Reply With QuoteThey're restricting ETA movements now and in the future anyway, so it'll become less of an issue.
Sellita may well supply parts for ETAs as I think their SW-200 is an ETA clone.
I think using the movement references is important. We are not just talking about Swatch Groups multitude of branded watches. We are potentially talking about any ETA movement from any branded watch, including micro-brands. Having to go to an accredited watchmaker starts to set up that £400-£500 watch bought a few years ago for a very expensive service.Originally Posted by lordloz
Now, when people are saying they don't want to buy inhouse because they are tied to the manufacturer, if Swatch has its way there won't be much difference in the cost of the service between their inhouse movement watches or any brand using an ETA movement.
It's just a matter of time...
They're restricting ETA movements now and in the future anyway, so it'll become less of an issue.
Sellita may well supply parts for ETAs as I think their SW-200 is an ETA clone.
It's not just movement parts that are an issue, case-specific parts are more of a problem. Handsets, crystals, crowns, bezels.......these are the bits that have to be supplied from the manufacturer.
If Swatch persist in curtailing general supply of parts it'll be impossible to get any mechanical watch serviced for less than £400 within 6-7 years. The watch repairer will have become a mythical beast, the few who remain will have spent so much in accreditation costs they'll only be interested in working on the expensive stuff.......it's already happening but many of you don't realise; why do the repairers who are Rolex or Omega accredited turn jobs down on lesser stuff?......... it's not rocket science!
The 'business model' of the one-man band watch repairer is bust; the price of parts was having that effect even before the restrictions in supply but the move to stop supplying seals it. It isn't financially viable for one guy to make the investment required to start from scratch, do the training, buy the equipment required for accreditation and set up premises to the standard demanded. The big firms know this, the plan is to get rid of the small guys and thus control the whole service business themselves.
Some people don't care; they've got plenty of money, ownership of a watch that cost a few £k is part of their lifestyle and subconsciously they actually enjoy paying a lot to have it serviced. .....indeed they'd be disappointed if it didn't cost a lot. This forum has changed over the last few years, there's more and more people who fit that description, lots of bragging about who's bought what and how much they're spending, so it's little wonder that the stance of Swatch Group (and others) doesn't receive the unanimous condemnation that would be expected from a forum of true watch enthusiasts.
Just listened to Bob Dylan whilst I posted this; he was right when he said 'The times they are a-changin'
Paul
Hear hear!
If Swatch lose the action, what's to stop them just raising the cost price of the spares in question monumentally to stop the market that way?
Cheers..
Jase
another point, until very recently eta/swatch was selling movements to every microbrand going, many of these will start to require servicing soonish - who do we end up having to send those to if swatch win?
ktmog6uk
marchingontogether!
Yes, really. What most customers might know or might do is interesting but not necessarily a deciding factor. The facts are that (a) watches do need servicing (it doesn't actually matter that most customers might not know this) and (b) that the conditions are now being changed in an arguably anti-competitive manner. Thus it is for the courts to decide whether or not this is legal.
That doesn't magically make legal what a court may judge to be illegal. The facts matters, all the facts, and how many people care is not necessary a deciding factor at all. It may be relevant but it's very unlikely to be the main thing that the court is concerned with.
Last edited by markrlondon; 5th January 2017 at 19:11.
Very well said.
I agree completely.
Indeed, spot on in my opinion.
The argument that watches and cars are different because "an Omega [can be replaced] with a cheap G-Shock that will do the same job. That doesn't apply to cars and vans which people may need for their job/business etc." is untrue. There is a vast range of cars and vans at varying price points and it's always possible to replace an expensive car or van with another cheaper model. Thus cars are much like watches: An expensive watch or car/van can be replaced by a cheaper one and do the same job.
I honestly don`t know what the criteria will be for obtaining ETA parts, but it's a fair question. Currently there are plenty of stocks of ETA parts but that'll change as supplies dry up. As for the Sellita 2824 and 2892 clones/copies, I don`t know whether every single part is interchangeable and I don`t know whether anyone can answer this. Sellita parts aren`t cheap, and until ETA stocks cease to be readily available there's no driving force to use Sellita parts in an ETA movement.
What's a lot more worrying is the Chinese ETA clones, which as stand-alone movements are reputedly quite good. However, parts interchangability is an unknown; on the one hand it may be a good thing if parts can be swapped (if genuine ETA parts aren`t being supplied) but on the other hand there will always be concerns about quality. The unscrupulous repairer could swap a whole movement out for a Chinese clone then use the genuine ETA movement for parts; the customer won`t know unless he opens the watch up. The chances of buying a genuine watch with a substituted movement will also rise.....all bad news for the watch enthusiast.
I could understand (but not condone) the logic of restricting Omega and Longines parts supply, but I cannot understand the sense in restricting ETA parts. As far as I`m aware Swatch will continue to supply the likes of TAG and Breitling, who will subsequently control who can and cannot have the parts, but I don`t know what'll happen for the small brands.
The watch world would be a whole lot healthier if Swatch would do a U-turn on this issue, or at least rethink it. I`m surprised a legal challenge hasn`t been mounted in the USA and elsewhere, it's restriction of trade whichever way you choose to look at it.
The analogy with the car industry/dealer servicing is a fair one; BMW tried a similar ploy in the UK (1990s if I remember correctly) but there were strong lobbies in the motor trade to fight it on restriction of trade grounds. Needless to say it got kicked out, anyone can buy parts for their prestige motor and fix it in their driveway if they wish (unlikely but possible). Sadly the watch repair industry has a much smaller voice.
Paul
Totally agree with Paul, it has already happened to me.
Rocco at Watchworks here in Bristol is under a mile from me, but I have not got any of my watches worked on by him for over 2 years now.
Why?
All he does is recent Rolex, Breitling and other high brand work, and he totally eschews all vintage pieces.
I asked him recently about a small job of re-shrinking an expanded Tudor Bezel using the Rolex Bezel Vice that I know he has.
I got an automated reply from his partner saying this work was only available as part of a full service at £350.
Clearly the fact that I must have spent over £6k with him over the last dozen years means nothing, but I do understand that the reason that he is doing this is that he cannot afford to do anything else.
It is a great shame.
Dave
Last edited by sweets; 5th January 2017 at 19:52. Reason: sp
Hi Dave,
I'm shocked at this news! I understand that Rocco was one of the few watch repairers who were willing to work on Lemania 5100 movements. In view of the fact that Steve Burrage is semi-retired and only does work for previous customers, who is going to work on Lemanias?
Dave
It is sad that the pool of. skilled watchmakers is shrinking: we become dependent on the major watch groups, who can charge freely, and take as much time as they like. However there is another side to all this. These companies are just that....companies, with resources and technical expertise. A lone watchmaker is vulnerable to such things as poor health . That's what happened to me; I paid £380 for a repair.but the guy fell ill and , to date, I have had. no repair or refund. I don't expect to get the money back, which I see as simple bad luck. I am not going to chase a sick man.
That is not likely to be an issue with the big firms...unless they go out of business.
Good point! I worked on one (admittedly a bad one) and I can honestly say it aged me......I'm sure I had more grey hairs when I finally sorted the beast. That's part of the reason I have a low opinion of these movements.
Unfortunately some watch jobs are more bother than they're worth. Anyone who's got accreditation from the big brands has made a very sizeable investment; it stands to reason that they'll take on the expensive brand work (which is often easier than some of the cheap stuff) because they're in business to make money. I do it as a hobby, so I sometimes take stuff on that others won't but I sometimes wonder if I'm stupid for doing this. Just spent ages fixing a 70s Sicura with a cheap pin-pallet movement, it's been a nightmare to sort out, and I can't help wondering how many ETA 2824s or 2892s I could've serviced whilst I wrestled with the thing; Lack of familiarity was part of the problem, so I guess that's my own fault, but I won't be in a rush to do another. Even ETA powered watches can be a headache; just spent approx 1 whole hour getting the hands to fit properly on a micro-brand watch watch held in very high regard around these parts...... basically the dial's too thick and the hands are poorly made, clearance is minimal and the bosses in the hands aren't exactly perpendicular to the hand itself......getting the hands to fit correctly is a challenge! If this was a TAG or Omega the hands would go straight on with no trouble, a 10 minute job; the better the watch the easier it is to work on (generally).........I'm sure you get my point!
Paskinner's previous point is a good one; if you spend money having a watch serviced by a one man band you rely on him for the guarantee. If he disappears or gets run over by a tram you've no comeback. However, if a watch is 'right' after a couple of weeks it's unlikely to develop a problem within 12 months. What matters is that owners have a choice, and that choice is going to disappear.
