Those Who Pursue a Sound Industrial Objective Will Survive

"The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function." — F. Scott Fitzgerald

Nov 16, 2025

“Those who pursue a sound industrial objective will survive.” A Swiss watchmaker’s warning demands reinterpretation for 2025, when independence has transformed from counter-cultural resistance into a collectible luxury category competing within capitalism itself.

The words of a Swiss independent watchmaker carry particular weight in today’s transformed luxury landscape: “Those who pursue a sound industrial objective will survive.” At first glance, the statement seems paradoxical. Independent watchmaking emerged in the 1980s precisely as resistance to industrialization, with the founding of the Horological Academy in 1985 by Svend Andersen and Vincent Calabrese to “resist the industrialization of the trade following the quartz crisis, against a capitalist and globalized system engulfing craftsmanship”. Yet in 2025, as 90% of independent watchmakers expect sales to be up or flat despite a 2.8% decline across the luxury watch industry, while simultaneously “for many of them, business survival is a struggle”, the quote demands reinterpretation. What does “sound industrial objective” mean for watchmakers who built their identity rejecting industrial logic?

The answer lies not in factory-scale production but in three strategic imperatives: accessing capital without compromising autonomy, building scalable business infrastructure while preserving craft identity, and understanding market positioning to choose sustainable strategies. The quote warns that in 2025’s sophisticated luxury ecosystem, artistic vision alone cannot sustain a business—survival requires industrial thinking applied to artisanal enterprises.

Strategic Capital Access Without Selling Out

The traditional model of independent watchmaking is inherently capital-starved. Production economics work against low-volume makers: manufacturing costs decrease 10-30% every time cumulative production doubles, “but many independents never produce as many as 80, or in some cases even 20, of a given design”. Without economies of scale, independents cannot invest competitively in tooling, research and development, or marketing infrastructure. They face a bind: needing resources while fearing that accessing capital means losing the autonomy that defines independence.

The emerging solution represents the first dimension of “sound industrial objective”—strategic partnerships that provide resources while preserving creative control. The most visible example is Chanel’s 2024 minority stake in MB&F, where “MB&F remains fiercely independent in its creative pursuits” while “Chanel’s involvement has contributed to strengthening its presence in the luxury market”. This model differs fundamentally from full acquisitions by conglomerates like LVMH or Richemont. Even within conglomerates, experiments are emerging: Daniel Roth’s revival within LVMH structure tests whether a brand with independence DNA can exist inside corporate frameworks.

Collaborations function as another form of strategic capital access. Louis Vuitton partnered with independent Akrivia on the LVRR-01, while Zenith worked with Phillips and Kari Voutilainen on the Calibre 135 Observatoire project. The logic is straightforward: independents gain cash flow and visibility; major brands acquire legitimacy and collector goodwill. Industry analysts expect this pattern to persist well into 2025, precisely because it solves capital-access constraints without diluting independence.

This represents a sophisticated understanding that independence need not mean financial isolation. The “sound industrial objective” here involves recognizing that survival requires capital and building strategic partnerships to access it while maintaining creative autonomy.

Scalable Infrastructure While Preserving Craft

The current market crisis reveals independents’ infrastructure vulnerabilities. Major brands cutting orders means “supplier businesses in difficulty,” creating a “knock-on effect on smaller watchmakers who also rely on the same suppliers”. More specifically, 33% of independents report problems sourcing components, while 28% struggle finding skilled watchmakers. When supply chains prioritize Rolex and Richemont over small independents, romantic notions of artisanal self-sufficiency collide with operational reality.

The response has been diffusion lines—a production strategy that creates scalable infrastructure. MB&F created M.A.D. Editions in 2021, Grönefeld launched GRØNE in 2024, and Hajime Asaoka founded Kurono Tokyo in 2019. The business case is compelling: “Supply from brands like MB&F, Hajime Asaoka, Grönefeld cannot keep up with demand, so other methods to satisfy that demand must be explored”. Diffusion lines provide revenue diversification that “helps protect the parent brand’s survival should market conditions change” while offering “instant gratification that solves the waiting problem” created by artisanal production constraints.

