I think the miss for UG is price point. Yes, Biver announced from the onset that prices would be on the high end…however…from a marketing and re-entry perspective, they have zero plan for anyone apart from the fanatical collectors and wealthy. It’s almost like rolling out a new currency for the arms dealers. They’ve also upended the secondary UG market…if you can find a nice Polerouter.
yea, i do find myself asking, who is this for? nerds are gonna buy old UGs (or whatever else), normies are still gonna wait for a Rolex. UG is for...[?]
With the sizes, and nice but industrial movements, it shows they need to sell a lot of watches because of...Private Equity...but then they're trying to position the brand, via marketing/storytelling, as above that--"Le Couturier de la Montre."
I think you captured it exactly with your statement about W&W that “it feels like it’s drifting further away from the world we actually live in.” Pricing reflects this. It seems most brands have pivoted toward the reality of fewer sales by increasingly higher prices targeted at HNW and UHNW buyers who can afford them. Thankfully there’s a healthy supply in the secondary and vintage markets. It’s where I live.
haha - i went back and forth with gemini about this because it's an interesting question. Dunkin Donuts was the most convincing answer it gave me. but again, that playbook would never work for UG (or any 'luxury' watchmaker?).
DD is a decent example, I guess, but as you correctly state, it’s a completely different business. My main point is that PE is about making themselves money…rarely do the owners of the company or its customers benefit because the real goal of PE is to “extract,” not “create” value…
It's so dumb. Henri Stern imported UG as a budget companion for Patek Philippe and private equity is at "like Breitling but hella more expensive." A decent Polerouter can be had for a thousand bucks right now, which is double what they were before the pandemic, and here's Partners Group going "surely people will pay ten times as much for the exact same thing."
UG is my favorite brand, far and away. They were innovative. They were different. They were the first three-register chronograph. They've always followed their own tune - compare an Accutron to a buzzsaw Unisonic! - and as far as private equity is concerned, the only thing Massena Lab did wrong was fail to charge through the nose. "Couture Creations?" AYFKM? As Hodinkee pointed out years ago, you bought a Tricompax because it's a tenth the price of a Patek perpetual not because it's theoretically available POR in a Bedazzled Edition.
It truly grinds my gears that the firm that came up with the Aerocompax, the Space Compax and the whole crazy captured-by-JDM Okeanos line is now at "bitchez love a Disco Volante." I mean, yeah - back when Rado Diastars were cool and the Corvette was a concept car. now? It makes a Serpenti look understated.
While it is *almost* always true that the new firm has nothing to do with the old firm (an analysis of Wristwatch Annuals I did reveals that the average start date of Swiss watch manufacturers is 1953, with a median date of 1987), it is *not* the case with Universal Geneve.
Stelux, the Hong Kong holding company that also owns Cyma, last exhibited UG in Wristwatch Annual in 2001, but maintained membership in FH as late as 2016. They sold NOS through Japanese boutiques through at least 2018, maintained a constant (albeit nascent) web presence through the sale to Partners Group and even responded to an email of mine in 2019.
Swiss law allows anyone with a checkbook to necromance any dormant brand back to life... but UG never actually went dormant. Their output just dropped to zero. Here's UG in May 2022, eighteen months before any Breitling shenanigans: https://web.archive.org/web/20220412011153/https://universal.ch/
Something I've been wondering, as most brands changed ownership or were acquired over the past 50 years dating back to the quartz/currency crisis of the 70s. The most notable exceptions are Rolex, AP, Patek Philippe, and Chopard, which all maintained basically the same ownership structure (the Scheufeles acquires Chopard in 1963, Sterns acquired Patek Philippe in 1932, Wilsdorf died in 1960).