Paul
This is a good point, and it applies to con-men too. A one man band is much more risky for the customer.
Clearly you don't understand how luxury goods markets works Paul - dare I say the 'V' word? Louis Vitton handbags, Rolls Royce cars, Swiss watches - all luxury products that are following the marketing 'plan'. Swatch are just controlling their product and its image.
I'm pretty sure you can still be a "true watch enthusiast" even if you don't like knackered old tat that can be repaired for half a farthing.
Of course it's different to the automobile industry - the absolute values are much less as are the servicing costs and no-one actually needs a Swiss watch. However, someone may need a van to run their business.
I'll be glad if this is resolved in Swatch's favour so that if I buy a used watch in the future I will know that some amateur ham-fisted "watchmaker" probably hasn't been delving around in the back of it.
Whatever!....utter rubbish from someone with previous form.
Reformed Omega fan-boy who's now gravitated to vintage Rolex, chooses to dismiss lesser watches as 'tat' that can be fixed for a farthing, believes anyone who isn`t an accredited repairer is a 'ham-fisted amateur'. You're talking out of your rear end again....not the first time and it won`t be the last
Laugh?........almost fell off my chair. Harry Enfield's 'Considerably Richer Than Yoooou' character is clearly alive and well!
Paul
I know we have different views Paul, we always have, but your failure to acknowledge them without insisting they're "wrong" is never ending. Your earlier passive aggressive posts, that I assume were aimed at me, we're really not necessary in an open discussion forum.
I think TZ would really benefit from less of your negativity.
Mate, I'm not sure I know what the term 'passive aggressive' is supposed to mean! Tactless, argumentative, contrary.....despite my best efforts to behave better I've been guilt on occasion but I don't do passive aggressive deliberately.
I can't deny that the watch repair business has been blighted in the past by poor workmanship; whether this is down to lack of ability, corner-cutting to make more profit, or simply rushing the work, is open to debate and I think it's a mixture of all three. However, I do think it's grossly unfair to make sweeping statements of condemnation; there are people in the repair game who provide a good service, many of whom are qualified but don't have the financial wherewithall to make the investment required to meet Swatch Group accreditation standards. I'm talking about guys such as John Murphy, who's a tutor at the BHI and an independent repairer. This guy is a genuine watch-god, one of the true experts, yet he is being denied the chance to continue in his profession. He's got better contacts than I have so he'll continue to procure the parts he needs by 'unofficial' means, but he should not be forced into this position. Brenden Hoey is another one; these guys are in a different league to the likes of me, yet they're being treated just as badly! I have no formal qualifications to prove I know what I'm doing; with 3 returned watches out of 220 jobs it's obvious I'm just a blagging chancer who doesn't deserve to be sold parts, as a ham-fisted amateur I'll accept this but I'll be damned if I'll agree with Swatch Group undermining the livelihoods of the genuine professionals who could run rings most people they employ at the Service Centres.
The majority of watch owners don't understand what's involved with service and maintenance of watches, the repair game is a black art to many, so it's easy for the manufacturers to create a mythology around it and convince owners that only a chosen few can be entrusted with their timepiece. It is a demanding and somewhat unforgiving activity, but as I've said many times it isn't rocket science. There is no good logical reason for restricting the supply of parts, but it's happening and the manufacturers are convincing owners that it's in their best interests. Why Swatch Group feel that preventing folks from fixing Omega watches sold in the 1960s is doing anything to 'protect their brand' is beyond me, the logic doesn't stack up.
If that's perceived as 'negativity' so be it.
Paul
Last edited by walkerwek1958; 6th January 2017 at 00:22.
I'm not your "mate", and I'm sure you can Google passive aggressive bullying.
Your attitude is why I despair where this forum is going. Your lack of knowledge on why swatch must change their policy is so evident in your posts above.
Paul, great posts. Your spot on.
Again, hear hear. If I want to read a defence of the anti-competitive and generally shoddy behaviour of the luxury sector/Swiss watch industry a watch forum is not the obvious place to go; I could probably download a press release from the Swatch or LVMH website.
As for this passive agressive nonsense...
I for one wish Cousins every success in their action.
The Swatch action is clearly designed to: a. make their own brands more attractive due to potential obsolescence issues, thereby effectively reducing choice to us customers, and b. increase the cost base to other manufactures who now feel the need to develop / manufacture their own in-house movements.
