In this Sunday morning section, two of our authors clash in an epic standoff for the ages. Solid conclusions and crazy exaggeration are welcome (so don’t hesitate to participate with the fun in the comments segment underneath). Also, remember to tell us which watches you’d prefer to see destroyed/gushingly lifted up one week from now. We’ll attempt to include as a considerable lot of our perusers’ decisions as we can. This week, the dubious Code 11.59 by Audemars Piguet gets its day in the sun. Clutch your caps: This could get messy…
You weren’t anticipating this, right? I’m sure a great many people envisioned we’d take-on the Audemars Piguet Royal Oak having put the Vacheron Constantin Overseas and Patek Philippe Nautilus through a lot. Don’t stress, we’ll get to the Royal Oak. In any case, before at that point, let’s investigate a glance at its dubious kin: The Audemars Piguet Code 11.59 collection.
After last week’s drubbing, it may have been insightful to require the path of least resistance this week and go through the following ten minutes loathing on the Code 11.59. Nothing more needs to be said. I’m an epicurean for discipline. Having been completely battered by Jorg’s guard of the Overseas 4500V a week ago (to the tune of 84% Vs — ouch), I’m standing, uncovered chested before Balazs, trying him to bring me down as I endeavor to persuade you that, regardless of the heaviness of general assessment, the Code 11.59 isn’t just acceptable, it’s the following extraordinary thing to hit watchmaking.
I’m a devotee of oddity. Yet, I don’t like a lot of it without a moment’s delay. That’s not something I apply to all parts of my life (I can never have sufficient cheddar, for instance), however with regards to set up brands dabbling with their DNA, I truly incline toward changes to come at a frosty speed. This isn’t truly in light of the fact that I for one can’t think far enough outside of a container to envision something altogether new from a brand, but instead that it is essential for a brand to dribble feed its virtuoso to the purchasing public so it seems to have stayed on-message from year speck to the present day.
I disdain it when brands attempt to persuade me that their assortments are associated by their distinction. It is complete refuse. At the point when a brand attempts to disclose to you it is characterized by thoughts instead of a thought, it implies they don’t know what their identity is. The absolute best brands are themselves start to finish. No peculiar off-shoots. No efforts to take advantage of a segment they unmistakably don’t care about or comprehend. Furthermore, unquestionably no deceptive efforts to urge their target fans to grow their psyche (code for, “please purchase another of our watches”).
Audemars Piguet is superior to most brands at holding a reliable message all through its deliveries. It isn’t resistant to indiscretion, notwithstanding. The Millenary assortment is, as I would like to think, a deplorable interruption from all that makes AP great. Possibly we’ll will highlight one of those models in this section. No prizes for speculating which side I’ll be on…
And it is by and large that ability that AP has for self-respect that makes the Code 11.59 such a triumph. Take a gander at it. It is completely new. What’s more, yet… There is something… Something unusually familiar… Eight sides, never a long way from the absolute best models AP has delivered since its commencement, spring up again. The complicated case center of the Code 11.59. is a unique creation. Blending commonality in with oddity in a particularly complex way that comes across from the outset as a lot less complex development than it is in reality.
Honestly, I’ve had dreams about that case. The manner in which all that openings together to make something new yet in a split second edible is marvelous. Definitely, so consider the possibility that the dials aren’t up to speed very yet?
Balazs: Nothing truly. It’s just one of – if not – the main piece of a watch.
Everything about the case and the developments is on point. What’s more, the sapphire gems that resemble they’ve lurched out of a Salvador Dali corrosive outing and onto your wrist? Indeed. If it’s not too much trouble. There’s more to come from this assortment, yet what we’ve got as of now is probably as tempting a delivery as we’ve found in the most recent decade. So come on, Ferenczi, disclose to me why I’m wrong.
I’m an enthusiast of you, Rob, so let’s imagine you never composed those words about the 11:59. Likewise, Brexit is simply behind us, consequently you, a Brit living in Germany (on the opposite side of the fence), should be sincerely hurt… So I’ll be pretty much as delicate as could really be expected. Most importantly, I need to say I concur with you on a couple of things. You’re a prepared watch columnist and in a limited way, I think I have something reasonable of involvement with regards to understanding watch PR also. We see through the misleadingly made fog of copyright messages and press pictures. Also phony history that specific brands use to attempt to captivate us while introducing their most recent pride and joy.
It isn’t not difficult to remain on top and keep up the nature of the items without becoming a one-stunt horse. Then again, at times this is by and large what you need to do. GoPro is an extraordinary model (despite the fact that their CEO thinks they’re an adaptable brand — no doubt right). There is no GoPro telephone, smartwatch, tablet, or, God disallow, DSLR camera. The brand sticks to what they know and do best. BMW likewise never made trucks, pickups, or vans and I trust they won’t ever will. BMW’s vehicles, let them be SUVs or sports vehicles, take care of business. Audemars Piguet was, is and I think consistently will be the Royal Oak.
