TAG Heuer Shoots Itself In the Foot on TAG Heuer Caliber 1887 Launch

BROWSE: Dive Watches | Hublot | Panerai | Special Report: Howard Hughes Patek

TAG Heuer Shoots Itself In the Foot on TAG Heuer Caliber 1887 Launch
by Kyle Stults on December 08, 2009

TAG’s Credibility Under Heavy Fire from Watch Enthusiasts – CEO Takes to the Web to Defend – Really? Doth TAG Heuer Protest Too Much?

You know there’s a problem when the CEO of a global watch brand is forced to defend his company’s actions by posting on watch forums and commenting on watch blogs. Such is the situation now unfolding at TAG Heuer, where CEO J.C. Babin’s remarks can be seen on watch blogs such as Calibre 11 and watch forums such as Watchuseek – as he defends what now appears to be overly aggressive marketing by TAG Heuer for the launch of its new, ahem, “designed 100% in-house” Caliber 1887. (side note: there was probably some action/discussion over at another watch forum initials “T.Z.” as well, but as I’m sure all dissent has been thoroughly squelched by the Dictators who masquerade as “Moderators” over there I won’t give them the dignity of a mention; of course this also a topic of discussion for another time).

So here’s the quick run-down: on December 2, TAG Heuer in great fanfare announced the launch of a new Caliber, the Caliber 1887. I admit – I was excited. The press release unequivocally states “The Calibre 1887 is the fifth movement designed 100% in-house by TAG Heuer, joining…” (my emphasis added). And therein lies the predicament that TAG Heuer has gotten itself in to. A quick bit of reading of the TAG Heuer blogs and watch forums indicate that the problem is this – TAG Heuer did NOT 100% design this movement in house. People called TAG out on it, and now TAG is on the defensive. But in fact the CEO has proven his critics correct, in my view – as confirmed in his own words – here are a couple excerpts of JC Babin’s comments on the aforementioned Calibre 11 (again, my empahsis added):

“Hi, I’m J.C. Babin the CEO of TAG Heuer, and YES, the new Caliber 1887 is based on a SII (Seiko Instruments Inc.)TC78 platform developped and patented in 1997 (filing) and eversince produced in very limited quantities, apparently for Junghans and Seiko watches in Japan.

STOP – there you have it, he admits the is based on a Seiko Instruments Inc. TC78 platform. Which apparently not only was patented by went into production.

“….The caliber we propose and announced last week in London is a major evolution of this platform even though I aknowledge that the overall construction may look similar at first glance. However, the TAG Heuer is much different in terms of components, size and eventually performances….”

STOP – again we see – the Caliber 1887 is an evolution (major or minor, it matters not) of a pre-existing platform. Babin goes on to state that “I would therefore qualify that movement as really in-house and manufactured by TAG Heuer even though, yes, the original IP has been acquired from SII.” Sure, I suppose it does “qualify” as in-house but the obvious reality is that is was not 100% designed in house. Period end of story.

Was Credit Given Where Credit Was Due?

In a “Q&A with Jean-Christophe Babin” document that TAG Heuer also released, question # 4 reads as follows:

4- What is the origin of the movement? When did the project start?
Back in January 2006, we started looking at every mechanical chronograph on the market, and none made the grade in terms of our criteria — high-volume production, unbeatable reliability, easy maintenance and reasonable manufacturing cost. So we set out to make our own, and three years later came up with a beauty.

The turnaround time for a new movement — from first draft to final product — is between 3 and 5 years. The Calibre 1887 is at the front end of the timeframe. But we didn’t rush anything, we took our time, we didn’t make any compromises. When it was completely ready, we launched. As always, the number one priority was to produce the best possible product.

Yup – that’s right – this beauty was all TAG all day long. Great job – conceived of it, drafted it, and brought it to market in remarkable time. Aye.

So, you might ask…..

Why are you are making a big deal out of nothing? The fact that JC Babin has 7 posts in the last 24 hours on the Watchuseek thread should tell us all something about how TAG Heuer views this situation. Although I give him credit for confronting the situation head-on, it’s got to be somewhat embarrasing for the CEO of TAG Heuer to have to go onto Watchuseek and register his own new account and defend his Company’s actions. Not only that but he made 7 posts today alone on WUS. As a small aside, I also happen to find a small bit of irony in this situation, which is that not only is TAG Heuer’s Press/Media department’s unwilling to reply to any of my requests for comment on things little ‘ole things like this (Has TAG Heuer Lost its Mind?) and this (TAG Heuer Meridiist is Dead On Arrival), but they also seem to leave the big issues to others as well. In this case the CEO himself. What do you people do?

The Caliber 1887 is a fantastic accomplishment – What’s the big deal? Indeed. The mistake here is not one of technical ambitions, nor technical prowess, nor technical innovation – these people all did their job, and they did it well. It is a mistake of marketing and being true to your brand and your customers. This is a Public Relations problem, pure and simple.

Who’s at fault? Hard to say, really, and who really cares. Although we see that JC Babin is stepping up as captain of his ship to take the heat, you can take it to the bank that things are not pretty behind closed doors at TAG Heuer. Allow me to ask one innocent question – how did the TAG Heuer press and or marketing department think they could get away with putting out such a bold statement in a press release? I gotta say that it is ambitious and aggressive to make such a bold statement and think you can get away with it. Whether ignorance or hubris – is there a better case to plead?

What’s the bottom line? If I had to guess, some heads may roll back at TAG Heuer, but the brand will most surely come out of this just fine because they have the marketing dollars to overcome it and it is most likely that a the large majority of TAG’s consumers will never catch wind nor even care about the origins of the design of the Caliber 1887 (they may even ask “What’s a Caliber?”). Hey, don’t get me wrong – I was pretty excited to see the Caliber 1887 coming from TAG, as I am a TAG Heuer fan and owner myself. But there’s no need to spin it into something that it isn’t – and that’s what all this big brouhaha is all about, sadly.

Oh, and one last thing – watch brands are wise to take note the power of the Internet and “social media” in bringing this story about – it’s time for many of you to re-think how you communicate and position yourselves vis-a-vis the Internet – time to learn to live in this brave new world.

CAL1887_Mvt

No related posts.

http://www.monochrome.nl Frank

Excellent journalism Kyle!! One of the best articles (blog seems an understatement) i’ve read this year.
Keep up the great work.

Cheers,
Frank

Kyle S.

Hey thanks Frank! Appreciate the kind words.

Independent voices need to be heard on this matter!

Glenn

Yes, very good work Kyle and good on you for calling out the “moderators” at T.Z.

Cheers

Kyle S.

Thanks Glenn.

http://www.horloge.com Gerard Nijenbrinks

A bit edgy but interesting article Kyle.

Next stop investigating the whereabouts of Patek’s new chronograph movement?

Regards,

Gerard

Kyle S.

Thanks Gerard. I think what is “edgy” is that Tag thought they could somehow get away with taking all the credit for the 1887 when this now appears not to be the situation.

I’ll let you know if I get anything on the new PP chronograph movement

Alexanderr

Superb, relevant and important – journalism Kyle. To me your blog is a great read.
http://amateureconblog.blogspot.com/ Speedmaster

Great work! In the last few years we’ve seen similar controversies w/ both Hublot and IWC.

When I saw this Tag announcement the other day I was slightly skeptical, but I was in a hurry, so no immediate concerns from others, so I took it at face value. Apparently a mistake.
http://amateureconblog.blogspot.com/ Speedmaster

Oh, and they also have the Tiger fiasco on their hands. Been a rough week.
Pingback: uberVU - social comments
http://velociphilewatch.blogspot.com Velociphile

Hi K. My first visit. Utter respect! Congratulations on this one. Reminds me of the three battles a couple of years ago on my blog over “in-house”.

I always enjoy a bit of schadenfreude. Good luck with this. I hope you do not receive some of the threatening behaviour I did. (NOT from JLC I hasten to point out).

Great blog.

V
Craig M

Great article! Very interesting to see the TH CEO stick his neck out there on a public forum. I find these stories to be extremely interesting, and think it’s great that the average watch collector nowadays seems to be able to determine movements and their origins on first sight.