That stated, I work with high value manufacturers in, for example, the space, aerospace and defence sectors and it is routine for those industries to negotiate continuity of supply of components for 20-50+ years. I am surprised that such conditions were not put in place by those using ETA or ETA-derived movements. Maybe the smaller manufacturers are just not big enough to secure such arrangements ?
Anyway, good luck to Cousins and to the skilled watchsmiths around the world; may they continue to do their amazing job for all watch enthusiasts unhindered !
It won't be long before movement parts are made to exacting standards by the Chinese etc so this argument won't matter . They already make copies of the ETA movements and some Rolex parts it's just a matter of time
Fair point, but I'd rather have the choice of an original part than a copy. Also, as Paul points out, it's not just movement parts that are affected.
I think that Paul makes some very good points. Like others, l have to believe that there is some muddled thinking at Swatch somewhere along the line, even allowing for their desire to control their market if they can.
OK, that may well happen, but that doesn`t address other issues such as crowns, handsets, bezels etc. It's the case-specific parts that concern me when taking jobs on; Omega SMP seals are a good example, they're simple O rings but it's not easy to identify the exact size (ever tried measuring a small O-ring?). It's far better to order the correct item from the manufacturer, you know it's correct.
Some of these issues only become apparent when you're actually doing the work; generic suppliers will be a big help but there will always be significant items they don`t supply. We can live in hope; I`d love to see more high quality generic parts become available.
Quality will always be a concern. Recently I found a supply of generic Omega acrylic crystals which even had the Omega symbol in the centre, so I ordered a couple. Tried fitting one and it cracked very easily....same happened to the second one. £18 thrown away, lesson learned, stick to genuine items or known generic suppliers (Sternkreuz for crystals). Omega SMP generic bezel insert is another to avoid; fitted one and it was so poor I couldn`t bring myself to charge money for it, looked OK and fitted Ok, but the finish was painted not anodised and it wouldn`t last long. Owner got his (genuine) damaged insert back with an offer to swap it back FOC in future if he wished. Another lesson learned, another £15 thrown away.
Paul
Last edited by walkerwek1958; 6th January 2017 at 11:37.
When your 15 year old car needs some parts like electrical , alternator etc you either pay main agent exhorbitant prices or go to a parts shop like Euro car spares . In many instances made by the same companies , the examples are endless. Of course for expensive watches it might not be an option but it's a fair and logical step to take . After all when you sell the car who points out the head gasket is not genuine and the timing belts/ chain or not original !
has anyone heard of any progress on this?
ktmog6uk
marchingontogether!
Not heard anything unfortunately yet.
I really wish this was an EU issue but since Switzerland isn't an EU member this has to be dragged through the Swiss courts and will therefore lose. The Swiss protect their most important export product obviously.
The parallels with the Motor industry are interesting but not really relevant in the end as we are not talking about something easily protected under EU law I suppose. The EU Motor vehicle block exemption rules ensure that you can get your car serviced outside the dealer network using original parts (which means parts to original specification) or equivalent quality parts (meaning not so original spec but of equal quality) without affecting your warranty. The manufacturers have to make parts or specifications available too. The EU did this to promote competition in the aftermarket motor industry which is a large employment sector in the EU.
The watch industry isn't anywhere near as big and most of it goes on outside the EU anyway. The repairers are a small employer in the grand scheme of things so unlikely to see any block exemption rules in this sector any time soon.
My view has always been, if it has an inbuilt service interval, the OEM must be legally obliged to make parts available to aftermarket repairers for a reasonable period of time, whatever product you are talking about.
Having read this thread over time and then after speaking to Stephen Burrage and is plans to scale back and semi retire, I reluctantly decided to sell my Bund Tutima Chrono with its Lemania movement - I didnt want to have a dud in the future. The watch has however gone to a good home, an officer in the Italian Air Force so its probably almost back where it belongs albeit with a different NATO country.
Good luck to Cousins, we all need them to succeed.
Keith
Swatch want to control all and are big enough to do so by throwing money at it until they get their own way and Cousins although taking a brave moral stance may end up spending much moola and need to beware other sides costs.
Sadly through experience large manufacturers and corporations will even if defeated sort it another way
If Cousins win based on "anti competitive" practices or Swatch behaving in a way detrimental to consumer choice
Swatch can do any number of things going forward.
