because of, because of the prevalence and the success of cost and the cost chronometer standard is a lot of people just assume that every watch with an ETA movement or a Solita movement is either a cost chronometer or should function and be as accurate as a cost chronometer certified movement. So like this happens a lot with brand. Many of the brands we sell don't go through cost certification.

[Asher Rapkin]

All of the brands.

[Gabe Riley]

It's unusual for indies, even indies who are using ETA and, and solita movements and things like that to certify them as, as chronometers. That's not really what you're buying when you're buying in indie.

[Asher Rapkin]

No, but I'll add if you did do that, like if we did for example, certify all of the watch or if the brands that manufacture the watches that utilize those movements certified them, they'd all be more expensive by several hundred dollars too. So I mean, part of the reason why folks don't do this is if you know that like an SW300 is going to perform pretty darn well, which it does. And why would you increase the price of the watch by almost the entire cost of the ebosh? Just to demonstrate tested.

[Gabe Riley]

Yeah, yeah.

[Asher Rapkin]

Well, and, and don't forget you also have to regulate that watch that level if that watch can even handle that level of regulation. Yeah. So it kind of feels to me like buying, you know, a Toyota and then putting a better engine into it and expecting everything to work perfectly and doesn't really work that way.

[Gabe Riley]

Yeah. So I don't know. I shuddered a bit when I, when I saw this, but I think, look, part of the strength of Kosk is not only are they synonymous with chronometer certification, I think they sort of cast a very long shadow over the industry as a whole, where people basically expect that any movement that comes out of Switzerland, especially Solita and ETA movements, should operate at that standard, even if they've never been certified or tested and regulated to that. To that standard. So that's why I, that's why I shuddered a little bit. But, you know, let us know your comments on, on accuracy. And you're right. Look, I get it if you're, if you're paying that much money for a watch, even if it's a watch, it's a couple hundred dollars. It's a lot of money. And if, and if part of the reason you're buying it is for accuracy, then I get it's disappointing if it's not as accurate as you're hoping it to be. So we'll see how this, this plays out. I'm curious to see if brands adopt this, if it makes a meaningful difference over, you know, standard chronometer status or if, you know, cost chronometer and metas kind of still end up being the two kind of the ends of the barbell. We'll find out. Next up, Audemars Piguet. The train keeps. This is really interesting to me. So Audemars Piguet recently announced that their revenues for 2025, which we know was a brutal and really difficult industry moment and year for the industry, were up 10% in the year. And this is amid a number of interesting changes at the brand. So, of course, they're under relatively new leadership from Ilaria Resta, who took over from a longtime CEO, Francois Beni. Hama. Benny. Benny Hamas. How do you always say Benny Hamas? And I think of the Benihana restaurant.

[Asher Rapkin]

I think it's.

[Gabe Riley]

I think of Rocky IO, I think

[Asher Rapkin]

it's pronounced bona feeds.

[Gabe Riley]

Bona feeds, you know. All right, Let the record show that the word bonafides is pronounced bona fides and not bona fides.

[Asher Rapkin]

All right?

[Gabe Riley]

In any event, she took over for the. The wildly successful from the wildly successful CEO, longtime CEO, who really raised the. The profile of, of the brand. And under her leadership. The brand continues to, to, to grow and, and do well. I think one, it's really impressive that they're up 10% in revenue. We don't have the bottom line figures, but just as a, just for like grounding us, they're doing over $2 billion in revenue a year. So about, actually it's about $2.6 billion in revenue a year now. That's tripled in 10 years. That is remarkable. And they're continuing to grow off of that. Incredibly strong.

[Asher Rapkin]

Yeah, I mean it's, it's, it's difficult to do. But I do think it's important to separate the sour grapes of the interactions that a lot of folks have had with the brand from the frankly indisputable financial success.

[Gabe Riley]

Absolutely.

[Asher Rapkin]

Of that, of that particular, of that particular brand. And you know, it's also somewhat indisputable when we look at it, that part of the way that they've managed to accomplish this is through massive price increases. And I do have to wonder, yes. If, you know, and I mean look,

[Gabe Riley]

price increases and a focus on complications.

