Has Anyone Got A Spare £290,000 ? ( Dennis Warning, Do Not Look)

This afternoon I popped down to the Bond St JLC Boutique to have a look at some Reversos and the sales assistant was kind enough to show me a couple of the prototypes from the SIHH 2013 collection. Luckily I was the only person in there for most of the time, as the rest of Bond St was closed today.

First, a couple of current models. Here is the Reverso Ultra Thin Tribute to 1931 - my favourite dial layout of the current Reversos.



Moving swiftly away from anything remotely normal, here is the Boutique edition Blue Enamel Reverso. I think it is limited to 50 pieces but my fading memory may have that wrong. Anyway, in white gold only with a hand worked enamelled dial it is absolutely beautiful in real life. No picture I have seen of it comes close to capturing what it looks like with the light playing on it. And the guilloche work is enough to give Dennis serious palpitations.



By the way, this one is £29,400.

Next was a SIHH 2013 piece. A master perpetual calendar. The perpetual calendar is also white gold and is slightly thinner than my already thin Master Moon.



This will sell for a slightly more reasonable £23,000...fortunately my wife quickly decided that she much prefers the looks of the Master Moon to this, as do I. But it is an amazingly well executed watch and the dial is really well balanced considering the number of functions.

Finally, a rose gold skeletonised gyro tourbillon with 8 day reserve limited to 50 pieces. (I can't quite remember if it is this or the enamel Reverso that is limited to 50 - or both, but both are very small run LE's.). Unfortunately my pictures of this are pitifully bad. I spent quite a bit of time looking at this one & wished that Stefan or Al were with me to appreciate the work that had gone into it.

[EDIT: I've now found out that this was released in 2011 and is a LE of 30 pieces in Rose Gold]

All the finishing is by hand, including a very nice Cotes de Geneve on the back. The tourbillon rotates on 3 axes and the detailing is amazing. This watch can be yours for the sum of just £290,000 my friends.

Not only that but it is also be available in a platinum version (I think he said that would be £350,000) and there will also is a run of 5 watches with a diamond bezel.

This is the first watch I have handled that costs more than some people's houses. I only wish that I hadn't taken such a blurry pic of the case back. Hopefully you can make out enough detail from these:



It is difficult to see but there is a small blued seconds hand that rotates over the tourbillon. Otherwise, you can make out the standard clock face, an 8 day reserve du marche and the date month and date tracks.

The result of this very pleasant hour is that I may put a deposit down on the Reverso I have been stalking for the last few months - which unfortunately still isn't in stock. But having a relaxed look at these pieces more than made up for that disappointment.

Ha, I totally forgot that Dennis loves a blue dial even more than I do. ...and did I mention how thin this watch is ? 😁

For the $30 that represents you might be limited to quartz 😉

I suspect the pricing of the blue enamel is due to the cost of the dials being hand finished, as well as the small production run and the scarcity value. Although the movement is in other watches too, I'm not sure if there is another Reverso currently in white gold in that size case. But yes, it's a phenomenal price.

I like the Tribute to 1931 a great deal - the only one I like more is the American Edition Tribute to 1931 with the candlestick hands and especially with the original font for 'REVERSO.' There is something I really find satisfying about these models omitting 'JLC' from the dial.

I'll go contrarian on the blue one - from these images at least, it is too showy, leans too far into pure jewelry for a Reverso. I would have been less surprised to see 'Chopard' on the dial than 'JLC.'

I'm very eager to see the perpetual calendar.

The blue enamel is far more subtle when it is on. My pics focused on catching the light across the guilloche as I haven't seen any that do that justice. From a few feet away it just looks gorgeous without being loud. In fact, I'd say a lot of your vintage Zenith's would stand out more.

Here is the Reverso Ultra Thin Duoface in pink gold, with the 1931 style face (plus a seconds sub-dial) released last year.

Well I love the gold UltraThin, but isn't there a blue Reverso that is supposed to be this year's limited edition. Is it the one you've shown? I thought it was not guilloche'd.

Yep, the blue one I'm after still hasn't been delivered - so no pics 🙁. It'll be another few months yet.

The blue will be similar to the gold ultra thin duo, which was why I was trying it on for size. Same case, but it's stainless and the dials will not be same as any of the above - certainly no guilloche on the blue side.

The blue will be the same layout as the black face on the 1931 above, apparently with paint that shows different blue shades depending on the light. It's by far the most tasteful layout as far as I'm concerned.

I agree, I think that's the one to get. 👍

If he does not survive this, it is on your conscious.

Seriously, It is amazing how many of us saw that dial and first thoughts were, "Oh My God, Dennis 😲 "

Hey, I even told the sales assistant I knew a guy in New Jersey who would love that dial 😀

If in the next few days you get an unexpected call from someone in London, you'll know they've tracked you down 😜

Hey, I knows a guy in Joisey City whos can git ya a convenient loan at only 30% a mont, compounded.👍 No colateral, ya word is as good as ya knees.😜

Thanks Gavin. In that case both this and the gyrotourbillon are limited to 50.

It also explains why the assistant said it was the last one left 😀

Update: after a bit of research this morning I've discovered that this version of the Gyrotoubillon was released in 2004 and the skeletonised version I tried appears to be from a release in 2011 and isn't from a preview of the 2013 watches. In Rose Gold it is limited to 30 pieces, not 50.