There are many contradictions in the month of January. There are reasons for optimism. In the northern hemisphere we've passed the winter equinox and our hours of daylight are lengthening. The world is literally getting brighter. Many major holidays have passed and the warm glow of that time has a halo effect. And yet, there is also the knowledge that tax season is ahead and a bill with uncertain properties may come due. The additional holiday spending can possibly weigh on the budget, out of precaution perhaps spending is slightly subdued.
The month's positive zeitgeist might suggest that it is a good time to hold an auction, particularly in the more mild climate of Monaco.
Monaco
Indeed, the Artcurial auction house did just that on January 14, 2020 with their "Important Watches" auction. But the results suggest that the more negative aspects of the month perhaps dominated. I'll explain.
Online I was able to watch approximately 105 lots go under the hammer. You can watch those lots on a livestream I recorded on YouTube (my live reactions are included). I skipped the pocket watches because I have less interest in those. First, the positive: the pocket watches did seem to do very well. I don't know why, perhaps there were institutional bidders such as museums. And Patek put on a strong showing, as is usual. So did Audemars Piguet, particularly the reasonably sized Royal Oak references (especially skeletonized). There also were not many surprises, good or bad, when it came to models such as the Reverso and the Submariner.
The surprises were mostly not positive. The "main event" of the auction was a Rolex Triple Calendar Moonphase ref. 8171 in steel.
A Rolex Triple Calendar "Padellone" sold in 2017. Credit: Author's photo of Phillips Auction catalogue.
Kept in the family of its original owner this timepiece had an estimate of € 200,000 - 300,000. It did not sell. In November Philips Auctions sold the same reference in steel for more than € 900,000. Things that make you go "hmmm." One possibility is that the more recent example was in rough condition. This reference has a snap caseback which, with regular use, tends to lose its seal, allowing for damage to the face over seven decades. But this was not an isolated outcome. Out of 105 lots 18 did not sell, roughly 17%.
It remains to be seen whether this was simply a January slump, the condition of the lots, or an emerging softening in vintage watch value. I've written elsewhere about signs that this may be a new normal. In the case of Artcurial, though, there are options to address this. The Head of Digital for Phillips Auctions, Arthur Touchot, recently made a strong case on Instagram that 2019 marked the point where vintage watch bidding online is almost equally as important as floor bidding. Artcurial conducted its auction in French, which almost certainly was more hospitable to the floor crowd. And they could also consider alternative months for their auction. If LVMH continues to hold their "Watch Week" in Dubai during January the likelihood of drawing a crowd becomes still more remote.
One last note: a Rolex "pre Daytona" 6834 chronograph sold for just under $37,000, a bright spot in the Artcurial auction. Tony Traina of Rescapementobserved that Mickey Mantel's personal 6834 is going up for auction with Heritage Auction next month with an estimate of $40,000. It will be interesting to see how that particular lot plays out.
News recently broke that watch brand Rolex was on the receiving end of a €91 million fine levied by French authorities. A view of Rolex's offices in France. Source: Google Maps. Generally, the headlines ascribed this fine to Rolex's alleged practice of prohibiting online sales of its watches. However, I've looked closely at the situation and I don't think those headlines are completely accurate (although they're probably what French authorities would want you to believe). I came to this conclusion after reading a Google translation of a 134 page report issued by the French Competition Authority on December 19, 2023. Generally speaking, such documents do not make for engaging reading. However, for those who know how successful Rolex has been at maintaining a comparatively high level of corporate secrecy, the French report provides a compelling and rare insight into some specific aspects of the brand's business. It is these insights which lead me to conclu
There comes a moment in the servicing of a watch that is probably easy to miss among the hundreds of steps required to remove a movement from a case, inspect the parts, repair anything amiss, lubricate all the pieces, and put the whole thing together again. A watch that Rolex's investigator bought at Beckertime for approximately $4,500. The lawsuit refers to this as "Counterfeit Watch One." That moment is when a watchmaker takes the dial and reattaches it to the movement. There is nothing particularly unique when it comes to the tools required or the tasks involved in this step. Instead, what is unique about this moment is that the watchmaker holds in their hand a mark that is not the property of the watchmaker and it is not exactly the property of the watch's owner. In the case of Vacheron Constantin, that mark is a Maltese Cross. For Audemars Piguet, it is the brand's initials. When it comes to Rolex, the mark is a widely recognized crown. If the reassembly
Among many avid watch collectors, the term "in house movement" seems to elicit eyerolling disdain. Pieces of an assortment, including balance spring, from a non-Swiss movement. There is a sizeable perception that "in house" is, in fact, nothing more than an unnecessary marketing ploy designed to tease more money out of the wallet of buyers (by way of definition, an "in house" movement means that the mechanism inside a watch was predominently manufactured by a brand itself, kind of like "we make our own bread" at a restaurant). I'll confess that I'd begun to think similarly, that is, until I read a 66 page report posted by the Swiss Competition Commision on May 10, 2023. Yes, this is the kind of thing an economist finds interesting on a weekend, or at least this economist. Before we get into the details of this report, in the interest of full disclosure I should say that the original document was in a different language: lawyerese.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDelete