Nick Hacko is a prominent watchmaker in Sydney. People might be interested.


*** Dumb vs. smart





On the left side of this picture is a Rolex link screw. A piece of stainless steel wire with a slot on one end and a thread on the other.

On the right are two electronic components.

The top one is a Silicon Labs Si570 "any frequency oscillator".

Basically a clock. Or to be precise, a super clever, super smart and super accurate clock featuring proprietary DSPLL technology. A fully programmable oscillator with tuning frequency resolution better than 80 parts per trillion.

The component below is a Michrochip microcontroller PIC18F4550. Like the Silabs component it is state of the art, a nanoWatt interface with programmable memory.

The two electronic components on the right paired together can do a miracle: their usage and application are only limited by your imagination and programming capabilities. You can build equipment which will allow you to communicate, measure, time, process and do unimaginable things; allow you to unleash your genius and creativity.

The two components on the right cost $4.50 each and they are available by the truck load from manufacturers, wholesalers and even hobbyists who sell them online. SiliconLabs and Microchip invested countless hours designing them yet they really don't care who can use them and for what application. They have no desire to restrict their supply.

Why would they? They want you to buy those components, learn, build, engineer, have fun and develop gadgets which you can play with or sell for profit.

Rolex didn't invented the screw. Rolex didn't invent the screw making tools.

Rolex didn't make one single improvement in functionality or design of the screw. Actually, the Rolex screw is the same as any other screw out there, like any other link screw manufactured by any other screw manufacturer in the past 50 years. It takes no brain to screw that screw into a link. I can train you to screw it in 5 seconds. Actually, you already know how to screw it.

Yet somehow, Rolex refuses to supply that STUPID screw to you. You can not buy a Rolex screw. It does not have a price because it is simply not available for sale. Sure, Rolex will install that screw for you (and charge you $40) but they will not supply it to me or to any other Australian watchmaker. Why? Because apparently I am not qualified to screw a screw.

According to Rolex I am dumb and untrainable.

When I approached Silicon Labs and Microchip to place an order for the two above components, neither company asked what I intend to do with them. I was not required to provide proof that I am smart enough to install them as per their specification or to prove that I possess programming knowledge.

Neither corporation restricted access to parts or access to instruction manuals, charts, operational parameters, evaluation boards. All the technical information are available online and the only restricting factor is my ability and capacity to learn. I am free to buy their components and engineer equipment, sell that equipment and make profit. They simply don't care.

This morning I've asked my assistant to make a call to Rolex to see if we can buy a link screw for a Submariner. A dumb piece of steel wire with a slot and thread. The answer? We can not give you a price, we can not sell you the screw, you have to bring the watch in. He insisted to be provided with the estimate on how much would screw cost, and Rolex refused to answer. "Bring the watch in, bring the watch in" was the only answer.

But what if I am located in a country town somewhere in the middle of Australia? What if I can not physically bring my watch in, even if I want to?Do I really need to ship my $8000 watch to Rolex just to have one screw installed?

I am a watchmaker. I can even design some of my own watch components and have them manufactured per my specification. I have proven to you, and to anyone else who cares to listen that I am good at what I do. I am not stupid nor unqualified. I can build complex electronic equipment despite a lack of formal engineering education. I AM NOT STUPID.

So why does ROLEX refuse to supply watch parts to watchmakers? According to Rolex, Australian watchmakers can not perform.

The general manager for Rolex said that Rolex wants to "control the quality of repairs". But who gives Rolex the right to CONTROL anything if that control breaches our right to practice our trade? There is a huge difference between controlling the quality of workmanship and imposing a total ban on the supply of parts.

Mr General Manager: have you actually assessed my skills or for that matter the skills of ANY AUSTRALIAN watchmaker? And would you at least disclose to us what your standards are?

Do we at least have the right to know what make us unqualified to work on Rolex watches?

When in 2012 Rolex Australia closed the last two parts accounts, they simply informed those two last watchmakers that their account will be closed. There was no explanation why Rolex made that decision. The decision was not based on any performance review. Those two watchmakers didn't fail any accreditation test or any skill/performance test. They were just discarded after 50 years of loyal service to the brand.

The door was slammed in their face. The door has been slammed into the face of all other watchmakers who aspired to learn, be trained and repair Rolex. This issue is driving me nuts. I am unable to focus on my business because I feel insulted. This injustice is irritating and I can't stop thinking about it. I can not accept that Rolex can get away with it.

But what makes the things even worse is the fact that almost every other Swiss watch manufacturer is now following the trend. Even the crappiest brand out there feels powerful enough to follow Rolex's practice.