Let’s be clear, this isn’t the current management’s flaw. Numerous things are, similar to the Code 11:59 (just as some wrecked iPhone screens) yet not this. The Royal Oak has been the bread and butter of the brand since the ’70s and that’s fine. As I said above, stick to what you know and improve it. Audemars Piguet did extraordinary with the Royal Oak. More than extraordinary really, they made stunning, amazingly lovely watches. Hello, I’m not against improvement, don’t get me wrong…but come on, would we say we are truly discussing a watch case? Obviously, it’s flawlessly designed. What else did you expect in that value range? Anyway when the case is a higher priority than the watch face itself (as they showed in during SIHH, sideways, not showing the dial plainly) at that point there is somewhat of an issue with the product.
It appears to me, my dear Rob, that Dali was not by any means the only one on a corrosive outing. The creators at AP were and presumably so were you when this passage was written. We are discussing a watch that is certifiably not a Royal Oak however a fresh out of the plastic new idea yet has eight sides. Hang tight briefly, where did I see this example previously? Could it be? No, I don’t think so. Goodness, it can’t be…yet, I’m right. The Royal Oak with an octagonal bezel. So would we say we are making new and trying or attempting to ride our past RO fad by moving the octagonal shape from the bezel to the center case? Also, we haven’t even discussed the dial.
Rob: Firstly, while I don’t approve the utilization of unlawful medications, envision how rapidly Baselworld would pass by on corrosive? They ought to consider supplanting the Basel Times with a tab. That’d get the guest numbers back up to where they need to be…
Secondly, I’m Irish so Brexit didn’t contact me by and by. Be that as it may, a debt of gratitude is in order for your sincere expressions of sympathy. Around half of my companions appreciate them; the other 50% appear to be strikingly glad. I surmise that’s democracy.
And thank the stars we have a majority rule community here on Fratello. The voice of individuals will most likely send your contention back to the shadowy babble domain from whence it came.
Balazs: Can’t wait to refute you on this one.
Rob: You may be holding up some time, mate. The Code 11.59 arrangement may not be an altogether completed article (and I yield that a portion of the dials could do with somewhat more work) however the establishments are there. It is an astounding first foot forward to bring the higher-idea AP stuff (which I venerate) nearer to the purchasing public.
Yeah, sure, the “buying public for this reach is a lovely little cut of society, however these pieces are more “accessible” than anything we’ve seen come out of the AP idea lab previously, and, now and again, they look similarly as cool.
I get your contention about a brand setting out its slow down and staying by it. However, the cool hard truth is that it doesn’t work generally. Indeed, I would remain close by and shout from the housetops that SevenFriday ought to never have considered a subsequent case shape, however, comparably, where might the business be without the Datejust an d the Submariner? We need brands like AP — driving lights in this imaginative circle — to fight the good fight. These undeniable level fashioners need to push the discussion ahead. On the off chance that they can’t do it, who can?
Balazs: Not all medications are illicit so while I’m additionally not a devotee of them, I’d love to see the administration at Baselworld putting them to use to raise the guest number. In spite of the fact that I dread this isn’t the issue with the occasion. The interest from fans and writers is there, the polished skill from the administration is absent. Predominantly with regards to keeping the brands at the show. In any case, that’s a point for an entire nother article.
Rob: Pretty sure that sporting medications aren’t connected to an expansion in professionalism…
Balazs: That’s the second reasonable thing you’ve said today. The other is: The Code 11.59 arrangement may not be a totally completed article. I wholeheartedly concur. As such it should’ve remained on the designers’ table until they can coordinate the remainder of the watch to the development. That is a show-stopper, there is no uncertainty about that. The case? Indeed, we experienced that. I’ve seen similarly fascinating watch cases by arbitrary Kickstarter watches. I would prefer not to invest an excessive amount of energy discussing the dial all things considered. Simply visit your nearby retail chain (that’s Warenhaus Karstadt for you in Dresden, Rob) and look at the style watch show bureau. I’m sure there’s still space left close to DKNY, Hugo Boss and Emporio Armani. In truth, the sticker price is unique, however the look is identical.
Rob: Identical is a genuine stretch. What’s more, I don’t accept you’ve seen cases bragging anyplace close to the level refinement as the 11.59 on Kickstarter. Without a doubt, a lot of brands attempt to accomplish something similarly as driven. However, doing it right costs cash (and time). Two things AP has obviously filled this design.
Balazs: Actually, you’re right. The solitary brand which is as yet draining the Royal Oak-DNA when attempting to come up with another idea is Audemars Piguet. Yet, man that is so 2013…
But this sort of “look” isn’t about the refinement: It’s about the quick impression a watch like this can make. It’s a similar sort of strategy as Diesel pushing four quartz modules into one case — sudden stunning exhibition. Neither ages well…
In my assessment, the greatest error the showcasing group at AP made with the Code 11.59 arrangement was the tone of communication. It was forceful and to some degree stooping. It was as though they’d welcomed us out for supper and put several hours driving food down our throats prior to disclosing to us the amount they appreciated our conversation. That sort of bossy demeanor once in a while, if at any point, works. Audemars Piguet is the Royal Oak. The brand, over all others, requires to understand that and have a smidgen greater modesty when transparently causing trouble with another delivery. Possibly one day Audemars Piguet will come up with another idea that will sell well and be viewed as a companion of the Royal Oak. The Code 11:59, nonetheless, will be a distant memory and failed to remember by then.