/fa/ - Fashion

>>16007089
This is a really interesting topic that most people probably aren't aware of. Richemont has a movement manufacturer called ValFleurier that provides ebauches to certain brands under the umbrella. Sometimes they do more than just provide ebauches, whether it be assembly or decoration, but for most brands they simply get the concepts from ValFleurier and it is up to the brand to assemble and decorate the movement.

This has led to some consternation among the watch community. A notorious example was when people realized what appeared to be the same movement was sold in both the Baume & Mercier Clifton 8 Days and the IWC Portofino 8 Days, yet both appeared to claim the movements were developed entirely in-house.

The question of whether or not an ebauche provided by ValFleurier disqualifies a movement from the nebulous in-house classification is not very clear. It doesn't really bother me, unless the movement is used by other brands and not easily distinguishable. The problem, at least in Richemont, is that the watchmakers at the top frequently move around from brand to brand to assist with whatever project is ongoing, so it is to be expected that there is some overlap.

This is all common practice in the industry, it's just not something talked about often.