Three years ago, we predicted that if the trend continues, Australian watchmakers will be out of business. Not because we are lazy, unqualified or stupid. I know that some of you have watched this video but I invite you to watch it again: then ask yourself does the watchmaker in this video look unqualified,
lazy and stupid to you?

Today, it is easy to predict that 3 years from now, you, the watch owner, will have absolutely no say or no rights whatsoever in making the decision over who can repair your watch. Like in the case of Rolex, there will be only one point of call, only one service centre to take your watch for repair. The monopolistic grip will be unbearable and you will ask yourself: what the hell just happen?

Today, we are just weeks away from another major development: Swatch group (the owner of Omega, Longines and number of other brands and the owner of ETA movements) will completely stop supply of parts to watch wholesalers and parts distributors.

Hundreds of small watchmakers who make their living repairing low and mid-range Swiss brands and who source parts through those wholesalers are facing uncertainty. Any watch fitted with ETA movement will be affected in some way- whether it is an IWC, Breitling, TAG or Tissot. Modern or vintage - the ban will be universal and complete. You local watchmaker will have no say, and most likely as of January 1 2016 he won't be able to help you anymore. Swatch Group is mysteriously quiet on the issue but I doubt that their solicitors are drafting a Set Of Standards for accreditation of independent watchmakers. Like in the case of Rolex, they will just assume that we are all stupid and unqualified and incapable of repairing the watches we have been repairing for the past 50 years.

Right now, ACCC believe that Swatch Group will do the right thing in spite of all the evidence and precedents set by other Swiss brands. Make no mistake - right now, this issue is not just an issue of independent watchmakers vs. big brands.

We are out, discarded and written off. It is not an issue between you and the brand because as an individual watch owner you have no say or power over the Swiss brands.

This is the issue between YOU and YOUR GOVERNMENT because only the ACCC has the power to prevent further deterioration and degradation of your consumers rights.

And remember: you are not asking for MORE rights, you are just asking that your existing rights are not taken away from you completely. Many of you have suggested that I should reinvigorate the Save-the-time campaign, to start an online petition or lead some sort of action. As I said before, I am out. I am not interested and I don't want to stick my neck out.

If you want a change, then YOU, a consumer and watch owner, must take action. If you feel that you have something to say on a matter then say it. The ACCC is set up to listen to you. Let the ACCC know how YOU feel.Regardless what you say, make sure that you introduce yourself properly:

"Dear ACCC
my name is [.]and I am an owner of [1,2,3,5,30] Swiss watches with the total estimated value of [$]."

The rest is up to you.

Over the years the issues related to the watch industry have been handled by a number of ACCC employees but most recently by Makkinga, Elizabeth http://www.directory.gov.au/directory?ea0_lfz99_120.&&56183875-7b64-445e-aa3e-386b5469c45c

For those who care, here is the photo of my project incorporating both Silabs and Microchip components. The two boards contain around 900 additional parts and the total cost of the lot is under $200 or the equivalent of two stainless steel bracelet links. All those components are soldered by hand, and they do exactly what they are designed for. And I am doing this for fun. I wonder why when I paly with electornics, I feel smart, but when I am restricted to obtain a screw, I feel dumb.





So Rolex and all other Swiss corporations: do you seriously believe thatwe, Australian watchmakers could not pass your 'quality control' test if we were only given the opportunity?
Bring it on- we are ready!

Nick


-----------------------------------------------Nicholas Hacko Fine WatchesSuite 403, Level 4, Culwulla Chambers67 Castlereagh St. Sydney 2000 NSWPhone: (02) 9232 0500 | Fax: (02) 9233 2273http://clockmaker.com.au-----------------------------------------------

 

This will be a global trend with the big car manufacturers already stopping computer diagnostics to local mechanics so newer cars will only be able to be serviced by the authorised dealers

 

I had that issue with my new Skoda (@Barking mad)

 

I don't think it is an accurate comparison (SiLabs/Microchip) vs Rolex selling spares. It would be more like asking HP or Dell to sell you a broken chip that is inside....... I'm in the industry and we sell our chips to anyone who is remotely interested. Spend billions to build a fab and thousands of man hours (highly educated engineers) to make one IC. Then we pump them out like popcorn for a couple of years and discontinue them for the next generation. Many times the IC's are designed specifically for the end customer and we will only sell it to them under a strict contractual agreement (called an ASIC). If one of these pops, good luck getting it.

This said, your argument still holds. HP, Dell, Samsung, etc all have repair facilities and also supply to "authorized" repair centers. The idea is to create brand loyalty.

Consumer electronics today are not designed to be repaired at the component level. I'm talking about cell phones, tablets,TV's, etc. You can swap out a board, display, fuse and battery no problem. Soldering on a high tech IC? Give it up.