* appoint an authorised network of suppliers and agents based on a selective quality standards they set themselves.
* change distributor margins of their products I.e reduce to 5% so it's not worthwhile being a re seller of their goods.
Experience with Omega (and Audi) seems to support this...
Omega boutique half the price for straps / clasps as any other retailer including online.
Audi tyre £40 cheaper from their service centre, fitted, and car washed within an hour (none of the rest had the tyre in stock).
I can sympathise with the hobbyists but not Cousins. And correct me if I'm wrong, as other companies such as Rolex do the same, I can't see Swatch being challenged successfully.
Sorry, I don't have a problem with it...
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Whilst current legal action is taking place in Switzerland, it is nevertheless worth noting that, as far as I know, when Swatch sell a watch to an UK AD or UK parts wholesaler, the transaction takes place in the UK under UK law. Thus there is every possibility of this being continued in a UK court (or, for the time being, an EU court). See my earlier comment at http://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.ph...=1#post4198606.
Last edited by markrlondon; 31st March 2017 at 14:20.
Speaking to my watchmaker making money on parts is rare , availability of the parts allow the job to be done in the first place and there arnt many if any Omega parts suppliers ?
So all in all your comments sound weak and not logical.
May I politely disagree.
my comments come from 28 years experience of franchising and how manufacturers seek full control of their products and services and ultimately their brand and the lengths they will go to achieve their end game which trust me is exhaustive once they get going.
I fully agree its not necessarily logical or even the right thing to do but it's almost inevitably what they will do or a variation of it - but i guess time will tell, then we can judge the strength of my views on what might occur in the future. - I actually hope I am proved wrong.
if an authorised network is established and your 'watchmaker' applies but is excluded (does not meet investment and training standards) from said network and so is his current parts supplier then you will have to go to a "Swatch' Authorised distributor / repairer. (not a cartel you understand as franchise would be open to all applicants who have to meet same exacting standards) unless they "Swatch" are aiming on doing full on "Selective Distribution" which i suspect is where they are heading to avoid the bother of dealing with applicants and to have full control over who can obtain and resell their products.
wether you or I think this is right is a different matter, but personally speaking I think it is a sad that "Independent" suppliers and watchmakers are being squeezed out.
Last edited by TKH; 31st March 2017 at 06:04.
Have they actually broken any laws in the UK (or the EU)? Block exemption rules come about to promote more competition. It would be really interesting to understand Cousin's legal strategy wouldn't it? I wonder why they chose to do this in Switzerland.
As I pointed out before, that would be for a court to decide. One cannot prejudge the outcome of any possible action.
The present requirement to pursue this in Switzerland was discussed in an earlier missive from Cousins, as I recall. But that's only the present.
It staggers me that any enthusiast would be happy about the demise of the independent service network ... it won't be long before big corporations own everything ...
Indeed.
NEWS FLASH, they already do
Not quite; there are small pockets of independent and small businesses still alive but some of the attitudes above will soon usher in the end of that ...
I have a few 60's watches that I won't be sending to Omega; so what will happen to them? Perfectly good watches that will in the end be consigned to the back of the sock drawer ...???
An update from Cousins, for what it's worth:
News Update: 27.4.17 - All submissions to the court are in, the Judge has advised that he will deliver his verdict shortly.
Many of you have asked for an update on the progress of the law suit that Swatch have brought against us in the Swiss courts. You will recall that we followed the required legal process of writing a letter advising Swatch that we would be taking the matter to the High Court in London if they refused to resupply us with parts. In response, they have attempted to prevent the English courts from hearing the case by launching pre-emptive action against us in Bern.
Our Swiss lawyers responded to their claim by pointing out to the court several reasons why this case was not admissible, and were successful in arguing (against Swatch’s wishes) that this issue should be decided by the judge before any arguments about the legality of parts restrictions are heard. I can now advise you that all submissions on these points of jurisdiction and admissibility have now been made to the court, and the Judge has advised that he will deliver his verdict shortly. We hope that this will be within the next six to ten weeks.
If the Swiss courts agree that the Swatch claim against us is not admissible, then we will begin the process of asking the High Court in London to hear the matter, and give a binding decision on whether or not Swatch’s refusal to supply spares is an abuse of their dominant market position.
We will update again on this process when the decision comes in from the judge in Bern.