This strategy requires different production systems for different offerings—industrial efficiency where appropriate, handcraft where it creates value. It is selective scaling, exemplified by Kari Voutilainen, who “dreamed of selling two or three watches a year when he first started” but now has a “dedicated guilloche building” with workshops that “enable Voutilainen to create...quality...at scale”. Voutilainen has not abandoned craft but has industrialized specific processes to increase capacity without compromising standards.

Infrastructure extends beyond production. Watch brand clubhouses create “spaces that transcend traditional retail—community and immersion...the future of watch retail”, while “many new brands will be social-media friendly, meaning the watches look distinctive in photos”, recognizing digital presence as critical infrastructure.

The second “sound industrial objective” involves building repeatable, scalable business processes and investing in appropriate infrastructure—facilities, digital capabilities, distribution networks—while understanding which processes to industrialize and which to preserve as artisanal differentiators.

Strategic Market Positioning

Current market dynamics paradoxically favor independents. “In 2024, vintage, neo-vintage, and independents thrived, while modern watches saw a clear decline. Collectors shifted toward rarity and quality”, with 40% of independent brands reporting they “could not produce enough watches to satisfy demand” despite industry-wide downturn. Being genuinely independent carries commercial value in 2025’s collector market.

However, the opportunity is constrained. “The number of well-heeled enthusiast collectors oriented toward the indies is quite small”, and the top four private brands—Rolex, Patek Philippe, Audemars Piguet, and Richard Mille—”captured 67% of the industry’s total profits with an average operating margin of 34%”. Most luxury watch profits flow to established players; independents compete for the remainder within a limited collector base.

This reality demands strategic clarity about competitive positioning and resource constraints. “The likelihood that artistic, leadership, analytic, and fiscal capabilities are embodied within a single watchmaker is quite low”. Success requires realistic assessment of production capacity, capital access, market positioning, and competitive advantages. Different market positions demand different “industrial objectives”—what works for an ultra-luxury artisan producing 20 pieces annually will not work for a brand attempting to produce hundreds, and vice versa.

The third “sound industrial objective” involves understanding which market segment you actually compete in and aligning production, pricing, and marketing strategy with that realistic position. It means recognizing constraints and choosing a sustainable business model accordingly, rather than pursuing growth incompatible with available resources or market opportunity.

What “Sound Industrial Objective” Does NOT Mean

Importantly, the quote doesn’t advocate mass production or abandoning craft identity. Even successful independents like MB&F face “unscalable artisanal production methods, use of intensely skilled labor, and limited use of third-party parts”. Innovation and craft remain core differentiators—Konstantin Chaykin’s ThinKing “beats establishment powerhouses in ultra-thin mechanical watchmaking...despite being a small independent manufacture without access to a large-scale research and development facility”.

Strategic partnerships do not require selling to conglomerates. Minority stakes and collaborations differ fundamentally from acquisition. But the quote does demand business sophistication—professional management, financial planning, strategic thinking—recognizing that survival requires more than making beautiful watches.

Conclusion

In 2025, independence is no longer counter-cultural resistance but a collectible luxury category competing within capitalism. The paradox is that survival requires industrial thinking even for anti-industrial brands. The three imperatives synthesize into a coherent strategy: access capital strategically through partnerships and collaborations, build scalable infrastructure for production and distribution, and position realistically within market constraints. Despite current optimism, independents face “supply chain challenges and rising costs” that romantic notions of pure craft cannot overcome.

“Sound industrial objective” ultimately means bringing strategic business sophistication to artisanal watchmaking—not industrializing the watches themselves, but industrializing the business thinking that sustains their creation. Those who survive in 2025 will be those who master this paradox, understanding that preserving independence requires precisely the kind of strategic, infrastructure-focused, capital-conscious thinking that the term “industrial objective” implies. The warning remains urgent: without sound business strategy, artistic vision alone will not ensure survival.

About the Author

Sergio Galanti is an independent brand strategist and writer in the luxury watch industry. He is the editor of WatchDossier, a publication devoted to the cultural and philosophical undercurrents of modern horology.

No compensation or brand affiliation influenced this essay. Opinions are the author’s own.