SDC Weekly 74; Swiss Made vs Global Trade; Where Ultra-Luxury Actually Sells
Reply to Wei Koh, Journe Shatters Records, Perezcope hits MSM, GPHG’s Problem, OnlyWatch dies, Grönefeld’s Sh1tter, LVMH Drama, New Rolex Patent and more.
🚨 SDC Weekly again! Estimated reading time: ~34 mins
This week, we respond to Wei Koh’s controversial take on watch media positivity, celebrate Perezcope hitting mainstream recognition, unpack record-breaking auction results, and explore the GPHG’s credibility crisis. We’ll also dive deep into how protectionism could reshape Swiss watchmaking in light of Trump’s re-election and investigate where ultra-luxury watches actually sell. Plus, we’ll look at Rolex’s latest material innovations, LVMH’s executive exodus, and Grönefeld’s budget brand.
If you’re new here, welcome! Feel free to catch up on the older editions of SDC Weekly here.
Before we continue… A short note.
On SDC’s Future
Several weeks ago, I nearly shut down SDC. The thought of breaking promises to paid subscribers troubled me deeply, as unexpected ‘day job commitments’ threatened the weekly schedule I had promised to maintain.
After working through those commitments and trialling it for a few weeks, I’ve reached a decision to paywall SDC. As always, every post will have a little preview section to start, but it will no longer be sent to free subs later on.
Warren Buffett once said “Price is what you pay, value is what you get.” This simple wisdom helped shape my thinking about SDC’s future. Over 70 editions and over 700,000 words (excluding other non-weekly posts) later, creating this newsletter has become a labour of love. From the research and drafting to the wonderful community engagement; every aspect brings me joy and teaches me something new.
In purely financial terms, the hours spent creating SDC put my effective hourly rate well below minimum wage 😂 This isn’t a complaint at all - money has never been the driving force. If it was, I should have stopped long ago. I happily choose this path because the rewards far outweigh any opportunity costs.
This change isn’t about maximising returns - it’s about recognising worth; both yours and mine. If you find value in SDC, I hope you’ll consider subscribing. If you don’t, I’d honestly encourage you to cancel your subscription. Your time is precious, and it should be spent on content you find worthwhile. This clarity of exchange benefits everyone, and cancelled subscriptions are the purest form of feedback - which I value immensely.
For those concerned about access - my position remains unchanged: If you genuinely cannot afford a subscription but want to read SDC, please reach out. I’ll gladly arrange complimentary access. Just be honest. There is a difference between not believing it is worth paying for, and not being able to afford it. I’ve had people who own multiple watches worth over £20,000 apiece telling me they can’t afford a few bucks a month … Wtf 🤣
With 67 draft posts waiting to be finished, I assure you there is no shortage of topics to explore. If anything, the challenge is finding enough time to do each subject justice. This change simply helps create a clearer understanding between us: your support enables SDC’s continued growth, and I remain committed to delivering the quality you deserve.
The weekly schedule continues, though timing might occasionally flex to accommodate my schedule (today included!). Most importantly, the thoughtful additions in our comments section - truly the heart of SDC - will carry on unchanged.
Thank you for being part of this journey. Your support, feedback, and engagement make SDC what it is, and I’m deeply grateful for that.
Alright, let’s get on with it!
🎈 Small stuff
When Positivity Becomes Propaganda
Wei Koh recently penned a piece about the need for positivity in watch media. While his heart might be in the right place, his argument feels about as balanced as a panda on a chopstick1.
Let’s unpack this.
Wei argues that social media breeds negativity because people chase dopamine hits through controversial posts. He writes: “Studies have shown that when people post negative comments, their brains release dopamine into their central nervous systems and, like drug addicts, they keep coming back for bigger and bigger highs.”
This is a classic case of correlation being confused with causation. The dopamine release isn’t tied to negativity specifically - it is linked to engagement of any kind. Your brain doesn’t care if people are agreeing or disagreeing with you, it just loves the attention. Sort of like how Thierry Stern doesn’t care what people say about the Cubitus, as long as they keep talking about it.
Wei positions himself as an industry cheerleader, stating: “my mission is to uplift this industry and not to tear it down.” Noble sentiment, but there’s a fine line between being supportive and becoming a propaganda machine.
Imagine a food critic praising every restaurant, regardless of food quality or hygiene standards. “Oh yes, that green fuzzy stuff on your steak? That's not mould - it’s artisanal penicillin garnish! And those cockroaches scurrying across the floor? They’re adding that authentic street food ambiance!”
Give me a break. The watch media’s current approach to criticism feels about as credible as our hypothetical food critic. When every new release is “revolutionary” and every design choice is “brave”, we’ve definitely crossed from journalism into fantasy writing.
The fact is, when watch media becomes an extension of brands’ marketing departments, everybody loses. The readers lose because they can’t trust the information they are being fed. The brands lose because they fail to receive valuable feedback. Even the journalists lose, sacrificing their integrity for access and advertising revenue2.
Wei claims: “To me, watch media is about offering all the best information possible for people to make up their own minds.”
Brilliant statement. Shame it’s complete BS when you look at how mainstream watch media actually operates.
Take the recent Cubitus launch. Rather than offering balanced coverage that discussed both strengths and weaknesses, most publications either gushed with praise or stayed conspicuously quiet. That is not helping readers make up their minds is it Wei?
It is making up their minds for them.
