Thanks for such an interesting and thought-provoking post.
Although I have several Sea-Gull watches and watches with Sea-Gull movements (and I like them a lot) in general I think that you are right to raise questions about their overall record and strategy.
The efficient manufacture of different clones is one thing; building a reputation for fine watch manufacture and high-quality and innovative movement designs that are backed up with service and maintenance over the long-term is another.
Is it possible to ride both horses? After all Seiko has managed something like that - though perhaps not without limiting the appeal of its top-end by its across the market strategy.
Or is Sea-Gull is going to have to choose the direction it wants to go in, sooner or later?
Although I have several Sea-Gull watches and watches with Sea-Gull movements (and I like them a lot) in general I think that you are right to raise questions about their overall record and strategy.
The efficient manufacture of different clones is one thing; building a reputation for fine watch manufacture and high-quality and innovative movement designs that are backed up with service and maintenance over the long-term is another.
Is it possible to ride both horses? After all Seiko has managed something like that - though perhaps not without limiting the appeal of its top-end by its across the market strategy.
Or is Sea-Gull is going to have to choose the direction it wants to go in, sooner or later?