Tudor are in house manufacturers why are Omega only i house design?

Archer

Can I ask why it bothers you? Do you not think there is a place in the watch world for assembleurs, which by the way is the proper term for a company that does this (rather than a manufacture)?

If people want to buy into the perceived advantage that being "in-house" provides (again can't be stated enough that this a term that has no official definition, but is thrown around like it means something very specific) then that's fine with me. But why should brands that don't do this "bother you" so much?

I think someone mentioned Panerai in this thread...looking at the problems they have had with several of their manufacture movements, I would take the ETA that was "slapped in the case" any day thanks.

Cheers, Al

J jaymyms

To answer your question Al, pricepoint has a lot to do with it. I'll gladly wear a Tudor. Now, if a company wants around $10k for a modern watch they've more or less assembled, I'm sorry, but that's not happening.

but for real, of you're spending $8k on a Pam or IWC with an ETA movement - AND they've outsourced most of the other components of the watch, it's my belief that you're getting ripped off compared to a Grand Seiko or Rolex. That's all.