Bremont - what have they done?

[earlofsodbury]

I always thought that venture capital tended to focus on relatively safe bets - no matter how weak the business, there would at least be solid material assets to strip - but here the main assets seem to have been the brand and the concommitant IP, all of which apart from the name is going in the bin. This seems a really good way to get rid of quite a lot of money quickly.

I'll admit that Finance is arcane to the point of bewilderment to me, but I don't see the angle here - Bremont don't own anything of significance, so what's the game?

[Rev-O]

I always thought that venture capital tended to focus on relatively safe bets - no matter how weak the business, there would at least be solid material assets to strip - but here the main assets seem to have been the brand and the concommitant IP, all of which apart from the name is going in the bin. This seems a really good way to get rid of quite a lot of money quickly.

I'll admit that Finance is arcane to the point of bewilderment to me, but I don't see the angle here - Bremont don't own anything of significance, so what's the game?

Yes. The (tangible) book value aka net asset value of the company would seem to be minimal.

By devaluing the brand they’ve lost the one thing Bremont had.

I can’t see this ending well for anyone. But then I always felt it was built on a dodgy foundation: a creation myth that never really rang true and some bad missteps along the way. With The Wing and the plans to make an entire ebauche from scratch in the UK I had hopes for them as a true in-house manufacture but it looks like that’s all gone now. What’s left is something caught between Tudor and CW but without the identity or customer loyalty of either.

[sweets]

Yes. The (tangible) book value aka net asset value of the company would seem to be minimal.

By devaluing the brand they’ve lost the one thing Bremont had.

I can’t see this ending well for anyone. But then I always felt it was built on a dodgy foundation: a creation myth that never really rang true and some bad missteps along the way. With The Wing and the plans to make an entire ebauche from scratch in the UK I had hopes for them as a true in-house manufacture but it looks like that’s all gone now. What’s left is something caught between Tudor and CW but without the identity or customer loyalty of either.

I am not sure this is very consistent.
You argue that they have devalued the one thing they have, their brand.
But then argue that the brand was built on dodgy foundations.
Which would seem to indicate that there really wasn't that much to devalue.

For me, there was a relatively strong and consistent story based around the slightly clunky tagline of "Tested Beyond Endurance".
It's a bad phrase, but the message was consistent throughout.
The other main consistency was much of the styling, based around the Trip-tick case.
These were 2 of the 4 mainstays of the brand creation. The others were the Limited Editions (most of which left me cold), and the Military Projects (which certainly seemed to be going great), which also spawned newer ranges.

We (as a forum) may not have loved it all, but I think the brand did succeed in getting quite a lot of traction (here and abroad), and I certainly believe genuine value was created in the brand.

But everywhere I look now there is a majority that are bemoaning the new direction, with its evident backtracking on quality and toughness (for instance 904 Stainless may be what Rolex uses, but if you are treating your 316 cases to achieve a 1200 Vickers Hardness, I'll take the 316 any day).
The fact that all of the styling seems also in the process of being ditched really does (as you rightly say) devalue the past performance, as well as the new direction.

And I certainly agree that it will end badly for many, if not everyone involved.

[Rev-O]

I am not sure this is very consistent.
You argue that they have devalued the one thing they have, their brand.
But then argue that the brand was built on dodgy foundations.
Which would seem to indicate that there really wasn't that much to devalue.

Well, people bought into it. I just found the whole "crash landed in a French farmer's field" thing slightly . . . overplayed at best, if not downright fanciful.

For me, there was a relatively strong and consistent story based around the slightly clunky tagline of "Tested Beyond Endurance".
It's a bad phrase, but the message was consistent throughout.
The other main consistency was much of the styling, based around the Trip-tick case.
These were 2 of the 4 mainstays of the brand creation. The others were the Limited Editions (most of which left me cold), and the Military Projects (which certainly seemed to be going great), which also spawned newer ranges.

Yeah, I'll concede that. Fair enough.

We (as a forum) may not have loved it all, but I think the brand did succeed in getting quite a lot of traction (here and abroad), and I certainly believe genuine value was created in the brand.

That's kind of my point: they created a story that people invested in. And some neat in-house(ish) watches, too. Not my taste personally but I admired the Trip-tick case and the aspiration to build a watch in the UK from the ground up.

Now? Now they look like yet another microbrand using ETA clones and Chinese cases. Watches that should sell for hundreds not thousands, with little intrinsic value and no USP.