[Asher Rapkin]

Oh for sure. But I mean like clearly like they want to develop clients into multi, multi unit owners, which is not different than any other brand frankly. And they're looking at lifetime value of these clients and they're really working hard to make sure that, you know, if a client is in for a penny, they're in for a pound, quite literally and good way of putting it, you know, and that's, that's where they're trying to, to take them now, how they take them there, the long term viability of that, I don't know. I mean it's interesting, you look at other brands that have tried similar strategies, gone boutique only focused on the high end, things like that. And the one that comes to mind most of all is Elanga and Zone. And not obviously not apples to apples. Very different brands, very different products.

[Gabe Riley]

Like, do you think elanga is copying AP in that way? AP is now at 90% distribution through their own company owned and operated channels, which is remarkable. And you think Lange is doing that simultaneous or they're taking a page from the AP playbook?

[Asher Rapkin]

No, I don't think they're taking a page. I think that this is a, this is something that we've seen in the, in, in the industry before and it's somewhat cyclical. I mean other brands have gone full boutique only and then chosen to work with retailers. Again. We've said in the past, my theory about AP being at Watches and Wonders is that they, they may want to create a little bit more of a buffer for themselves and lower that number of 90% boutique only. However, flip side of that is 90% boutique only is probably how they've also massively increased their revenue by recouping a

[Gabe Riley]

lot that they're selling their watches not at a wholesale cost, but a full retail.

[Asher Rapkin]

Yes, exactly. And yeah, and I could see how if you were sitting in the boardroom for ap, you might see the barbarians at the gate that are really upset about, you know, the evolution of the brand and where it's gone, but then compare that to the balance sheet and say it is what it is. So, you know, they're telling us two things.

[Gabe Riley]

I mean, they're telling us this success, you're right, is in large part due to that 90% mix coming from retail that has to help top line numbers, A and B. They're saying it's also coming from a focus on complication and high end watchmaking. So their, their goal as they continue to grow, they apparently have ambitious growth goals as well. Not surprising is not to focus on volume, but is to focus on quality and higher end pieces and complicated watchmaking. So we're going to see more complicated watchmaking from ap, not less of it. Which of cool, actually. And then three women are a growing share of the brand. So they're telling us that right now in this, this is surprising to me. It's sort of surprising and not surprising. They're saying women now make up 25% of their customers and their goal is to get it to 30% of their customers in two years, which I get. We've talked a lot about AP diversifying their client mix and that's a really good way to do it and expand their, their, their base and their kind of addressable population. But that surprises me.

[Asher Rapkin]

Yeah, I'd love to learn more about it because I could approach that with great respect. I could approach that with cynicism. I mean, but the reality is I just don't know enough to know what's driving that. Look, I think what we're seeing right now is probably 70% to 60% Beni Hama strategy being played out under the leadership of Hilaria Resta. And over the next few years, we're gonna start seeing Hilaria Resta strategy playing out under her leadership. So I'm very curious to see, you know, where the brand continues to grow because of course, she comes from a very different background. She doesn't have much watchmaking knowledge at all. She's what she's learned she's learning on the job.

[Gabe Riley]

Yeah. I think she came from the consumer packaging industry.

[Asher Rapkin]

Yeah, I think it was a P and G. Or was it Unilever? It was one of those. It was one of those.

[Gabe Riley]

So she knows how to do brand marketing.

[Asher Rapkin]

Well, that's what I was going to say. So, I mean, because if you think about it, like, what is. What does a big CPG company do? I mean, they manufacture industrial goo wrapped in a very valuable brand. And, you know, that's what makes, you know, Old Spice such a valuable brand. It's the product is the product. It's a commodity, but the brand is what sells it.

[Gabe Riley]

Yeah.

[Asher Rapkin]

So I'll be very curious to see how she takes that skill set and applies it to this and continues to develop what it. What AP means. And you sort of see that a little bit in their execution of ap, you know, marketing lifestyle experiences. The AP House is a brand experience. You know, sure, you can go there and you can, you know, swipe your card if you, you know, if you have been blessed by the gods there. But what it really is about is creating a space that makes you feel like the watch is the key to this magical empire.

