precisely, many dont want to pay dealer price as mentioned earlier. they want to maximize. hence this occurs. you know what to look for because you do homework but others rather leave it to 'expert'.
to me, there is no right or wrong in wanting to authenticate. it is the comfort zone. but we have to be understand that there are different mentality and comfort zone.
there are other ways to get a watch authenticate. this i am not willing to share openly because if it gets abused, then it wont benefit anyone.
Wah towkay, you have other ways & you never teach me leh. When are you free for kopi har?
Sorry lah, I'm not a well travelled person. My global mileage is very low
Dino
Aiyoh, dun like that say lah.
Chinese got a saying: 一种米养白种人
Guess I was suay enough to meet the 'kia su' type nearly everywhere I go. Maybe in each country got another word for 'kia su'.......
Back to the thread's topic:
The move by Richemont seems like a poor management decision to me. The 'hotness' of PAMs is mainly due to its variety of limited run production models which will eventually evolve into a grey market demand. It seems that the main marketing strategy for PAM is to constantly refresh the market demand with new models but with limited quantity. Think a recent thread for the 360's price supports this statement.
By creasing the authentication service, it will be a move against the brand's strategy resulting in counterproductive results. We are now speculating on the reason for Richemont's current move (poor sales, loss of revenue, replica quality, outflow of service parts, etc). Unless the the root cause is known, we can only just guess if the countermeasure is effective.
Be it the consumer is a collector, trader, etc, there is no perfect system as it is human nature to want to find loopholes. Richemont should move with the flow & optimize the current strength of the brand's demand to move forward.
In the meantime, it is us (the consumer) who is on the losing end as only a handful is experience and knowledgeable enough to tell the real deal from the fakes.
Now that I notice the error...its super funny. Ironical that it is the 白种人 that don't eat so much rice.
ha ha, bro KubingKu, you're so sharp and humorous
My humble beginning:
Ball - Conductor (SE), Rolex - Green Sub LV (Alpha-numeric series), Omega - PO XL & Pam - 351 (M-series)
Dream watch:
It is a tough choice between IWC IW500114 and IW500109.
[url]http://www.iwcportugieser.com/en/[/url]
[url]http://www.iwc.com/en-us/collection/portuguese/IW5001/[/url]
Just to add.. Richemont does not verify anymore for all the brands under its stable.. not just pams. I accompanied a friend to verify a IWC, no go. So cartier, lange and all the richemont brands, you can't verify anymore. So its not just aimed at pams..
Come to think of it, I have never found a need to verify a pam... but I do verify rolexes.. somehow
I have been to a few boutique in other parts of the world (Pam and Rolex and others). There is no such thing as paying for authentication of watch. I walked into a boutique overseas (say Pam) wearing a Pam. I show it to the guy there saying that I recently picked this up and ask him if it needs servicing? He would le tthe technician check and tell me the answer. No payment needed. Why in Singapore RSC and Richemont charges for this is still a puzzle to me?
But I guess it could be our own doing....many people bring many pieces to them to do this so it takes up their time to do real servicing. That could be the reason RSC and RM start charging for this. Not sure why this is not happening in US or Europe or even HK. On my visits to these places, never see people go into RSC, ask to authenticate and strike a deal there. Maybe its because those people buy the seller or do their homework more so there is less reliant on RSC to do the checks for them. And since such request are low in those places, there is no need for them to charge...its just regular service for the occasional request to check a watch and they are happy to do it FOC.
Now, RM cancel this service is just going back to its original policy which is they should not charge customer for just looking at the watch. However, they have not reinstead the service of checking the watch FOC. I suppose if this is not abused, then RM/RSC may do it happily FOC like in other countries.
Well said, totally agree.
Think paying for authentication is not in line with the parent company policy, instead of we look at this topic as negative maybe is wat Kuchinku is saying.... Richmont is scrapping the charges to authenticate and might provide free quotation of charges for servicing a watch.
When i went Patek for servicing, they open up the watch, check movements, timing check and then give me a approximate charges. If i decide not to go ahead they will just close back my watch and return to me with a smile, no charges incurred. Watch was authenticate and i do not need to pay a single cent
So let us all view this move by Richmont positively
Comment