Baume et Mercier - continuous operation since 1830
Breitling - *almost* continuous operation since 1864 (production ceased for six months and ownership transferred in 1979)
Carl Bucherer - family owned 1888-2023, sold to Rolex 2023
Bulova - American company founded 1875 that moved production to Switzerland 2008
Bulgari - established 1884
Cartier - always overlooked by watch nerds, created the first wristwatch, created the first pilot watch, always in the top 5 watch sales worldwide, established 1847
Chopard - 1860
Corum - established 1955
Du Bois et fils - 1785
Ebel - 1911
Eberhard - 1887 somehow
Girard-Perregaux - 1852
Glycine - 1914
Hanhart - 1882
IWC - 1868
Jaeger LeCoultre - 1883
Junghans - 1861
Longines - 1832
Minerva - although technically a line of Montblancs now, watch production has been continuous since 1858
Movado - 1881
Ulysse Nardin - 1846
Omega - 1848
Patek Philippe - 1839
Piaget - 1874
Rado - 1917
Revue Thommen - 1853
Rolex - A British company founded in 1905 that became Swiss for tax purposes in 1920
No. But it *was*, right up to the point where private equity got involved. Citizen-owned Bulova is obviously not the same as New York Bulova but there's a constant chain of ownership and production linking the two, and Citizen-owned Bulova has a lot more to do with New York Bulova than Biver-owned Blancpain has to do with Omega-owned Blancpain.
Universal Geneve continuously sold, then advertised, the same Okeanos Moon Timer from 1998 to 2024... which was the edition they launched when they ran out of UG Sennas and anything with a Valjoux 72 in it. They hadn't done much? But the company ran as an ongoing concern, uninterrupted, from 1894 to 2024.
I really puzzled by UGs decision to launch so many new releases all at once rather than trickle them out over months. And they also did this in the W&W window with hundreds of other new releases. A missed opportunity to gain better focused collector attention in my opinion.
Perhaps financial realities can get in the way of brand strategy. That said, releasing an entire collection is a way to make a splash. If they had released, say, just the Polerouter, maybe people would be saying, 'We waited 2 years just for this??'
It also sounds like they have eyes on opening UG boutiques, and relatively soon. They need to merchandise those boutiques with an entire collection to make them viable.
No idea if its going to work but I give Kern credit for having huge balls dropping a whole assortment all at once as if the brand never ceased operating and these are the latest variants. Also I think the pricing is actually right on, aggressive but not crazy, for the US there's been good growth in volume in the $10k-$15k space and they are right there. Yeah it feels expensive but all the brands have raised prices and everything is expensive. They can't go head to head with rolex pricing, they would get murdered like Omega, and they aren't good enough to be AP/VC, so its a knife fight in the middle with JLC, Blancpain, IWC, Breguet and in that company they might actually win.
I think the watches are fine, but it definitely feels overdone. Too many references too many sizes trying to appease everybody and not actually bring in real collectors which frankly is really where they should’ve started. The goal should’ve been dead get true vintage collectors to buy one of these. I haven’t seen many people who fall in that category who want one. It’s fascinating because every collector chat I’m on everyone has talked about the prices and they think they stink. I think there is delta building between what real collectors are thinking and the voices of watch influencers (YouTubers) whether you own a store or started out as just a fan. And watch press has basically just become watch trade magazines so they’re never critical. Maybe they’ll mention price lightly. I exclude you as I believe the subscription business is the only one that creates a path for real opinion. And they do give some credit to Andrew that time plus tide for asking the Blancpain about the price of the 50 fathoms
Nice article. Let's remember that most products are mid, because that's where the median lies.
In a world where all consumer products and experiences are packaged as being superlative, I keep coming back to that Garrison Keillor line from decades ago, "Lake Wogebon...Where all the children are above average."
I'm wearing my curmudgeon hat this morning and applauding you for offering something other than flowery praise for a watch brand output. On the one hand, Watches and Wonders is a trade show and, as a B2B event, isn't really meant for the end consumer. On the other hand, watch enthusiasts and consumers are, of course, the end target.
You're correct. "We're the ones who decide what sticks." But so long as we all continue to follow hundreds of watch-themed Instagram accounts which offer us nothing more than banal wrist shots, and interact with watch brands' social media accounts with fire emojis for every single release, then we're getting what we deserve. Mid watches at S-tier prices, or even worse, a long-tail distribution, where "all the watches are below average."
yes, I totally agree on your last point, that we get what we deserve and I often lose faith in our ability as a species to be good filters. (eg I saw that AI photo of the saved airman shared one too many times this week.) I'm typically reticent to go down the media-talking-about-media rabbit hole, it can come off as self serving!
As an admitted “newbie” to being a collector — I’ve had just five or six watches most of my adult life until somehow this number exploded over the past five years — I have fallen ever more out of love with the latest, newly released, shiny new objects. Yes, they are “better made,” more accurate (yet always less so than the cell phone on which I type this), but more often than not, they have no soul. A 1960’s Sub had a purposefulness about it that gave it gravitas. A 2026 Sub? It’s a facsimile. Most will never see seawater, they are heavy / bulky and the ceramic inserts on the bezels are perfect. Perfectly sterile.
All of this is to say that with each passing year, I find myself looking more and more to the past for my horological thrills. With rare exception — Kollokium being one personal recent example — much of what’s released today is just more stuff that will sit in a drawer or one day end up in a landfill.
With so many stunning vintage watches available for reasonable prices — watches with history, soul and passion to burn, doesn’t W&W seem like nothing more than marketing hype and crass commercialism?
yes, i agree. Kollkium and a few other indies/creators of that style are notable exceptions.
and you don't have to sell me on the appeal of vintage! — it's what got me into watches, and the stark contrast of what excites me about vintage and what I see at watches & wonders (hype and crass at its worst, as you say), is what can give me such complicated feelings about the industry as a whole.
i'll add - i kinda like the look of the handmade bunds on the tribute to compax set from last week's newsletter. but this padded alligator bund looks so uncomfortable
“New York—The private equity firms that own Breitling have drastically reduced the watch brand’s valuation following a decline in sales and a rapid, pricey store rollout.
CVC Capital and Partners Group wrote down the Swiss watchmaker’s value to around half of what it was three years ago, according to a report by the Financial Times.
London-based CVC Capital acquired an 80 percent stake in Breitling in 2017 in a deal reportedly worth $870 million.
In December 2022, CVC sold a controlling stake (more than 50 percent) to Partners Group in a deal that reportedly valued the watch brand at $4.5 billion.
CVC has reportedly slashed the value of its remaining stake to half of what it was in 2023, as per FT.
Partners’ value is reportedly holding at 70 percent compared with 2023.
Breitling, CVC Capital, and Partners Group all declined to comment on the report.
CVC Capital and Partners Group are reviewing Breitling’s strategy after an expensive store rollout and a decline in demand for luxury watches, due in part to U.S. tariffs on Switzerland, sources familiar with the matter told the FT.”
Doesn’t seem to square with the plan to open new UG retail boutiques, does it?
i'm not sure on the retail, it's a good question. breitling just opened a second boutique here in chicago (one is retailer-operated, the other by the brand). it seems excessive, NO brand has multiple mono-boutiques in the city limits, not even Rolex. just one small anecdote to prove that article's point.
maybe the issue is that retail works for breitling, it's just they're doing too much, and too fast, and it's a real drain on cash flow.
One anecdote I heard some time back (post Covid, probably 3-4 years ago): With every store Breitling is opening, they are still adding new revenue to the business. Obviously, it also comes at a cost, ie the growth may not be profitable yet (from a Private Equity lense) there may be an argument to be made to increase the store footprint. Nonetheless, I agree that two stores in one city is quite a bold move?
