Thierry Stern’s Comments, Stallone’s Auction Approved By Patek, Lisa Jones Background

[James84]

Hi All

There has been much buzz about Thierry Stern’s recent comments in response to criticism about the Cubitus, specifically where he says “the haters will never own a Patek”. A very unorthodox response from a leader when facing critique and not being well received as many blogs are viewing this as pretentious and arrogant.

Having said that I’ve seen posts on here in the past where Mr Stern made comments at private events stating “Patek is only for the elite” and what he considered non-elite are people who are not relevant to the brand. Interestingly enough that post quickly got locked.

We also saw Sylvester Stallone auction his brand new fully sealed rare pieces recently and Patek did not directly comment on this matter but made cryptic statements about it saying it was disappointed when any collector does such things and they strive to make sure they sell these pieces to people who will not do such things. I call BS on this public statement by Patek because Stallone has been selling his ultra rare Patek’s for years and Patek was well aware of this yet they continue allocating to him, see 14 min on this video where Avi & Co confirms this https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=vZAC2e...NlciBtaWNoYWVs

So Patek has not been entirely honest with the public and its core customer base relative to allocations, what it frowns upon, and enabling and encouraging flipping to create more hype on its own brand.

Lisa Jones president of Patek Philippe USA comes from an auction house background. Prior to joining Patek she worked for Christie’s auction house. There is more than enough evidence to show Patek has no dislike for its new highly rare allocated pieces being auctioned at “inflated” prices, and it actually enables “certain collectors” to do this so an inflated price sticks to the brand thus driving more revenue for the company and helping to sell all of its pieces.

The Stallone auction did not play out as well as Patek had anticipated as the 6300G piece sold for a mere $5.4 million. After fees that’s close to the high 3’s and very close to retail. Patek is not seeing the 5X returns on such strategic execution of celebrity auctions, and we continue to be in a downward trend of secondary pricing with demand continuing to fall from peaked levels.

So in conclusion with Mr Stern’s controversial and somewhat arrogant comments in recent years, combined with failed executions of the brand trying to inflate its own brands value and price per piece with such auctions, and the Cubitus being viewed by the majority as “lazy” and “unimaginative” for a brand like Patek’s caliber do you all think these are the early signs of Patek Philippe losing some prestige and its place as the number 1 watch brand in the world?

Patek will always sell watches and is cemented in horological history and prestige. But nothing remains number 1 forever so my question is more around its place and number in horological prestige.

Would love to hear your thoughts.

[77T]

I have been critical of PP's decisions on the Aquanaut's role. But I'm not a hater and I own a Calatrava.

Out of context quotes are a minefield so won't comment on that hater quip.

I tend to agree that Stallone's approach is counterproductive to more different people buying a Patek. But it is his right to sell any of his watches. It reflects more on his choice of PP versus another high-end brand like RM.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[MangoTree1]

Sometimes even i, as an arrogant person, i like arrogant people. And with TS as CEO i m sure PP will stay far ahead of all others! Buy ur APs, Mosers or what ever-please get happy with. Who do you "haters" think you re?! Its "only" a new design and not your company! You can also take yourself for too important and this is said by a (sometimes) arrogant person!

[Guppydriver]

I’m not sure there is much context to digest here .. I’m not saying he’s wrong , but these comments are off putting by most standards



In other news , PP modernized their slogan to coincide with the release of the Cubitus :

“You never really own a Patek Philippe. You just wish you did , you poor piece of shit “


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bearxj86]

Saw this on IG- chuckled abit


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GGGMT]

I am a lover not a hater. Patek


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[byow]

Originally Posted by Guppydriver

I’m not sure there is much context to digest here .. I’m not saying he’s wrong , but these comments are off putting by most standards



In other news , PP modernized their slogan to coincide with the release of the Cubitus :

“You never really own a Patek Philippe. You just wish you did , you poor piece of shit “


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The translation is inaccurate. The article in Bilan reports that TS said in French: « 99% de ces haters n’ont aucune Patek et n’en achèteront jamais », which means: « 99% of these haters do not have any Patek and will not buy any ». TS is not referring to these « haters » being rich or poor. This is something that is not in the article.

