Comments on: Spare Parts Restrictions http://watchmakingblog.com/2009/01/26/parts/ A mechanical watchmaker in a digital world Fri, 18 May 2012 18:45:46 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.5 By: J.Peter http://watchmakingblog.com/2009/01/26/parts/comment-page-1/#comment-4830 J.Peter Sun, 08 Feb 2009 21:26:19 +0000 http://watchmakingblog.com/?p=711#comment-4830 Engineer, It's nice to hear its a problem in other fields as well. All too often we make the comparison to automobiles and it just seems so unfair. I'm sure its a problem in many fields and many nations. I still wish it wasn't. Engineer, It’s nice to hear its a problem in other fields as well. All too often we make the comparison to automobiles and it just seems so unfair. I’m sure its a problem in many fields and many nations. I still wish it wasn’t.

]]> By: Engineer http://watchmakingblog.com/2009/01/26/parts/comment-page-1/#comment-4825 Engineer Sun, 08 Feb 2009 05:54:53 +0000 http://watchmakingblog.com/?p=711#comment-4825 I am a precision engineer, not an actual watchmaker. However I come across this problem in all aspects of life, even electronics. So I am not speaking specifically about watchmaking. While I have a certain sympathy with manufacturers wanting to ensure their parts only go to their selected clientele and their stated policy of protecting customers from unauthorised and potentially badly-carried out repairs. It potentially leaves an after-taste of market protectionism. Worse still, I see many people who are deeply disappointed in their purchase being irreparable without sending it away or a very long trip to an authorised repair facility. In Europe, there is often only one authorised repair facility for the whole of Europe, meaning you have to send it away to another country as well. Vehicle manufacturers are having to release service codes in America to the smaller independant garages. I am a precision engineer, not an actual watchmaker. However I come across this problem in all aspects of life, even electronics. So I am not speaking specifically about watchmaking.

While I have a certain sympathy with manufacturers wanting to ensure their parts only go to their selected clientele and their stated policy of protecting customers from unauthorised and potentially badly-carried out repairs. It potentially leaves an after-taste of market protectionism.

Worse still, I see many people who are deeply disappointed in their purchase being irreparable without sending it away or a very long trip to an authorised repair facility. In Europe, there is often only one authorised repair facility for the whole of Europe, meaning you have to send it away to another country as well.

Vehicle manufacturers are having to release service codes in America to the smaller independant garages.

]]> By: J.Edwards http://watchmakingblog.com/2009/01/26/parts/comment-page-1/#comment-4745 J.Edwards Wed, 28 Jan 2009 04:05:54 +0000 http://watchmakingblog.com/?p=711#comment-4745 This is an area I would really like to see improve, but at the same time I do have to say that I think a lot of positive progress has been made in recent years through the efforts of the American Watchmakers-Clockmakers Institute and others. CW21 certification is definitely a step in the right direction. It's a shame to see damage done to watches that otherwise could have been avoided if parts like crowns and gaskets were simply made available to all watchmakers. Whether via traditional supply conduits or directly from the manufacturers. It would be really great to see a supplier step up with a standardized form of crown design that could easily be swapped in and out of any covering of the manufacturers' choosing. A sort of intermediary, water resistance system, that acts as a bridge between the stem and what the client sees as the crown. This is an area I would really like to see improve, but at the same time I do have to say that I think a lot of positive progress has been made in recent years through the efforts of the American Watchmakers-Clockmakers Institute and others. CW21 certification is definitely a step in the right direction.
It’s a shame to see damage done to watches that otherwise could have been avoided if parts like crowns and gaskets were simply made available to all watchmakers. Whether via traditional supply conduits or directly from the manufacturers.
It would be really great to see a supplier step up with a standardized form of crown design that could easily be swapped in and out of any covering of the manufacturers’ choosing. A sort of intermediary, water resistance system, that acts as a bridge between the stem and what the client sees as the crown.

]]> By: Michael O. http://watchmakingblog.com/2009/01/26/parts/comment-page-1/#comment-4727 Michael O. Mon, 26 Jan 2009 21:01:34 +0000 http://watchmakingblog.com/?p=711#comment-4727 Great post. I would be furious if I spent thousands of my favourite dollars on a watch, then found out it couldn't be serviced. Fortunately, I can't afford those kinds of watches. Yay recession! Great post.
I would be furious if I spent thousands of my favourite dollars on a watch, then found out it couldn’t be serviced.

Fortunately, I can’t afford those kinds of watches.

Yay recession!

]]>