IWC-connect.. pls no

100% agree.
It relates to competition on the wrist.
The wrist is the most convenient place to carry information, that is/was the time/date/moon,..., what we call a traditional watch. Think about the pocket watch that transferred into a wrist watch. Now we enter a new era that other information can be carried around the wrist. What would you do if you were IWC. Sit and wait? I admire their innovation to use a strap, instead of trying to bring a hybrid watch that loses value with each IT innovation. All values of IWC remain in the watch, while innovating the strap. I find it smart.

Eduard

Come on David... This is nonsense. I have criticized plenty of things from Schaffhausen. Have you seen the TriBeCa watches? LOL
I fail to see how an optional module on a watch strap hurts your values. If you don't value it don't get one.

For innovation, learn from Richard Mille
For traditional, learn from PP, VC, AP etc
Don't become Breitling, Mont Blanc or Omega......

Adam is right on. Agree with him 100%

Let's face it - fine mechanical watches are competing for Wrist-Space with next gen devices and wearable tech. If IWC can eliminate the barrier of wrist time by offering an OPTIONAL device that can be worn on the same wrist - they can expand their addressable market.

Let's also consider that Apple will be leading the charge to encourage an entire generation of people who do not wear watches at all with their new device - once the Millennials get used to wearing watches - they'll graduate to the timeless classic, heirloom watches by IWC - so the strategy needs to be supportive.

Richard, let's not forget: The competition for wrist space has been ongoing for decades. It is not an overpriced gadget that will change this game. The invention of Swatch did not make all luxury brands suddenly wanting to look like lollipops, because everbody was aware that there was no point in abandoning a brand image and its values just because of a hype in a completely different segment.

It's about purpose and use cases - and a small relatively dumb computer on the wrist will not change that. Looking at the fact that this simple insight is not present at IWC appears more than strange to me.

Subject to further and better particulars, this innovation is a watch strap with a device. The watch is not compromised but if there is a need to carry some form of bio monitoring device, this might be the solution. It's an optional extra which consumers will pay for. If you don't like it then don't buy it. Those who knock innovation are Luddites. If the innovation strikes a chord with the consumer, it's a win / win. If it doesn't work for the consumer then it will be quickly forgotten. Most innovations are quickly forgotten. A handful works and takes the industry forward.

I agree with previous comments, the wrist has limited real estate. A fool would bet against Apple. In the not too distant future, your GP may insist you carry such a device. If it can be incorporated in the strap of my Big Pilot then I would be happy to use the innovation (provided, of course, the accompanying watch has a 9 and full antimagnetic protection).

I find Regulateur's comments rather offensive. The suggestion that members of this Forum automatically applaud everything that IWC does is arrogant. If we don't like it, we don't buy it.

Well said Ralph. I agree.

OK, so from that perspective, any innovation would be welcome. This is a weak argument, IMHO.

I apologize if it was perceived like this. On purpose I added to the sentence that I admire the people like you who are able to always see the positive in everything IWC does and applaud it. An ability that I am lacking. So, there was no intention to be offensive.

Ralph I totally agree with you here.
And I accept and and appreciate Regulateurs appology as well.
So I think we can again concentrate on the content.

At the moment I rather think it's a gimmick, but I don't want to judge it before I have really all information including pricing. And some things develop their value over time, i. e. in Version 3 or 4. In IT this very often is the case.

So let's keep cool, wait and see, give everything and everybody a chance. And buy only what we want (and can afford - unfortunately that is not the same thing sometimes). ;-)

I both agree and disagree to some comments here.

Although I lean more towards Regulateurs reflections.

My stand point at the moment makes me feel old and conservative which I usually am not. Of course open mindedness should be encouraged although I believe others can supply wearable tech one could place on any strap thus preserve the integrity of IWC. Much why PP, AP and VC probably won’t go down the ”connect”-route, I don’t think IWC should either.

But I could be wrong and then I will be the first to admit.

Cheers

So let me get this straight...in summary...
IWC issues a teaser on a new product to be added as an option on some straps for some pilots as an initial test. Little details are given. And yet the naysayers are instantly offended by this foray into the future despite knowing almost nothing about how it will work. The purity of the watch design is totally unaffected by an optional strap.
What's the problem?

I just don't like the idea of mixing mechanical watches with IWC-branded wearable tech. As little as I would want an IWC-computer of any kind.

/A

If iwc is never planning to integrate this technology into the watch itself, i think it would be better to just let another company that focuses on this technology to just have space on their bracelets. Like iwc straps by jawbone up, google, samsung or fitbit. Or if allowed even apple down the line. if i were buying the best smart technology im not sure id buy anything by iwc.

The impression that IWC runs after all possible money - come what may - is a contradiction to a pride such a brand should show. That's the point. The only thing missing is a limited, non-sequentially numbered boutique-edition of this IWC-connect ;-)

David, I must commend you on taking a point to it's illogical extreme and then castigating IWC for it. You are an expert at that. And yes, I saw the gratuitous smiley face.

I guess it's kind of like putting a GPS navigation system on a horse. I guess it serves a purpose, but most of the riding community isn't trying to find the fastest way to get across town while riding a horse. They use a car for that. Hope no one's offended, no offense intended.

This concept really doesn't bother me as long as I am not forced to buy it with my future acquisitions and as long as Mr. Klaus does not have to go back to making miniature silver Porsches because of it.

+1
Best,
-Christian