SDC Weekly 72; Cubitus Rant, Time Psychology, Storytelling, and Watchmaking Talent
Chrono24 Drama, Fire Sales at WristCheck, White Gold's Rise in Monaco, Sotheby's Gets Psychological, Upcoming Geneva Auctions, MLB's Global Push & Saudi Arabia's £16bn clock tower.
Just when we thought the Cubitus conversation was fizzling out, Fratello Watches drops a puzzling defense of Patek’s latest creation, prompting a response. From there, we embark on another dive into human psychology - exploring how we perceive time, why we covet expensive watches, and the power of storytelling in luxury. We round out this week’s exploration with an investigation into what truly makes watchmaking genius, inspired by Tyler Cowen’s insights on talent spotting.
Estimated reading time: 44 minutes
If you’re new here, welcome! Feel free to catch up on the older editions of SDC Weekly here.
🎈 Small stuff
🤡 Cubitus is What You Deserve
I know I said I was done with the Cubitus chat, but hear me out. First, I saw a post shared in a friend’s story today, regarding the Cubitus. His take was “It’s not horrible.” That’s like describing your spouse as “not ugly”… It’s technically a compliment, but Jesus Christ, is that where we’re setting the bar?
“Fine”, I thought. Let it die.
Then I was sent this absurd take posted on Fratello Watches, asking if we can “even be pleasantly surprised by watches anymore?” This piece bends over backwards to explain away mediocrity, suggesting we’re all just too jaded to appreciate innovation. I even half-jokingly asked R.J. Broer whether Patek paid Fratello for this post!
Let me be crystal clear; This is not about whether the Cubitus is beautiful or ugly. This is not about “innovation paradoxes” or “the mere exposure effect” (which I too, have written about at length). This is about a purported luxury powerhouse serving up reheated Nautilus leftovers and calling it a new menu item.
The article suggests we’re too harsh on new releases, that maybe we need to give designs time to “settle.” What’s next? Should we also give stale bread time to become toast? The Cubitus isn’t polarising because it is (too) innovative (or at all!) – it is polarising because it’s damn lazy. When you take a Nautilus dial, slap it in a square case, keep the same bracelet, and charge £35,000 for the privilege, you’re not innovating as much as you’re insulting your customers’ intelligence.
The Fratello piece insinuates today’s black sheep might be tomorrow’s hottest collectibles. This misses the point entirely. The Code 11.59 “opinions shifting now” ? Fvck. Here we go again. Is every rejected manuscript going to become the next Great Gatsby because we know some publishers passed on Harry Potter? For every Royal Oak that went from hate to hero, there are a hundred forgotten designs that were binned because they deserved to be.
The Code 11.59 was polarising because it tried something new. The Cubitus is polarising because it didn’t try at all.
The watch industry doesn’t need apologists.
It needs accountability.
I repeat, the Cubitus itself isn’t particularly ‘bad.’ I actually tried it on for myself. The finishing is what you’d expect; it “wears nicely,” despite being sized for Thierry the elephant, and it’ll probably age well especially when smaller case sizes are launched.
Yet, this is exactly the problem. Patek Philippe, supposedly the pinnacle of watchmaking, is serving up mediocrity with a side of arrogance, and collectors are lining up to say “thank you, sir, may I have another?”
You don’t get what you deserve.
You get what you accept.
Remember what I wrote last week about Thierry’s “let them eat cake” attitude? This is the moment where Marie Antoinette’s head should roll. Instead, the watch collecting community is acting like someone with Stockholm syndrome… convincing themselves that daddy Thierry knows best (precisely as I described the people attending the launch event).
Look, I get it. FOMO is a hell of a drug, but when collectors say they’ll “buy it because they can,” they are essentially giving Thierry a green light to keep serving up reheated leftovers at caviar prices. Would you pay Michelin star prices at Nando’s just because the chef once worked with Gordon Ramsay?
I didn’t think so.
The math is simple: Collectors accept mediocrity… Brands deliver mediocrity… Prices keep rising… Innovation dies… Thierry keeps not giving a fvck!
Do you even need proof? Just read his own words from last week’s interview, one more time:
“The haters are for the most part people who have never had a Patek and never will have one. So that doesn't bother me.”
Translation: Keep buying whatever I serve up, peasants.
The bottom line here, is that Patek isn’t changing because there is no incentive to change. Why innovate when you can just recycle the Nautilus DNA, slap a square case on it, and watch the waiting lists grow? Why respect your customers when they’ll fight each other for the privilege of being disrespected?
The only language luxury brands understand is money. Not Instagram comments. Not forum posts. Not angry tweets. Not “innovation paradoxes.”
Money.
Want better watches? Stop buying mediocre ones. Want more innovation? Stop rewarding laziness. Want respect from brands? Start respecting yourself enough to walk the fvck away.
The Cubitus, therefore, is not just a watch. It is a test. And right now, collectors are failing it spectacularly. Every purchase is a vote, and what are people voting for?
MORE OF THE SAME. 🤡
The next time you’re tempted to buy something “because you can,” ask yourself if that’s really the message you want to send to brands. Because trust me, they’re listening – not to what you say, but how you spend your money.
Your move, collectors clowns. Thierry’s already shown his cards, and it is time to show yours.
P.S. To the “established collectors” planning to buy this just because they can – congratulations on being part of the problem. You’re not collecting watches; you are collecting more symptoms of Stockholm syndrome.
P.P.S. Sorry for ANOTHER Cubitus post. I am hopefully done, unless that Fratello writer responds. Then you’ll have to excuse me once more 😂
📊 WatchCharts October Market Update
WatchCharts recently released their October market update, and while there might be a glimmer of hope in the numbers, don’t break out the champagne just yet.
The Overall Market Index showed a positive trend in September (+0.8%) - the first uptick since December 2023’s holiday season. October’s first three weeks are also showing a bit of resilience with a +0.4% rise. However, dig a little deeper, and the picture becomes more nuanced:
Rolex: Up +0.8% in September (Air-King, Day-Date, and Datejust leading the charge), but down -0.2% in October
Patek Philippe: Up +0.5% in September (mostly thanks to Nautilus?), maintaining some momentum with +0.3% in October
Audemars Piguet: Down -0.4% in September, continuing to slide with another -0.4% in October
Thing is, these figures may be misleading due to “heavy-hitters” - most brands are down, and even the ones which aren’t, are not ‘up’ by much. The broader market health indicators (supply, turnover rate, inventory age) remain just as troubling as they have been throughout the year.
In other words, while the premium segment might be finding its footing, the wider market is still struggling to find solid ground.
🎪 Chrono24 Sequel
Remember the recent coverage of the Chrono24 fee hike drama? Well, grab your popcorn, because the story got even spicier. After dealers organised and demanded changes, Chrono24 essentially told them to fvck off - or, in corporate speak, they’re supposedly standing by their decision.
“The lack of meaningful competition has put many of us in a position of economic dependence, a situation that – if it continues – could lead to the closure of numerous companies.”
The numbers tell an interesting story according to George over at Infinite Breguet. Since September 28th, listings have dropped by nearly 5% (from 579,778 to 552,826). While that might not sound dramatic, it represents thousands of watches vanishing from the platform. Think about it - that’s actual inventory being pulled by legitimate dealers who’ve had enough.
What’s worse, about 32% of Chrono24’s listings are marked as “needs to be procured” or “available on request” - essentially drop shippers trying to flip watches they don’t even own. So while real dealers with actual inventory are pulling out, Chrono24 seems perfectly content with virtual inventory from procurement dealers.
The platform’s recent statement reads like it was written by ChatGPT having a stroke - lots of words about “trust” and “sophisticated marketplaces” while completely ignoring dealers’ actual concerns about unpredictable commission rates and skyrocketing monthly fees1. Some dealers are now paying more in fees than they make in profit on certain sales - one does not need an MBA to tell you it is not a sustainable setup.
What’s really going on here? Well, as George pointed out; with a reported €22M negative net income in 2022 and equity capital down 33%, it looks suspiciously like Chrono24 is trying to polish their numbers ahead of a potential IPO. They’re valued at over $1B after investments from Cristiano Ronaldo and Charles LeClerc (because nothing says “solid business fundamentals” like celebrity investors, lol), but they’re burning cash faster than a degenerate gambler stranded in Macau.
So, how long can Chrono24 maintain their near-monopoly position while alienating the very dealers who make their platform valuable? They say they are no longer a classified ads website, but really, other than adding a one-sided escrow service, aren’t the dealers and their listings, the most valuable asset(s)?
Chrono24 is truly full of sh1t, by the way. They have no respect for the dealers who use their platform. Here’s an example of two separate listings for a Patek Philippe 5990 - one from K2 Luxury (private dealer), and the other directly from Chrono24. The former has the watch in stock, and displays actual images of the watch in question. Chrono24 on the other hand, simply stole an image from K2 Luxury’s listing, edited it, and used it for their competing listing - for a watch they don’t even have ‘in stock.’ Now, Chrono24 might argue the dealers surrender their ‘rights’ to image copyrights when they upload them to Chrono24 (not sure), but is this ethical/acceptable? Does this sound like a company who cares about good business practices?
