Cousins addresses components crisis at LWS 2014

[PJ S]

Cousins UK wants watch and jewellery servicing to be simple, quick and painless for retailers and their customers.

For 45 years, the company has been supplying the trade with millions of component parts for watch and clock brands, along with tools, equipment, consumables and jewellery findings.
The company will be promoting its nationwide products and services at this year’s London Watch Show, and aims to educate trade professionals about how to profit from a well run watch and jewellery workshop.

Cousins UK’s appearance at the London Watch Show comes at a crucial time for watch brands, and the retailers that service their timepieces.

Anthony Cousins, managing director of Cousins UK says Swatch Group will start restricting the supply of Omega watch parts to unauthorised service centres at the end of next year, which may force customers to send their watches away to get them repaired. This situation, Cousins argues, is unnecessarily complicated and time consuming.

Cousins says the company will use the London Watch Show to meet existing and new customers, and to “raise awareness of the increasing Swiss watch part unavailability and the recent Swatch Group announcement of no more Omega parts post December 2015.”

“It is unacceptable that when an owner of a Swiss watch requires a service, repair or just a battery replacement they are faced with having to go through the brand agent (the retail jeweller selling the brand) resulting in them having to wait months and face a disproportionate financial charge due to the watch having to be sent back to the watch brand. It has never been more important to communicate and network and to prevent the gross underestimation of the very high level of service the independent wholesalers and repairers provide in support of their brands,” Cousins argues.

The difficulties facing watch customers are particularly extreme in the UK because there are not enough qualified horologists being trained in this country, despite the efforts of the British School of Watchmakers, Cousins asserts. “The school is not designed and will never address the wider shortage issue that the whole trade suffers from,” he says.

Cousins hopes that the London Watch Show will stimulate this debate, and lead to a more open discussion about the challenges facing the British watch industry.

The London Watch Show takes place at Freemasons’ Hall on July 6-7. Over 50 exhibitors will present their latest watch collections. There will also be a lively seminar programme where watch professionals can meet and discuss their challenges.

Article reproduced in full from WatchPro magazine online

[jegger]

The difficulties facing watch customers are particularly extreme in the UK because there are not enough qualified horologists being trained in this country, despite the efforts of the British School of Watchmakers, Cousins asserts. “The school is not designed and will never address the wider shortage issue that the whole trade suffers from,” he says.

I agree with that but I think he was to kind to the "effort" the school is making...

I believe the school only takes on 8 students a year and most/half of those places are assigned by the big watch companies, add in the fact these same watch companies are cutting off supply of parts, I'm not sure you can call that an effort, it's akin to an arsonist pissing on the fire he just set at the same time dousing it with more petrol.

Some of the biggest names in the watch world support this school and all they can take on is 8 students a year!

[walkerwek1958]

I`m pleased to hear that Anthony Cousins is doing this; hopefully it'll raise awareness of the problems. The manufacturers will put forward their own arguments, which are based around controlling the quality of service/repair work by only supplying parts to the people they want to. This has been discussed at length on a separate thread http://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.ph...21#post3143521.

Many watch owners/enthusiasts may think this has nothing to do with them, but overall it's bad news for everyone. Waiting times to get watches serviced will increase and prices will go up. There will continue to be a shortage of trained repairers in this country and some of the older independents will simply shut up shop and call it a day.

This issue will polarise opinions. The accredited repairers in the industry will rub their hands, and those who work for such organisations (or the manufacturers service centres) will feel happy because it puts them in a privileged position. Generic/reproduction parts will become more prevalent because it'll be far more lucrative to produce them.

Paul

[Omegamanic]

Surely we have European legislation to stop these protection (rackets) practices? Car main dealers used to get away with it for years, until the manufacturers were forced to accept qualified mechanics - if a car can be serviced without the manufacturer popping along to assess the individual mechanics, why can't a suitably qualified watchmaker have access to parts?

[Meinessex]

Well done to Cousins for airing this issue so publicly.

There will be many journalists and bloggers attending the show, so hopefully some will pick up on the story and publish it. It should help further the debate and maybe get Swatch to see the error of their ways.

[Guitarfan]

Surely we have European legislation to stop these protection (rackets) practices?

Switzerland is not in the EU, so the rules don't apply. They can do what they like, as Rolex have done for many years.

Speaking of Rolex, if it's all kicking off about Omega are Rolex going to get a load of grief too?

[walkerwek1958]

Speaking of Rolex, if it's all kicking off about Omega are Rolex going to get a load of grief too?

I doubt it.

Compared to the number of Omegas being worked on, Rolex work represents a much smaller slice of the total repair business. Also, Rolex have operated in their own way for a long time; it can be argued that people have made decisions in recent years which rely on Omega parts being available to them. This extends to ownership too; people have been happy to buy 60s Omegas in the knowledge that the local repairer can sort out any problems for a fair price.

