I think case making got a major spotlight last year with the passing of Jean-Pierre Hagmann. I know it spurred me to learn more about him and the overall case making process. I think a new focus on case construction and artistry would be a great pivot for 2026!
It'll be interesting to see where cases go. A dial can be done with a $180 pad printer bought off Amazon; for cases you're best not going much smaller than a FANUC Robodrill, which shares price, depreciation, maintenance and space utilization brackets with Mercedes Benz. Cases have been third-party piecework as a consequence, with all but the biggest brands either purchasing in quantity from machine shops or buying off-the-rack.
Or so it was, until the Chinese PCB fabs rolled out machining-as-a-service to go along with their on-demand metal printing and custom PCB fabrication. PCBWay, JLCPCB and Xometry all offer minimum-quantity custom 5-axis parts in stainless, titanium, bronze and a whole bunch of horologically-inappropriate materials. The bar for custom cases has been lowered - it remains to be seen if the industry can clear it.
lange use several suppliers for their cases, centror, donze baume , efteor and sinn (that i know of, maybe there are more). i’ve seen different casemaker hallmarks on the same reference even. nobody thinks less of them for not making their own cases.
cases are not the next big thing, they’ve always been the biggest thing. oyster, royal oak and nautilus are all case-driven manias (and bracelets too of course). cartier (and the shameless cartier rip-offs like berneron) are also all about the cases. the case design is always the first consideration, the dial and movement are add-ons. that’s why out of all the 920-powered watches with interesting dials from ap and patek, only the genta cases ever made it to the pantheon.
Cases are incredibly important. In conjunction with the lugs and strap/bracelet, it determines how the watch wears (and you can change straps). And that’s a huge part of the wearing experience. I’d love to see a bit more experimentation. But I’m honestly not sure how the economics work for cases.
i think that's part of the challenge--case and bracelets are expensive to produce and in many cases have been outsourced to asia at the lower- to mid-luxury price point, which while it makes them more affordable can make experimentation more difficult given geographic (and time zone) realities, if nothing else
Personally, I do think there’ll be greater experimentation within case design, but I’d put my money on the focus switching back to movements; but instead of it being at the price category of in-house 5+ years ago, there’ll be innovation at more affordable prices.
hey why not both? i'd be interested to understand if/how technology advances have changed the cost curve for small brands who want to do their own movement development or 'innovation'
Sorry, accidentally hit send while writing/editing. Please skip previous “post”
Knowing who makes what (e.g. cases)is as fine a subject for watch nerdism (er, enthusiasm) as any other strand in horology. Personally I would love to know more. In the grand sweep of things, pocket watches from watchmakers had cases from jewellers and into the 20th century were often sold as uncased movements to jeweller/retailers usually buying cases from other sources, some huge like Dennison, many obscure They varied in materials, elaboration, quality and of course price but analog time is read in a circle, movements were circular and with rare exceptions cases were circular. I can’t imagine many people ever knew who actually made the case or cared any more than who made a given screw, wheel or spring. That carried into wristwatches, both literally as the same casemakers or jewellers soldered on lugs to small pocket watches cases and later produced pocket watch cases with more wrist watch purposed lugs. Shapes were in part an extension of lug/strap attachment solutions, but the post WWI generation, those early adopters rejecting the still mainstay pocket watches on fob, probably really liked distance from their father’s and grand fathers pocket watches, hence the 1930s mania for shaped cases. Pocket watches were round: wristwatches were rectangular, square, tonneau, anything but round. Everyone eventually returns to round, clockwise on a clock face ( and white face dial for town, black face dial for field) and the Calatrava was a land mark of round with really suitable lugs, but there will always be gyrations as people seek change and differentiation for its own sake. Every decade seems to have its own distinctive language and we are now seeing an explosion of creativity with the relative technical ease of producing odd and complicated case designs and incorporating an increasing range of materials . Although I would be genuinely interested to know more about who makes or made what, I find the history of design trends and fashions equally fascinating. As a simple example, I had repressed memories of integrated (or at least permanently affixed) milanese mesh bracelet watches in the 1970’s: to understand that idea you have to look at the whole social fashion context where they made a certain kind of logical sense with the rest of the fashion of the time as much as I would lime to forget that. I find it perfectly fitting that Unpolished is classified under Men’s fashion: Watches and horology generally are so many other things, but they are also fashion and a product of their times. Understanding cases, or any other part of the whole in the overall context of their time, periods and fashions is a great way to build appreciation of your timepieces.
Knowing who makes what is a very fine subject for watch nerdism (er, enthusiasm) as any other strand in horology. Personally I would love to know more. In the grand sweep of things, pocket watches from watchmakers had cases from jewellers and into the 20th century were often sold as movements cased up by jewellers buying cases from other sources. They varied in materials, elaboration, quality and of course price but Analog time is read in a circle, movements were circular and with rare exceptions cases were circular.
If the dial is the face, then the case is the body and the strap or bracelet are the limbs. We all want healthy, well‑proportioned bodies, so there is a strong argument for a truly “fit” case. I really appreciate how you show that this seemingly smaller focus is actually part of a much larger trend.
While shapes have dominated so many vintage conversations, the condition of the material has been just as important. Collectors are literally going for gold, but so often the real trigger is that the case is “unpolished,” “sharp,” “angular,” has “perfect proportions,” “sits well on my wrist,” is “slim enough to slide under my cuff,” and so on.
It has always been about the case; someone has finally articulated it.
it's true, we always pay attention to the case once we put it on our wrist—we experience so many watches through our flat screens, it's easy to forget this sometimes!
I'm still relatively new to the watch world as these things go, so forgive me if this is nonsense, but it certainly feels like the mainstream attention on (vintage) watches seems incredibly high right now. 60 Minutes, the Economist, etc. But I have no comparison to how things were during COVID as I only owned a single Shinola at that time :)
i think this is watches in general, not just vintage. that 60 minutes segment wasn't really about vintage specifically. there's been a noticeable uptick in interest, and watches are part of 'culture' now in a way that i don't think they were pre-pandemic.
Before the pandemic I would judge certain events by whether they broke through to non-watch friends, and they were rare. The Paul Newman Paul Newman, the first John Mayer x Hodinkee G-Shock, etc. But nowadays there is almost always something in 'the culture' that's watch related.
I could see this shift happening but I wonder if it needs to be precipitated by some scholarship.
Outside of a handful of collectors, I’m not sure many enthusiasts have developed a shared design language to be able to talk to one another in detail about cases – beyond perhaps dimensions and maybe polishing techniques.
Maybe I’m being unfair but I think most people would be hard-pressed to have many discussion points about what makes a Hagmann case attractive beyond historical importance, for instance.
Looking forward to the podcast episode with Nicholas to drop to hear some of that education!
I heard! I thought Nicholas spent more time on construction than I thought he would versus design but it was informative nonetheless. As was the entire conversation!
i wish i had a crystal ball, but it's a common trend we've seen before. the 3940 and 3970 are moving from modern classic into true vintage territory, and prices are going up as a result. this is especially the case for early and 'special' examples, where the delta between those and a more common 3rd or 4th series continues to grow. i think that will continue to be the case as more collectors become informed about this era of patek philippe and decide that they only want 'the best' 3940, which to them means a 1st series or a dore dial or etc.
that said, usually it feels healthier to see linear growth as opposed to the exponential growth of the past 1+ year. still, it certainly feels more sustainable than journe!
I think we need to embrace the term "établisseur".
1. everything sounds better in french
2. I cant help but think we actually have a healthier, more dynamic, sustainable and frankly interesting watch world when b2b suppliers work with b2c brands.
It seems a fairly universal rule that the more vertically integrated a brand a the samey and iterative their product.
1. everything sounds more pretentious in french ;)
2. vertical integration cuts both ways, i think. it's the fundamentaltension between operational efficiency and creative risk. it can result in more of the 'same' (see rolex), but that 'same' can also be of very high quality (see rolex), and often even more price competitive than peers given cost savings and scale advantages.
That said, being able to control the whole process can also result in innovative products—apple doing its own hardware, software, and making its own chips is a classic example.
Another really interesting feature. I’m pleased to learn that the focus has shifted to cases, which I always thought are quite under appreciated. Like a C.R.S.
(Charles-René Spielmann) manufactured Oyster case on a vintage Tudor. The highlight of the watch for me.
i think vintage collectors are more used to looking at component suppliers and judging a watch on that, it's interesting how it is happening with modern now, too.
Sorry 'bout the Bears. I'm a Jets fan so I can't relate to winning as much as you guys did, well, I can't relate to winning at all actually! CW is a great QB! Fun to watch, super talented.
I think case making got a major spotlight last year with the passing of Jean-Pierre Hagmann. I know it spurred me to learn more about him and the overall case making process. I think a new focus on case construction and artistry would be a great pivot for 2026!
that's a great point re JPH! perhaps the best example of collectors searching out specific casemakers.