[Gabe Riley]

Yes.

[Asher Rapkin]

And they're building that entire narrative where it's like, there's mystique about it. And if you're an owner, you can hang out and all this, and again, you can approach that with respect, you can approach it with cynicism, whatever. But the bottom line is some people want that.

[Gabe Riley]

It's a value proposition, 100%.

[Asher Rapkin]

It is. And it is still the physical manifestation of a brand on the consumer level. The masters of this are Disney, surrounding you with the physical manifestation of a brand with the intent of then selling you the actual manifested product.

[Gabe Riley]

Yeah, they're locking you in totally.

[Asher Rapkin]

And I think AP in their own world is creating their own Disneyland. And we'll see how that goes.

[Gabe Riley]

That is a really great comparison. Hey, it's Gabe. Openwork is proudly ad free and requires no paid subscription. If you'd like to support the show, please take a moment to subscribe, rate and review on your podcast platform of choice. Please also check out and subscribe to collective horology on YouTube where you'll find hundreds of videos we've made on independent watchmaking. You can find our [e-mail] YouTube. And of course, you can always support the podcast by picking up a watch from over a dozen independent brands along with our Latest merch@colusive horology.com thanks for listening and for your support. Now back to the show. One thing you said is, you know, we're, we're still seeing a lot of the former CEO strategy continue to play out, and this is how things in business and in life always work. You know, the current president is always blamed for things that actually started under the previous president and nothing to do with all that kind of stuff. This is, this is famous in, in life, or they'll take credit for something that, you know, started under someone else's administration. All that stuff. And that happens in business and in, in life. In life, too. Are there, are there things you have seen from Ilari Oresta as CEO that are a sign of a distinctive strategy? I mean, to me, the biggest one I've seen from, from her is the move back to Watches and Wonders, which we've talked plenty about. But, like, that's a major strategy change about how they show up in the industry and how they, they show up in media and with, with ultimately with collectors. Have you seen anything else from the brand that signals an interesting change in strategy or approach?

[Asher Rapkin]

I mean, look, I'm going to hold my, my, my thoughts on that until we see what they do at Watches and Wonders. I will tell you that just to, just to kind of test the waters, I called some AP boutiques.

[Gabe Riley]

You called a Laria Resta or so. No, you called the boutiques and I

[Asher Rapkin]

called some boutiques and I just wanted to see and, and, you know, and I mean, look, I, I, I bought APs in the past, so technically I am an actual client, even though I haven't in years. But I called up as if I weren't a client, just to see what the, what the interaction was. And the interaction is essentially identical to what it's been for years. You know, I don't know. You come on in and, you know, we'll show you the experience and create a wish list for you. And the standard, you know, the standard. Misha Goss. Now, whether or not that plays out differently in person, I don't know. I certainly would never want to waste the time of a salesperson by doing that. But, but the, I think you're not

[Gabe Riley]

gonna mystery shop the boutique.

[Asher Rapkin]

No.

[Gabe Riley]

Next week.

[Asher Rapkin]

Come on, man, that's, it's not cool. Something to do. But, but I think, I think the, I think my point is I don't see a, a meaningful first interaction change. But I would also say based on what she's talking about from strategy, like, I'm not the target.

[Gabe Riley]

Well, here's one of the interesting things you pointed out to me about this strategy. So if you're interested in an AP watch, you gotta call the boutique and they give you this whole, as you said, mishigas about, well, you need to come in and we'll work with you on a wish list and get to know you. And we all know what this means. They vet their clients very, very aggressively. One of the things I found so fascinating, or the great contradiction here is the people they probably want as clients are the people who have the least time for that. Presumably they want people to your point, who are.

[Asher Rapkin]

Well, they want. They want those people to make the time for that.

