JLC Master Chrono
Discussion
poocherama said:
Apparently the Richemont system doesn't allow for notes to be added about diagnosis / repair work. Apparently when a watch fails (in my case completely) it's not always apparent what the cause is. It's taken apart, serviced, if a component is broken replaced, put back together and tested. This apparently was the situation with my watch, no history of the failure was noted.
Yeeaahh, right.As a design engineer who has spent the last 16 years designing kit for IBM (I left last year) and 5 years before that working as a production quality engineer there are two potential conclusions to draw from that statement.
1/ They are cowboys who really don't know how to make a quality product.
or
2/ They are fibbing.
If you are trying to design and manufacture high quality product, then EVERY failure in manufacturing and under warranty gets recorded with as much detail as you can muster. The cost of gathering, storing and maintaining this data is peanuts. But I'll admit it does take discipline to set the system up and adhere to it.
Why would you do this? Well if there is a design or manufacturing defect, sometimes the only way you can diagnose it is to trawl through the warranty data. On defect X, how many watches have we sold? How many have been returned for the defect? What is the time to failure? Plot spread of time to failure, work out probability of failure. etc. etc.
Cowboys or liars?
It's a shame, I really like their watches. This sort of thing definitely puts me off.
mikeveal said:
Cowboys or liars?
It's a shame, I really like their watches. This sort of thing definitely puts me off.
Me too, there seem to be too many similar experiences both on this forum and also based on the experience of friends (Master Calendar and a Reverso). JLC are off the list for me now, regardless of whether they are 'the watchmaker's watchmaker.'It's a shame, I really like their watches. This sort of thing definitely puts me off.
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff