The ‘Horology Forum’ in Hong Kong Cast a Spotlight on Asian Watchmaking
As high-end watch collectors, brand heads, and journalists gathered to talk about watches for three days in Hong Kong, conversations naturally veered toward Asian watchmaking and collecting. This emphasis was not the stated goal of the conference but seemed to be an inevitability given the location and the concentration of Asia-based attendees.
The latter included, among others, Ming Thein of Ming Watches, Wei Koh of Revolution and the Rake magazines, Mark Cho of the Armoury, Ali Nael of Future Grail, Austin Chu of Wristcheck, Carson Chan of WatchProfessorAcademy.com, Jiaxian Su of SJX Watches, Jill Chen of Christie’s Hong Kong, and Jonathan Chan of The Horology Club. Several prominent Hong Kong-based collectors, including Lung Lung Thun, drifted in and out of the conference, some taking breaks from their workday to catch a panel at Christie’s space in the avant-garde Henderson building.
More from Robb Report
The European and American presence at the conference was smaller, but impactful nonetheless. Independent watchmaker Fiona Kruger, Bertrand Meylan of Moser, and Benoit Mintiens of Ressence flew in from Europe, along with a number of American and British watch journalists who attended and hosted panels.
The conversations on stage and around the coffee tables continually swung to the differences between European, American and Asian collecting habits, a topic that seemed to fascinate those gathered. Perhaps the most interesting commentary on this topic came from an on-stage back-and-forth between New York-based watch dealer Zoe Abelson and well-known collector Mark Cho, who splits his time between America and Asia. Both noted that that Americans are fast and furious collectors, buying and flipping watches regularly online, while buyers in Hong Kong specifically (and China more generally) want to see the watch in person and tend to buy and sell with patience and clear intentions.
The number of semi-public horological lounges in Hong Kong alone suggests this insight is accurate. The 1916 Company’s swanky bar-showroom was filled with rare watches from F. P. Journe and De Bethune, while Philipps Perpetual, an auction preview space in The Armoury’s Pedder Arcade, casually showed tens of millions worth of watches next to a bar, a casual seating area, and a cigar lounge. In each spot, you could enjoy a cocktail, coffee, and light fare while handling some of the world’s most desirable watches. The foot traffic was impressive—and well heeled.
The conversation at the Horology Forum also turned to Asian watchmaking at both the industrial scale and at the level of handcraft. It was readily apparent that attitudes are shifting around this potentially divisive topic, with Asian makers of all kinds gaining the respect of serious collectors and enthusiasts alike.
Speaking from my own perspective as an American collector, something like Eurocentrism has long predominated American attitudes toward high-end watchmaking. The French and English have long been known to Americans as the greatest watchmakers, famously supplying our Founding Fathers with exceptional timepieces (Jefferson knew and admired Louis Moinet, for example). Meanwhile, American watchmaking wasn’t impressive until industrialized, and, as such, never achieved the status of high horology. For various reasons, the Swiss emerged as the world’s watchmaking center after World War II, and the resurrection of A. Lange & Sohne in 1994 gave the Germans renewed cache as high-end watchmakers. Asian watchmaking—though long an enormous industrial force—was (and still is) thought to be of low quality.
Over the past 35 years, however, high-end watchmaking has globalized at an increasing pace, yet Americans are still slow to concede Asia’s watchmaking prowess. The one concession that came up most readily during the Horology Forum was, predictably, Grand Seiko. Over the past five years or so, the revived brand has convinced many American collectors to accept Japanese watchmaking as an art. Japan industrialized much earlier and more quickly than China after World War II—thus developing expertise and name recognition—such that Americans have accepted Japanese goods, from hi-fi to cars to tailoring, as elevated products.
Attitudes toward products made in China, however, remain dismissive. That negative attitude seemed to come up again and again at the Hong Kong Horology Forum, as did signs that the attitude was slowly growing more positive.
A few high-end Asian watchmakers like China’s Qin Gan were mentioned during the panel discussions, but it was the comments from Robin Tallendier of watch brand Atelier Wen that set the conversation about Chinese watchmaking into brighter light. Atelier Wen was given its hybrid brand name to underline the connection between France and China that undergirds its watch production. Trying on a one-off watch from the brand with case and bracelet crafted entirely from ruthenium (a member of the platinum family used by high-end watchmakers) left little doubt about the quality on offer.
When asked about attitudes toward Chinese watchmaking more broadly, Tallendier noted that there is simply no logical reason that the geographical location of a watchmaker or a watchmaking facility should impact the quality of the work being done. “People are people,” he said, shrugging his shoulders to emphasize the obviousness of his answer.
To hear the heads of watch brands openly discussing Chinese manufacturing was refreshing, and it felt like a small but important shift toward new narratives brands will likely tell their customers in the near future. Whether the Horology Forum can significantly impact the broader conversation about international collaboration in watchmaking remains to be seen, but there is no question that those of us who were there walked away with our eyes more open on the topic.
Best of Robb Report
Sign up for RobbReports's Newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
Solve the daily Crossword