[Gabe Riley]

Here's my point. They want people who are, you know, conn. Influential, extremely wealthy because as you've said, they want repeat customers. They want people who are not just going to buy the steel Royal Oak. They want people who are going to buy the complicated stuff and keep buying it and help them move, help them continue to move their average price per watch up and up and up. The people who can really do that have the least amount of time and patience for going into the boutique and sitting down for an interview. I would imagine if I were some extremely busy, powerful wealthy person, the last thing I would want to do is go to a boutique and be vetted by someone to determine whether or not I'm good enough to buy the watch. But maybe I just don't understand the psychology of an AP buyer.

[Asher Rapkin]

Yeah, I don't. I don't want to spin out too much on this one because it's how they want to approach it. I think we see this with other brands too, like Richard Mille. Pretty sure if you called a Longo Boutique. For that matter, if you called a Vacheron boutique and you asked them do you have X, Y or Z in stock, they probably wouldn't answer you on the phone. Rolex isn't even allowed to tell you over the phone if they have something in stock. You have to physically go in. There's lots of legitimate reasons for what?

[Gabe Riley]

There are Rolex stores all over the place. Sure. The number of AP houses and boutiques just in the United States alone is quite limited. You know, if you are a wealthy person, let's say you lived in Seattle, Washington. I'm making this up. I don't think there's a boutique or AP house nearby. So what, you're going to get on a plane and go to Dallas or New York when I.

[Asher Rapkin]

The last AP that I bought personally was a beautiful watch. It was a code 1159 with the red dial and I bought it from a boutique that was an AP boutique that wasn't local to me, and they. They wanted me to get on an airplane to go get it, and I respectfully declined because I don't have the time for that. I have a family.

[Gabe Riley]

Yeah.

[Asher Rapkin]

And they were very confused. I mean, look, I. And I think, you know, and to

[Gabe Riley]

be clear, like, so. So you're telling me what that. What that tells me is they're used to people saying, okay, yeah, they are.

[Asher Rapkin]

Or at least they were at that point. I mean, that was 2020 is when I turned 40. So it was 2022. But I just found that fascinating. Like, that was just their expectation. Not that they're going to fly you there. That's, you know, which would have been ridiculous for that Watch, but, like, you

[Gabe Riley]

know, that would have been my retort. Oh, are you buying my. My plane ticket and putting me up?

[Asher Rapkin]

Exactly. How am I supposed to do that? Yeah, but my point is, like, that was their expectation. And in fairness to them, too, like, after I was like, I have a small child and it's the end of COVID and I'm sorry, but no, they shipped it to me. Yeah, but. But my point is they want that feeling because the extra level of effort and work is in their mind. I suspect by putting those barriers up, creating additional brand value, it's also alienating a lot of people. But I think their calculus is, well, that's okay, because if we alienate X, Y, or Z, we still have A, B and C. And if A, B and C are creating a plus 10% increase in our bottom line, this strategy may work for us, even if we're creating some negativity in the market, which, again, in fairness to ap, so is every other major brand that sells a desirable product. So I think, you know, let's keep watching and we'll see. We'll see what miss Resta can do.

[Gabe Riley]

All right. Well, speaking of limited supply and demand and all that stuff, let's talk about Rolex. I think one of the great debates in the Watch community about ap, about Rolex, Patek Philippe and others, is this notion of manufactured scarcity. And it seems in the case of Rolex, that perhaps is a legitimate criticism or a legitimate phenomenon. So recently, Swiss bank Vontobel, which does industry analysis and reporting, has estimated. And again, this is based on whatever data they're looking at to determine this stuff. But they're looking. Based on the data they're looking at, they've estimated that Rolex has cut production for a second year in a row. So apparently they cut Some production in 2024 According to this, according to this analysis. And then again in 2025, they, they peaked in production probably around 2022, which makes sense. Watch demand and demand for Rolex peaked around then. So let's take this reporting at face value. Let's assume they've done some analysis. There's some rigor. Rolex has in fact cut production. What is really interesting, however, is that even though Rolex is cutting production, they're continuing to grow share. And now that's not a good sign for the industry. That means the pie overall is smaller so that Rolex can cut production but still gain share. So they make up in the, in the watch market over 3,000 Swiss francs. So kind of the mid tier and high tier. Their share, share of sales by value went from 57% in 2023 to an estimated 61%.