[77T]

^^^
That's a good of example of what I said earlier - when people take things out of context (including a proper translation) it's a minefield.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Guppydriver]

Originally Posted by byow

The translation is inaccurate. The article in Bilan reports that TS said in French: « 99% de ces haters n’ont aucune Patek et n’en achèteront jamais », which means: « 99% of these haters do not have any Patek and will not buy any ». TS is not referring to these « haters » being rich or poor. This is something that is not in the article.

I wasn’t translating, I was using satire when I mentioned the being poor part..

I agree no posted or printed translation insinuates that TS mentioned socioeconomic status of clients that will never buy his brand.

We can agree to disagree, but I think there is a heavy implication why 99% of the haters will never buy a Patek. I’m honestly curious why else he thinks 99% of an audience consisting of (primarily) watch enthusiasts would never buy a watch from the most famous member of the Holy Trinity?

[Guppydriver]

Originally Posted by 77T

^^^
That's a good of example of what I said earlier - when people take things out of context (including a proper translation) it's a minefield.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Other than the 99% part (which doesn’t change the meaning), the translation repeated by Time & Tide is very accurate. More accurate than BYOW’s translation which omits the word “never” or “ever” which is what jamais means.

I do agree whole heartily that it’s a minefield. I also believe one of the responsibilities of a CEO is to avoid them.

I love Patek by the way. I’m just having discourse over what I feel is a very off putting and elitist statement by the CEO.

I do feel the Cubitus was a bit of a lazy all new release compared to say….the Zeitwerk by ALS, so I think objective critique is warranted. I expected a little more from a company with the resources and heritage of Patek. And yes, PP isn’t responsible for my expectations.

Now if you love the Cubitus and can afford one , I think that’s awesome and I sincerely look forward to the incomings. If you love the Cubitus and can’t afford one, I look forward to hearing all the reasons why you do love it.

[byow]

Originally Posted by Guppydriver

I wasn’t translating, I was using satire when I mentioned the being poor part..

I agree no posted or printed translation insinuates that TS mentioned socioeconomic status of clients that will never buy his brand.

We can agree to disagree, but I think there is a heavy implication why 99% of the haters will never buy a Patek. I’m honestly curious why else he thinks 99% of an audience consisting of (primarily) watch enthusiasts would never buy a watch from the most famous member of the Holy Trinity?

Originally Posted by Guppydriver

Other than the 99% part (which doesn’t change the meaning), the translation repeated by Time & Tide is very accurate. More accurate than BYOW’s translation which omits the word “never” or “ever” which is what jamais means.

I do agree whole heartily that it’s a minefield. I also believe one of the responsibilities of a CEO is to avoid them.

I love Patek by the way. I’m just having discourse over what I feel is a very off putting and elitist statement by the CEO.

I do feel the Cubitus was a bit of a lazy all new release compared to say….the Zeitwerk by ALS, so I think objective critique is warranted. I expected a little more from a company with the resources and heritage of Patek. And yes, PP isn’t responsible for my expectations.

Now if you love the Cubitus and can afford one , I think that’s awesome and I sincerely look forward to the incomings. If you love the Cubitus and can’t afford one, I look forward to hearing all the reasons why you do love it.

I was referring to T&T translation which is inaccurate and does not reflect the meaning of what is translated.

My bad. I forgot about the « jamais ». Still, adding « ever » to the text does not change anything: TS expresses his opinion that 99% of the « haters » do not own any Patek nor will ever buy any. And, by the way, in French, this would rather be interpreted as: they do not have any intention to buy any. But I would may be « over interpreting » since I was not present when TS said this and only have the text.

Adding any reference to being poor or rich is at best inaccurate and does only reflect the bias one may have. This feeling leads you to believe that TS was being elitist in his statement.

[Calatrava r]

Remember this is a company that boasts about auction prices in every issue of their magazine. So, they must love the re-sale of their watches.

[scurfa]

Originally Posted by Calatrava r

Remember this is a company that boasts about auction prices in every issue of their magazine. So, they must love the re-sale of their watches.

Also remember the high prices are a by product of Patek’s own purchases for the museum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[pam66]

Originally Posted by byow

I was referring to T&T translation which is inaccurate and does not reflect the meaning of what is translated.