I have no problems with TH as a company. Just seems like they got caught with their hand in the cookie jar on this one.

An informed consumer will always come out on top.

Thanks!
Craig M.
http://www.bathyshawaii.com John Patterson

Great article. My brand (Bathys Hawaii) got our start on watchuseek and one must realize in this age of instant information that you’ve got to be completely honest and transparent or the enthusiasts will call you out every time. The guys on WUS are very sharp and knowledgeable. I’ve had to defend our brand on there and it requires being open and forthcoming, without defensiveness. Kinda funny to think Tags CEO has to do this himself, but respect.
Great article!
Alexanderr

All your points are relevant Kyle, this is important stuff.
I have to stress again how much I seriously like how you
push the envelope on some really great issues:

The other articles on TAG – the overpriced memory stick/ USB – rather bizarre,
and how dated their phone is. Again, relevant points.

Same thing with your article – and this is journalism – on the Big Bang.
- I bet there are hundreds, maybe thousands, of collectors thinking the
same thing: What´s after the big bang ? Please NO more flavours – odd colors.
It was SO about time, for someone to post that very question. Why can´t Hublot let some fresh, young, new designers in to present
something cool to the world ?

Since you´re on this crusade – why don´t you try to define the word
” exclusive ” often followed by ” limited edition “.
This is a topic that should be discussed. Thank´s !!

Alexanderr

Hey Kyle,

I missed that there is another” NEW “thing out from Hublot. : The Valentine Big Bang.
Wow – there you have it. Yet another new fruity fusion of colors and materials.
Same old case, shape but – and this is not cool: quartz ??
More brands today seem to offer the mechanical magic to women as well; look at
little Perrelet for instance. Only mechanical movements. What is your feel on this ?

http://www.onthedash.com Jeff Stein

Interesting information and good reporting. I operate the vintage Heuer website, http://www.OnTheDash.com, and a related discussion forum and have been following the vintage Heuers for the last 10 years. I also keep an eye on developments at TAG-Heuer, especially when they are doing the re-issues, commemorative editions, etc.

While I would agree that the introduction of the Caliber 1887 seems to have suffered from a PR or marketing blunder, I believe that their decision to use the Seiko platform and adapt it for TAG-Heuer’s purposes is a fantastic solution. They can develop their own caliber, on a white board, and we will wait years and pay thousands more for each of the watches. Instead, they have taken a fantastic Seiko movement, and they will improve it. In my view, a very efficient, effective way of proceeding . . . an elegant solution to the problem of sourcing movements. They will have reliable, proven movements, suited for high-volume production, on favorable economics.

In terms of Jean-Christophe’s going onto the discussion forums, do a search of our vintage Heuer forum — http://www.chronocentric.com/forums/heuer/ — and you will see that Jean-Christophe has made several appearances on our forum. He has engaged in dialog with the vintage enthusiasts, to share his ideas and to seek ours. So he is not a stranger to the discussion forums (though his visits to WatchUSeek may not have been in the plans for the roll-out of the new movement.). I applaud these visits to our forum, as they reflect genuine dialog and interest in the vintage community.

Here’s a prediction: In five years, watch enthusiasts will have forgotten the problematic press releases and messaging associated with the roll-out of the Caliber 1887 (though some journalists and forum junkies will still be giggling). The watch enthusiasts will be celebrating a great line-up of TAG-Heuer chronographs, powered by an awesome movement, that was made better by TAG-Heuer.

Of course, I will extend a warm welcome if you will reciprocate with a visit to our vintage Heuer discussion forum.

Cheers,

Jeff Stein
Atlanta, Georgia

Kyle S.

Hi Jeff,
Thanks for weighing in with your thoughts. With all due respect, while you make some good points, I think you have missed the MAIN POINT.

Sure, it was a smart move by TAG to shortcut the process as it will save many years and thousands of dollars on the price point of the finished watches – but nobody is arguing the fantastic job and technical sophistication of the movement. And as I acknowledged in my article – yes this will not harm TAG Heuer in the long run for the average TAG Heuer consumer.

