Interesting to see Max frame this as a responsibility rather than an opportunity. While I’m not a collector of these brands and therefore not as tuned in as some may be, it seems that Journe is still Journe after taking investment from Chanel, and this short history appears to bode well for the future of MB&F. One has to wonder, though, what could be the consequences if a more hawkish leadership team were to one day take over the reins at Chanel?
I often point out Max's disingenuous actions, but I don't think Max is being disingenuous about this feeling like a responsibility. Part of his brand surviving, is the confidence that his brand can live on when he's not there. That is debatable of course - as it is also debatable with Journe. However, at least with Chanel involved, it will live on in some shape or form. Whether that stays true to what the early collectors signed on for - is of course unclear.
As for the future Chanel leadership posing a threat - I think that's well managed from a board-set perspective - at least with Journe and RG. Not sure about the setup MB&F has in place, and I am far less friendly with MB&F than I am with the others, so I may never find this out. However, my hunch is Chanel will interfere far more in MB&F operating decisions than they do with the other two - but it remains to be seen.
So ask him then. I stand by what I’ve said and have learned even more detail which unequivocally proves he’s incorrect - I simply haven’t been authorised to share it publicly. If you’d like more, I’m afraid I can’t help.
I have read elsewhere - cannot recall, however, so I can’t link it - the AP subsequently purchased a further 10% stake in Richard Mille, giving them 20% ownership.
Interesting to see Max frame this as a responsibility rather than an opportunity. While I’m not a collector of these brands and therefore not as tuned in as some may be, it seems that Journe is still Journe after taking investment from Chanel, and this short history appears to bode well for the future of MB&F. One has to wonder, though, what could be the consequences if a more hawkish leadership team were to one day take over the reins at Chanel?
I often point out Max's disingenuous actions, but I don't think Max is being disingenuous about this feeling like a responsibility. Part of his brand surviving, is the confidence that his brand can live on when he's not there. That is debatable of course - as it is also debatable with Journe. However, at least with Chanel involved, it will live on in some shape or form. Whether that stays true to what the early collectors signed on for - is of course unclear.
As for the future Chanel leadership posing a threat - I think that's well managed from a board-set perspective - at least with Journe and RG. Not sure about the setup MB&F has in place, and I am far less friendly with MB&F than I am with the others, so I may never find this out. However, my hunch is Chanel will interfere far more in MB&F operating decisions than they do with the other two - but it remains to be seen.
So who does the higher end movements for Chanel? I always thought it was RG but can’t be sure.
@Moe Jaber any idea?
You’re refuting SJX’s assertion with another assertion. I don’t know who to believe right now.
You’re right 🌹
Convenient deflection.
I got my information from a reliable source.
Yeah, and he can presumably claim the same.
So ask him then. I stand by what I’ve said and have learned even more detail which unequivocally proves he’s incorrect - I simply haven’t been authorised to share it publicly. If you’d like more, I’m afraid I can’t help.
Thank God I don’t have to wade through 258 comments on the Watch chat to get some perspective on this business merger which I was just about to do 😳😬🤣
All conjecture perfectly reasoned and makes sense to me BTW …. interesting development and good write up 🤨
I have read elsewhere - cannot recall, however, so I can’t link it - the AP subsequently purchased a further 10% stake in Richard Mille, giving them 20% ownership.