The case for the case
It'll be interesting to see where cases go. A dial can be done with a $180 pad printer bought off Amazon; for cases you're best not going much smaller than a FANUC Robodrill, which shares price, depreciation, maintenance and space utilization brackets with Mercedes Benz. Cases have been third-party piecework as a consequence, with all but the biggest brands either purchasing in quantity from machine shops or buying off-the-rack.
Or so it was, until the Chinese PCB fabs rolled out machining-as-a-service to go along with their on-demand metal printing and custom PCB fabrication. PCBWay, JLCPCB and Xometry all offer minimum-quantity custom 5-axis parts in stainless, titanium, bronze and a whole bunch of horologically-inappropriate materials. The bar for custom cases has been lowered - it remains to be seen if the industry can clear it.
lange use several suppliers for their cases, centror, donze baume , efteor and sinn (that i know of, maybe there are more). i’ve seen different casemaker hallmarks on the same reference even. nobody thinks less of them for not making their own cases.
cases are not the next big thing, they’ve always been the biggest thing. oyster, royal oak and nautilus are all case-driven manias (and bracelets too of course). cartier (and the shameless cartier rip-offs like berneron) are also all about the cases. the case design is always the first consideration, the dial and movement are add-ons. that’s why out of all the 920-powered watches with interesting dials from ap and patek, only the genta cases ever made it to the pantheon.
Berneron's success is clear evidence of the shift towards cases imo. People want something different
Personally I want to see the old vintage bracelets with exquisite craftsmanship make a comeback, instead of the generic bracelets we have today
Seconded!
i agree, though i think 2025 was a great one for bracelets - JLC, Rolex, etc. released great new bracelets. i hope we see more.
Cases are incredibly important. In conjunction with the lugs and strap/bracelet, it determines how the watch wears (and you can change straps). And that’s a huge part of the wearing experience. I’d love to see a bit more experimentation. But I’m honestly not sure how the economics work for cases.
i think that's part of the challenge--case and bracelets are expensive to produce and in many cases have been outsourced to asia at the lower- to mid-luxury price point, which while it makes them more affordable can make experimentation more difficult given geographic (and time zone) realities, if nothing else
Personally, I do think there’ll be greater experimentation within case design, but I’d put my money on the focus switching back to movements; but instead of it being at the price category of in-house 5+ years ago, there’ll be innovation at more affordable prices.
hey why not both? i'd be interested to understand if/how technology advances have changed the cost curve for small brands who want to do their own movement development or 'innovation'
I saw Zenith’s new release this morning and thought ‘hmm, maybe Nick’s right!’
Sorry, accidentally hit send while writing/editing. Please skip previous “post”
Knowing who makes what (e.g. cases)is as fine a subject for watch nerdism (er, enthusiasm) as any other strand in horology. Personally I would love to know more. In the grand sweep of things, pocket watches from watchmakers had cases from jewellers and into the 20th century were often sold as uncased movements to jeweller/retailers usually buying cases from other sources, some huge like Dennison, many obscure They varied in materials, elaboration, quality and of course price but analog time is read in a circle, movements were circular and with rare exceptions cases were circular. I can’t imagine many people ever knew who actually made the case or cared any more than who made a given screw, wheel or spring. That carried into wristwatches, both literally as the same casemakers or jewellers soldered on lugs to small pocket watches cases and later produced pocket watch cases with more wrist watch purposed lugs. Shapes were in part an extension of lug/strap attachment solutions, but the post WWI generation, those early adopters rejecting the still mainstay pocket watches on fob, probably really liked distance from their father’s and grand fathers pocket watches, hence the 1930s mania for shaped cases. Pocket watches were round: wristwatches were rectangular, square, tonneau, anything but round. Everyone eventually returns to round, clockwise on a clock face ( and white face dial for town, black face dial for field) and the Calatrava was a land mark of round with really suitable lugs, but there will always be gyrations as people seek change and differentiation for its own sake. Every decade seems to have its own distinctive language and we are now seeing an explosion of creativity with the relative technical ease of producing odd and complicated case designs and incorporating an increasing range of materials . Although I would be genuinely interested to know more about who makes or made what, I find the history of design trends and fashions equally fascinating. As a simple example, I had repressed memories of integrated (or at least permanently affixed) milanese mesh bracelet watches in the 1970’s: to understand that idea you have to look at the whole social fashion context where they made a certain kind of logical sense with the rest of the fashion of the time as much as I would lime to forget that. I find it perfectly fitting that Unpolished is classified under Men’s fashion: Watches and horology generally are so many other things, but they are also fashion and a product of their times. Understanding cases, or any other part of the whole in the overall context of their time, periods and fashions is a great way to build appreciation of your timepieces.
Knowing who makes what is a very fine subject for watch nerdism (er, enthusiasm) as any other strand in horology. Personally I would love to know more. In the grand sweep of things, pocket watches from watchmakers had cases from jewellers and into the 20th century were often sold as movements cased up by jewellers buying cases from other sources. They varied in materials, elaboration, quality and of course price but Analog time is read in a circle, movements were circular and with rare exceptions cases were circular.
If the dial is the face, then the case is the body and the strap or bracelet are the limbs. We all want healthy, well‑proportioned bodies, so there is a strong argument for a truly “fit” case. I really appreciate how you show that this seemingly smaller focus is actually part of a much larger trend.
While shapes have dominated so many vintage conversations, the condition of the material has been just as important. Collectors are literally going for gold, but so often the real trigger is that the case is “unpolished,” “sharp,” “angular,” has “perfect proportions,” “sits well on my wrist,” is “slim enough to slide under my cuff,” and so on.
It has always been about the case; someone has finally articulated it.
it's true, we always pay attention to the case once we put it on our wrist—we experience so many watches through our flat screens, it's easy to forget this sometimes!
I'm still relatively new to the watch world as these things go, so forgive me if this is nonsense, but it certainly feels like the mainstream attention on (vintage) watches seems incredibly high right now. 60 Minutes, the Economist, etc. But I have no comparison to how things were during COVID as I only owned a single Shinola at that time :)
i think this is watches in general, not just vintage. that 60 minutes segment wasn't really about vintage specifically. there's been a noticeable uptick in interest, and watches are part of 'culture' now in a way that i don't think they were pre-pandemic.
Before the pandemic I would judge certain events by whether they broke through to non-watch friends, and they were rare. The Paul Newman Paul Newman, the first John Mayer x Hodinkee G-Shock, etc. But nowadays there is almost always something in 'the culture' that's watch related.
I could see this shift happening but I wonder if it needs to be precipitated by some scholarship.
Outside of a handful of collectors, I’m not sure many enthusiasts have developed a shared design language to be able to talk to one another in detail about cases – beyond perhaps dimensions and maybe polishing techniques.
Maybe I’m being unfair but I think most people would be hard-pressed to have many discussion points about what makes a Hagmann case attractive beyond historical importance, for instance.
Looking forward to the podcast episode with Nicholas to drop to hear some of that education!
yep, i tried to ask him a bit about this because i agree we don't have the tools to talk about it in a way that feels really informed
I heard! I thought Nicholas spent more time on construction than I thought he would versus design but it was informative nonetheless. As was the entire conversation!
How high do you think 3940 prices will go? Or is this just a temporary blip..
i wish i had a crystal ball, but it's a common trend we've seen before. the 3940 and 3970 are moving from modern classic into true vintage territory, and prices are going up as a result. this is especially the case for early and 'special' examples, where the delta between those and a more common 3rd or 4th series continues to grow. i think that will continue to be the case as more collectors become informed about this era of patek philippe and decide that they only want 'the best' 3940, which to them means a 1st series or a dore dial or etc.
that said, usually it feels healthier to see linear growth as opposed to the exponential growth of the past 1+ year. still, it certainly feels more sustainable than journe!
First - Im being serious here, not snarky.
I think we need to embrace the term "établisseur".
1. everything sounds better in french
2. I cant help but think we actually have a healthier, more dynamic, sustainable and frankly interesting watch world when b2b suppliers work with b2c brands.
It seems a fairly universal rule that the more vertically integrated a brand a the samey and iterative their product.
1. everything sounds more pretentious in french ;)
2. vertical integration cuts both ways, i think. it's the fundamentaltension between operational efficiency and creative risk. it can result in more of the 'same' (see rolex), but that 'same' can also be of very high quality (see rolex), and often even more price competitive than peers given cost savings and scale advantages.
That said, being able to control the whole process can also result in innovative products—apple doing its own hardware, software, and making its own chips is a classic example.
Another really interesting feature. I’m pleased to learn that the focus has shifted to cases, which I always thought are quite under appreciated. Like a C.R.S.
(Charles-René Spielmann) manufactured Oyster case on a vintage Tudor. The highlight of the watch for me.
i think vintage collectors are more used to looking at component suppliers and judging a watch on that, it's interesting how it is happening with modern now, too.
Sorry 'bout the Bears. I'm a Jets fan so I can't relate to winning as much as you guys did, well, I can't relate to winning at all actually! CW is a great QB! Fun to watch, super talented.