So let me reiterate, briefly- it is the deception of marketing and the fact that TAG was disingenuous in trying to pass the movement off as “designed 100% in-house.” As you yourself stated, the movement was based on and adapted from a Seiko platform – NOT “100% in-house” as TAG Heuer tried to make claim in more instances than one! You see the point here?

Again, your comments here are appreciated, but I see no reason nor justification to try and make excuses or “brush off” TAG Heuer’s actions in this matter. And congratulating JC Babin for racing to the blogs and forums to defend Tag’s actions is not warranted – he was forced to do so by the outrcy. Although it was courageous and forthright to acknowledge the mistakes, I’m sure JC Babin would much rather be spending his time doing other things.

Sincerely,
Kyle

http://www.onthedash.com Jeff Stein

Kyle:

Maybe you have helped me discover one of my shortcomings: I pay very little attention to the press releases from the watch companies (and — while I am on the subject — the auction houses that sell the watches). Show me a stack of these press releases and I’ll show you many misstatements, omissions, half-truths, exagerrations, etc. I really just don’t pay much attention to them. This is not an excuse for the people who publish these press releases; but it’s just not something that I get very upset about.

It’s not exactly a badge of honor of the watch (or watch auction) industry, but it has little to do with my own collecting experience.

Jeff

Kyle S.

Jeff,

Then where do you get your information about a watch if not from the brand itself?

Press releases are a central part of the marketing / PR / communication strategy for the brands – which helps create the “aura” or perception for a brand and its watches – which ultimately drives the all important figure – sales.

PR’s also often form the basis of stories by watch journalists, bloggers, and others. And once such information is circulated widel – truth, half-truth or not – well…perception becomes reality.

You are free to give TAG Heuer a “pass” on this fiasco, but I and many others will not.

http://onthedash@bellsouth.net Jeff Stein

Kyle:

I collect vintage watches, so the worthwhile information coming from the manufacturers of the brands that I collect (Heuer, Breitling, Sinn, Omega, Gallet, Zenith, Zodiac etc.) is virtually non-existent. As you might expect, these brands are interested in promoting their current lines of watches, rather than providing information about the watches that they produced 40 years ago. So in the world of vintage collecting, the most important information comes from websites and discussion forums, with virtually no contribution from the factories.

I would probably be considered a “watch journalist” (having published a dozen articles and dozens of webpages on specific topics), and I appreciate others who study the watches and write about them. [Here are a couple of samples of my webpages, just so that you can see what I mean by serious research and writing:
history of the Caliber 11 / 12 movement --
http://onthedash.com/docs/ChronomaticMovements.html --
and history of the vintage Carreras --
http://onthedash.com/docs/CarreraReferenceTable.htm. Believe me, there is no watch brand producing this type of historical information; they are occupied in developing, producing, selling and servicing their current watches, not researching their old ones.

When the watches with the new Caliber 1887 are produced, I will evaluate them based on what I see and how the watches function. By then, this "fiasco" [your word, not mine] will not matter much at all. For me, it’s about the watches.

Jeff
Kyle S.

Uhhhhh, Jeff – in case you were not aware the Caliber 1887 has nothing to do with “Vintage.” Nobody denies that information on vintage watches is hard to come by!

With all due respect, you are still not focusing on the issue at hand here – this is about one thing: a NEW Movement and mis-information and lack of transparency as to its true design origins.

christian

Thanks for the informative article.

One thing I cannot imagine is a CEO of an international recognized company (and one that even puts a lot of focus on corporate identity as TAG Heuer) posting under his own name in web fora.

I think the belief in a more connected / wired / up-to-date and real-time web 2.0 world makes us accept such statements and opinions way too fast.

Just a thought.

http://blog.perpetuelle.com Kyle S.

Well, you should imagine it! I think there is little question that it is JC Babin who has posted the comments around the Internet. This is not uncommon to see this – but the circumstances of WHY a CEO is posting online forums or blogs is usually the more important fact – “For fun” is one thing, to defend mis-steps of the brand is another.

