Will the Cubitus be the final straw that will put Patek Philippe customers off for good?
Zach BlassThe saying goes that schools like Harvard are only as prestigious as the number of applicants they reject. But what happens when you no longer have people to reject? Like an Ivy League school, luxury watch brands, despite apparent advancements, aim to be exclusive rather than inclusive. The more exclusive your clientele is and the more elusive your product is at retail, the greater your secondary market prices, the amount of buzz that surrounds your brand, and in turn, increased desirability and aspirational interest. At least in theory.
Brands like Rolex, Audemars Piguet, and Patek Philippe have by no means made much of an effort to placate frustrated consumers who have been unable to find a way to access the particular references they desire at retail. But they largely got away with it, or at least got by, by keeping things moving and not commenting on the unobtanium nature of their watches. Instead, they let the market do its thing, and not make major efforts to acknowledge the frustrations of watch buyers worldwide. Patek Philippe, however, has made a series of moves as of late that not only reinforce the status quo, but also stand to inflame the watch community more than the brand ever has. This begs the question: will the Cubitus and its launch strategy be the straw that breaks the camel’s back?
On a professional level, I’m obligated to be interested in what Patek Philippe unveils at Watches and Wonders each year. But as a mere mortal, I’ve hit a breaking point at which I’m no longer genuinely excited to discover more of the same-old that I, and many others, either cannot afford and couldn’t score the allocation for anyway. While I’m no millionaire, I do own watches that command price tags similar to Patek’s entry level. Had these Patek Philippes been more readily available as I built my collection, I very well could’ve had a Nautilus 5711 or Aquanaut 5167 in my collection. That would’ve been the dream at the time, though I’m now thankful that it didn’t happen. My interests and budget went to far more interesting watches that I otherwise may not have paid attention to.
I suspect I’m not alone in this, where beyond the 1% of the 1%, there’s a sense of ambivalence towards Patek Philippe. And as I alluded to earlier, four recent elements of Patek’s behaviour have pushed the needle from ambivalence to borderline disgust.
Is this it? The lazy design
Watches take time to develop, of course, but the longer a brand takes to introduce a new collection, the higher the expectation will be – especially for a Holy Trinity brand like Patek Philippe. And we have previously seen how a launch can control the narrative around a brand, despite the fact it is just one model amongst many. Audemars Piguet’s Code 11:59 has become the go-to case study for a watch launch gone awry – a marketing campaign that raised hype and anticipation only to lead to a noticeable sentiment of disappointment. Fortunately, Audemars Piguet has pushed past the puberty stage and the Code 11:59 has since grown into a more appreciated range of watches.
While the Cubitus did not have any official teasers, it did suffer from an unfortunate leak – a print magazine running an advertisement ahead of the official reveal. When collectors were made aware of these images, the immediate reaction was largely “this can’t be it… it better not be”. Alas, it was.
My initial reaction to the official reveal was primarily confusion. After a concerted effort to no longer be “the Nautilus brand”, with Thierry Stern discontinuing the most sought-after watch in the world, Patek’s first collection in 25 years is, in Stern’s own words “a sibling of the Nautilus”. Rumours revealed that whatever was to come would be a new “entry-level” model, but the Cubitus did not feel “new”. The common sentiment has been that it’s worse, with media outlets at the launch walking negative reactions back, claiming “it actually sits very nice on the wrist and it is admirable how slender the profile of the watch is”. In the eyes of an ever-cynical watch community, this was just appeasing their host – a kissing of the ring.
If you covered the case and only looked at the bracelet or strap, it would look identical to the Nautilus. The time and date-only models have since been defended more by the watch community, albeit too large at 45mm in diameter. The complicated model, however, has largely remained panned for its awkward placement of the calendar, moonphase, and runnings seconds counters. Even if the movement is somewhat commendable.
Baller or bitchy? The antagonising quote
View this post on Instagram
In the wake of the leak, official reveal, and established majority of negative sentiment towards the Cubitus, Thierry Stern proved that honesty is perhaps not always the best policy through his candid comments during an interview with the Zürich-based business magazine Bilanz.
The most discussed comment Stern gave in the interview was undoubtedly: “The haters are mostly people who have never had a Patek and never will.” Naturally, this enraged the large frustrated-with-Patek segment of the watch community.
Bark & Jack founder Adrian Barker commented: “Imagine running a company and not wanting to appeal to new customers. No wonder Patek they are [sic] in the position they are. What a pleb.”
Mike Margolis, watch industry executive and founder of Horology Works, wrote: “Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall. Proverbs 16:18.”
