Quote:
Originally Posted by the dark knight
This makes sense to me as well. Repairing a movement to make it ready to be put in a watch would still require a decent amount of human labor, at which point it makes you wonder why they wouldn't just service the movement. Especially considering they probably aren't outsourcing this work to other countries due to IP issues as someone mentioned above.
Probably also why Kenissi is sticking to fairly simple time only type movements, I think a GMT is the most complicated movement they manufacturer.
This "hot swap" model is probably also attractive to the companies that are buying these movements to put in their own watches (Tag Heuer, Breitling, Chanel, etc). With an ETA or Sellita movement, there's a good chance these companies never see the watch again as people just find a local watchmaker that can service the watch easily. But now with movements that have parts that need to be replaced and no watchmakers with parts accounts, owners are required to send the watch back to the manufacturer. At which point they just pop in another Kenissi movement, overcharge the customer, and make a tidy little profit from that as well.
|
Ok, found it:
https://www.watchuseek.com/threads/t...5568696/page-2
Last post. I have no idea what they actually said (or if the call actually happened, for that matter), but taken at face value, seems to be new-for-new swap, not refurb.
Curious what made the others mentioned above so certain that the swap-ins were refurbished, not new (unless everyone was operating off different definitions of the term "hot swap" here. I never listened to the interview mentioned, nor do I know which Tudor employee it supposedly came from.