I thought I was the only one that had a "mythical watch" like Tony's monopusher Hermes. For me, it's the Zenith Defy 21 "Urban Jungle” ref: 49.9006.9004/90.R942). I really liked the watch with its green ceramic case. Every watch outlet published stories about it back in 2021 and there are even manufacturer PR videos of it, but it never materialized.
it’s been interesting to see the reaction to the ug relaunch. people don’t know what to think yet. which is hilarious to me, people only know what to think about a novelty when it’s prestige pedigree or some pretentious indie with a readymade waitlist.
for me the litmus test is: do i want this watch? the answer is yes to both the polerouter and the compax.
the pricing considerations come after. i like the pricing. it’s expensive enough to keep away flippers, but cheap enough that there’s no real opportunity cost to consider in the primary market.
"in October, Hermès did release an H08 Monopusher, but it wasn’t quite like that first one: It’s yellow and has a larger 45mm case (not 41mm)." You are right it is larger, and I had been wondering what happened to it as well as I watched that W&W video from a few years ago on its introduction. But, right on cue I found one on the secondary market in November and scooped it up. Now it's my favorite watch and it sits next to 2 other HO8's along with other Hermes in my collection. It's beautiful. It's different and way underrated. Thanks for clearing up the Monopusher mystery!
I must add, calling it 'birkin bait' is no comment on the watch itself, I think the H08 is a really good sports watch, and the smaller 39mm, especially, is quite nice on my wrist!
If it was used as 'birkin bait' for the original owner I'm happy. When I got it it was just three weeks old, so probably birkin bait. Yes, the regular H08 at 39mm wears a bit smaller. But the Naples yellow band on the mono really stands out - in a good way. I literally dreamed of owning this watch one day and then presto there it was.It's never leaving the collection.
The UG Cabriolet looks like a Fritz Lang Nightmare. The Polerouter lugs are way too thick, and stone dial is very 2023. Maybe the blue dial one I like but not better than the OG versions. The Compax is meh. I like the Disco Volante. The prices are are a bit out of wack for what you get and remind me of Omega at the moment. The movements are a nice surprise and definitely cool. They will be a success on the secondary market and a flop otherwise. C+
Thanks Tony! Good write up and appreciate your thoughts. I’m also pretty tired of watches being released with loud acclamation, only to be followed by the fact that they are basically unavailable. What’s the point?
For the same reason, I haven’t watched or clicked on anything this week about that new Rexhepi chronograph. It’s stunning I’m sure, but why would I window shop for something in principle I can never possess?
Whilst in Geneva will you be visiting Time to Watches or any of the other shows? I imagine most of the smaller brands don’t just present exhibit watches but real ones.
yes! i have an entire afternoon set aside for Time to Watches, and most of a day for Beau Rivage / Chronopolis. I'll also be visiting with Berneron, a new indie, Gregory Proz (at his workshop), and a few others. You're right, it's much more casual, like a Windup Fair.
I will say, on the Rexhepi: Plenty has of course been said. But there's something to be said for taking a moment to appreciate the best of today's independent watchmaking, even if you or me or hardly anyone will ever get the chance to own, or even see, one.
I think the miss for UG is price point. Yes, Biver announced from the onset that prices would be on the high end…however…from a marketing and re-entry perspective, they have zero plan for anyone apart from the fanatical collectors and wealthy. It’s almost like rolling out a new currency for the arms dealers. They’ve also upended the secondary UG market…if you can find a nice Polerouter.
yea, i do find myself asking, who is this for? nerds are gonna buy old UGs (or whatever else), normies are still gonna wait for a Rolex. UG is for...[?]
With the sizes, and nice but industrial movements, it shows they need to sell a lot of watches because of...Private Equity...but then they're trying to position the brand, via marketing/storytelling, as above that--"Le Couturier de la Montre."
It seems a bit incongruous.
I think you captured it exactly with your statement about W&W that “it feels like it’s drifting further away from the world we actually live in.” Pricing reflects this. It seems most brands have pivoted toward the reality of fewer sales by increasingly higher prices targeted at HNW and UHNW buyers who can afford them. Thankfully there’s a healthy supply in the secondary and vintage markets. It’s where I live.
The audience for this is very small.
And can anyone give an example where Private Equity actually did anything other than ultimately suck a company (or its customers) dry?
haha - i went back and forth with gemini about this because it's an interesting question. Dunkin Donuts was the most convincing answer it gave me. but again, that playbook would never work for UG (or any 'luxury' watchmaker?).
DD is a decent example, I guess, but as you correctly state, it’s a completely different business. My main point is that PE is about making themselves money…rarely do the owners of the company or its customers benefit because the real goal of PE is to “extract,” not “create” value…
I should pivot and start to focus on watch marketing…it has the same dynamic as cologne and perfume.
It's so dumb. Henri Stern imported UG as a budget companion for Patek Philippe and private equity is at "like Breitling but hella more expensive." A decent Polerouter can be had for a thousand bucks right now, which is double what they were before the pandemic, and here's Partners Group going "surely people will pay ten times as much for the exact same thing."
UG is my favorite brand, far and away. They were innovative. They were different. They were the first three-register chronograph. They've always followed their own tune - compare an Accutron to a buzzsaw Unisonic! - and as far as private equity is concerned, the only thing Massena Lab did wrong was fail to charge through the nose. "Couture Creations?" AYFKM? As Hodinkee pointed out years ago, you bought a Tricompax because it's a tenth the price of a Patek perpetual not because it's theoretically available POR in a Bedazzled Edition.
It truly grinds my gears that the firm that came up with the Aerocompax, the Space Compax and the whole crazy captured-by-JDM Okeanos line is now at "bitchez love a Disco Volante." I mean, yeah - back when Rado Diastars were cool and the Corvette was a concept car. now? It makes a Serpenti look understated.
amazing comment
"bitchez love a Disco Volante."
I need that on a shirt
All fair points, but I'd like to reiterate that this is not the 'same' firm, the original of which died many decades ago.
While it is *almost* always true that the new firm has nothing to do with the old firm (an analysis of Wristwatch Annuals I did reveals that the average start date of Swiss watch manufacturers is 1953, with a median date of 1987), it is *not* the case with Universal Geneve.
Stelux, the Hong Kong holding company that also owns Cyma, last exhibited UG in Wristwatch Annual in 2001, but maintained membership in FH as late as 2016. They sold NOS through Japanese boutiques through at least 2018, maintained a constant (albeit nascent) web presence through the sale to Partners Group and even responded to an email of mine in 2019.
Swiss law allows anyone with a checkbook to necromance any dormant brand back to life... but UG never actually went dormant. Their output just dropped to zero. Here's UG in May 2022, eighteen months before any Breitling shenanigans: https://web.archive.org/web/20220412011153/https://universal.ch/
Something I've been wondering, as most brands changed ownership or were acquired over the past 50 years dating back to the quartz/currency crisis of the 70s. The most notable exceptions are Rolex, AP, Patek Philippe, and Chopard, which all maintained basically the same ownership structure (the Scheufeles acquires Chopard in 1963, Sterns acquired Patek Philippe in 1932, Wilsdorf died in 1960).
Which brands am I missing?
Alphabetically:
Audemars Piguet - 1875
Baume et Mercier - continuous operation since 1830
Breitling - *almost* continuous operation since 1864 (production ceased for six months and ownership transferred in 1979)
Carl Bucherer - family owned 1888-2023, sold to Rolex 2023
Bulova - American company founded 1875 that moved production to Switzerland 2008
Bulgari - established 1884
Cartier - always overlooked by watch nerds, created the first wristwatch, created the first pilot watch, always in the top 5 watch sales worldwide, established 1847
Chopard - 1860
Corum - established 1955
Du Bois et fils - 1785
Ebel - 1911
Eberhard - 1887 somehow
Girard-Perregaux - 1852
Glycine - 1914
Hanhart - 1882
IWC - 1868
Jaeger LeCoultre - 1883
Junghans - 1861
Longines - 1832
Minerva - although technically a line of Montblancs now, watch production has been continuous since 1858
Movado - 1881
Ulysse Nardin - 1846
Omega - 1848
Patek Philippe - 1839
Piaget - 1874
Rado - 1917
Revue Thommen - 1853
Rolex - A British company founded in 1905 that became Swiss for tax purposes in 1920
TAG Heuer - 1860
Tissot - 1853
Tudor - 1926
Universal Geneve - pour one out
Vacheron Constantin - 1755
Zenith - 1865
It is still not the same firm as the glory years of the mid 20th century.
