Not much talk about the North Flag

[eightbore]

Originally Posted by engin33r

. But still, has Tudor the same quality, craftmanship, and ultimately value as Rolex?

A few days ago, I would have said "no" on all fronts. Today though I think they just might...and I will hammered for saying this...except on the "value" front where they DEFINITELY just surpassed Rolex if one is into the styles that Tudor offers.

[fania123]

I think the quality, and craftsmanship are on par with Rolex. As far is value is concerned, keep in mind that Tudors can be had at a good discount and therefore hold their value very well.

[Mr. K]

Originally Posted by fania123

I think the quality, and craftsmanship are on par with Rolex. As far is value is concerned, keep in mind that Tudors can be had at a good discount and therefore hold their value very well.

Good point.

[watchwatcher]

I'm digging it...whether I buy one or not, I don't know.

[joe100]

A lot of misinformed folks here regarding Tudor

[Wesley Crusher]

The new movement is great (technically speaking), but bland (aesthetically). Movement decorations are not what Rolex/Tudor is known for, but it is a non-issue since they're always covered by a solid caseback. Why Tudor decided to put an exhibition caseback on this watch is beyond me. So much for the whole "tool watch" image. The rest of the watch, well, I think it's rather ugly.

[Takemusu]

Originally Posted by eightbore

Tudor is not what Rolex is....it is, to a substantial degree and to the joy of many, what Rolex was. Rolex has clearly reached the point where it is producing jewelry as much or more than it is producing tools or instruments. That is just fine, of course, and even they have realized that there is also money to be made in the tool/instrument business at a price point lower than that which is enabled by the production of jewelry. Rolex is fortunate to have Tudor....and so are we.

Nicely put.

[donq]

Maybe we need a contest to come up with a clever nickname?

[Presa canary]

Originally Posted by engin33r

Nope... The Tudor brand is owned by Rolex, but no, Rolex doesn't make Tudor watches.

Rolex most certainly does make Tudor...

[slasherj]

Tudor's tag line make me cringe -
"Watch Your Style"....

shudder.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by slasherj

Tudor's tag line make me cringe -
"Watch Your Style"....

shudder.

As a big Tudor fan, I have to agree. The 'Style' and 'Glamour' names for their dress-watch lines leave me cold, too. And the advertising copy for the Heritage watches seems to have been written post-deadline by an intern. It's a shame really.

[DateAperture]

Safe to say, the North Flag has grown significantly on me over the last few days and has become my favourite of this year's Bazel.

[Blackdog]

Originally Posted by Wesley Crusher

The new movement is great (technically speaking), but bland (aesthetically). Movement decorations are not what Rolex/Tudor is known for, but it is a non-issue since they're always covered by a solid caseback. Why Tudor decided to put an exhibition caseback on this watch is beyond me. So much for the whole "tool watch" image. The rest of the watch, well, I think it's rather ugly.

We definitely have similar tastes. I concur with all your points.

But I think the new Pelagos saved Tudor's reputation this year.

Regarding quality and finish of the watches i think they are easily at the same level of Rolex.

It would be a pity if they abandon the Heritage Series idea, though. I think there is room for both Heritage and Modern. The THC and the BlackBay are great homages.

[Blackdog]

Originally Posted by Presa canary

Rolex most certainly does make Tudor...

That's my understanding too.
Where is this idea of Rolex NOT making Tudor coming from ?

I also read in this forum about these new movements NOT being made by Tudor but outsourced somehow, where is that coming from ?
I mean, if it is not manufactured in-house can it still be seriously considered Manufacture ? It's still good news and the specs are impressive, but….

There was a rumour some time ago about Rolex having bought at least part of the Sellita operation, I'm not aware of it being confirmed though.
Could it be that Tudor/Rolex designed the movements and have outsourced the actual manufacturing to them ?

[engin33r]

This whole discussion about who made Tudor... there's no definite answer as Rolex is notoriously very secretive.

But just take a quick look into their products, Rolex uses 904L steel, whereas (CMIIW) Tudor doesn't. What part of the watch does Tudor share with Rolex? not the case, not the bracelet, not the movement. And then there's the legal entity. Rolex SA owns Montres Tudor SA, but that doesn't mean they are the same. They are two separate companies.

Tudor just created a new in-house movement. Here's the interesting part, if Rolex does indeed make the new Tudor movement, then it's not in-house, because it should be called Rolex movement - instead of Tudor. And the movement itself doesn't use any of Rolex innovations, such as parachrom, paraflex. CMIIW Rolex uses parachrom in every single watch they make today. Tudor claims that they now have the capacity to produce their own movement in-house. I believe this is so, in house means using Tudor's own facility - not Rolex's facility. Although they may share the same building.

For me it's a good thing that Tudor stands alone from Rolex. As long as Tudor is considered cheaper version of Rolex, it doesn't interest me at all - because Tudor will never equal or even surpass Rolex's quality that way.

[eightbore]

Originally Posted by Blackdog

That's my understanding too.
I also read in this forum about these new movements NOT being made by Tudor but outsourced somehow, where is that coming from ?