Perhaps Swatch Group may rethink their stance if the owners of Omega watches (and prospective customers) complained to them.....that would probably carry more clout. Did the folks who've bought Omega watches in the recent past realise how much they'd have to pay to get their watches serviced? I`m sure some buyers don`t even think about it, but there will be many that do, and ease of servicing could influence their decision.

Anyone who commits to Rolex ownership should expect to pay a premium for servicing, it goes with the territory. I include myself in this category; other than regulation and minor refinishing I won`t work on my own Rolexes. However, Omegas are in a different category, with a tradition of readily available parts and much cheaper service/repair cost. That's one of the reasons the brand has flourished and the interest in the vintage watches has remained high. Maybe there's a case for restricting parts availability for the latest co-axial Omegas which are specialised, but that shouldn`t translate through to preventing folks from getting their 1970s cal 1010s fixed up cheaply.

Omega are trying yet another ploy to emulate Rolex; painting stripes on a horse doesn`t make it a Zebra, but it'll fool a few people.

Paul

[Wicky]

Switzerland is not in the EU, so the rules don't apply. They can do what they like, as Rolex have done for many years.

Speaking of Rolex, if it's all kicking off about Omega are Rolex going to get a load of grief too?

I don't see how you can compare Rolex to Swatch. I'm not aware of any non-Rolex watches that have a Rolex movement in them. I know lots of non-Swatch watches with ETA movements though...

[Guitarfan]

I'm comparing Rolex to Swatch with respect to the restriction of parts supply and therefore restrictive servicing. The same argument applies to both. I find it interesting that people think it's OK for Rolex to do it, but not Omega.

My opinion on this issue is well known if you've read the various threads, and I think it's just another step along the mechanical Swiss watch journey. They're becoming a very expensive luxury item to both buy and maintain - doing it on the cheap just isn't going to be an option.

[Richie_101]

Well done to Cousins for airing this issue so publicly.

There will be many journalists and bloggers attending the show, so hopefully some will pick up on the story and publish it. It should help further the debate and maybe get Swatch to see the error of their ways.

While it's commendable that Cousins are doing this, their involvement or the thoughts of journalist/bloggers won't make any difference at all. The Swatch Group's motivation behind doing this is one thing and one thing only: profit.

There are millions of their movements in watches out there, so restricting the parts supply and servicing options gives them a cast-iron guaranteed revenue stream going forward.

The fact of the matter is that Swatch will do exactly as they please, and if you want to keep your ETA powered watch (old or new) in good order going forward, you'll have no choice but to pay up and wait.

Speaking of Rolex, if it's all kicking off about Omega are Rolex going to get a load of grief too?

In a word, no. Rolex and all the other 'luxury' manufacturers have had this policy in place for many years. The only reason Omega is in the spotlight is that they are changing their policy and it will affect a section of the readership here, but out in the 'real world' this change doesn't even register.


Rich.

[Wicky]

I'm comparing Rolex to Swatch with respect to the restriction of parts supply and therefore restrictive servicing.

And I'm telling you that you can't compare them as Rolex never sold movements to 3rd parties and Swatch does. I would think that makes a massive difference w.r.t. the restriction of parts supply. I'm sorry that you fail to see that.

[Dazzler]

The battle has already been lost.

[Guitarfan]

And I'm telling you that you can't compare them as Rolex never sold movements to 3rd parties and Swatch does. I would think that makes a massive difference w.r.t. the restriction of parts supply. I'm sorry that you fail to see that.

You seem to be mixing up Omega (the brand) and Swatch (the parent company who own ETA) here. General ETA parts are still going to be available, but Omega specific are not - crystals, crowns, co-axial parts, cases, bracelets etc.

So the Rolex comparison is completely valid.

[jegger]

And I'm telling you that you can't compare them as Rolex never sold movements to 3rd parties and Swatch does. I would think that makes a massive difference w.r.t. the restriction of parts supply. I'm sorry that you fail to see that.

Rolex did, they used to supply Panerai with movements for their watches, ok it was many years ago but it did happen ;-)

[Wicky]

You seem to be mixing up Omega (the brand) and Swatch (the parent company who own ETA) here. General ETA parts are still going to be available, but Omega specific are not - crystals, crowns, co-axial parts, cases, bracelets etc.

So the Rolex comparison is completely valid.

Swatch Group advise Cousins that the supply of watch parts is to totally cease after December 2015, this will affect all brands including Omega, Tissot, Certina, Rado, CK and Longines.

