QC Issues C9 Chronometer - Excellent Resolution by Mike France

Discuss Christopher Ward watches
User avatar
Amor Vincit Omnia
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 20226
Joined: Sat Jun 11, 2011 7:34 pm
CW-watches: 8
LE-six: Yes
Location: Norfolk, UK

Re: QC Issues C9 Chronometer

Post by Amor Vincit Omnia » Fri Aug 30, 2019 7:14 pm

Dave, first of all sorry to see this issue. Everyone is completely right, of course, it shouldn’t happen and it is a complete PITA. Statistically it may well be reasonably rare, but it’s not rare enough and I think the powers that be appreciate that it’s not rare enough. We on the forum, and that includes the Admin Team, can only sympathise. It is pointless people like me coming on to say how good our watches are, and how pleased we are, because that doesn’t solve your problem in the slightest.

You were right to email Mike France, and I suspect you sent him the photo as well. I would be surprised if he didn’t reply, and if I were you I would probably forward it to Christopher Ward as well.

It’s a brand new watch so the options should be clear: fix and return to new condition; replace with completely new watch (make a note of the serial number); or refund. But give them the opportunity to put it right. Keep us informed with how you get on.
Steve
The half minute which we daily devote to the winding-up of our watches is an exertion of labour almost insensible; yet, by the aid of a few wheels, its effect is spread over the whole twenty-four hours.
Charles Babbage


@Avo238

DavecUK
Senior
Senior
Posts: 128
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:10 pm

Re: QC Issues C9 Chronometer

Post by DavecUK » Sat Aug 31, 2019 11:01 am

I don't have any update from my e-mail to Mike France, I have not forwarded to Christopher Ward because I don't have his e-mail address. On reflection I wish I had asked for it at the time.

I have a personal update for those interested which will clear up exactly how the screw got in there and the sorts of things people should be checking on any new watch if you are fortunate enough to have an exhibition case back. It's one of the checks I would always do.

In the first photo you can see the screw much more clearly, note the length and the unthreaded larger portion, this is to hold one of the plates down that hold parts of the movement together. It is so long that this could not come undone during transit. It would have been placed during assembly, perhaps with a slight twist. I thought it was a balance bridge screw, but if it had been there would have been insufficient space under the rotor to actually assemble the rest of the movement.

In the second photo I have allowed the rotor to move and identified where screw should be (near the spring barrel), this area is low enough that it would not have prevented watch assembly. I am amazed it passed COSC testing in 5 positions and also any form of quality control but of course they test their movements outside the watch. Even had the watch been running when I got it, I would have spotted in on a normal cursory inspection of the movement through the case back and I was only using 3X optics with natural light.

The balance wheel will run for a while, but I dare not wind the movement for fear of more damage. When it runs the amplitude is really low (I can see that visually), it might be because there is no power but there is significant chance of movement damage. I hope when it ships back the screw doesn't lodge into the balance and hairspring and then get clouted by the rotor, although that probably already happened.

The rotor moves extremely well (when not impeded by the screw), so that's a very nice thing about the movement.
c9 qc2.JPG
c9 qc1.JPG

User avatar
Viognier
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 2996
Joined: Mon May 28, 2012 8:16 pm
CW-watches: 3
Location: Canada

Re: QC Issues C9 Chronometer

Post by Viognier » Sat Aug 31, 2019 2:43 pm

Appreciate the explanations and the quality close up photos. Do hope it gets sorted for you quickly!
Small collection of timepieces that I enjoy

User avatar
groovin
Senior
Senior
Posts: 73
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 1:17 pm
CW-watches: 6

Re: QC Issues C9 Chronometer

Post by groovin » Sat Aug 31, 2019 3:38 pm

Funny how in the discussion with the owners on the YouTube stream from the get-together the owners when confronted with the quality control question and especially your case Dave, say they didn't know about it and constantly use phrases like "first time we hear about these issues" "very few" and praise the quality of CW watches.

Now while I do agree that the event should have a positive vibe, that generally the quality of CW is solid and that maybe Mike France didn't have a chance to look at this email and must be very busy, it is really wierd to not acknowledge these issues and say they will be improved but instead to say that the issue with customer support and service over the past months was the duration and not the quality. That must be a really disappointing thing to hear for anyone on this forum.
Tudor Black Bay | C9 Moonphase | C65 Trident Auto | C9 5 Day Auto | Vulcain Aviator | C60 299 Signal Sqn | Seiko Turtle Blue Lagoon | Oris Aquis | Steinhart Ocean One Gnomon | Zelos Swordfish V2

User avatar
TigerChris
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 2376
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2017 2:51 pm
CW-watches: 3
Location: The right side of the Pennines

Re: QC Issues C9 Chronometer

Post by TigerChris » Sat Aug 31, 2019 4:07 pm

groovin wrote:
Sat Aug 31, 2019 3:38 pm
maybe Mike France didn't have a chance to look at this email and must be very busy,
Load of rubbish. I own a 365 days a year business. Admitted nowhere near the size of CW, but still have 16 members of staff. I have staff on shift from 5am till midnight 7 days a week, 365 days a year. I sit down every night, including when I’m on holiday, and double check every single email that has come into my personal email box to make sure I haven’t missed anything. I wouldn’t expect a regular employee to do this, but I would expect a company director with money invested in the business to ensure that he/she has a system in place that they capture all of their personal correspondence each day. If not, things get lost. In this day and age where emails are on all of our devices, including phones, there is no excuse. For Mike to sit there and say its the first he’s heard of it when a message was sent directly to him regarding it yesterday is, I’m sorry, a load of rubbish. If its not a load of rubbish and he genuinely hasn’t seen it then he needs to look at how he works himself. If a director is missing simple things like an email how are you meant to direct your staff in the correct manor? We can blame the people on the shop floor all we like but the book stops at those 3 sat there on the stage this afternoon and I question whether they do actually know what is happening in their business day to day. On the face of it they have a great product but something is not working how it should and the blame lies at the top. Time for Chris, Mike and Peter to step up and physically sort things out rather than just keep saying ‘it’s in hand’.
If it’s not from Yorkshire it’s sh1te!

jtc
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 3028
Joined: Fri Oct 05, 2012 9:50 pm
CW-watches: 1
Location: Hampshire, UK

Re: QC Issues C9 Chronometer

Post by jtc » Sat Aug 31, 2019 5:26 pm

Very disappointing from the founders/owners of CW.
Jon

Sales Corner Feedback

CW | Tudor | Tag Heuer | Omega | Halios | Oris | Seiko | Casio

User avatar
welshlad
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6770
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 12:33 am
CW-watches: 9
LE-two: yes
LE-three: yes
LE-foura: yes
LE-five: yes
Location: Yorkshire, UK

Re: QC Issues C9 Chronometer

Post by welshlad » Sat Aug 31, 2019 5:27 pm

My understanding is that someone (I can't remember who it was, sorry) spoke to Mike about this specific case in the chat after the Q&A session today, watched him find the email on his phone and impressed on him the need to look into this case personally. So hopefully there will be some developments soon for the OP. I certainly hope so.
CWL C1R | C5A | C60 x2 | C70 x4 | C8
Omega Speedy | AT8500 | AT2500 | PO Ti
Rolex Exp 114270 | Sub 14060 Zenith EP1969 Damasko DA44
Grand Seiko Snowflake Seiko 55 Fthms
Citizen Promaster Tissot V8 Vratislavia S6 Casio WT Luch 1Hand

User avatar
TigerChris
Senior Forumgod
Senior Forumgod
Posts: 2376
Joined: Tue Mar 21, 2017 2:51 pm
CW-watches: 3
Location: The right side of the Pennines

Re: QC Issues C9 Chronometer

Post by TigerChris » Sat Aug 31, 2019 5:41 pm

welshlad wrote:
Sat Aug 31, 2019 5:27 pm
My understanding is that someone (I can't remember who it was, sorry) spoke to Mike about this specific case in the chat after the Q&A session today, watched him find the email on his phone and impressed on him the need to look into this case personally. So hopefully there will be some developments soon for the OP. I certainly hope so.
As you say, hopefully something will be sorted for the OP. However, it really shouldn’t take someone to speak too him after a GTG to get him to find the email on his phone. I’m sorry, but thats terrible. So, basically, if it wasn’t for todays GTG, I’d wager that the OP’s email would have got missed. All I can say is that I’m glad he’s not running a company where an oversight like that could have real consequences.
If it’s not from Yorkshire it’s sh1te!

DavecUK
Senior
Senior
Posts: 128
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:10 pm

Re: QC Issues C9 Chronometer

Post by DavecUK » Sat Aug 31, 2019 11:24 pm

Just to let people know, Mike would probably not have had time to view my e-mail as it was sent on Friday evening at 17:38 and I wouldn't have expected a reply until Monday evening or Tuesday at the earliest. So thanks for those who bought it up at the GTG but you would have rather ambushed Mike.

He has since contacted me via e-mail and of course initially I only gave a precis of what had happened, he would undoubtedly want a fuller report from his experts. I have replied with more information and identified it (as best I can) as one of the screws securing the movement to the case and provided Mike extra photos so he can see for himself.

I have suggested 2 preferable courses of action and wait for Mikes decision on the way he feels comfortable to proceed. For me the last resort is a refund and only if neither of my suggested/preferred 2 solutions are accepted by Mike. Let's hope a less than ideal start can end with a quality solution and customer experience.

User avatar
welshlad
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 6770
Joined: Wed Apr 11, 2012 12:33 am
CW-watches: 9
LE-two: yes
LE-three: yes
LE-foura: yes
LE-five: yes
Location: Yorkshire, UK

Re: QC Issues C9 Chronometer

Post by welshlad » Sun Sep 01, 2019 12:22 am

Fingers crossed for you, Dave. Please keep us posted on developments.
CWL C1R | C5A | C60 x2 | C70 x4 | C8
Omega Speedy | AT8500 | AT2500 | PO Ti
Rolex Exp 114270 | Sub 14060 Zenith EP1969 Damasko DA44
Grand Seiko Snowflake Seiko 55 Fthms
Citizen Promaster Tissot V8 Vratislavia S6 Casio WT Luch 1Hand

meinberg
Newbie
Newbie
Posts: 22
Joined: Fri Apr 26, 2019 4:06 am
CW-watches: 2
Location: Melbourne

Re: QC Issues C9 Chronometer

Post by meinberg » Sun Sep 01, 2019 8:16 am

DavecUK wrote:
Sat Aug 31, 2019 11:24 pm

I have suggested 2 preferable courses of action and wait for Mikes decision on the way he feels comfortable to proceed. For me the last resort is a refund and only if neither of my suggested/preferred 2 solutions are accepted by Mike. Let's hope a less than ideal start can end with a quality solution and customer experience.
You are very patient, given the circumstances Mike should have offered you a refund or a new watch, it is not up to him to 'feel comfortable', his company have stuffed up and sent you a very sub standard product.
If I bought a packet of biscuits from my local supermarket and discovered they were moldy when I opened them the supermarket would give me a refund and another packet of biscuits, now I am not suggesting you should get a free watch but your case shows that the 3 amigos have not yet woken up fully to the disaster that is QC/CS at CW, and what I find most worrying is that your situation indicates Mike clearly does not get it.
Oris, CW, Tag and a few others.

DavecUK
Senior
Senior
Posts: 128
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:10 pm

Re: QC Issues C9 Chronometer

Post by DavecUK » Sun Sep 01, 2019 9:49 am

meinberg wrote:
Sun Sep 01, 2019 8:16 am
You are very patient, given the circumstances Mike should have offered you a refund or a new watch, it is not up to him to 'feel comfortable', his company have stuffed up and sent you a very sub standard product.
If I bought a packet of biscuits from my local supermarket and discovered they were moldy when I opened them the supermarket would give me a refund and another packet of biscuits, now I am not suggesting you should get a free watch but your case shows that the 3 amigos have not yet woken up fully to the disaster that is QC/CS at CW, and what I find most worrying is that your situation indicates Mike clearly does not get it.
I agree that the customer experience is well short of what they would like people to have, their processes clearly need improvement in a few areas.. My guess would be Customer Service is reactive rather than proactive in driving their business forward in the QC and customer experience areas. Mike would do well to make that an integral part of the engine that drives his business.

The 3 owners also need to put themselves in the position of the customer, driving processes and solutions that delight the customer when things go wrong without breaking the business. Sometimes this is going to hurt a little but we all know the saying, if it doesn't hurt, it's not working. Just so it's clear this watch was a clearance at 50% off. If I were Mike the solution would be simple and I would offer the customer 2 options and let them choose and for clarity Mike did offer a refund but that's not my preferred course of action.
  • 1. Offer a movement swap (not a repair) no questions asked with a guaranteed turnaround time (that would be the basic minimum and doesn't really delight the customer)

    2. Or invite the customer to the shop to pick out whichever SH21 watch they liked of similar RRP and let them take that away with them. If the RRP was significantly more, offer the watch at a 50% discount. (this is how to delight the customer)

If I were offered these options with what's available now...I would choose this watch and pay Mike the extra £215 based on a 50% reduction:


https://www.christopherward.co.uk/c65-t ... -sh21-le-1

I would go away delighted and Mike would have my existing return to repair and sell at some time in the future...a win win all round. In fact if I were Mike, I would probably not take the extra money, or give a free service voucher linked to the watch movement number. Thus ensuring the customer a decade of worry free enjoyment.

These sorts of problems can be gifts to companies like CW, it just depends on how they handle them and what they learn from them. I'm a reasonable person (or at least I think I am), mistakes happen, it's what you do afterwards that matters.

User avatar
richtel
Forumgod
Forumgod
Posts: 806
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2015 9:10 pm
CW-watches: 8
Location: Cotswolds

Re: QC Issues C9 Chronometer

Post by richtel » Sun Sep 01, 2019 10:05 am

Dodging the CS issue discussion, I'm not sure that's a bridge screw- more like it's a movement clamp screw.

