SDC Weekly 81; Musings on Collecting; Mathematics of Watch Insurance; On Trust and Instincts; Perspective & Value; Neuroscience & Manifestation
Ben Clymer: Afterthoughts, Gerald Charles Celebrates a Fake “25th Anniversary”, Chrono24's New Diet, Richemont’ results, On Time and Priorities ++
🚨 Welcome to SDC Weekly 81!
Estimated reading time: ~37 mins
—
A day early and a dollar extra… or not quite. Instead of waiting until tomorrow, I’d like to get this out now and clear my schedule - read to the end to find out why.
If you had any doubts about Ben Clymer’s influence in the watch world, you only need to look at SDC subscriber numbers from last week. A nearly 10% bump in paid subscriptions followed the analysis of his podcast appearance. I suppose I should thank him 😂! But more on that particular saga shortly...
So, if you’re new here: welcome aboard! You’ve joined at an interesting time. If you’re wondering what SDC Weekly is all about, think of it as your slightly unhinged friend who can’t stop talking about watches, and who occasionally makes some sense. We dive deep into industry analysis, collector psychology, and whatever else catches our attention. Sometimes it’s serious, sometimes it’s not, but it’s always honest. Older editions of SDC Weekly can be found here.
N00bs aside… If you’re a long-time reader, thank you for sticking around. I appreciate you. And if you’re Ben Clymer... well, thanks for the boost!
Let’s get into it…
Gerald Charles invents a “25th Anniversary”
When a luxury watch brand celebrates an anniversary, you’d expect the dates to add up. Unfortunately, Gerald Charles’s latest marketing charade raises further questions about the company’s claims and integrity.
In recent days, watch media outlets covered Gerald Charles’s supposed “25th anniversary.” The coverage, appearing in Watchpro, Oracle Time, T3 and several other publications which showed up on a Google search, paints a picture of long-standing heritage and tradition. There’s just one small problem - the numbers don’t add up.
Check out this timeline:
According to online records, Gerald Charles SA was only registered in January 2019, changing its name from Pièces Uniques SA - a company that itself was only established in February 2014. Even more amusing, the ‘Gerald Charles’ trademark wasn’t registered until July 2018:
So what 25th anniversary are they celebrating exactly? 😂
The brand’s website claims “Mr. Gérald Charles Genta founded the Maison in 2000.” As far as I am aware, the Genta family themselves don’t even endorse this company.
It is particularly concerning how readily watch media has accepted and amplified these seemingly false claims. Watchpro’s recent article speaks of “25 years of Gerald Charles”, while Oracle Time confidently states “Gerald Charles is turning 25”. This is a complete failure on their part.
The coverage extends beyond simple date confusion. Publications are happily repeating marketing claims about “24-hour dial production” and “Qualité Fleurier levels” of finishing, without questioning whether these claims align with the brand’s actual capabilities or history.
This pattern of misrepresentation adds another concerning layer to what I’ve previously covered about Gerald Charles’s questionable value proposition. They now seem to be going beyond just overpricing to actively creating a false narrative to justify their egregious prices.
—
As an aside, this situation highlights a broader issue in the watch industry - the ease with which brands can construct artificial heritage. When watch media fails to fact-check basic claims, it becomes complicit in misleading consumers who rely on their coverage for making informed decisions.
As I’ve said before, Gerald Charles represents everything wrong with certain segments of the modern watch industry. Not content with charging unjustifiable prices for their watches, they now appear to be manufacturing history itself!
In an industry built on trust and tradition, truth shouldn’t be optional. Even if you’re charging £50,000 for a watch - especially if you’re charging £50,000 for a watch - your history should be exactly that: history, not fiction.
Ben Clymer: Afterthoughts
The response to last week’s analysis of Ben Clymer’s latest podcast appearance has exceeded all expectations. If you read through the comments, you’ll notice some folks felt the critique was too harsh, and others argued it didn’t go far enough. We’ll get to this in a moment.
First, I have some additional data for those on the fence; actual quotes from former H staff: