Hi everybody,
I have waited for a few days before answering to this post. Actually, we were uncertain if answering or not.
Before seeing this topic, we had thought whether we should present WATCHFID on the forum or not, and we decided not to do so, because we thought it would have been judged as too much “self-promotion”.
Now here we are, thanks to this topic opened by
@kov. We are very thankful to him: it is clear that he didn’t want to promote WATCHFID at all, he just presented our services – very clearly, just as he understood them – with the unique goal to start an open discussion, which is pretty fair.
First of all, let’s start with some very simple questions, just to make a long story short:
· Yes, WATCHFID has been created by the Moonwatch Only authors, meaning Greg and myself, together with some other investors / friends / collectors / experts…
· Yes, WATCHFID is ran by myself, as it is presented clearly on both the website (Company page) and my LinkedIn profile for those who use it. This is because I decided to dedicate 100% of my time this year to the launch of this new project, but we are working together with Greg and other people (full time or not) on the different subjects. I am not the only captain on board…
· No, WATCHFID is not a non-profit organization: it aims to do business (and also to create jobs, support costs, pay charges, taxes,…). This is an entrepreneurial journey. We at WATCHFID have had our own careers, but we also have dedicated many years to watch research, just by passion, and now we have decided to turn this passion into a job, leveraging on our knowledge, network, complementarities and skills.
· Yes, we decided to launch a separate website using a different name, because we wanted our different new activities to be presented properly.
Having said that, we have to talk about the main subject. What is WATCHFID? My feeling is that even if some right aspects have been clearly explained in some posts, the original one - and certainly the most important one – is missing.
WATCHFID IS AN ADVISORY COMPANY
· It is not (only) a publishing company, even if we’ll continue writing books for sure, as much as we can, because it is our passion.
· It is not (only) a watch dealer, even if there is a sales corner, for two essential reasons: first, because WATCHFID is not the owner of the watches that are presented (we’ll come back on this point later), and second because the sales corner is just one of the 4 pillars of the company’s activity, those 4 pillars being completely complementary.
· It is not (only) a new tech company, even if we have chosen to introduce the Blockchain technology in the vintage watch market, because we are convinced of the utility of traceability and transparency on this market (again, we’ll go back on this point later).
· It is not only a “2 Speedmasters guys (let’s assume we know something about Speedmasters…) selling Speedmasters Expert Reports to monetize their hypothetical knowledge” story. It is a much more global initiative willing to gather as much independent watch experts and analysts as we can, selecting them – or more precisely controlling that they share our same philosophy and procedures – with the objective to create a qualitative platform of knowledge, not only for Speedmasters.
That is the reason why we have called it “an ecosystem dedicated to watch collectors”.
Quite an ambitious idea, for sure… We are just at the beginning of the story; maybe we won’t succeed, maybe the market won’t accept it, understand it, need it, nor use it… or just a part… who knows? Guys, you all are working for companies, projects, structures, markets you believe in, making you motivated and happy with your job, I presume (at least I hope so)? That’s our goal too. Just as simple as that. We like what we do, and we are strongly motivated. Nothing more, nothing strange.
A key point of this open discussion – which shows, by the way, very interesting questions and high-quality observations, so thank you for this – is that not
ALL our different services are useful for
ALL of you on the forum (and in general). This is normal.
We fully understand that some of you don’t need our reports or ratings because they will not bring them more information than they have.
We fully understand that our books are not useful for some of you, ok, our goal is not to bother experts.
We fully understand that some of you can make better deals on thousands of other sales platforms. That’s the game. Everyone has to put forward his strengths to be attractive, this is an open market.
But does that mean that offering watch advisory is definitely useless – or even prohibited – and doesn’t have a room on the watch market? I don’t think so, definitely. Especially if this is done seriously, with methodology, transparency, and innovation.
This is it for the introduction, which will help you to understand better, I hope, the philosophy of WATCHFID. Now let’s start with some more specific feature.
WATCH RATING
This seems to be one of the most discussed topic.
The
Watch Score reflects the condition and the conformity of each of the components.
I remind you that the methodology consisting in analyzing each component of a watch has been the basis of the first MWO book, which has been used by many people since then.
Each part receives a score, reflecting both conformity and condition.
When a part is not period conform (we invite you to brainstorm on the “period conform” vs. “original” meaning…), a multiplication factor between 0 and 1 is applied to the condition score. This ratio depends on the importance of the part. For example a service crown on a 145.012 is less critical than a service dial on a CK 2915.
Then these parts scores (condition scores corrected by the multiplication factors), are weighted thanks to a proprietary algorithm that takes into consideration their relative importance for each specific model (we are not talking only about Speedmasters, or even chronographs… and the relative weights also depend on the period, rarity…).
The result of this calculation is the
Watch Score, that has a maximum of 10 and is expressed X/10.
Now, let's take an example, very simple. How would you differentiate these 2 models from the 1960s:
· the 2 watches are similar, meaning same reference, same condition,
· the first one is full set, delivered to an army, with a rare bezel version,
· the second one has none of these specific features.
The watch score will be exactly the same for both (depending only on components).
But the value for a collector will probably not be the same. For this reason, we tried to convert specific – and rare – features into a numerical value. This is not an easy job, and of course, there is a part of subjectivity. This is the goal of the
Extra Score, which is independent of the Watch Score.
Note that the Extra Score is not necessarily > 0: it can be negative (for example in the event of a missing accessory, like box & papers for a modern watch). The Extra Score range is [-5;+5] – but we would probably not advertise or provide a report for a watch deserving a -5 score, meaning a very critical issue.
