IWC-connect.. pls no

+1
Best,
-Christian

Pretty funny this thread. Also pretty funny to see how some people by definition are against anything that is new or innovative ... and hide behind the statement of heritage of a brand.

Is IWC producing the same watches as they did early 1900? No!
Is Porsche or Ferrari producing the same cars they did in the past? No!
Do these cars have a navigation system inside today? Yes, they do. Would you buy them without? Most probably not.

Most probably, in ten or twenty years from now you will also not buy anymore a watch which does not come with an IoT device.
So what is so bad about IWC preparing for the future?

Btw David, as much as you admire some of the members here for applauding whatever IWC does, I admire you for disliking and negatively commeting whatever IWC does. No offense here, I really admire your persistance in this thing;-) I really would not have the time to deal with such a passion on something I do not like;-)

Many interesting perspectives. My take is that it can be great add-on for those who want to have a fine watch and connectivity.

I'm not a Luddite, and in fact I'm a gadget guy. But to me mechanical watches are entirely about craft, or otherwise all sorts of utilitarian advantages can be attributed to quartz watches.

But, hey, next time I'll wear this on the strap of my Portuguese Regulateur Tourbillon ;)

Just kidding.

Michael, I actually remember my father putting those on his watch band each month. I think after a few months the novelty wore off. Hard to believe, but at the time it seemed very innovative. And very optional!

Actually, I used those calendar add-ones for several years. They abraded the hell out of strap, but, then again, my $50 watch could take the abuse.

Oh my, I remember using those on my watch band and as well!!
I was about 15 and remember going to the barber who had a glass jar full of the current month's tabs for purchase. Jewellers and pharmacies sold a whole year's worth. Thanks for bringing up the memory :-)

Oh Giovanni, you are just not doing justice to me.

I like so many things about IWC and my latest two acquisitions were actually IWC watches, I am sure you will remember (5102 and the 3704).

But perhaps my balanced view o the brand did not entirely come through, so I will have to work on my communication skills - and I will take that point.

At the end, also criticism is a very honest way of showing love to somebody or something. If I wouldn't do it, it would mean that I would not care at all or applaud everything just as a courtesy.

Hello,

Like others have said, I would like to wait before I pass judgement. With that said, given the size of the device, I am curious how much information can it give a user? There is not a lot of real estate there for something that needs to store energy, have connectivity (at least to the other devices if I interpreted this correctly), and display meaningful information to its user. I wonder if there is some battery pack integrated in the strap? How would you charge it? I guess we will all know soon.

Rave,

Thanks for enriching my vocabulary-- I have never heard the term Luddite before. I can make good use of that word! :-)

Regards, George

I am very grateful for the high-tech innovations that have made our lives easier and more productive, but I also respect and admire the centuries of engineering and painstaking design and production that have gone into the IWCs we are fortunate to own today.

I love these tiny, exquisitely engineered and beautiful hand-made machines we wear on our wrists or carry in our pockets, unchanged in large part for some 400 years. I love that my watches are toiling away at 28,800 beats per hour, every hour, every day, the mainspring losing and gaining tension as I go about my day, the escapement sharply tapping against the escape wheel, the balance whirring back and forth on the balances spring, keeping track of time to a breathtaking degree of accuracy. There is not a digital device on the planet--and I own more than a few of them--that gives me as much pleasure as my mechanical watches.

I am curious about this Connect device, although I am very unlikely to mix my modern digital life with my old-fashioned analog life. They are both important to me, but in distinct and decidedly separate ways. It is my fervent hope that the IWC Connect and other wearable devices do not represent the beginning of the end of mechanical timekeeping.

Swiss article from today about "IWC connect":

www.bilanz.ch/unternehmen/statt-smarte-uhr-iwc-setzt-auf-smartes-armband-415030

Best, Harald

Well, it is difficult to anticipate the future of "smart" functions integrated in a watch, and I guess that is what ICW management are struggling with.

They should know better, however. Just read Donzé's (2014) business history of the Swatch company, which offers many insights into the luxury watch market - including the Richemont brands.

I see it a sign of unjustified nervousness on the side of luxury watch companies if they try to jump on the bandwagon here and now. Finally, it will be a question of positioning for IWC and the likes. True ("exclusive") luxury or low-end ("affordable") luxury? The latter will be exposed much more than the former, on the long run. On the sort run, any conclusion appears premature. The core claims of Swiss luxury watches, not only IWC, (such as [Swiss]heritage, technical excellence & fine manufacturing, life style, etc.) don't seem to fit well with short-lived life cycles of IT.

I just hope they won't repeat the mistakes they made during the so called "quartz crisis", which in fact had had other origins in the first place.

Hans
(who happens to be, among other things..., a professor of marketing management)

Perfectly put, thank you Hans!

I tend to agree with Hans. Seriously assuming IWC or Richemont know what they are doing, I wonder why IWC tries this path. Is it the idea of IWC itself, or has Richemont ordained that one of their brands must try this, and IWC is the lucky one? My guess is: if it proves to be a success, then IWC is the early adapter, fit for the developments that come, the others, maybe not all, will follow. If it proves to be a failure, not much harm is done, some money is spent but not in vain: experience counts for something. The whole thing is then quickly forgotten without leaving a negative image. So, whether a future sucess or failure, not much harm is done, and much can be gained, so the try must be judged in a positive way. Good luck IWC, whatever happens, but probably without me trying that gadget.

Kind regards,
Paul

After reading lots of comments and thinking about it for a while I think it's kind of ridiculous. IWC claims the space on both of my wrists or wants to prevent me from wearing an Apple watch on my other wrist.
If I were the guy for an Apple watch I wouldn't be the guy for IWC and vice versa.
Don't get me wrong. I find iPhones, iPads and Macs very useful and well designed. But that watch doesn't provide me with any additional value. That's why I'm an IWC watch guy. And that's why I won't need IWC connect. But that's just me.
On the other hand, if IWC or Richemont or both feel they need to try this - ok. It's just an option that I don't have to draw.

I can't believe I'm bothering to comment again, but, really, you naysayers are overthinking this. You don't like it? Don't buy it. Yes, it's really that easy. And no, the integrity of the brand hasn't been impugned one iota, regardless of how dramatic you want to be about it. Go ahead and bandy about words like "heritage" and "integrity" and whatever else you can dig up in the thesaurus, but the fact of the matter is that IWC has always been at the vanguard of technology, and the birth of wearables and IoT fits perfectly within their DNA. As I said before, they'd be fools not to explore this.

I, for one, can't wait to see what functionally IWC Connect brings to the table, and -- if the price is right -- to my wrist.

Regards,
Adam

PS - FWIW, no, IWC Connect wasn't a mandate from Richemont; this is 100% their initiative.

At least I know now where IWC stands in Richemont's group. Under Mr. Kern it has been successfully transformed into overpriced fashion brand with poor taste as demonstrated on several occasions in the last couple years.
Of course this connect nonsense is another testament of IWC poor re-positioning. This wouldn't fly with Jaeger-LeCoultre or Vacheron Constantin for a good reason. I hope IWC gets back on track soon.

Adam I must agree with you, if you don't like the idea or the look then don't go near the display box at your boutique,don't buy it and have your say after the launch but as we don't know the true functionality of the connect yet then is it not best to hold judgement.
Just my opinion.

David

[](s556.photobucket.com/user/Waikato7/media/image.jpg1_zps4awrvyat.jpg.html)