that is a trend for many years now. rolex led the way. many other swiss companies followed. the answer is a bartering trading system. we have a few rare omega parts; good friends in south africa have rare rolex parts. portugal is a good source as well. IWC parts and others..... we exchange parts very often and it will get to a point, where not the watches make the money, but the spare part supply..... marcus in melbourne and a few others realized that many years ago. but there is another exit: if you are prepared to have 100 plus parts made, china offers many services . rare rolex parts are made in china and other brands will follow. and there are still exeptions ; even within the swatch group: for example longines cares a lot more for the vintage collectors

 

So you're the guy with the stash of moonphase parts!

 

I'm following this thread with great interest.
I get "worked-up" over the potential difficulty and cost of obtaining parts (Otto Frei is 50 miles away and was a monthly visit for a stretch). Then I realize I've already been through this with vintage Rolex and it hasn't been so bad yet. Now I think according to the current plan I'll have two contemporary pieces with no vintage anyway (just like those bastards wanted!)....
Well, I guess the best advice to myself is to chill out and see what happens.
No parts hoarding here. I think my vintage interests are small enough to just bite whatever the bullet is when I need something.
I'm sure my wife is hoping this will nudge me to a less expensive and time consuming hobby...best not to get her hopes up for nothing!

 

I'm sure you're right. Interesting that the 'tied' system we are talking about doesn't hold for the majority of the car industry...here in the UK, we can easily buy generic parts for cars, and can get most cars serviced with independents.

 

Interesting you mention Universal as someone who might "make the cut." They "universally" have a less than stellar reputation in the industry.

Certainly the decision to buy tools and try to get a parts account is an economic one. But when I updated my shop years ago and applied for a Swatch account, I made the significant investments up front, and then made my application. That is usually how things work, and the fact that you meet all the requirements is no guarantee that you will get an account. It is completely up to the discretion of the company.

Swatch already forced all US account holders to go through Service Provider Training in the US, or lose their accounts. My understanding is that many accounts were eliminated through that process. There was no such requirement here in Canada (markets differ on how these rules are applied) but I went for the training on my own volition. Training was free, they picked me up at my hotel and dropped me off each day, and fed me lunch every day. I just had to get myself to NJ and pay for the hotel. Why would I not take advantage of that? But many stubborn people who did not like having these rules imposed on them didn't attend and suffered the consequences.

In the end if Swatch wants to close accounts, they don't need to put some big equipment requirement on us as an excuse. These are agreements that can be terminated at any time without the need for any specific reason.

I am hearing enough things through the grapevine that on their own might not be too significant, but when put together are making me nervous about where this is going with regards to individual watchmaker accounts. Time will tell I guess.

Cheers, Al

 

Absolutely, but the point is that the multi national companies that make cars still manage to make okay profits even though the parts supply chain isn't closed. In that sense, I don't really see what particular advantage Omega - or Rolex, or whoever - gain from closing off the supply. People who want to buy new watches aren't generally too bothered with vintage, so hard to say that vintage cuts into new sales. And the reverse in also true. In the end, servicing watches is a fiddly affair and Swatch/Omega don't seem terribly capable to do so, even though they're shooting fish in a barrel.
I don't accept the view that restricting part supply assures greater long-term profits for the companies. It might, or might not. The potential for the 'prestige market' is finite - there are far too many brands, chasing far too few consumers, and every day sees a re-launched 'heritage' brand, or a new 'ultimate watch' being launched.
Perhaps they ought to be paying attention to the basics first. But, really, what does my opinion matter to them? What indeed? Sigh.

 

Do your experiences include dealing with Swiss companies? If not, then you might have a different view after dealing with them.

There is no doubt that Swatch is more "reasonable" for lack of a better word, and in fact they may close accounts by putting some condition on again like they did with the SPT. They at least gave the material suppliers some notice so they could prepare for the end of 2015, so I'll certainly give them credit for that, as it is unusual.

When it comes to individual accounts, I would hope they would not be as brutal about it as Rolex is typically. Here is an example of what a termination letter from Rolex looks like:

"Dear Mr. XXXX,

After careful review of your spare-parts account, we are herewith informing you of our decision to discontinue our business relationship. Your Rolex spare parts account has been officially closed as of today's date. For more information, you may refer to your agreement, which provides in the Policy Statement, under General Policies, 4th item, that "Both the parts account and Rolex are free, at any time and for any reason, to discontinue their business relationship, without cause and without prior notice." In compliance with this agreement, we will not discuss the details of our decision.

Sincerely,
ROLEX WATCH SERVICE CORP. /s/ Khaled Elrawi
Spare Parts Manager "
I have heard first hand from people who have their Rolex accounts cut, and again no one is told why they are being cut - it just happens and you are out of luck.

Cheers, Al

 

I certainly do not wish to involve myself in this thread so late in the day other than to say that closure of accounts at short notice is not as many of you will be aware unique to the watch industry.
My experience is in construction dealing with a multi-national, as a major account holder over many years myself and fifty two other account holders had our accounts closed with four days notice.
Reason given 'rationalisation" and the one certainty is the end user will pay a significantly higher cost as with only two account holders left to carve the market as they see fit.
Modern business

 

i do not think so. that is just a blip on the radar of omegas worldwide actions. if you buy out any watchmaker , who retires, on the planet, you end up with a LOT of stuff.....and the cases for a few factory lines are made in china with stringent quality controls. that opens the door for the 2.grade cases destroyed and in many cases rather NOT destroyed and finding the way back to the market.....there will always be ways to circumvent controls, if money is involved. kind regards. achim

 

At some point in the future, all serious collectors will gather together and raid the spare parts department at Omega's own factory in search of parts to service their expensive vintage pieces....maybe 2040? lol

 

I'll join the raid..........

 

I admire your professional skepticism

 

But it isnt just Omega that is doing this or has been doing this. Look at most of the higher end watch companies, they will not let you order parts. Even American watch companies do this. The whole Swiss industry has been collectively restricting parts, because they want to make money on the entire life of the watch. At worse, it makes you buy a new watch instead of bothering to get the old one fix, which means they can push new products that will sell.

Lazy way out is if Omega had done this ages ago, and completely restrict parts to everyone including watchmakers. They've been doing it slowly but I guess they want a hard push now.