Xi Wang, watch artist and enthusiast, noted: “‘People who have never owned a Patek and never will – is he saying poor people have bad taste? Cashed up or not, people are entitled to not like your new watch.”
Others pointed out, and in a few instances praised, the savage nature of Stern’s words – arguing that while the words sting, it’s the harsh truth.
Patek Philippe’s unwavering north star when it comes to its philosophy around novelty creation and allocation has undoubtedly preserved the status of the brand. This has always been, and likely always will be a top priority for Stern, who has always expressed his mission to protect the brand’s collectors and their investment in its products. That being said, it would seem with each new launch, it’s the same familiar faces that are the first to wear new pieces like the Cubitus.
Collectors or celebrities? The unstoppable promotion machine
View this post on Instagram
Almost immediately after the announcement, eagle-eyed watch spotters clocked actor Mark Wahlberg, who seemingly gets every unobtanium watch first, sporting a Cubitus in a reel on Instagram. Plenty of celebrities and athletes followed suit, with various references of the Cubitus landing on the wrists of Orlando Bloom, Zlatan Ibrahimović, Michael Jordan, and most recently, Mark Zuckerberg.
Surely, these big-name individuals are not the only people to have been allocated a Cubitus, and I cannot with significant certainty claim whether or not these members of the rich and famous actually appreciate the watch, or have merely added another hype watch notch to their collecting belt. The sentiment as these watch-spotting images dominate watch enthusiasts’ feeds is that the Cubitus is not being offered to genuine watch collectors, but rather famous watch amassers.
Again, such speculation is not entirely fair, and this contentious issue also cannot solely be laid at the feet of Thierry Stern. It’s likely that the authorised dealers are more culpable in the quick shifting of Cubitus models to their mot VIP clientele. But it’s hard to imagine Thierry and the top execs at Patek don’t have a list of famous faces they green light to get the watch as a priority.
So, with lazy design, a statement from Stern effectively putting down 99% of people that cannot engage with Patek Philippe, and a continual flaunting by the famous means the snowball of frustration and negative sentiment has never been larger. A recent advertisement campaign has only made it worse.
Hand-made or AI made? The now infamously horrendous advertisement
View this post on Instagram
Patek Philippe is well-known for the tagline “you never truly own a Patek Philippe, you merely take care of it for the next generation.” These words have not only been ingrained in those indoctrinated in the niche bubble of #watchfam, the line has also been a part of case studies in some of the most venerated business schools around the world. So at least historically, Patek is associated with having a strong affinity for marketing and advertising. Consistent with its uninspired design, the advertisement campaign promoting the Cubitus has been blasted for being peak laziness. While the watches are coveted for being hand-made and crafted, this most recent advertisement feels like it’s been spat out of a Chat GPT prompt. Nothing about it feels romantic, and it does a poor job of striking the chord previous Patek campaigns have.
Boiling it down, the advertisement has no humanity. The voiceover feels computer generated, and had the Patek tagline not appeared in the video, you could rightfully think the generic stock footage was a discarded video for a hotel rooftop bar. Aside from the lack of humanity, it also felt out of touch. Perhaps in an attempt to seem more youthful, the video did not overtly incorporate the old-money vibe most maisons lean on.
Final thoughts
The best closing analogy I can make here is Salt Bae – bear with me. Nusret Gökçe, nicknamed Salt Bae for his signature salt-sprinkling pose, created hype around his luxury steakhouse chain Nusr-Et. It initially appeared that if you wanted the best of the best in terms of steak, Nusr-Et was the place to visit. But the seasoning did not last. With such hype surrounding his cuisine, those clout-chasing a reservation and personal tableside performance from Nurset were left realising it was more show than substance. Nusret appears to still be benefiting from the showmanship and social media opportunities his venues offer visitors – the status afforded to the tasteless.
Now, the effect may not be immediate, but Patek Philippe arguably finds itself at such a crossroads of show versus substance. Are the clients it engages with arriving at the brand due to the substance of its watchmaking, or the show of flexing the name on their wrist? Is Patek Philippe actually pushing the envelope anymore when it comes to watchmaking, or is it resting on its laurels? Has the inaccessibility of its products, and the demeaning of the denied reached a peak where demand beyond the VIP circle of clients will cease to exist? Will the brand become former New York City staples Studio 54 or The Friar’s Club, once the places to be, and now the places that no longer exist?
Presently, a manufacturer of Patek’s scale can comfortably live off its existing Rolodex of VIPs, but as independents like Journe continue to rise in status, over time, Patek Philippe could become Berghain without a line of queuing ravers hoping to get entry and the seal of approval from its black-leather-clad bouncers.