[Asher Rapkin]

So is that inclusive of CPO, do you know?

[Gabe Riley]

I don't think so. I believe the analysis is around new watch sales because this is of course tied to watch production and all that sort of stuff. So with cpo, yeah, you're right. In terms of like business flowing through

[Asher Rapkin]

Rolex, well, that's flowing through Rolex ads because of course, the revenue from official channels. Yeah, yeah. I actually, I think this is just good. This is just good, good brand management.

[Gabe Riley]

I mean, I would agree.

[Asher Rapkin]

You know, I don't think this is, I mean, as we've said in the past, like, part of what makes Rolex so impressive is that they think in terms of decades and not in terms of quarters or even years.

[Gabe Riley]

Well, their business structure allows them to do that in a, in a way that the business structure of other publicly owned companies or, you know, companies that really have a profit motive. And I mean that in not in any kind of.

[Asher Rapkin]

Oh, you. And I couldn't think like that because that's just not the way they, they

[Gabe Riley]

have the luxury of being able to think in that way.

[Asher Rapkin]

Earned it. They've earned it. I mean, I think, I think with them, you know, this is, this is a recalibration for a change in the market and they are rebalancing where they are. I think Rolex is also continuing their slow methodical pace towards raising the retail value and perceived value of their watches and the CPO program. The thing about the CPO program I find really interesting is yes, it represents a lot of money. Something like half a billion chf.

[Gabe Riley]

Yeah, that's the, the, the bank did do an estimate around that and they're estimating half a billion in sales.

[Asher Rapkin]

To be honest, I find that to be less interesting than what it really is, which is a method of price

[Gabe Riley]

control in the secondary market.

[Asher Rapkin]

Yeah. Because essentially what it's doing is them saying this is the floor. Right. Because if we're going to continue to increase the price of our watches. Right. If a, if a base, if a no date sub is just, is a little bit under $10,000, I think a date sub now is over $10,000. Starbucks certainly is. We can continue to make sure that that value is retained by building this massive program which prices these watches very aggressively for a relatively low amount of energy and, and cost. Because if you think about a warranty,

[Gabe Riley]

like talked about the, the price difference on a previous podcast, I think with Hamza where it's like a CPO Rolex compared to its pre owned counterpart that's not certified pre owned. So watch you'd buy from another dealer presumably can have anywhere from like a 10 to 20% price premium.

[Asher Rapkin]

Yeah, but, but this is the point I'm making which is, is if you think about what a warranty is, a warranty is like in essence a form of insurance, Right?

[Gabe Riley]

Sure. Well, they do work to some of the watches to recondition them to a certain standard. It's not just the warranty.

[Asher Rapkin]

Yeah, some of them, but not all of them. Yeah, I mean if it was all of them, they'd never be able to do this at scale. You'd need an insane amount of watch.

[Gabe Riley]

But the point is it's not just, it's not just insurance, it's also confidence that what you're buying meets a particular standard.

[Asher Rapkin]

Yeah, yeah, but the point I'm making is effectively what Rolex is best and reasonably so because Rolex watches are pretty darn reliable. He said, yeah, you know what? Well sure, I'll certify this watch and I'll test it and I'll do all these things and, and I'll return it. But, but the cost of that is relatively minimal. Sure. Every once in a while one of these watches is going to have a problem and I'll have to do the actual work to repair it. But most of them won't. So offering that warranty is inevitably going to be neg is going to be positive from a financial standpoint.

[Gabe Riley]

Point.

[Asher Rapkin]

Just because not every Rolex is going to fail. That's in the CBO program.

[Gabe Riley]

Well no, it's also the quality of their watches paying a dividend over time.

[Asher Rapkin]

Right.

[Gabe Riley]

You know, Rolex can back up their, their certified pre owned watches and provide that warranty. With a level of confidence that most other manufacturers can't.

[Asher Rapkin]

Sure.

[Gabe Riley]

Because I'll tell you, like having owned some Rolexes and plenty of other watches, generally speaking, in terms of the initial quality that these watches come out of the. The factory with, I remember we had a problem years ago with some watches we were selling where we were failing them. And this is not a brand that we carry or currently, but we had a very high fail rate of the watches that were coming into our store. We QC every single watch that comes into collective before it goes out. That doesn't mean we catch everything or things don't happen, but it's an added level of, you know, quality assurance you get when you buy something from us is not only is the brand QC'd it, but it gets to us and we QC it again. And one of the brands we were working with at the time had a very high QC rate and I.

[Asher Rapkin]

Fail rate.

[Gabe Riley]

QC fail rate. That's right. And I remember complaining to a guy we know who's a Rolex dealer, and he was like, I've got to be honest with you, like, that's crazy. Like, if Rolex has a fail rate on products that come into our store, it's like one in every few hundred.

[Asher Rapkin]

Yeah.

[Gabe Riley]

And therefore, because of the quality standards that Rolex has, they can offer that cpo, that CPO warranty, and it's the quality they put in the watches. Paying dividends.

[Asher Rapkin]

Exactly. So all that to say, you know, this is. I think this is important in relation to the market share being consumed, but this is Rolex doing Rolex stuff the way that they do it, which is, thoughtfully, one step at a time. No major innovations blowing everything out of the water every year. No waving a flag of a major change, just one thing at a time. And does that sometimes mean that we can make jokes that this sub is like that sub, but one millimeter? Yes. But the flip side of that is I guarantee you that part of the reason they made those choices was based on a decade of knowledge thinking through the dimensions of a watch. They execute on that. And then with a few notable exceptions of watches that had short lives, like a sea dweller 40 or whatever, know pretty much that they're all the right choices.

[Gabe Riley]

Yeah. So anyway, I think that the number one question, or the number one thought that goes through the mind of an executive at Rolex is. Is a bit different than the number one question that goes to the mind of an executive or a creative person at. Certainly at an independent watch brand.

[Asher Rapkin]

Oh, for sure.

[Gabe Riley]

Generally, you know, the the number one question going through the mind of, let's say your average independent watch brand is am I being daring enough? Am I doing something good enough? Is this cool enough? Is this interesting enough?

[Asher Rapkin]

Is this beautiful?

[Gabe Riley]

And rele, we'll just keep my brand relevant. The number one thing going through the mind of a Rolex executive is don't this up and look that that has value. That's part of, that's part of their promise. And you're right, you've made this point which is to the average person on the street, like, forget Rolex as a watch brand and what it means to watch collectors and enthusiasts. But Rolex is one of the few watch brands that exists out there in like the popular imagination and in culture and in the real world where like the average person kind of certainly knows about Rolex and is more likely to care about Rolex than they are almost any other watch brand. And part of the promise is these things will hold their value. They're not burning money. And you can agree with that, disagree with that. You can hate that, you can love that. There's all sorts of different perspectives on it. But this is, as you've said, Rolex, keeping that promise and doing Rolex stuff.

[Asher Rapkin]

There you go.

[Gabe Riley]

So speaking of questions that people keep that keep people up at night, we have a couple of questions here that have come in. And the first actually is, is a collector question about Rolex in particular. And this is a question we got. Do you think Rolex is kind of ruining the industry? And I think maybe they mean also the hobby by artificial scarcity. Is this something that is bad for the industry overall? And is this something that's bad for the hobby? I would say for the industry overall? No. It's probably a good thing because again, Rolex is one of the few brands that exists outside of watch enthusiasm. And the idea of that watches, and the idea that watches are desirable and scarce in some ways is, is a good thing and have some mystique around.

[Asher Rapkin]

It's an unanswerable question. It's an unanswerable question because if you, if you say, sure, like release the constraints on demand so that everyone can get the watch they want. Great. And then you're. And then we'll hear complaints about the fact that the secondary value of those watches are greatly diminished because the market's been flooded.

[Gabe Riley]

Yeah. Imagine someone who wants to trade into your point a submariner towards another watch

[Asher Rapkin]

and then you go into this death spiral of like, okay, well maybe things are too expensive and they should get che well, okay, but the reason they cost, what they cost is to support the ecosystem that builds them. So you can't just depress costs by increasing production in an industry that's rate limited by the, by the talent that actually makes it. So you have to look at it

[Gabe Riley]

turns out maybe Rolex isn't rate limited if they're cutting production.

[Asher Rapkin]

Yeah, but they're cutting production not, not that dramatically. They're trimming around the edges, they're making choices. I mean they're still making over a million watches, for God's sake. I mean, I think the, the, I think this is an ecosystem just like any other and you can't just adjust one thing or another to, to address an individual problem. You have to look at the overarching market, which is what they're doing here. So I get it. But artificial scarcity in the way that, that we are talking about it here, I don't think that's a thing.

[Gabe Riley]

Well, let's say it is a thing. Let's just play Devil's Adventure.

[Asher Rapkin]

Well, okay, actually it is a thing in the sense that could, could if, if, if, if Rolex wanted to, could

[Gabe Riley]

they make more watches?

[Asher Rapkin]

Could they make more subs? Could they make more Daytonas? Absolutely, they could. But, but the thing is why would they, what would that do for them?

[Gabe Riley]

Well, forget what it would do for them. Here's how I think about this, which is as watch. And let's say the premise of the question, let's shift it a little bit. Is it ruining the hobby of color collecting to have artificial scarcity? The way I would answer that would be okay, we're watch enthusiasts, we love watches. Presumably we want this to be a thriving hobby.

[Asher Rapkin]

Yeah.

[Gabe Riley]

We want there to be people who care about watches the way we do, who we can become friends with and share this with. We want watch brands to, to succeed and do well in the industry. To succeed and do well so we can have, continue to have watches and creativity and risk taking and new things to love. So the fact that one of the most powerful, one of the most desirable, one of the most recognizable brands in the world. Brands in the world, not a watch brand, but one of the most desirable brands in the world, one of the strongest brands in the world is a watch brand. Brand is a good thing for this hobby.

[Asher Rapkin]

Yeah.

[Gabe Riley]

Rolex is like the beachhead of watch enthusiasm. It's out there in the real world. It's in the, on every high street, in every high end mall. It's on the wrists of millions of people and it reminds people that watchmaking is a thing, it keeps watchmaking relevant, it keeps the love of watches relevant. And part of the way they do that is through this artificial scarcity and creating desirability and demand. And I do think that that's good for watches. If Rolex weren't the brand that it is out there in the real world as this beachhead of watchmaking, I don't know that this hobby would be what it is.

[Asher Rapkin]

Good question.

[Gabe Riley]

So we'll do one more question. This one came in last month which was following your episode ditching the luxury script for independent watches. That's where we had our colleague Jeff Souter on what is the single most important factor that prevents a fast growing micro brand from being taken seriously as a true independent watchmaker in the industry. And I have got a thought on this. I'd love your your response. I think the, the thing that, the single thing that limits some, let's say micro brands from being perceived as independent brands. And let's say there is a distinction there, we can debate that. But let's just, let's accept the premise of this question. I think that most important factor is this idea of value. A lot of micro brands position themselves around value, which is we're offering you so much, look at how much watch we're offering you for your money. And I've seen time and time again when a brand and it's usually, you know, micro brands or entry level brands, brands, these sort of mid tier brands on the $5,000 and under space, when you position yourself around value, it becomes impossible to get out of that trap. And look, positioning yourself around value is extremely, is a extremely compelling offering. You know, to be able to say like I know the thing I'm wearing on my wrist, I'm getting like this experience out of it that feels really elevated and really special from a watchmaking standpoint. And I know that is priced fairly and is offering me a compelling value. There's a role for that for sure. But when you build your brand around that as the thing your brand stands for, which is value proposition, it becomes very hard to move out of that. So I think a great example of a brand that moved out of that micro brand space that never positioned themselves around value proposition is Ming. You know, the early Ming watches were very much in the micro brand lane in terms of like price positioning. But it was a brand new brand that always identified and stood for thoughtful and creative design and that allowed them to sell watches that were maybe a thousand Swiss francs when they started up to watches that are now nearly, you know, $50,000, we've sold some precious metal mings that are extremely complicated and beautiful. It's because the brand never stood for value. It stood for design. And, and that allowed them to, to really, to really stretch. The one example I've seen of a brand that's been able to move out of that trap is Christopher Ward. This is a brand that very, you know, very explicitly stood for value proposition. But they had to do something so arresting to get out of that trap, which was the belcanto.

[Asher Rapkin]

I think the difference between a micro brand and an independent is maturity. And I think how that's defined varies brand to brand.

[Gabe Riley]

Yeah. What do you mean by like, maturity?

[Asher Rapkin]

It could be, it could be a commitment to an explicit design language that plays out across the entire line. It could be, it could be a, an ownership of unique technology. It could be a clear brand story that that creates some degree of brand equity, that, that attracts clients. I mean, we, you know, you can't. I think, I think part of the reason people struggle to define this is because they try to do it by def. By looking at the product and like, well, X percent of that product was touched by the watchmaker, Y percent wasn't. Or this one was assembled there, independent or not. Yeah. And to me, I'm like, that's, that's not even true of like a billion dollar corporations who have long supply chains, you know, that make quote unquote, in house things. It's the maturity of that brand. So to answer your question, if it's a fast growing micro brand, how will I know it's. It's become a cemented and trusted independent because it's got a distinct point of view that continues to execute and fire on all cylinders and a clear path forward. That's why Brew in my mind is an independent.

[Gabe Riley]

Oh, interesting.

[Asher Rapkin]

You know, that's why Studio Underdog isn't independent.

[Gabe Riley]

But these are also brands that never stood for value. Now, is a brew watch an incredible value?

[Asher Rapkin]

They never defined themselves by that.

[Gabe Riley]

They divine themselves around like a design aesthetic and creativity, not, hey, look, how much of a value.

[Asher Rapkin]

Yeah, and that's why Richard Benz was able to like, you know, market, you know, whether you liked it or you didn't. You know, a $60,000 studio underdog in partnership with Moser, a $20,000 studio underdog in partnership with Sartori. B. So, you know, same thing with Sartori, you know, that like, I, you know, there is a clear point of view about what that brand represents. Garrick. There's a clear point of view about what that brand represents by volume. Garrick, you know, produces a hundred watches a year. Are they independent? Absolutely. Because they are mature in the way that they present themselves. So I think that's the core definition. I think where we struggle is. And when I see someone, I'm like, I think you're still a micro brand, or you're in that space is when you see almost like a chaotic bouncing back and forth of ideas around, like, what if we try this? Or, hey, how about this? Or like, hey, we invented that. Or like, here's a new technology. Or like, and then, you know, special Christmas sale, 40% off. That, to me, is a lack of maturity and therefore hasn't graduated.

[Gabe Riley]

All right, you have to. Who knew? You have to graduate from.

[Asher Rapkin]

I don't think you do. I don't think. No, no, no, I don't think you do. But I think if that's where you aspire to be, you know, then. Then you have to. You have to make some choices and commit to them. You can't, you know, you can't oscillate as. As. As much as we sometimes see a brand in. In. In their early days doing.

[Gabe Riley]

Yeah, yeah. I think we're saying the same thing, which is you have to own a point of view.

[Asher Rapkin]

Yes.

[Gabe Riley]

And that you can't be all over the map on product and fall into the value trap, because once you're there, it's. It's hard to get out of that. And there's a. And by the way, if you aspire to be more than a value brand, if you just want to be a value brand, that's great, too. And there's a role for that. But I think you have to acknowledge that that has its. Comes with its limitations.

[Asher Rapkin]

100%.

[Gabe Riley]

All right, well, should we leave it there?

[Asher Rapkin]

Let's do it.

[Gabe Riley]

All right, well, thanks so much for listening. Openwork is, of course, a production of Collective Horology. You can find us online@collective horology.com and while you're at it, get in touch with your questions, your comments, your feedback suggestions. Send those to us, please. And to do that, you can email podcastollectivephorology.com.

[Asher Rapkin]

Christmas sale, 40% off.