The IWC Brand as it now is

At MF's suggestion, I am raising anew my questions from another discussion. There seems to be at least two factions within the Forum Community-one decidedly in abhorrence of the present trend in watch-making in Schauffhausen; another which is very enthusiastic of the current collection.
Initially I am questioning those unhappy with all things IWC in 2014. What makes you say the brand is soulless, and that the watch families have been gutted,or destroyed? Why do you only like the watches that are Vintage now? And does your feeling toward the present collection encompass the last updates from 5-6-7 years ago? When did the slide in quality begin for you? Do you like the "Vintage" watches that were released in the latter part of the last decade? Do you like the F.A. Jones?
I, for one, would love to hear your thoughts on these questions.
Thanks

Hi Mike
I think this issue needs a timeout. It appears that some members of this forum have some difficulty in accepting opinions of other forum members that do not coincide with theirs.
I suggest returning to this important matter at a later date, after the dust has settled.

Strike while the iron's hot, I would think, but whatever. Maybe you're right, Antonio. No one is rushing to write.
i hope to hear much from you in some future post.

Mike, Antonio

Did I miss something? What is the cause for this post?

However, I think the topic is interesting and should be discussed. The transformation of the previously rather small, almost secret brand IWC to a more glamour-oriented, internationally known name has not only left some admirers back, but is also visible in the products today which are "louder" than the watches of the Blümlein-Era.

If you look at the commercials, this move has been successful so far. For some, this is a bit of a problem, because they predicted that IWC would not be. The good thing is that jobs have been created, and to me, this is a valid point for today's strategy to continue.

To me personally, (not only isolated) experiences with watches and people of IWC, the look and the pricing of then new collections simply had the effect that I don't buy IWC anymore. I still like the brand very much and hope some day it will respect its roots more than it does today, as I believe this is the key for long term success.

Meanwhile, I watch from outside and spend my money on other brands where the balance is right - for me, personally.

Hi, David
Read the thread regarding a new "North American President." It got a little off-topic.

OK - got it. Very interesting reading.

My 2 cents for what it's worth...

I admit I'm a bit confused by all of this. They are, at the end of the day, merely watches. I get that people love them and are passionate about them but I don't get the problem with modern day IWC. What, exactly, are they doing wrong?

Growing the business? I would have thought this was essential for survival.

I get that the new Ingenieur range is a change in direction for that line. These things happen. Personally I love the line and would happily own any of them. (Much to the horror of some) Is the problem the size? IWC still make watches of all sizes to suit everyone. If 46mm is too big for you, buy a smaller one. Design? They look great to me. I love the AMG Ceramic ones Again, if they are not your cup of tea, fine, there must be plenty of other choices that are. But I don't agree that IWC have sold their soul by branching out and releasing these designs.

Likewise the new Aquatimers. They look to me to be a fine design effort and a maturing of the Aquatimer line. I can't wait to see them in the flesh.

Is there not room for the modern IWC's alongside the more traditional ones? What do the people who are horrified by my Inge AMG Ceramic think of the new Portuguese Chronograph Classic? Or other similar modern releases?

The way I see it IWC are increasing their appeal. Is that such a bad thing? You don't have to love everything they do and it wouldn't make sense if you did. (Personally I do though, mostly)

I have been wearing my 322504 non stop since I picked it up. I absolutely love it. How can that be a bad thing? I get my VC AT in about 4 weeks time. I can't wait. The CF3 later this year will be my 1st Pilots watch. What a way to start! I literally cannot wait to get my hands on that either. Then I am going to start looking for some much older second hand pick ups. Now that is going to be fun!

I'm a late starter to the brand so it's difficult for me to yearn for the good old days. But the way I see it IWC are not doing anything wrong. On the contrary they are walking a fine line of moving with the times while retaining their heritage.

I'm pretty sure I didn't offend anyone in that other thread. Apologies if I did. But I don't see why I should feel silly for wearing my new Inge. I love it.

It's all good really.

Cheers,

Jarrod

For me it's size and style. I like my watches to be on the smaller side, 38-40 mm. For me watches of 42 mm and up are way to big. Between 40 and 42 it depends on the case design. The smallests watches in the current collection are 40 mm, that limits my options.

