Universal Geneve was re-started and yes, all the watches are beautiful and have their merits -- a new form-movement with spectacular metrics or something like that and etc: great. But overall the watches shown are very close to their originals, they are too close to the vintage UGs made more than 50, 60 or even 70 years ago. These were amazing watches that pushed UG in that position that Mr Kern and his group aims to, now again. But there is no chuzpe, there is no risk, there is nothing new. It is a bit like another iteration of a mechanical movement with the Swiss lever-escapement (*klikk). There is nothing wrong with that but it is not just me that expects something new and innovative: a good reason why this venerable brand is not left to rest in peace.

Even more it misses the point of the vintage UG success-story: UG was respected and had a outstanding position in the 60s (and following) because they took some risks. They made things different, were on the forefront of technology (early in automatics with bumpers, normal and micro-rotors, electrics and especially electronics with tuningfork (Unisonic) & quartz) and designed things different. And this resonated with the audience; this has set some trends. But this success back then was the result and this result is very obvious. Less obvious is the risk they took in doing something new and different. And the latter was the first step. Now, you can read the book from its end, reproduce the happy ending and the success-pieces, push them into the market with some prominent artists and wonder why the audience is missing the whole fairy-tale. The fairy-tale of pilots using the PoleRouter for being non-magnetic; the F1-drivers wife stopping the time with the Compax. But this is all long gone and was several times told. And honestly, who can still hear these buzzwords today without snoozing-away? Polerouter, chronograph, Nina Rindt, car-racing, stonedials... please.

I think with what they did they can queue right behind Piaget, which is a very similar story with their warmover of the Andy Warhol-relationship: *klikk. By not going the full way (ie. not taking the risk of a loud fail) both brands will not come close to where they have been in the past and likely both are going to become a silent fail. Both shy away from risks and try to repeat a vintage success -- but this is effectively a bigger risk. I am sure both will remain a shadow of their past and currently both produce strong arguments to buy vintage, instead of the re-edition: it is the original; it is usually much cheaper (CHF40'000 for the new Dioramic); it comes with a history and usually in much lower quantities -- overall it makes the buyer of the new product look... lets say: a bit less smart.

And now a true surprise-move. Here is our UG-stock -- all vintage: *klikk. The bonus-task is of course: to sum up the list of pieces you could buy from us instead of one new Dioramic for CHF40'000.