My bad. I forgot about the « jamais ». Still, adding « ever » to the text does not change anything: TS expresses his opinion that 99% of the « haters » do not own any Patek nor will ever buy any. And, by the way, in French, this would rather be interpreted as: they do not have any intention to buy any. But I would may be « over interpreting » since I was not present when TS said this and only have the text.

Adding any reference to being poor or rich is at best inaccurate and does only reflect the bias one may have. This feeling leads you to believe that TS was being elitist in his statement.

well, he is really elitist, in a counterproductive way. why insult (potential) clients?

[pam66]

Originally Posted by scurfa

Also remember the high prices are a by product of Patek’s own purchases for the museum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

finally, we are getting to the meet of things. it is so ridiculous for a PP owner to get problems with Patek for selling a nautilus but they profit from it and encourage it on a grand scale.

[byow]

Originally Posted by pam66

well, he is really elitist, in a counterproductive way. why insult (potential) clients?

This is not what he says in French. He simply says: 99% of the haters do not own a PP and will never buy any, these opinions do not impact PP.

How is that elitist?

In order to not be elitist, a company should not market any product that may give rise to any criticism from any person who is not a client and will not be?

In what kind of world critics are entitled to not have their criticism ignored?

[pam66]

Originally Posted by byow

This is not what he says in French. He simply says: 99% of the haters do not own a PP and will never buy any, these opinions do not impact PP.

How is that elitist?

In order to not be elitist, a company should not market any product that may give rise to any criticism from any person who is not a client and will not be?

In what kind of world critics are entitled to not have their criticism ignored?

look, a year ago he started to say that a new model line would be created to attract young people, lower price points etc. then he came up with a square nautilus (how long did they need to work on the design?:::))) at very high price points with the old calibers (except the platin model). at the launch he experienced a lot of pushback from serious collectors (i talked to quite a few of them since i was in munich at that time) and then he goes out and tells the world that he doesn't care about the people who dislike his new product? and it is simply not true that 99% of those do not own a patek....also shouldn't he try to convince not-yet customers to get into the boat? instead he disses them. if that is not arrogant (and childish) then i don't know what is.

[byow]

Originally Posted by pam66

look, a year ago he started to say that a new model line would be created to attract young people, lower price points etc. then he came up with a square nautilus (how long did they need to work on the design?:::))) at very high price points with the old calibers (except the platin model). at the launch he experienced a lot of pushback from serious collectors (i talked to quite a few of them since i was in munich at that time) and then he goes out and tells the world that he doesn't care about the people who dislike his new product? and it is simply not true that 99% of those do not own a patek....also shouldn't he try to convince not-yet customers to get into the boat? instead he disses them. if that is not arrogant (and childish) then i don't know what is.

How do you, or me by the way, know that these « serious collectors » are haters and that they represent more than 1% of said haters? Unless we have proof of this, or TS clarifies, these « serious collectors » are not the people TS said he does not care about.

[Gebbeth]

Translations are tricky, yes. Which makes it very important for a public person, making a public statement, to a reporter no less, to be very careful what is said.

He could have meant something like "The vast majority of people who hate the design don't own a Patek and will never buy a Patek." This is just my summary based on the other posters' comments about the French translation.

A neutral interpretation would be that most people who hate the Cubitus don't really like Patek watches in general and would never buy one as a preference.

That statement, in and of itself, is still an extremely arrogant statement. It suggests that those critical of the Cubitus are critical of Patek and just don't like what Patek offers.....perhaps they just hate the entire Patek brand?

Really? These people just "hate" Patek? The last I checked, Patek has a very broad and large library of designs of various styles, some beloved, some not so much. So there is a category of people who just hate on Patek and would reject Patek now to the end of time?

No Thierry. People just hate the Cubitus....yes, even those who love Patek and own Pateks and will buy or want to buy Patek. It's the design stupid. Don't conflate the dislike bordering on hate of this design....a design you so proudly exclaim as yours and yours only....with hate of the brand. It's this kind of passive aggressive, super possessive, behavior is off-putting.

On the extreme end, he did mean that those who don't like the Cubitus are the "poors", they don't like it because they could never sniff a Patek. I don't need to explain why this is a problem.