No. But it *was*, right up to the point where private equity got involved. Citizen-owned Bulova is obviously not the same as New York Bulova but there's a constant chain of ownership and production linking the two, and Citizen-owned Bulova has a lot more to do with New York Bulova than Biver-owned Blancpain has to do with Omega-owned Blancpain.
Universal Geneve continuously sold, then advertised, the same Okeanos Moon Timer from 1998 to 2024... which was the edition they launched when they ran out of UG Sennas and anything with a Valjoux 72 in it. They hadn't done much? But the company ran as an ongoing concern, uninterrupted, from 1894 to 2024.
Glad we're on the same page.
Couldn’t agree more. Why would I ever buy a new UG, when the original, genuine articles are still widely available AND less expensive?!?
I really puzzled by UGs decision to launch so many new releases all at once rather than trickle them out over months. And they also did this in the W&W window with hundreds of other new releases. A missed opportunity to gain better focused collector attention in my opinion.
It's an interesting point, though no doubt UG is on a timetable (see also: Private equity owners slash value of Breitling, https://www.ft.com/content/94468bf8-c671-40f8-ae56-386207b89a58?syn-25a6b1a6=1)
Perhaps financial realities can get in the way of brand strategy. That said, releasing an entire collection is a way to make a splash. If they had released, say, just the Polerouter, maybe people would be saying, 'We waited 2 years just for this??'
It also sounds like they have eyes on opening UG boutiques, and relatively soon. They need to merchandise those boutiques with an entire collection to make them viable.
We'll see how it goes...
You don't relaunch a brand with reruns.
Full stop.
No idea if its going to work but I give Kern credit for having huge balls dropping a whole assortment all at once as if the brand never ceased operating and these are the latest variants. Also I think the pricing is actually right on, aggressive but not crazy, for the US there's been good growth in volume in the $10k-$15k space and they are right there. Yeah it feels expensive but all the brands have raised prices and everything is expensive. They can't go head to head with rolex pricing, they would get murdered like Omega, and they aren't good enough to be AP/VC, so its a knife fight in the middle with JLC, Blancpain, IWC, Breguet and in that company they might actually win.
It was so that Hodinkee can post 5 different articles about them on the same day.
lol
I think the watches are fine, but it definitely feels overdone. Too many references too many sizes trying to appease everybody and not actually bring in real collectors which frankly is really where they should’ve started. The goal should’ve been dead get true vintage collectors to buy one of these. I haven’t seen many people who fall in that category who want one. It’s fascinating because every collector chat I’m on everyone has talked about the prices and they think they stink. I think there is delta building between what real collectors are thinking and the voices of watch influencers (YouTubers) whether you own a store or started out as just a fan. And watch press has basically just become watch trade magazines so they’re never critical. Maybe they’ll mention price lightly. I exclude you as I believe the subscription business is the only one that creates a path for real opinion. And they do give some credit to Andrew that time plus tide for asking the Blancpain about the price of the 50 fathoms
Nice article. Let's remember that most products are mid, because that's where the median lies.
In a world where all consumer products and experiences are packaged as being superlative, I keep coming back to that Garrison Keillor line from decades ago, "Lake Wogebon...Where all the children are above average."
I'm wearing my curmudgeon hat this morning and applauding you for offering something other than flowery praise for a watch brand output. On the one hand, Watches and Wonders is a trade show and, as a B2B event, isn't really meant for the end consumer. On the other hand, watch enthusiasts and consumers are, of course, the end target.
You're correct. "We're the ones who decide what sticks." But so long as we all continue to follow hundreds of watch-themed Instagram accounts which offer us nothing more than banal wrist shots, and interact with watch brands' social media accounts with fire emojis for every single release, then we're getting what we deserve. Mid watches at S-tier prices, or even worse, a long-tail distribution, where "all the watches are below average."
yes, I totally agree on your last point, that we get what we deserve and I often lose faith in our ability as a species to be good filters. (eg I saw that AI photo of the saved airman shared one too many times this week.) I'm typically reticent to go down the media-talking-about-media rabbit hole, it can come off as self serving!
As an admitted “newbie” to being a collector — I’ve had just five or six watches most of my adult life until somehow this number exploded over the past five years — I have fallen ever more out of love with the latest, newly released, shiny new objects. Yes, they are “better made,” more accurate (yet always less so than the cell phone on which I type this), but more often than not, they have no soul. A 1960’s Sub had a purposefulness about it that gave it gravitas. A 2026 Sub? It’s a facsimile. Most will never see seawater, they are heavy / bulky and the ceramic inserts on the bezels are perfect. Perfectly sterile.
All of this is to say that with each passing year, I find myself looking more and more to the past for my horological thrills. With rare exception — Kollokium being one personal recent example — much of what’s released today is just more stuff that will sit in a drawer or one day end up in a landfill.
With so many stunning vintage watches available for reasonable prices — watches with history, soul and passion to burn, doesn’t W&W seem like nothing more than marketing hype and crass commercialism?
yes, i agree. Kollkium and a few other indies/creators of that style are notable exceptions.
and you don't have to sell me on the appeal of vintage! — it's what got me into watches, and the stark contrast of what excites me about vintage and what I see at watches & wonders (hype and crass at its worst, as you say), is what can give me such complicated feelings about the industry as a whole.
I'm just here for the Bund hate.
i'll add - i kinda like the look of the handmade bunds on the tribute to compax set from last week's newsletter. but this padded alligator bund looks so uncomfortable
Couldn’t access the FT article but I found this:
“New York—The private equity firms that own Breitling have drastically reduced the watch brand’s valuation following a decline in sales and a rapid, pricey store rollout.
CVC Capital and Partners Group wrote down the Swiss watchmaker’s value to around half of what it was three years ago, according to a report by the Financial Times.
London-based CVC Capital acquired an 80 percent stake in Breitling in 2017 in a deal reportedly worth $870 million.
In December 2022, CVC sold a controlling stake (more than 50 percent) to Partners Group in a deal that reportedly valued the watch brand at $4.5 billion.
CVC has reportedly slashed the value of its remaining stake to half of what it was in 2023, as per FT.
Partners’ value is reportedly holding at 70 percent compared with 2023.
Breitling, CVC Capital, and Partners Group all declined to comment on the report.
CVC Capital and Partners Group are reviewing Breitling’s strategy after an expensive store rollout and a decline in demand for luxury watches, due in part to U.S. tariffs on Switzerland, sources familiar with the matter told the FT.”
Doesn’t seem to square with the plan to open new UG retail boutiques, does it?
yes exactly, re breitling's financial position.
i'm not sure on the retail, it's a good question. breitling just opened a second boutique here in chicago (one is retailer-operated, the other by the brand). it seems excessive, NO brand has multiple mono-boutiques in the city limits, not even Rolex. just one small anecdote to prove that article's point.
maybe the issue is that retail works for breitling, it's just they're doing too much, and too fast, and it's a real drain on cash flow.
(not a finance guy.)
One anecdote I heard some time back (post Covid, probably 3-4 years ago): With every store Breitling is opening, they are still adding new revenue to the business. Obviously, it also comes at a cost, ie the growth may not be profitable yet (from a Private Equity lense) there may be an argument to be made to increase the store footprint. Nonetheless, I agree that two stores in one city is quite a bold move?