—
You know what real love for this industry looks like? It looks like collectors and enthusiasts who care enough to speak up when they see something wrong. It is the people who point out flaws not because they hate the brand, but because they want it to be better.
When someone spends time writing detailed criticism of a watch or brand, they are not always doing it for dopamine hits - they might be doing it because they are invested in the outcome. They want the industry to improve, to innovate, to excel.
The Way Forward
The solution isn’t to silence criticism or paint everything with a rosy brush. It is far more productive to foster genuine dialogue between brands and their customers. It is even more beneficial to create spaces where constructive feedback is welcomed, not feared.
The watch industry really doesn’t need more yes-men. It needs honest brokers who can bridge the gap between brands and collectors. It needs media that serves the reader first, and not the advertiser.
Wei’s heart might be in the right place, but his approach risks leaving watch journalism in the echo chamber of endless praise, where it currently resides. And if there’s one thing this industry needs less of, it is echo chambers.
Remember, true friends tell you when you’ve got spinach in your teeth. They don’t pretend it’s a new form of dental decoration just to avoid hurting your feelings.
Perezcope Hits MSM
According to a recent GQ article, Jose Perez, the guy behind Perezcope, is making serious waves in the vintage watch market with his forensic approach to exposing fakes and ‘frankenwatches’. This is hopefully not ‘news’ to most serious watch nerds, but the fact that JP’s hit mainstream media is something to celebrate.
Operating from Malaysia, JP is a Swiss national of Spanish heritage, who has built an extensive private database which helps him identify manipulated watches and expose major players in the fraud game. His most notable recent case was that record-breaking Omega Speedmaster that sold for £2.8 million at Phillips in 2021.
What makes Perez’s work particularly interesting is his stance on restoration. Rather than simply condemning restored watches, he advocates for a market-wide grading system that would bring transparency to the industry. As he puts it in the article: “Like paintings, cars and other collectibles, materials deteriorate over time; it is the nature of things.”
Perez’s mission isn't just about exposing fakes - it's about bringing radical transparency to an industry that often thrives on opacity. As he said to GQ:
“We’re not only talking about vintage watches, but exposing all these fake stories that the watch world invented.”
His work has divided the watch world between those who support his exposés and others who consider him an ‘internet troll’. No points for guessing who thinks he is a troll. Read the full article here to learn more about how this tattooed, top-knot sporting detective is shaking up the watch market.
Historic F.P. Journe Shatters Records
So, here’s a story that’ll make your wallet weep; F.P. Journe’s second-ever wristwatch hammered for CHF 7.32 million (about $8.4 million) at Phillips in Geneva last Friday. That’s more than most people’s retirement funds, houses, and children’s education combined.
The watch is a 1993 Tourbillon Souverain à Remontoire d’Egalité, marked ‘15/93’. While it wasn’t the first Journe wristwatch ever made (that one stays in François-Paul’s personal collection), it was the first one he ever sold. Think of it as Journe’s debut album - if debut albums came with tourbillons and were made of platinum. The ‘15’ represents the ‘15th creation’ (he made a bunch of other clocks and pocket watches before these Tourbillons).
The auction itself played out like a game of high-stakes poker. Phillips’ Paul Boutros kicked things off with a mic-drop moment, shouting ‘Five million!’ faster than you can say ‘sold’ - thanks to LB for the video! This wasn’t just an opening bid; it was a power move that screamed ‘I've got champagne taste and a champagne budget to match’.
This makes sense, since I recently heard an unverified story that it was Mark Zuckerberg who was being represented by Boutros. Go figure! Phillips has stated these rumours are false. Either way, I think this strategy ensured it wouldn’t get too heated, and worked in the buyer’s favour.
That’s proven by the fact that only one brave soul in the room dared to challenge Boutros’s phone bidder, making the equivalent of a polite cough with a couple of counter-bids before bowing out. The hammer finally fell at CHF 6 million, with fees bringing the total to 7.32 million Francs.
To put this in perspective, this sale breaks several records:
Most expensive F.P. Journe watch ever sold (previous record: CHF 4.5 million for the FFC at Only Watch 2021)
Most expensive watch by an independent watchmaker - beating Philippe Dufour’s USD 7.63 million (~CHF 7 million) Grande Sonnerie.
Seventh most expensive watch ever sold at auction
François-Paul Journe himself was apparently in the room, probably trying not to smile too broadly. When Aurel Bacs, the auctioneer, asked about the actual first wristwatch he made, Journe confirmed it would never be for sale - exactly like telling hungry wolves about a juicy steak they can’t have.
The sale cements Journe’s position as the independent watchmaker of our time. It’s rather fitting that a watch which essentially launched his career has now launched him into the price stratosphere alongside brands like Patek Philippe and Rolex. Speaking of Rolex, at the same auction, the first-ever Rainbow Daytona from 1994 sold for CHF 5.5 million.
See the other results here, and the other auctions’ results here and here.
has a neat summary of the Reloaded auction here, and below you’ll find the Phillips press release.
This is today’s auction catalogue, it starts at 1pm Geneva time (an hour from now!):
GPHG’s Pay-to-Play Problem
Robin Swithinbank has, to my delight, written a rather pointed critique of the Grand Prix d’Horlogerie de Genève (GPHG), highlighting how its pay-to-play model undermines its credibility as watchmaking’s premier awards ceremony. I need not repeat where I stand on this!