Chopard

What are the three conglomerates in "Masthead".
Jul 07 2008,00:51 AM

Hi, newbie here!! I was just reading the so-called "Masthead" and it said that "three conglomerates" are dominant and strong-arming the watch industry. I'm wondering what the three are?? Two of them would be swatch and richemont, I'm sure, but what is the third? Movado? Bulgari? I'm against these mega partnerships by the way. That's why I'm thinking that Chopard appeals to me.

Respond to this post | 

Welcome Clayton to PuristSPro...
Jul 07 2008,10:54 AM

The other company should be Audemars  Piguet.

Any reason you do not favour the conglomerates?

Please feel free to discuss.

Thanks.

Kong

Respond to this post | 

Thanks for reply.
Jul 07 2008,13:02 PM

Just a casual observation. Mega conglomerations tend to dilute the identity, character and the geographical synergy between individual brands and the locale that has nurtured them. After a conglomeration goes on a buying spree and takes over multiple brands, including them all in a convenient portfolio, everything ends up being about marketing and cost analysis. Brand identity becomes orchestrated in a very artificial manner--I won't name names but one conglomeration seems to stand out particularly in my view. Does anyone like beer here?--because in the same vein, that's why so many people are against the Belgian/Brazilian InBev taking over Anheuser-Busch here in the States.

thanks for the reply and friendly welcome by the way--I didn't know that Audemars was actually a conglomerate. I need to learn more, obviously!

Respond to this post | 

Anheuser-Busch is being taken over because the dollar is cheap, Clayton, . . .
Jul 10 2008,08:25 AM

. . . which is entirely a consequence of governmental policies. A-B isn't known for crafting exceptional beer . . . their stock in trade is producing drinkable brew at a reasonable price, and little would change if InBev acquired them other than diversion of future capital to an offshore multinational corporation. Who knows, maybe if Budweiser is labeled as an import, then Pabst Blue Ribbon will enjoy a revival amongst fans of domestic beer ;-) . . . cordially, Art

Respond to this post | 

Whoa! This is like a seminar in macro-economics!!
Jul 10 2008,18:38 PM

But the thing is, I DO think that a lot will change if capital goes into a multinational company that couldn't care less about the heritage of specific institutions in a local context. If St. Louis loses A-B, that would be a huge setback for many workers (both white collar and blue collar), and will possibly have a negative effect as well on the status and morale of the city in the political world. I wouldn't be surprised if the recipes of their signature beers are forcibly changed, too, from purely economic reasons, like the price of grains or whatever... And by THAT point, it would be too late to whine...

That's why I'm gonna support the little guy whenever possible, and that includes celebrating watch companies that value heritage, quality and above all, independence!!

Thanks for the reply above, though! I appreciated it!

Respond to this post | 

Hey Art, you are the ONE to answer the beer question. Thanks a lot! [nt]
Jul 10 2008,19:26 PM

No message body

Respond to this post | 

The 3 watches conglomerates
Jul 11 2008,12:26 PM

mentioned in the original masthead were:

1. Swatch Group
2. Richemont Group
3. LVHM Group

Since then, more luxury groups have formed with watches as major components:

• Watchland Group (Franck Muller, Pierre Kunz, ECW)
• MGI Luxury Group (Movado, Ebel, Concord, ESQ, Coach, Tommy Hilfiger)
• Bvlgari Group (Bvlgari, Daniel Roth, Gerald Genta)
• Gucci Group (Gucci, YvesStLaurent, Boucheron, Bedat & Co)

Regards,

MTF

Respond to this post | 

MTF, thanks for correcting and elaborate further. [nt]
Jul 11 2008,13:55 PM

No message body

Respond to this post |