Buying a watch company in 2023?!? Buy high, sell low?
Stoniest stone
💎💍👑 which one is your fave
I’m a fan of the movement. Im pretty un enthused by the polerouters
I thought I was the only one that had a "mythical watch" like Tony's monopusher Hermes. For me, it's the Zenith Defy 21 "Urban Jungle” ref: 49.9006.9004/90.R942). I really liked the watch with its green ceramic case. Every watch outlet published stories about it back in 2021 and there are even manufacturer PR videos of it, but it never materialized.
haha - we need to start a database of these vapor watches!
it’s been interesting to see the reaction to the ug relaunch. people don’t know what to think yet. which is hilarious to me, people only know what to think about a novelty when it’s prestige pedigree or some pretentious indie with a readymade waitlist.
for me the litmus test is: do i want this watch? the answer is yes to both the polerouter and the compax.
the pricing considerations come after. i like the pricing. it’s expensive enough to keep away flippers, but cheap enough that there’s no real opportunity cost to consider in the primary market.
"in October, Hermès did release an H08 Monopusher, but it wasn’t quite like that first one: It’s yellow and has a larger 45mm case (not 41mm)." You are right it is larger, and I had been wondering what happened to it as well as I watched that W&W video from a few years ago on its introduction. But, right on cue I found one on the secondary market in November and scooped it up. Now it's my favorite watch and it sits next to 2 other HO8's along with other Hermes in my collection. It's beautiful. It's different and way underrated. Thanks for clearing up the Monopusher mystery!
I must add, calling it 'birkin bait' is no comment on the watch itself, I think the H08 is a really good sports watch, and the smaller 39mm, especially, is quite nice on my wrist!
If it was used as 'birkin bait' for the original owner I'm happy. When I got it it was just three weeks old, so probably birkin bait. Yes, the regular H08 at 39mm wears a bit smaller. But the Naples yellow band on the mono really stands out - in a good way. I literally dreamed of owning this watch one day and then presto there it was.It's never leaving the collection.
Can also pull off a Bund strap: Jason Heaton
The UG Cabriolet looks like a Fritz Lang Nightmare. The Polerouter lugs are way too thick, and stone dial is very 2023. Maybe the blue dial one I like but not better than the OG versions. The Compax is meh. I like the Disco Volante. The prices are are a bit out of wack for what you get and remind me of Omega at the moment. The movements are a nice surprise and definitely cool. They will be a success on the secondary market and a flop otherwise. C+
Another thought provoking article I really enjoyed! Quite few points in there which do really reasonable with me, thank you!
Thanks Tony! Good write up and appreciate your thoughts. I’m also pretty tired of watches being released with loud acclamation, only to be followed by the fact that they are basically unavailable. What’s the point?
For the same reason, I haven’t watched or clicked on anything this week about that new Rexhepi chronograph. It’s stunning I’m sure, but why would I window shop for something in principle I can never possess?
Whilst in Geneva will you be visiting Time to Watches or any of the other shows? I imagine most of the smaller brands don’t just present exhibit watches but real ones.
yes! i have an entire afternoon set aside for Time to Watches, and most of a day for Beau Rivage / Chronopolis. I'll also be visiting with Berneron, a new indie, Gregory Proz (at his workshop), and a few others. You're right, it's much more casual, like a Windup Fair.
I will say, on the Rexhepi: Plenty has of course been said. But there's something to be said for taking a moment to appreciate the best of today's independent watchmaking, even if you or me or hardly anyone will ever get the chance to own, or even see, one.
Yeah I get that, it just seems (to me) that this is happening more and more, even with brands/watchmakers that aren’t necessarily “the best”.
Look forwards to following your footsteps in Geneva next week!
oh -- 100% agree on that!
Looking forward to the Geneva coverage!
Do you ever think about calling it Her Mees instead of Her Mezz
that's how duolingo has been teaching me are you saying it's wrong?
Is the H silent?