Q: What's the "right" number for limited editions?

Devils advocat.

The parallel is not 100% but sometimes a case could be made for extending the limited series. Cars for example. Both the 959 and the Enzo have been made in series that were larger than what was originally intended and promised to the first buyers. The respective manufacturers made the additional cars because the prices on the secondary market became so grossly inflated and too many of their buyers were not "real" enthusiasts but merely speculative buyers wanting to make a quick buck.
Nevertheles I think that IWC was 100% correct in refusing this unusual demand.

JCB

Q: What's the "right" number for limited editions?

Depending on the price tag of the watch I believe that 100-2,000 would be the right amount. Beyond 2,000 sort of defeats the purpose and idea of a limited edition. I think that it is also very important not too have too many limited editions. GP is one of a few manufacturers that is guilty of releasing too many insignificant limited editions which are not different enough from the base version. Sometimes just the dial has been changed. Great shame...

All the best

JCB

49 ;-)

Many of the experienced internet surfers readers know the inside story on that number.

A: There is no "right" number

The limitation number is only one of many attributes of a limited edition, in my opinion not an important one.

There are multiple points of view: the manufacturer wants a smooth distribution and sale, the principal (e.g. Wempe for the Jubilee Flieger Perpetual) is interested in the marketing effect, the collector wants a special, exciting piece keeping value.

Most important is a strong, comprehensible policy of the manufacturer and its distribution channels: no similar re-configuration of unlimited versions, no look-alike limited editions, reasonable prices -- you know, like IWC does it.

Michael Gehret

Limited edition thoughts for Ingenieur

500 Limited edition silver aniversary Ingenieurs. 50 would be to low and unfair to collectors, the demand for that watch would be very high and very few would get to the right people, if it is priced @ around 10k that would be realistic, in this case we should not measure our love for IWC by how deep our pockets are. Some of IWC's biggest fans may only have one watch or even none. I think that limited editions should be special for collectors and distributed acordingly. (for MF) Is there any way of having an priority list from this forum? Whichever 500 of us qualify can give our number to our local dealer for there April orders @ the show. Maybe I personally wouldn't qualify but at least the 500 would be going to the right people.

Clarification....

I am a Panerai collector, but do not own the PAM195 LE. Sorry for the poor choice of wording before.

Q: What's the "right" number for limited editions?

Michael ... I just have to quit lurking and put my two cents in here. Usually I simply keep silent and read, as I own but a few old plebian IWCs.

Personally, I think that the widespread use of artificial limited editions is simply a marketing gimmick, designed to creat the impression of the mechanical watch as nothing more than a showy symbol of wealth. I understand the economic motivation, I just dont approve.

I suggest a distinctions between watches like the grand complication and the DiVinci, which consume a great deal of skilled labor to assemble and are almost by necessity 'limited', and the deliberate attempts to create special dials, bands, etc with no technical justification.

So to me, the answer to your question is not in a specific number but in the intent. If the intent is to limit to create an artificial shortage, then that number is unjustiably small.

The number justifyable to me is the number that can be produced with available resource, and without uneconomic expansion of capacity.
Charlie

Should definitely be less than 1,000

Limited Edition, by definition, should be something which is released in very small numbers, generate large demand and leave enough people unhappy due to their inability to obtain one. Some years ago I got into the habit of collecting Swatches (shock! horror!) and quickly realized that any "limited editions" with numbers greater than 1,000 was pretty worthless.

This means that there should definitely be less than 1,000 pieces of it, perhaps 500 is a good number if you consider a global release. I don't think there should be SS versions of limited editions if you are also producing YG, RG, WG or PT versions.

I also collect wine where my most prized possessions are often produced in quantities of 500 cases or less. To be able to get your hands on even a few bottles of something like this and have the experience of drinking it is truly a privilege.

That said, can I propose that IWC double the production for the Portuguese Perpetual in PT to 500 so I can get my hands on one? =)

1953! What about Jan Ullrich?

Cousteau Divers is the perfect LE watch for all the reasons listed above.
The GST Jan Ullrich was IMHO a failure (with all due respect to Herr Ullrich) and thak you IWC for only making 250 of those.
There´s not much Living Legend over a present german sports star. Otherwise it seems like IWC is trying too hard to be like Michael Schumacher and Speedmaster. Not charming.
Better luck next time - and you too Jan on The Tour.

regards
Stig

Q: What's the "right" number for limited editions?

To me, the supply should always be, say, half of the estimated demand, so as to create a sense of scarcity/exclusivity.