The
Watch Rating is just the addition of both scores and should not be considered on a scale of /10 or /15. This is just an absolute value.
The key point here is that you can still consider both scores separately if you feel more comfortable: we always indicate the 3 scores, to respect a principle of transparency.
As someone said about a specific feature (tropical dial for instance), “it's up to the buyer if he likes it or not”. Correct. But if a buyer is interested in a particular thematic or feature, we have to highlight it. If someone does not like a tropical dial, that is fine: he can look only at the Watch Score, which is based – remember – on conformity and condition. We however think that the majority of collectors – let’s say, the market – considers a tropical dial in good condition as an added value. And it has to be highlighted it in the Watch Rating.
Does our calculation represent
THE perfect / ultimate scoring methodology? Probably not. Is there a part of subjectivity? Probably yes, but which system does not have one? The difference between “fair, excellent, good...” for instance also has a part of subjectivity, just because it is a human decision. Our rating aims to provide the reader with the best – and complete – keys as possible to understand the watch.
And the high-resolution pictures that are always available represent a second check.
APPRAISAL AND RATING INDEPENDENCE – THE SALES CORNER
Of course independence is essential. No doubt about that.
But there might has been a misunderstanding here. The Sales Corner is not dedicated to
OUR own watches that we would sell with
OUR own ratings. It is an open platform available to private and professional sellers. There is only one condition for a watch to be published on the WATCHFID website, which is to respect a certain level of quality.
Someone will ask for sure: and what about WATCH BOOKS ONLY’s watches? Are the authors of the books authorized to sell their own watches of the website? And in this case, what about independence?
The answer is yes, of course. Some of the watches presented for sale may come from the author’s private collection. Buyers will be clearly informed about this, as every single transaction on the website is supported by rigorous administrative rules (invoices, sales certificates, ID copies, bank transfers only,…). Nothing unclear, nothing hidden.
In this specific case, it is right to highlight that the rating will not be independent.
But please, note that in any case, the buyer is always able to:
· check all the high-resolution pictures on the website, with the possibility to analyze each watch detail,
· on request, check every single note that has been given to the watch components in the expert report (32-page!) and ask for an explanation.
So yes, in some cases, we will do the ratings for watches we sell. But precisely because we are aware of the conflict of interest that might exist in any watch transaction, we have put as much transparency and information as we could in the process, offering to the potential buyer all the information to make his own decision.
And don't forget it represents just a specific case: the objective of the Sales Corner is really to be an open platform for external sellers, private and professional. It would have had no sense to imagine it just for our watches.
THE BLOCKCHAIN
This is clearly the second important topic of this discussion.
We have been working on this subject for about 2 years before we launched it. We know about the other initiatives that started recently (someone here quoted watchcertificate.com; some brands, like Breitling and Vacheron Constantin for instance, announced something). We are trying to make as much market intelligence as we can – not only for watches – and we know the players.
So what are we doing at WATCHFID?
Our idea is very clear:
·
We dematerialize the information related to a watch, in order to create its virtual identity: the digital passport. This dematerialization results in defining a series of data that are all registered on a blockchain, making them safe, unforgeable, and - being crypted - anonymous. The owner of the watch is the only holder of the watch digital passport (
the WATCHFID-ID), and nobody else has the access to it.
·
This digital passport is dynamic. And this is extremely important. Because it will contain the whole history of the watch (cessions, maintenance, appraisal reports, pictures,…), allowing the successive owners to understand what they see or that they are going to buy. For example, you see a black dial on the digital passport (thanks to the pictures) and the seller is showing you a tropical one? Ask the question. There might be no problem at all (everyone has the right to change some part, for any reason… but remember the “period conform” vs. “original” point…). The idea is just that it is better if the change is transparently shown and traced.
This is the basis of what we have called
the 3Ts Principle: Transparency, Traceability, and Trust.
Someone claims that this is useless because the digital passport should be created only when a watch is new. Believe us, the question came to our mind too… So does that mean that we just have to leave the vintage market apart from the Blockchain game? For sure no. Nobody can go back 60 years. However, you can create a “photography” at t0 (digital passport issuance), with as much transparent and reliable information as you can, and this will start the traceability for the next 10, 20, 30 years. And you always have the possibility to enrich the information during the “new” life of the watch.
·
It is safe and user-friendly. Each of your watches is “associated” with its virtual identity, meaning its digital passport. All your digital passports are registered and centralized in your own safe digital wallet.
You can transfer a passport very easily if you sell the watch. In one click,
ALL the watch information will be registered in the new owner’s digital wallet.
You can share – momentarily and with strict and safe limitations – the information contained in the digital passport with someone interested in buying your watch for instance.
You can manage – within a specific process aimed to preserve security and integrity – to add some more information (an extract of the archives for instance).
Last but not least, the digital passport could dramatically simplify insurance processes in case of theft.
For those interested in this argument, we invite you to read our website page dedicated to blockchain, and we will be extremely happy to answer to all your questions if you contact us. I think that other players have different processes, that you can check too.
CONCLUSION
This was a very long message, sorry for this…
As you probably have understood, WATCHFID represents an important step for us, and we can assure you that we have worked, we are working and we will work on it with exactly the same enthusiasm and sincerity than we did on the very first MOONWATCH ONLY book.
We are also aware that our initiative does not please everyone. For some different reasons. We’ll be happy to share constructive discussions, but we’ll not enter into gratuitous criticism or attacks. There are so many more essential things in life deserving debates and fights.
Thank you very much for your interest and keep your enthusiasm.