Kind Regards
Anthony Cousins
Sadly there will be more and more watches left in the back of sock drawers!
Eventually there will be a handful of accredited repairers in the UK plus the brand service centres. Taking Omega as an example, the accredited repairers are told what they can and can`t work on depending on the age and complexity of the watch. Swatch want all the old stuff to go back to Switzerland for service/repair at very significant cost, which is crazy. The feasibility of getting old watches with relatively low values fixed will diminish; the few remaining repairers will make their living charging high prices to service the expensive stuff and hey won`t be interested in fixing that old Accurist or Avia that's been handed down as an heirloom. This is already happening, repairers will quote silly prices that are in line with the cost of servicing the upmarket stuff........they need to turn over enough money to pay for the inflated overheads associated with getting brand accreditation and I can`t say I blame them. There are only so many working hours in a day, so why spend time servicing a watch for £100 when you could be servicing a modern Omega and charging £350!
If parts were still available, even at 2013 prices, it would still be feasible for folks like me to restore the majority of old watches for a sensible cost on a hobby basis. The parts situation is now starting to bite; I`m still in a position to work on the 50s-70s Omegas because I`ve acquired a stash of movement parts over the last couple of years but it's the case parts (hands, crowns etc) that are becoming a problem. It's getting worse for the later watches such as 10 year old SMPs; again it's case parts that are the issue. 2 years ago I could order a new handset for a Moonwatch or SMP, now I can`t. There's one monkey selling stuff on ebay that's been returned after watches have been serviced by Omega, that's the way things are going. He's wanting £65 for a 2254.50 handset that's second-hand......I offered him what I thought they were worth and needless to say he turned it down. Swatch Group are creating a market on ebay for second-hand parts of dubious quality. If parts were freely available folks wouldn`t be trying to sell second-hand crap, but there enough chancers out there trying to make a killing. There are legitimate sellers who sell NOS parts still in original packaging, but they're now asking high prices because they know people are struggling.
There's no fun in any of this, it takes the pleasure away from working on watches. If parts are genuinely obsolete I can accept that, but the fact that the parts are still produced but supply is restricted is a different matter. It's frustrating to say the least, there's no pleasure in having to scrape around and beg favours to obtain parts that were easy to get 2 years ago and that's one reason why I`m taking very few jobs on thesedays.
I hope Anthony Cousins has some success, but I`m hopeful rather than optimistic. I don`t understand the legalities and I`ve no wish to try, I stick to logic and common sense which often doesn`t apply where the law's concerned.
I think there could've been a sensible middle ground, whereby repairers had to have some level of accreditation by a professional body such as the BHI (or similar overseas bodies) to be supplied with parts. Sadly I think the time for negotiation and compromise has passed, the Swiss have made a stand and they'll be loathe to lose face at this stage.
The one major manufacturer who hasn`t gone down this path is LVMH. They haven`t supplied wholesalers for years but will supply bona fide repairers directly without putting too many hurdles in the way. Unless they change strategy this means TAGs and Zeniths will be easier for service in the future.
Rant over, back to the bench to finish work on a 50s Omega.........even though Swatch Group have branded the likes of me to be totally unworthy. What's really crazy is the fact that they're treating some very highly regarded professional repairers the same way.....and that really is wrong.
Paul
Perhaps when 3D printing has improved, they won't be able to have such a monopoly...
Is it really feasible that 3D printing could manufacture the tiny parts used in a watch movement? My gut feeling says no.
I know little about 3D printing, I know a lot more about watches; does anyone who knows about both feel that 3D printing is a feasible way of producing parts?
Paul
It was just a hypothesis. It wasn't long ago that we thought CD's were cutting edge..
Yes it will be possible, you can already print in metal not just resin, in Eastern Europe gun parts, even whole hand guns have been printed and used!
Including the pressure bearing parts, i.e. barrel and chamber? Are you sure?
No.
You buy a pre-manufactured DIY set and 3D-print the missing (illegal) parts.
Someone who lies about the little things will lie about the big things too.
I'm sure it's going to be possible. It reminds me of reading about Ericsson manufacturing one of the first 3G handsets in a press release which they released sometime in the late 90s. The second paragraph referred to the fact that they were driving the said handset around the countryside in the back of a van but the approach is to make it work and then work out how to make it smaller.
Posting Permissions