Thanks for your comment.

http://www.horloge.com Gerard Nijenbrinks

@ Jeff Stein

I agree on the main idea of your reaction, however realize that this kind of information (on a movement being 100% in-house, out-house or no house at all) is not meant for the large group of main stream TAG-Heuer clients which you describe

They probably don’t even care about the movement; they are more interested in the looks and imago of the watch I guess. They probably don’t even read this kind of information, and indeed forget very fast about the fuzz it generates now.

With this kind of information TH however ‘talks’ to watch aficionado’s – which they obviously would like to attract (again). And then they made a major mistake by communicating to that group of (potential) TH customers that the movement was produced 100% in-house. Certainly because they previously stated to have studied the market, and didn’t find anything suitable for their needs and/or quality level.

Ever heard PP communicating on their movements being in-house or out sourced? Even if they used Lemania chronograph constructions in the past. They just produce what they produce and let their customers judge for them selfs if they like it or not. They don’t try to attract them with ‘colored’ or even misleading information, which TH has tried in this case in my opinion.

http://blog.perpetuelle.com Kyle S.

Well stated Gerard. I agree with you.

http://amateureconblog.blogspot.com/ Speedmaster

I posted the following this morning on my site:
“In the last few years we’ve seen similar controversies with Hublot and JLC. There’s most certainly nothing wrong with using a Seiko-based movement. Imho, Seiko has some of the best engineering over the last 40 years. The issue is one of transparency and perhaps honesty.”
http://www.calibre11.com David Chalmers

Greetings all- I’ve been travelling since this issue took off on Monday- been fascinating to watch it evolve, and I was very surprised to see a post from JCB on my blog on Monday morning. I had been seeing a lot of hits from Switzerland, so I figured something was up….

From my perspective (and wearing my rose coloured TAG Heuer branded glasses) I am surprised that there has been so much interest in this.

First point, is that I agree that TAG’s claim of “100% design” is a real stretch.In-house yes; 100% design? No. But this was a press release that always contains a bit of fluff and puff…but this 100% claim is the only thing that rings untrue in the press release.

Second is this: do you think this controversy would exist if this was a modified Zenith movement? Why no outrage over TAG Heuer claiming IP over the Calibre 360 which uses an ETA base? Go back and read the press release for the Calibre 360- its very similar to this one (except, granted, no claim of “100%”, yet no outrage or mild indignation….maybe it was before the time of blogs! Could it be because this is based on a Japanese rather than Swiss movement?

I’m OK with a Japanese movement as a base. My Apple is “designed in California”, yet made in China. Who knows where your “German” car is made?

Finally, I am surprised that there is a cynical reaction to M. Babin jumping onto the internet (after business hours) and participating in a discussion. I don’t see it as embarrassing or defensive on his part. And frankly, if he was really concerned about the reaction from the watch world, he would have gone for a larger stage than my little blog..

Anyway, if nothing else it is a fascinating example of the power of the internet and the power of the blog and forum communities such as this one. More power to the people!

Great article Kyle and thanks for such an interesting discussion

Cheers

David
http://www.thewatchlounge.com Tom

I’m with David, I think this whole issue has been slightly blown out of proportion but having said that I think it is exceptional to see that the highly educated and vocal on-line communities we all belong to have been successful in making even the bigger of the watch makers accountable to their customers. I think its fantastic to see so many people take such an interest in the finer details of watch making as too often I come across individuals who only care if a piece is aesthetically pleasing.

With regards to CEOs, etc getting on-line this happens quite a lot more than you might think and is definitely something to be commended. The heads of some of these companies are far more internet savvy than you might think and are quite aware of what is being said about their brand online (which when you think about it, makes sense given the fact that the internet is the place where most consumers turn for information these days.) I’ve had several prominent individuals, such as Christian Bedat either comment directly on The Watch Lounge or contact me via it. Again, I think this is really commendable, it shows that they are really starting to become aware of the power and potential of the internet, which a number of luxury brands have been slow to realise.

Any way you look at it, there are positives to be taken from this latest development.

Fantastic work Kyle, really enjoyed reading the article and also the discussion that followed. Keep up the great work and continue to keep the big brands honest!

Cheers,
Tom

http://www.thewatchlounge.com

Kyle S.