And regarding the style, I'm with David:

Well, this topic is not suitable for a brand Forum !

Because it will need comparisons und price / performance discussions.

If I would do this, I would be punished immediately :-)

And that would be right, because such discussions are against the Forum rules !!!!

But you can find an tremendous amount of information about this topic on non brand forums all over the globe.

But just my personal way is this:

Because of strong increasing prices and sizes of modern IWC, I got more and more interested in other brands, especially with small (campared to IWC) production volumes and - for me - suitable price / performance ratios.

But it takes a lot of experience to assess this.

So, I shrinked and will shrink my IWC wrist watch collection, but not my IWC pocket watches.

Regards

HEBE

I guess I'm not sure what all the angst is about; as MF has previously said (paraphrasing), at the end of the day, they're just watches after all. I happen to like my AT 3767 with external bezel and decent size, and would never buy an AT with internal bezel (either new or vintage). The purists might disagree, I suppose. Some purists don't like that Porsche put a water-cooled engine in a 911, but the brand is doing just fine. And, you can still buy a vintage 911 if you want. I wouldn't wear a watch > 46 or so mm, but obviously a lot of folks who like fine watches are. As long as IWC keeps the quality/fit/finish up to standards (which I think it has), then in my case it just comes down to personal preference on style and function.

Jarrod, nobody tells you that you should feel silly, for heaven's sake! If you feel happy with what you get, this is perfectly fine!

The question - at least how I read it - is different: It is curiosity about why some collectors or friends of the brand abandoned it. There is nothing "wrong" with it, it is just the result of the company's strategy.

And to me, it is for sure about personal experiences, about watch design, about perceived value for price. But it is also about the question if you feel comfortable to be connected with the style and VIPs the brand connects itself to. I am (intentionally) not in a glamour world, and I would hate to hear from somebody asking me "Ah, isn't this the watch Kevin Spacy wears?" - it's just embarrassing (again, to me).

Yes, David. That was the question I was asking. Why are some of the Forum members feeling really averse to IWC as it presently presents itself, and at what point did that aversion start? Was there a watch or family that changed in style, size, workmanship, price that set the ball rolling? Is it the way the brand markets itself? Is it the celebrity ambassador program? All of these things? Something else?

There are any number of reasons people have migrated away from the Forum. Let's face it...IWC was a sleepy brand back in the early 90's. Great technical innovation but very quiet about it. The number of people who knew about the watches was small but when this Forum started things began to change. Over time the brand evolved and so did the participants.
The Forum at its inception was unique and groundbreaking. Today, it is just one of many social media options. Facebook, Twitter and WhatsApp provide many more outlets for content without any controls.
I spend five times as much time on WhatsApp conversing with Forum members as I do on this Forum. All without any oversight. Every morning I wake up to 50-100 posts about watches. The responses are instantaneous and thought provoking.
Many of the topics started here are continued on WhatsApp in great detail and without moderation. We moderate ourselves. Much of the content which would have been featured on the Forum never gets here now.
So, over time things change and in today's world the change can be quick and dramatic. I suspect Herr Kern is on top of this phenomenon.

Hi Alan,
The "advantages" you cite for other venues, incluidng the WhatsApp, are the reason why I stopped participating and eventually left it. No moderator, and no moderation, among others.

Hey, I'm unsure what all this moderation is about. I doubt that one post a month is removed or edited, except for clear Spam, and we average many thousand a month. I remind people that prices aren't to be discussed, no personal insults, etc. I suggest when topics wander that new threads make sense. That's about it.

The moderation I really do is to try to contribute meaningfully to the discussions here, with substantive comments.

I'm glad there are other venues; not every place is right for everyone. I like to think that there's more substantive contributions and information here than any where else, and I like that niche.

Michael,
Veteran Forum users know what topics are verboten on the Forum. It's not the moderation but the threat of moderation that I reference. And just to be clear... I have no problem with the way you moderate this Forum.

Alan,
What are you talking about? Do you mean that veteran forum members follow the forum rules?

Exactly.