Let me preface this by saying that my goal is not to insult or accuse anyone of wrong-doing. Realize that we all have an 'itch' that is satisfied by our interest in watches. And our reasons for being drawn to watches are as diverse as we are. Some of us may be drawn to the beauty of the design but cannot afford the genuine price. Others may be drawn to the technical merits of these watches, and are satisfied by the precision and modifications. And yet, some may just want to get a great deal, having real at a fraction of the price. Of course this is not an exhaustive list, and I am not making a caricature of anyone here. My point is that we are drawn to this culture for various reasons and we shouldn't expect everyone to adopt our reasons or impose ours on others.
With that said, I will be building a 3717 Spitfire, and have considered Genstein vs. Frank. As I look at other threads, I see a trend and I think it would do us good to talk about this and consider the ramifications.
I see a trend to produce IWC Gensteins for sale to consumers, and there seems to be a growing market for this.
My concern is that when the Richemont Group’s analysts begin to see a sharp increase in replacement parts going out the door, will they begin adopt a policy like Breitling, requiring parts to be returned first?
Will this 'loophole' be closed if we abuse it?
Will the increase in replacement part sales draw unwanted attention to our craft?
Maybe others would be more sophisticated than I, but how will it look when you see orders for:
(5) 3717 cases
(5) 3717 backs
(5) 3717 faces
(5) 3717 hand sets
(5) 79320 movements
(3) 3717 bracelets
(2) 3717 croc straps
(2) deployment clasps . . .
Will IWC, in their pursuit of profits, identify their unassembled watches going out the back door, and severely limit the availability of quality parts?
Or am I being a hypocritical alarmist?