Tom / David:

Thanks for your comments but let me clarify as you guys are putting words in my mouth:

1) I never said that JC Babin is not “internet savvy” or that CEOs getting on-line never happens or happens rarely. I know well firsthand that some CEOs do participate online, for example from my interactions with JC Biver on this blog.

But it is indisputable that JC Babin’s Watchuseek account was created Dec 2009 and that all his posts occured within a short time span. It’s not as if he is hanging around dropping comments every now and then – the evidence doesn’t support this! Fact is he only posted these comments because he felt it was necessary to, ahem, clarify the situation.

2) David – You say “I am surprised that there is a cynical reaction to M. Babin jumping onto the internet (after business hours) and participating in a discussion. I don’t see it as embarrassing or defensive on his part.”

REALLY? It’s not a bit embarrasing to have to defend and plead his case? REALLY? I think this is hardly something he was more than happy to have to do.

And as I also said “the brand will most surely come out of this just fine because they have the marketing dollars to overcome it and it is most likely that a the large majority of TAG’s consumers will never catch wind nor even care about the origins of the design of the Caliber 1887 (they may even ask “What’s a Caliber?”).” So it’s not like I am calling a doomsday scenario here.

Look – I’m trying to be very fair in my comments here, but you gotta call a spade a spade (ie tell things like they are). Why the rush to cheerlead/defend TAG Heuer in this particular matter when it is very clear they crossed the line? There will be plenty of other opportunities for this in the future for other good things TAG does.

http://www.thewatchlounge.com Tom

Hi Kyle,

Just to clarify, I was actually responding to Christian’s comment (about 4 or 5 comments above this one) not in specific reference to anything you mentioned in your article regarding the participation of CEOs, etc online.

Cheers,
Tom

http://www.thewatchlounge.com

Kyle S.

Thanks Tom – duly noted! The feedback here has been quite intense so I am just trying to keep up with it all!.

By the way – I fully agree on the rest of your comments

Take Care
Kyle

http://professionalwatches.com Jason

That is a nice looking movement. I especially liked the blued column wheel.
Vijay Singh

I can see the ad now, Tiger Woods and his new Caliber 1887 watch “everything is not what it seems”
http://www.fratellowatches.com Robert-Jan

Hello Kyle,

I can’t be away from my computer a few days and look what I have missed!

What a terrific article, superb piece of (blog) art imho. This “designed 100% in-house”-phrase seems to be an over enthusiastic one-liner written by their marketing department. The guy who came up with it should be fired as far as I am concerned.

The attitude of TAG Heuer really amazed me already during BaselWorld 2009 (I think I blogged about it back in April), so I can’t say I am that ‘in shock’ with this embarrassment from the company who should spend more time in designing their own products instead of lousy but expensive marketing campaigns.

Keep up the good work. Enjoyed reading all comments and discussions.

Best,
RJ
http://www.fratellowatches.com

Kyle S.

Hi RJ – thanks for the nice comment. Much appreciated. Hope all is well with you and likewise keep up the good work !~!!

Seiko

Could it be possible that TAG acquired the TC78 from Seiko*? If this is true, it COULD be marketed as 100% in-house, that is so long as they own the movement. However, in my opinion, if Seiko sold the movement to TAG, then them movement is not 100% in-house. If I were TAG, I would not market the movement as “in-house.”

*Does Seiko still produce the movement?

Kyle

thanks for your comment!

I do not know if seiko still produces the TC78. But I think it is quite clear now that Tag Heuer exaggerated its claim of “100% in-house” movement.

Matt

I left Tag behind when I purchased an Autavia and when using the chronograph, the second hand would jump ahead a few seconds. I sent the watch in 3 times for repair, they could not fix it, finally sending me a new one, when I recieved the new watch, EXACT problem with the watch. Tag never returned my calls about the issue or admitted it had a problem with the watch. I am sure I wasn’t the only person to complain.
http://parmigiani.ch Parmigiani Fleurier

Great investigative work!

http://www.perpetuelle.com Perpetuelle

@25af7a76262a07b416c78dfbf0b9ae8d:disqus Thanks, I really appreciate to hear a comment like this.
Kyle, Perpetuelle Blog Editor