Watch Journalist Yasuhito Shibuya's Useful Watch Industry Chat
The COVID-2 pandemic, which had once seemed to be heading toward a resolution, has become uncertain due to the spread of the new mutated virus, the "Omicron strain." Meanwhile, it has been two years since we were able to hold in-person fairs and events.
Over the past few years, the format of fairs and events has changed dramatically and evolved, with the advent of virtual presentations over the internet, online interviews and meetings, and more. However, the desire for something more "real" continues to grow, rather than subside. Journalist Yasuhito Shibuya reflects on the state of watch fairs and the dissemination of watch information in this era.
(Article published on October 9, 2021)
Where will other brands launch their new products?
In this series of columns published on October 31, 2021, I questioned the feasibility of a "revived" Baselworld and introduced a proposal by British watch journalist Rob Corder to hold a "London Watch Fair." As rumored, Baselworld 2022 has been canceled. Managing Director Michel Loris-Melikoff, who had been working tirelessly to revive the event, has also resigned. If the MCH Group continues to do nothing, Baselworld's demise is inevitable.
So where should watch brands that can't exhibit in Geneva announce their new products?
It was to raise this issue that Corder wrote his column.
Currently, only 39 brands are able to participate in Watches & Wonders in Geneva, but up until 2019, when Baselworld was still in operation, hundreds of watch brands had been presenting their new releases to the world from that location.
What should watch brands that can't participate in Geneva do, especially small and mid-sized brands that don't have the financial resources to hold their own events? This is a serious issue for the watch industry that could affect the survival of brands.
So, this time I would like to think about future watch fairs and how information about watches should be disseminated.
Physical watch fairs are "absolutely essential"
First of all, what form will future watch fairs take?
The cancellation of physical watch fairs for two years has revealed the limitations of online fairs and the need for physical watch fairs. However, this does not mean that online fairs are completely useless. In particular, the 2021 "Watches & Wonders Geneva" was a highly accomplished interactive fair, despite criticism.
However, with digital, even 3D or virtual image data, unless absolute trust in quality is established like with Rolex, watch buyers will not be able to make a purchase decision based on that alone. Watches are expensive and precise, and it is very difficult to quantify details such as finishing, so they have a higher emotional value than functionality or reliability.
The value of a watch cannot be judged unless people see it with their own eyes and touch it with their own hands. That's why physical fairs and exhibitions, opportunities to see product samples and touch the actual product, are essential to the watch business. I think that those involved in the watch industry have come to understand this all too well over the past two years.
However, does it have to be a large-scale event like a watch fair, which requires a huge amount of money and time? Wouldn't individual exhibitions be sufficient? There are probably quite a few people in the watch industry who think that "individual exhibitions would be fine."
However, watch fairs have a certain charm and advantage that regular exhibitions don't have. That is the power to become newsworthy, to spread information, and to advertise, which comes from the fact that a fair is a huge festival event. As someone like me who plans and produces media content, you know, individual exhibitions don't have the same power to spread information as a watch fair.
In fact, the Swatch Group also wanted the watch fair to continue.
In the summer of 2018, when the news of the Swatch Group's complete withdrawal from Baselworld was reported, the media at the time commented that "the internet is the future." However, upon rereading the Swatch Group's statement, it is doubtful whether this comment was appropriate. In fact, the statement stated the following:
"Annual watch shows as they exist today are no longer very relevant. This doesn't mean that watch fairs should disappear, but they (watch fair organizers) need to adapt to the current situation and reinvent themselves with more dynamism and creativity."
The statement does not say a word about "a physical watch fair is unnecessary." What follows is a statement that could be interpreted as an accusation that "the MCH Group, which runs Baselworld, is prioritizing the depreciation of the renovated venue over the enhancement of the fair itself, placing an excessive burden on watch brands."
The Swatch Group also recognized the importance and necessity of watch fairs, and it must still recognize this today. This is clear when you consider that in 2019, the group held a journalist tour in Switzerland to announce new releases from its top six brands, but although the 2020 fair was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic, it was scheduled to be held in early March in Zurich, Switzerland, with only the group involved.
With physical watch fairs canceled in 2020 and 2021, watch-related content, both in magazines and online, has clearly decreased compared to previous years. In the watch industry, it was reported that in 2019, exposure to information about new products from a certain watch group that did not exhibit at watch fairs fell to about 6% compared to the previous year.
The discourse dismissing physical watch fairs as "outdated" has now disappeared. There is no doubt that physical watch fairs will continue to live on.
