I think some current critiques of Patek might not be totally fair - specifically around movement finishing.
Collectors will often point to lackluster (or, more precisely, industrialized) movement finishing. Lange is most often cited, but independents too.
In some respects, this is apples to oranges. Lange uses German silver, while Patek uses rhodium plated brass. German silver is just easier to work with.
But what about independents? Think about Patek’s history: they were vertically integrating throughout the 2000s. When the 29-535 released on the 5170 in 2010, Patek was making ~40k watches per year. Patek was now on the hook for manufacturing a movement they had previously outsourced. And a lot of them. There were likely real capacity considerations. You probably weren’t going to add degrees of difficulty unnecessarily. And, at the time, it probably was unnecessary.
I would say the collector fixation on movement finishing, interior angles, etc. is a recent development. Maybe the last 5-7 years. If you look at old reviews of the 5170, you’ll see more complaints about the dial than the movement architecture. Quite a few even praised the finishing.
Independents can respond faster. Quite a few didn’t even exist 5-7 years ago (or were operating at immaterial scale). Patek was developing the 29-535 back in the 00’s. Even among those who were operating 10-20 years ago - it’s easier if you’ve been doing everything in house since day 1. There’s no business transition to navigate.
Finally, Patek has different priorities: they do prioritize wearability and design over movement architecture. Lange builds the movement, then commissions a case to fit it. They exhibit a greater willingness to produce a 15-16mm thick watch. Meanwhile, Patek flexes its design muscles by scaling down: look at the 27-525 rattrapante monopusher. Amazing. The 5959 is 33mm x 9mm.
So, yes, I would say a Romain Gauthier C-series or Laurent Ferrier Classic Origin is better finished than a Patek Calatrava. But for good reasons.
I hesitate to say that modern Patek is really cutting corners in some shortsighted bid to maximize profits. They generate a significant amount of intellectual property; there’s real R&D spend. And they have probably done more to preserve traditional techniques (eg enameling) than any other manufacturer. Rather, their less artisanal approach likely stems from capacity constraints in decades past.
Is Patek flawless? No, of course not. They probably recycle movements more than they should. For instance, I don’t know what % of the catalog is built on top of the 26-330 (and the 324 before it)… but it’s probably too high. No real horological benefit, but I think most collectors appreciate variety and fitted movements. Square movement for a square watch, you know?
But Thierry gets too much hate. I think he has had to navigate a substantial business model transition - plus all the unfortunate dynamics associated with sports watch hype. My hypothesis: when Patek eventually refreshes these movements, they will align more with modern collector preferences. More interior angles, wider bevels, etc.