I think people (myself included) are naturally suspicious when a company like Rolex/Tudor develops a new movement out of the blue (no rumors at all?) and then effectively charges NOTHING for it. It seems unlikely that they managed to produce a whole new movement that, on a per unit basis, costs about the same as a 2824. Of course, this could be all about gaining market share in which case companies like Omega might have a non-competitive behavior case against Rolex/Tudor if they are dumping watches below the total cost of production (which I sincerely doubt). I also think people might be wary of the "in house" statements of most watch companies after the TAG/Seiko debacle in recent years. This is all in addition to the credibility issues I think all watch companies face as a result of their traditional "re-naming" of other people's movements and effectively presenting them as their own. Sure the average WIS knows how this works, but most people do not and probably resent it after they are burned a time or two.

[Blackdog]

Originally Posted by eightbore

I think people (myself included) are naturally suspicious when a company like Rolex/Tudor develops a new movement out of the blue (no rumors at all?)

Well, if there's a watch company that can pull that off is Rolex. If it had been developed/built outside of their walls we would have probably heard something…

Originally Posted by eightbore

...and then effectively charges NOTHING for it. It seems unlikely that they managed to produce a whole new movement that, on a per unit basis, costs about the same as a 2824.

The cost of the new movement could well be twice that of the older ETA, and they could still charge the same and have a profit margin, I reckon.

Besides, maybe they are saving money with the rather utilitarian finishing they chose for the movement….

[Presa canary]

Dude... Rolex makes Tudor. That's the definitive answer...

Originally Posted by engin33r

This whole discussion about who made Tudor... there's no definite answer as Rolex is notoriously very secretive.

But just take a quick look into their products, Rolex uses 904L steel, whereas (CMIIW) Tudor doesn't. What part of the watch does Tudor share with Rolex? not the case, not the bracelet, not the movement. And then there's the legal entity. Rolex SA owns Montres Tudor SA, but that doesn't mean they are the same. They are two separate companies.

Tudor just created a new in-house movement. Here's the interesting part, if Rolex does indeed make the new Tudor movement, then it's not in-house, because it should be called Rolex movement - instead of Tudor. And the movement itself doesn't use any of Rolex innovations, such as parachrom, paraflex. CMIIW Rolex uses parachrom in every single watch they make today. Tudor claims that they now have the capacity to produce their own movement in-house. I believe this is so, in house means using Tudor's own facility - not Rolex's facility. Although they may share the same building.

For me it's a good thing that Tudor stands alone from Rolex. As long as Tudor is considered cheaper version of Rolex, it doesn't interest me at all - because Tudor will never equal or even surpass Rolex's quality that way.

[fania123]

Originally Posted by Presa canary

Dude... Rolex makes Tudor. That's the definitive answer...

[Malak]

list price 3010 Euro

[slasherj]

Originally Posted by engin33r

This whole discussion about who made Tudor... there's no definite answer as Rolex is notoriously very secretive.
.....

But just take a quick look into their products, Rolex uses 904L steel, whereas (CMIIW) Tudor doesn't. What part of the watch does Tudor share with Rolex? not the case, not the bracelet, not the movement. And then there's the legal entity. Rolex SA owns Montres Tudor SA, but that doesn't mean they are the same. They are two separate companies.

Tudor claims that they now have the capacity to produce their own movement in-house. I believe this is so, in house means using Tudor's own facility - not Rolex's facility. Although they may share the same building.

Rolex is secretive, ain't that the truth. Being setup to be owned by a private charity organisation was a brilliant move, making corp governance and structure opaque.

Rolex started Tudor in 1946, that much we know. Also from the last Hodinkee report, Tudor and Rolex share the same factory and facility.
Tudor use titanium and 316L which I think is cool. It just tells me Rolex has that technology and facility.

Another way to look at it would be ask the question - if Rolex doesn't make Tudor, who else? unless that manufacturer is also a private entity, their work will be disclosed in the financials. At the very least, case backs, sapphire sold etc. Eg, it's public knowledge Rolex doesn't make its own crystals or hands.

Still, to me it's a bit academic, fun to think about. The new Blue Pelagos... Drool.

[engin33r]

Originally Posted by slasherj

Rolex is secretive, ain't that the truth. Being setup to be owned by a private charity organisation was a brilliant move, making corp governance and structure opaque.

Rolex started Tudor in 1946, that much we know. Also from the last Hodinkee report, Tudor and Rolex share the same factory and facility.
Tudor use titanium and 316L which I think is cool. It just tells me Rolex has that technology and facility.

Another way to look at it would be ask the question - if Rolex doesn't make Tudor, who else? unless that manufacturer is also a private entity, their work will be disclosed in the financials. At the very least, case backs, sapphire sold etc. Eg, it's public knowledge Rolex doesn't make its own crystals or hands.

Still, to me it's a bit academic, fun to think about. The new Blue Pelagos... Drool.

Finally... an intelligent answer

I guess only Rolex and the Switzerland tax authority can answer that. Tudor is officially produced by Montres Tudor SA - however it was founded by Hans Wildorf, and share the same facility as Rolex. So from the financial statements / reports it will be obvious if Montres Tudor SA actually outsourced the manufacturing of their watches to Rolex SA. There will be records of payments (lots of them) to Rolex SA. If those records do not exist then Montres Tudor SA indeed has their own manufacturing capability.

I've mentioned before about why Rolex does not use titanium. The answer: just buy a Tudor if you want titanium rolex...

[TudorSnowflake]

Case and band look like this:

[Old Expat Beast]

And this.

[bdex75]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

And this.

I thought Oysterquartz as soon as I saw this bracelet as well.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mr. K]

don't like the case, you will lose the crisp edge with a polish.

[TudorSnowflake]

Yes, that watch too.

I hate integrated bracelets.