So what TS said is problematic on both ends, the former being just a statement of arrogance and (I'll use the vernacular) butt-hurt about the heavy criticism of the design, and the other, an aristocratic...."let them eat cake" type of statement.

It's just a stupid statement to make on every level. He took it personally, this dislike and criticism of the Cubitus, and I think even he is kinda worried, maybe a little, about the reaction.

I go back to that limited edition minute repeater with the profile image of his father. I just don't get him.....if it was a piece he made for himself, I get it, but that is just a weird watch to me. I mean if you are not connected to the Stern family, people are going to be confused why you have an extremely expensive watch with someone else's father on the dial?

But it's indicative of how inbred Patek seems to be nowadays. It's a sign of megalomania born of the echo-chamber of his own making and self-praise.

[Russell996]

Originally Posted by Gebbeth

Translations are tricky, yes. Which makes it very important for a public person, making a public statement, to a reporter no less, to be very careful what is said.

He could have meant something like "The vast majority of people who hate the design don't own a Patek and will never buy a Patek." This is just my summary based on the other posters' comments about the French translation.

A neutral interpretation would be that most people who hate the Cubitus don't really like Patek watches in general and would never buy one as a preference.

That statement, in and of itself, is still an extremely arrogant statement. It suggests that those critical of the Cubitus are critical of Patek and just don't like what Patek offers.....perhaps they just hate the entire Patek brand?

Really? These people just "hate" Patek? The last I checked, Patek has a very broad and large library of designs of various styles, some beloved, some not so much. So there is a category of people who just hate on Patek and would reject Patek now to the end of time?

No Thierry. People just hate the Cubitus....yes, even those who love Patek and own Pateks and will buy or want to buy Patek. It's the design stupid. Don't conflate the dislike bordering on hate of this design....a design you so proudly exclaim as yours and yours only....with hate of the brand. It's this kind of passive aggressive, super possessive, behavior is off-putting.

On the extreme end, he did mean that those who don't like the Cubitus are the "poors", they don't like it because they could never sniff a Patek. I don't need to explain why this is a problem.

So what TS said is problematic on both ends, the former being just a statement of arrogance and (I'll use the vernacular) butt-hurt about the heavy criticism of the design, and the other, an aristocratic...."let them eat cake" type of statement.

It's just a stupid statement to make on every level. He took it personally, this dislike and criticism of the Cubitus, and I think even he is kinda worried, maybe a little, about the reaction.

I go back to that limited edition minute repeater with the profile image of his father. I just don't get him.....if it was a piece he made for himself, I get it, but that is just a weird watch to me. I mean if you are not connected to the Stern family, people are going to be confused why you have an extremely expensive watch with someone else's father on the dial?

But it's indicative of how inbred Patek seems to be nowadays. It's a sign of megalomania born of the echo-chamber of his own making and self-praise.

A lot of overthinking going on in these threads.

[dchang81]

I guess as long as people keep buying the product. I liken it to the NFL and Roger Goodell. NFL is as popular as ever. Many fans say this is despite his decisions, he thinks it's because of his decisions. As long as people keep watching, it's not going to change.

[dauster]

Originally Posted by byow

How do you, or me by the way, know that these « serious collectors » are haters and that they represent more than 1% of said haters? Unless we have proof of this, or TS clarifies, these « serious collectors » are not the people TS said he does not care about.

Horology ancienne on IG is probably one of the most serious collectors on the planet and he had some great feedback and critique.A bunch of others given their collections they seem pretty "serious" as well and voiced citicism. Frankly, the only "heavy hitters" based on IG alone that I have seen that are not cirtical are mainly younger nepo babies that don't seem to want to upset the powers at be (cough cough Zach Lu :)

[dbfagan]

Originally Posted by Guppydriver

I’m not sure there is much context to digest here .. I’m not saying he’s wrong , but these comments are off putting by most standards



In other news , PP modernized their slogan to coincide with the release of the Cubitus :

“You never really own a Patek Philippe. You just wish you did , you poor piece of shit “


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Now THAT is funny!

[enjoythemusic]

Originally Posted by Russell996

A lot of overthinking going on in these threads.

It shows how passionate some are about the direction of PP. i left long ago, the Kid doesn't inspire me. Dad did.

Anywho... It really is impressive no matter which side of the debate you may be on. Of course most of the world doesn't care at all, it's just a luxury goods brands, not like they're developing interplanetary space travel, AI robotics to better serve mankind, or bartering longstanding peace between all leaders of the world (a country drops a bomb or hosts MIL deployment, PP will remove all product from all dealers within that country).

Gentlemen, it's just a luxury goods recent release. Am pretty sure there will be more over the decades.

Enjoy your time.

[subtona]

Interesting discussion.

I’m rooting for the brand to continue to navigate the fickle world of collectors.

I find it interesting that when it comes to design, there are times the masses are not ready to accept it and there are times the company missteps in their pursuit of greatness.

to appreciate this process is part of the joy of the experience of collecting.

[Russell996]

Originally Posted by enjoythemusic

It shows how passionate some are about the direction of PP. i left long ago, the Kid doesn't inspire me. Dad did.

Don’t dress it up in nonsense, anyone following your posts over the years knows you love constantly dumping on Patek, whether valid or not.

[Maleg]

Originally Posted by Guppydriver

Other than the 99% part (which doesn’t change the meaning), the translation repeated by Time & Tide is very accurate. More accurate than BYOW’s translation which omits the word “never” or “ever” which is what jamais means.

I do agree whole heartily that it’s a minefield. I also believe one of the responsibilities of a CEO is to avoid them.

I love Patek by the way. I’m just having discourse over what I feel is a very off putting and elitist statement by the CEO.

I do feel the Cubitus was a bit of a lazy all new release compared to say….the Zeitwerk by ALS, so I think objective critique is warranted. I expected a little more from a company with the resources and heritage of Patek. And yes, PP isn’t responsible for my expectations.

Now if you love the Cubitus and can afford one , I think that’s awesome and I sincerely look forward to the incomings. If you love the Cubitus and can’t afford one, I look forward to hearing all the reasons why you do love it.

I own a 5396G that I can stare at for hours, but the Cubitus is a definate fail for me. The caveat is that I'm not a fan of the Genta Pateks, so a Genta ripoff design won't work for me anyway.

The TS quote misses the mark on the criticism of the new design. People hate the Cubitus because it is fugly and worthy of their hatred, not because they hate PP or it's efforts to grow the brand. People who can and will buy a new Patek can still hate on Patek for rolling out this cringe design and calling it new and chic.

[byow]

Originally Posted by dauster

Horology ancienne on IG is probably one of the most serious collectors on the planet and he had some great feedback and critique.A bunch of others given their collections they seem pretty "serious" as well and voiced citicism. Frankly, the only "heavy hitters" based on IG alone that I have seen that are not cirtical are mainly younger nepo babies that don't seem to want to upset the powers at be (cough cough Zach Lu :)

The fact that TS used the word « haters » in French makes it clear that he is not implying that all the persons who do not like/criticize the Cubitus are haters.

The fact that TS chooses to ignore « haters » is a healthy reaction.

It is beyond my understanding that an adult can hate a timepiece.

[enjoythemusic]

Originally Posted by Russell996

Don’t dress it up in nonsense, anyone following your posts over the years knows you love constantly dumping on Patek, whether valid or not.

Am actually hopeful for the future of the company. Frankly, am a bit taken aback at some of things being said from 'both sides'. Yes, it shows how much many lovers of horology really do care. The great news is that i have no doubt there will be a Next PP release, and one after that....

As best i can recall, would guess there's never been this much cyberink and internet videos about a new PP new release in the history of the company. If, instead, no one cared, no one talked about it... so we know there is hope. And where there's hope, there's possibilities....

[James84]

Originally Posted by Russell996

Don’t dress it up in nonsense, anyone following your posts over the years knows you love constantly dumping on Patek, whether valid or not.

And some are skewed in the other direction too. Thierry can do no wrong to some of those heavily invested in the brand and relationship. The bias is clearly there too.

When you are a leader and make arrogant comments or belittle some in passive aggressive ways in commentary it should be discussed. Broad brushing any group is fundamentally wrong. I don’t care how many minute repeaters they allocate you. Some things are just fundamentally wrong to say. Especially for “leaders”

Love the dialogue.