08/05/14

Q: Hi Anthony just read the news regarding omega parts not being supplied after dec 2015, but does that include ETA movements and parts aswell - Regards Russ

A: Hi Russ: No it does not, well not for now, ETA are already restricting us completely on circuits and limiting the quantity on a lot of general parts, but as of yet we have not experience too many problems of being without the correct levels of stock

I read: "Omega, Tissot, Certina, Rado, CK and Longines" and "ETA are already restricting us completely on circuits and limiting the quantity on a lot of general parts". Completely unlike Rolex.

[Guitarfan]

I used Omega as the highest profile example of one of the brands affected, and a rival to Rolex, for the brand comparison. Swatch are only doing what Rolex and Tudor do with their brand specific parts.

The general ETA movement parts are the ones shared with non-Swatch manufacturers, and as Cousins state they are still readily available (with the exception of quartz circuits by the sound of it).

[Guitarfan]

Reading around on this subject, it seems like the independent watch repairers are the ones who have actually caused this situation:

"They {Omega} have specifically explained (over the phone) that they are fed up receiving botched repairs back at HQ from so called watch repairers (their words) where the public blame the brand causing brand damage."

From Cousins: https://www.cousinsuk.com/page/news

[walkerwek1958]

Reading around on this subject, it seems like the independent watch repairers are the ones who have actually caused this situation:

"They {Omega} have specifically explained (over the phone) that they are fed up receiving botched repairs back at HQ from so called watch repairers (their words) where the public blame the brand causing brand damage."

From Cousins: https://www.cousinsuk.com/page/news

Does anyone really believe that? Sure, there are examples of poor workmanship, but the majority of repairers do the job right. Watches are fairly unforgiving; if they're not put together properly you'll soon know about it. It suits Omega's argument to make statements like this.

Paul

[Cirrus]

Does anyone really believe that? Sure, there are examples of poor workmanship, but the majority of repairers do the job right. Watches are fairly unforgiving; if they're not put together properly you'll soon know about it. It suits Omega's argument to make statements like this.

Paul

I don't believe a word of it... what do Swatch care how a watch became defective if they can charge over the odds to fix it?

[Guitarfan]

I don't believe a word of it... what do Swatch care how a watch became defective if they can charge over the odds to fix it?

It sounds like it's the brand (image) damage they're worried about, not the individual watch.

[walkerwek1958]

It sounds like it's the brand (image) damage they're worried about, not the individual watch.

Agreed, that's what they're trying to say, but I still don`t believe it. It's typical ad-man bollocks......the sacred image of the 'brand' is an overused metaphor these days.

Lets face it, all Omega care about is being able to sell more watches for high prices. I don`t believe the potential Omega buyer thesedays will be influenced by anecdotal evidence referring to the performance of a 10 year old example; he'll be even less influenced by the performance of a 40year old watch. There simply isn`t a credible link between (potentially) poor servicing on ageing examples and the perception of build quality in the minds of the customers.

The most serious risk to the Omega brand image, in my opinion, is the co-axial escapement. How will these watches perform after 10-15 years of use and neglect? We don`t know the answer, but my guess is that the co-axial escapement is likely to give problems when the parts start to wear, and these problems will cause the watches to stop. A conventional watch will still run when the pallet stones, pallet pivots and escape wheel pivots are worn; it won`t give of it's best but it'll still run reasonably well for many years. I think the co-axial parts will be far less forgiving. Stopping is a very serious problem for a watch (and it's owner) and it's something that owners can relate to. Talk to owners about low amplitude and positional variation and the chances are their faces will glaze over; most people aren`t interested, but they certainly grasp the concept of a watch that's stopped, and that is really bad for the brand image! I think the only way around this will be replacement of the escapement parts more frequently, and I can understand Omega wanting to control this situation by forcing owners to deal with their own service centres.

Maybe I`m being over-pessimistic about the co-axials, but I don`t think so. They're sensitive to friction between the contacting parts so it's likely that they won`t work well when wear sets in.....and maybe Omega know that.

Paul

[Guitarfan]

But I thought the whole point of Co-Ax was less friction and therefore less wear?

[walkerwek1958]

But I thought the whole point of Co-Ax was less friction and therefore less wear?

Not that simple. The original Daniels concept was an escapement that didn`t require lubrication and had less friction than the conventional design. This was based on an 18000 beat count; Omega inplemented the design in a higher beat movement (28800) and had problems. The beat count of the later 2500 movements was reduced to 25200 and the escapement has to be lubricated, and that seems to have overcome the original problem. That's my understanding of the story.

Clearly, wear can take place, and wear at the pivots will be no different from a normal watch. The co-axial is an innovation, no question about that, but whether it was a worthwhile development for mass production in everyday watches is questionable. Adopting the free-sprung balance was a nice idea, that was a step forward, but I think they should've stuck with the conventional escapement and kept the beat rate at 28800. Of course, they would've lost the marketing hype that the co-axial's give them, but I think the idea should've been allowed to die quietly following the problems encountered with the early movements.

Paul