Rolex calls it quits on the Carl F. Bucherer brand, but I have a proposal for the Crown…

Zach Blass

As reported by Swiss news outlet Bilanz earlier today, Rolex has apparently called it quits on Carl F. Bucherer (the watchmaking brand, not the Bucherer retailer arm), though neither Rolex nor Bucherer have confirmed such a decision. This rumoured pulling of the plug comes 18 months after Rolex acquired Bucherer in August 2023, and could affect approximately 100 employees tied to CFB watchmaking. With Carl F. Bucherer reportedly long unprofitable, it makes sense Rolex would put an end to what Bilanz described as “Jörg Bucherer’s expensive hobby.” But, I personally see a solution that would benefit both Rolex and perhaps the legacy of CFB.

Taking a step back, Carl F. Bucherer was founded in 1888 by Carl Freidrich Bucherer and has, for the most part, continuously produced watches since its inception to the present – over 135 years of watchmaking heritage is certainly nothing to scoff at. That being said, the brand has never built an aura or reputation in which the mass or mainstream market has assigned any meaningful value to the brand. At least not outside of Switzerland.

However, I was surprised to see Bilanz report that “in good years Carl F. Bucherer generated sales of between 80 and 100 million francs” and that “There have even been years, as you can hear, in which the brand was the second strongest brand behind Rolex within the Bucherer stores.” That being said, Bilanz claims that, even in the good years of its modern era, the brand never became profitable and that elements like it being the second bestseller behind Rolex in Bucherer locations could stem from the fact that “Bucherer is said to have often sold the brand in the past in a package with the hotly sought-after models from Rolex.” Who knew the path to a Daytona was to purchase a CFB?

Looking at Carl F. Bucherer’s recent watchmaking endeavours, I would argue it is not poor design or spec to blame for the faltering of the brand’s success. I can understand Jörg Bucherer’s desire to keep his family’s namesake brand alive, and it staying alive because his being in charge was the only deterrent. But, unfortunately, the name has to ultimately mean something to the market – not just its maker. It could be a dynamic, akin to how singer Robbie Williams is massive in the United Kingdom, yet largely unknown in the United States, that Carl F. Bucherer does not really have enough clout as a watchmaker beyond Switzerland. It’s not due to a lack of trying. Carl F. Bucherer did try to have its James Bond moment, partnering with Keanu Reeves and the John Wick film franchise.

Rolex, however, is one of the biggest brand names in the world – both in and beyond the world of watchmaking. And here is where my proposal for Rolex begins…

As I mentioned above, the shame in the possible shutdown of the Carl F. Bucherer brand is that it has made strides to up its game and place in the watch market. In 2007, CFB acquired Techniques Horlogères Appliquées (THA), the complications maker and movement manufacture founded by renowned watchmakers Vianny Halter, François-Paul Journe, and Denis Flageollet. Shortly after, in 2008, CFB unveiled its first in-house movement: the 55-hour A1000 peripheral rotor automatic, notably the first-ever serially-produced peripheral rotor movement. In 2016 the next generation made its debut with the CFB A2000 and CFBT3000 double peripheral rotor tourbillon movement. Then, in 2019, its Heritage collection was born, a move that tapped into the brand’s archives and had Carl F. Bucherer wading into the ever-popular heritage revival trend.

When you look at the recent Carl F. Bucherer Heritage Worldtimer, in my opinion, it is a handsome watch and the design caught the eye of Hodinkee enough that it decided to create a Hodinkee x Carl F. Bucherer Heritage Worldtimer Limited Edition (later followed by a piece unique configuration of the limited edition for TimeForArt). As my colleague Borna wrote in his introduction: “It backs itself with a well-designed case, handsome dial, and a unique movement that’s finished to a satisfying standard.”

So, we’ve established that the design and movement ethos is actually solid from CFB. It’s just largely the lack of brand power the Carl F. Bucherer name has. Therefore, my proposal is that the strides CFB has made should not just be thrown in the rubbish bin, and, instead, Rolex should seek to refine and integrate CFB’s work into its own models. We have said it a million times: Rolex’s new 1908 collection is a ripe canvas for further complication. I am not diminishing or undervaluing Rolex’s watchmaking capabilities, but if in the acquisition of Bucherer it has also acquired THA, then there is so much potential Rolex is leaving on the table in terms of bringing complication to a design like the 1908. On the other hand, anyone telling Rolex, the most successful and beloved watch brand in the world, what to do is beyond nuts. They have long cracked the code and algorithm of how to be a successful watchmaker. Therefore, I understand why such risk may not be attractive to Rolex. But… C’mon… Watch geek to watch geek… You’re picking up what I am putting down, no?