There are usually two or more holding the movement into the case together with a small springy metal retention plate which holds the movement down against a lip in the case. You can see one of them at the two 'o' clock position in the OP's first photo just to the right of the 'Swiss Made' marking. The screw is long and beefy and goes into the main plate. What adds a little more alarm is whether there is also a clamp floating around in there also.

User avatar
richtel
Forumgod
Forumgod
Posts: 806
Joined: Tue Sep 29, 2015 9:10 pm
CW-watches: 8
Location: Cotswolds

Re: QC Issues C9 Chronometer

Post by richtel » Sun Sep 01, 2019 10:16 am

DavecUK wrote:
Sun Sep 01, 2019 9:49 am
If I were Mike the solution would be simple and I would offer the customer 2 options and let them choose and for clarity Mike did offer a refund but that's not my preferred course of action. [/b]
  • 1. Offer a movement swap (not a repair) no questions asked with a guaranteed turnaround time (that would be the basic minimum and doesn't really delight the customer)

    2. Or invite the customer to the shop to pick out whichever SH21 watch they liked of similar RRP and let them take that away with them. If the RRP was significantly more, offer the watch at a 50% discount. (this is how to delight the customer)

If I were offered these options with what's available now...I would choose this watch and pay Mike the extra £215 based on a 50% reduction:


https://www.christopherward.co.uk/c65-t ... -sh21-le-1

I would go away delighted and Mike would have my existing return to repair and sell at some time in the future...a win win all round. In fact if I were Mike, I would probably not take the extra money, or give a free service voucher linked to the watch movement number. Thus ensuring the customer a decade of worry free enjoyment.
I'm going to stick my neck out and disagree wholeheartedly. Your contract was to buy a watch at 50% off- a watch they chose to discount because it was end of line or a slow-seller. They have failed to provide you with a watch of suitable quality so have breached the contract. You have a right to expect a total refund- that's it. To expect them to give you something that goes way above the retail value of the item you bought is hugely unrealistic.

It's like me buying a second hand 1 series at the BMW dealer which turns out to be a lemon, and expecting them to provide me with a new M5 with me paying only the difference between the M5 and a brand new 1 series. Unrealistic.

They screwed up, they've offered a total refund. Take it.

DavecUK
Senior
Senior
Posts: 128
Joined: Wed Aug 14, 2019 6:10 pm

Re: QC Issues C9 Chronometer

Post by DavecUK » Sun Sep 01, 2019 10:49 am

richtel wrote:
Sun Sep 01, 2019 10:05 am
Dodging the CS issue discussion, I'm not sure that's a bridge screw- more like it's a movement clamp screw.

There are usually two or more holding the movement into the case together with a small springy metal retention plate which holds the movement down against a lip in the case. You can see one of them at the two 'o' clock position in the OP's first photo just to the right of the 'Swiss Made' marking. The screw is long and beefy and goes into the main plate. What adds a little more alarm is whether there is also a clamp floating around in there also.
You are quite correct and this is what I told Mike yesterday with photos of the movement clamp screw in another SH21 movement. Also I did mention about the little retention tab as well and that it will be floating around somewhere. It's why I have not operated the keyless works in any way, or attempted to wind the watch. It's why the recess I identified is not fully countersunk as in the movement bridge screws etc..because it's designed to centre and clamp down on a movement retaining tab.
richtel wrote:
Sun Sep 01, 2019 10:16 am
I'm going to stick my neck out and disagree wholeheartedly. Your contract was to buy a watch at 50% off- a watch they chose to discount because it was end of line or a slow-seller. They have failed to provide you with a watch of suitable quality so have breached the contract. You have a right to expect a total refund- that's it. To expect them to give you something that goes way above the retail value of the item you bought is hugely unrealistic.

It's like me buying a second hand 1 series at the BMW dealer which turns out to be a lemon, and expecting them to provide me with a new M5 with me paying only the difference between the M5 and a brand new 1 series. Unrealistic.

They screwed up, they've offered a total refund. Take it.
Rich, whilst I see where you are coming from, I feel you are so wrong I cannot begin to explain...This is a specialist type of market that is 100% about brand image, service and customer confidence. Whilst your comparison might be fine for B&Q or Ryan air, it's not right for CW Watches. As for BMW, I drive one and as someone mentioned earlier you get better CS from your local supermarket.

Oh and Rich "my contract" wasn't for a watch, that wasn't what I was buying....because if it was that simple no one would buy Rolex, Omega, PP, AP etc.. They would all go and get a sub £300 quartz ecodrive atomic watch which would run perfectly with perfect time for 20 years and never even require setting. Or even just this I purchased for £40 over 15 years ago. It's in a watch case because I respect it. It's travelled the world with me, in the sea, in swimming pools in jacuzzis in showers and never once missed a beat, it now has a value beyond just a watch. I sold my Rolex and AP, but I would never part with this scruffy old watch. I still wear it regularly even now.
wc watch.JPG

Post Reply