Watch Snob: Do Not Spend $3,500 On This Brand

Xemex

“It’s not just the pedestrian movements, or the contrived name, and not even the design-school-reject aesthetics that I abhor.“

The Watch Snob is in.

The Brand The Snob Abhors

Hi Snob,I am writing to ask about Xemex watches. I have always been interested in watches and spent several years in uni learning to repair pocket watches. I’m interested at a real level but can’t read through the brands in the marketplace. Some Xemex are produced with Valjoux movements; others are not. Can you appraise the brand in general terms?

I am feeling generous today so will give you more than you requested and appraise the brand in very specific terms: pure rubbish.

In school days, I sat next to a boy who was obsessed with Italian supercars. Mind you, this was the 1980s, when these cars were all about scissor doors and origami body panels. This chap would sit and sketch cars of his own devising, far more garish than the real things, all wings and air dams and scoops and giant rims. We lost touch in the years after school, but I bumped into him at a soirée to find that he is now working for Bentley, designing tail lamps. Clearly, his outlandish tastes and designs from the classroom matured to tasteful understatement.

Why do I bring up this story? Because Ruedi Külling, the designer behind Xemex, either never matured past his overblown whims of youth or else his son is providing the design drawings for the “Offroad” and the XE 5000 models, right down to the matching yellow strap. It’s not just the pedestrian movements, or the contrived name, and not even the design-school-reject aesthetics that I abhor. It’s the fact that the company is asking over $3,500 for these eyesores. I advise you to take your money elsewhere. $3,500 will almost buy you something respectable.

Independent Watchmakers

Snob,

Few, if any, of your previous columns have dealt with any of the true independents of watchmaking. Names like F.P. Journe, Kari Voutilainen, and De Bethune are crafting some of the most interesting and beautiful timepieces available. While most of their clients can justify the purchase solely on emotion, some of us are a bit more rational. Could you comment on the lasting impact on the world of horology from independents such as these? Will we still be talking about these timepieces in 50 years, or do you believe their names will be lost on future generations?

At one time, Breguet, Piguet and Lange were independent watchmakers. Admittedly, times are different now, and those men were innovating timepieces out of necessity. But even then, complications were often created at the behest of bored rich guys who wanted to one-up their fellow dukes. Whether Journe, Voutilainen or De Bethune will be remembered in a hundred years is anyone’s guess.

If I had to wager, I think F.P. Journe stands the best chance of creating a lasting legacy. Having learned at the knee of the great George Daniels, his pedigree is impeccable and his watches have consistently been both revolutionary and classic. And though I find the “boutique” trend these days a bit smutty, Journe has a network of sellers that will make sure the brand stays in front of the right people in the right places — Paris, Geneva, Asia, Asia and Asia.

The biggest challenge for Journe will be for the brand that is so closely tied to its founder to carry on the legacy after the man himself shuffles off to the great manufacture in the sky.

I very much enjoy reading your articles, tearing people to shreds about their so-called timepieces, but I will admit I found this exact reason quite intimidating when deciding whether to write in or not. Whether you truly are one person, or it is a team of editors who work under the guise of “you,” I nevertheless would like to hear your thoughts on decisions I am intending to make in the future with regards to building a timepiece collection. Despite being 17 years old, I am very interested in horology. I currently own a Tudor Sport 20010 with a white face and a Breitling Superocean 44 with a black dial and slight red detailing (the other options were yellow, orange or blue). Yes, I know, these are indeed low-end timepieces in the grand scale of watches, but I feel both of these pieces are “adequate” for a person my age. I use the Tudor for school and formal functions, and the Breitling for everything else. I expect you to now crack a few jokes about my age, ignorance and then deduce what type of person I am. Anyway, I am very keen for my next purchase to be either the stainless-steel Rolex Submariner or the Jaeger LeCoultre Master Ultra Thin. I feel the JLC will serve only formal purposes, and the Rolex all except formal purposes, though if I had one I would wear it anyway. My concern is whether I am too young to be wearing either watch, and if i would look foolish or if it looked like my parents had bought me this watch and it was not me saving for it. I feel the Tudor I have reflects aspiration to something better, which accurately describes what I am looking to present myself as. I think I am moving too quickly in upgrading timepieces, but I feel so strongly for them. Your thoughts, sir.

Like most people your age, you suffer from verbal diarrhea and your writing reflects this. My time is valuable, so please don’t waste it with superfluous words. In fact, I am still looking for a question mark in the mess above. I don’t care about the colour options of a Breitling Superocean or your insecurities about Daddy buying you a watch.

You want my thoughts? Get rid of both the Tudor and the Breitling, and get the Jaeger-LeCoultre. With any luck, wearing a more grown-up timepiece will rub off on you and you can enter adulthood acting more like one.