Manufacture Vs. Outsourced Movements – A Matter of Faith

What happens when a dominant company no longer provides its product? This is the problem that watch manufacturers are now facing due to the fact that ETA – the largest manufacturer of Swiss watch movements – is going to reduce the production of their movements almost in half by 2019 in compliance with the agreement set out by the Swiss Competition Commission. Consequently, the watch industry began rethinking its watchmaking strategy, and in a move to ensure survival in the industry, began to develop mechanical movements themselves.

When it comes to the watchmaking world, is a manufacture movement preferred over an ETA produced movement? What are the pros and the cons of an outsourced movement? The answer to these questions, of course, depends on the reason why you purchase a watch and the different aspects of watchmaking that hold significance to you. Of course, the external design of a watch is usually responsible for the initial intrigue of the watch. When the design of the watch is not appealing, the movement in itself is not always convincing enough to lead to a sale.

Essentially, the question of what lends a special charm to a manufacture calibre relates to the reason that most individuals prefer mechanical watches over the ones powered by a quartz movement – it’s all about the central piece, the movement. An in-house calibre holds significance because it means that a watch has been produced by a single manufacturer, and in some cases, was entirely created in a single plant. If you know how complicated a mechanical movement is, you are also aware that it is a technical, scientific, and organizational feat to produce a mechanical watch as an entity.

If you know how complicated a mechanical movement is, you are also aware that it is a technical, scientific, and organizational feat to produce a mechanical watch as an entity.

It is accordingly different when it comes to watches that are powered by outsourced movements. Here, a watch brand will purchase movements from producers such as ETA or Miyota and then install them into its own cases, inscribing its own label on the dials.

Yet, it is somehow wrong to primarily focus on the negative aspects of a watch that is powered by an outsourced movement. One cannot simply put aside the fact that ETA movements have proven their unconditional reliability for several decades now and have upheld their reputation as reliable mechanisms.

Such a bulletproof product is not easily duplicated, as can be witnessed by several manufacture calibres that were placed on the market within recent years. These movements were reported to have various problems, but were thankfully covered under brand warranties. But it is very annoying when you run into problems with a new timepiece so soon after a long awaited purchase. And those who have already experienced watch repairs are aware that a timepiece is not returned within a short few days. All in all, problems with a watch movement can without a doubt destroy the joy and excitement felt when a new watch is purchased.

It is important to note that the revision of a mechanical movement varies when it is produced in-house as opposed to outsourced. Only the brand watchmakers can repair their proprietary movements but any freelance watchmaker knows how to fix an ETA movement. Even if an independent watchmaker has the necessary skills to work on a manufacture movement, there is still the problem of sourcing the spare parts.

In addition, numerous watches do not showcase the watch movement, for example, through a sapphire case back. So basically, what you are paying for is the knowledge of knowing that the movement is produced in-house, since you are not even able to witnessed the inner mechanisms of the timepiece. Precision chronometers are not only produced by renowned retailers such as Rolex, Jaeger LeCoultre, or A.Lange & Söhne, but also by companies such as ETA or Asian movement manufacturers such as Miyota.

Finally, it should be mentioned that manufacture movements do not always signify an immensely higher cost. It has previously been thought that manufacture movements can only be found in extravagant timepieces that cost thousands of pounds, but this statement is untrue today.

Nomos Glashütte is a prime example of quality manufactory movements powering exquisite timepieces at a reasonable cost. Shortly following the revival of Nomos in 1990, the company begun to refine outsourced movements by gradually including their own complications such as the ring-shaped date disc. A decade later, in 2005, the watchmaking company begun to produce their own movements. This happened without an extreme increase in prices. Currently, Nomos Glashütte operates at a vertical integration rate of 95%.

The Seiko Group is another good example of movements produced in-house. Here, Seiko even produces the machines for manufacturing their movements, which demonstrates an extreme level of integrity. Of course, the movement of a cheap Seiko is not produced with the same level of manual work exhibited in a movement created for example by A. Lange & Söhne.

Ultimately, the inclination towards a manufacture or outsourced movement remains a question of personal preference. However, which option is better simply cannot be answered based on objective criteria. What speaks for an in-house developed movement is the amount of passion and attention that is placed on the handwork and fine mechanics that make mechanical watches so wonderful. In my personal opinion, manufacture movements are important, as the previously described idea of placing an outsourced movement into a watch case is displeasing to me. But, in general, if the outward design of a watch speaks out to someone, looks great on the wrist, and invokes that “got to have it” feeling, an ETA movement in itself would not hinder the purchase of the watch. However, when I am considering purchasing a timepiece, an outsourced movement always acts as a negative aspect when it comes down to the final decision.

Don’t forget that many premium manufacturers use ETA movements, which are processed in-house and sometimes even modified. Perhaps this is a good balance between complete in-house manufacturing and outsourcing. But this starts another debate regarding what defines an “in-house” developed movement. Is it when 50% of the movement is produced in-house? 75%? 100%? But this is an entirely different debate, which we will have to continue at another time.