 

My understanding is they are cutting off the supply houses like Ofrei and Cousins then slimming down their repair service network into three levels 1,2,3. Each level requiring certain equipment and training to qualify. This will certainly end the weekend warrior or hobbyist and putting it back into the hands of full time watchmakers. This also increases overhead costs to qualify to whatever the Swatch Group wants and at the mercy of pricing of parts set by the company. The big repair shops like STS couldn't care less as they are ready for all the requirements but smaller mom and pop shops are going to suffer or close. Just my thoughts.

 

Actually not quite true. Due to block exemption companies are not allowed to withhold or restict access however they dont have to make it cheap or easy I am surprised that the watch manufacturers are getting away with this, maybe because they are dealing with lots of smaller independants who dont have the clout to fight it.

 

It's just sad imho, and it wouldn't be so bad but the brand repair centres have more work than they can handle otherwise it would not take months for repairs to be carried out.

 

On a slightly off subject course. I recall a dealer in older watches, especially Rolex, who'd bought in the past at various London auction houses. After sending them to Rolex for service he was often told that they were "not Rolex" i.e. they'd had a number of non Rolex parts fitted and therefore were not deemed as genuine Rolex watches. Rolex therefore refused to work on them. As you can imagine this meant that the watches were returned to the auction houses and their value greatly reduced. It could be that the increasing number of people interested in collecting and therefore the increase in value of the watches has alerted Rolex to a money spinner. Maybe now they would work on those watches, replacing all the parts they identified as non Rolex and thereby greatly increasing the price of the work.

 

I thought once different parts are found on any Rolex (even genuine from similar models) policy is to not work on said watch

 

Make you want to buy a Seiko!

 

Good rant.

This is simply about increasing profits through control. Rolex knows full well that there are qualified independent watchmakers all over the world, and that those who purchase their watches are mature enough to decide whether or not to "risk" using them.

They are rent seeking, and would prefer to increase their profits (largely) at the expense of the consumer. Much like the control fraud that is currently rampant in the banking system, this will continue until those who are injured by the practices stand up and refuse to participate any longer.

On a related note, I produced a little rant of my own against AP, and shared my experience of when I attempted to have a set of correct hands for a vintage model sent to the U.S. for installation. You might enjoy the story, in a perverse sense:

http://ap.watchprosite.com/show-for...mars-piguet-disappointing-service-experience/

 

All about increasing the profits of the business. They make money selling new watches not repairing older ones. We see it in all walks of life, LG refrigerators etc. after 5 years, no parts or backordered from manufacturer etc. Restraint of trade practices don't seem to raise flags.

 

Totally agree and have said the same before. They want you to buy a new watch and service it no more than twice. 25 years will be the limit for servicing in years to come. With no parts to watchmakers by then a new watch will be needed.

 

However, with the small size of these parts, a 3D printer and a tech savvy watchmaker may in the future be the way vintage watches are fixed.

Just thinking.

 

Whether it’s cars or watches, the problem is the same. Of course it’s nice to use ‘original’ parts, even if they’re more expensive – if they’re available. But if they become ‘unavailable’, alternatives spring up. In the busy, expensive ‘developed’ world, if an electronic ‘commodity’ breaks it’s probably cheaper to buy a new one (with warranty etc). But in other parts of the world, there are repair shops with specialists who just don’t accept that something has died (fridge, car, watch or …): “How soon do you need it back?” I can tell you where to get your iPhone repaired/unlocked etc.

Things get more complicated in the computerized world we live in. The manufacturer can forcibly control that repair shop out of it. But people have even hacked into the Pentagon. Legislation prevents pirate copying of software – but if the software is no longer available for older items (cars or watches) through choice of the manufacturer, legislation won’t support them.

Aren’t we in a transition phase? If the big manufacturers (Toyota, Omega, Rolex) choose to run the vintage models out of town – through unavailability – the alternatives will spring up. Maybe not yet.

Only a view (hope!).
Tom

 

Well, there goes one of the arguments against quartz watches...

 

Only if you have the skills to measure out the old part, straighten it, add in the worn away material. generate a 3D model and print it.

Assuming you have a printer thats accurate to less than 0.001" and prints in metal.....

having worked at that very type of reverse engineering on occasion I can say it wouldn't be worth it for any but the most expensive or rare pieces. The tech will get cheaper but equipment that capable will never be that inexpensive.

 

And they didn't when approached by the dealer with the watches he bought at auction. I'm thinking that now they have stopped supplying 3rd parties with genuine parts they may change their mind and agree to bring a watch back to it's genuine state, but at a very high price.

 

I know that Rolex did think that way but believed that they'd seen the interest in their older watches grow and with it a lot of new money coming into the market and wanted some of it.
I'm hoping to meet an IWC bigwig in a few months and am interested in his and IWC's point of view of the vintage watch scene.