and wrong at the same time.
Biowatch,
Since your first post on 11/5/2008 you have said the same thing.
In the last year and a half, has Montblanc not proved itself a capable partner with the financial resources to allow Mr. Cabiddu and the other wonderful craftsmen at Minera to continue their work in Villeret?
The Retour A Zero was a new model once MB joined in the partnership.
So was the Grande Chronographe Regulateur.
Did the Exotourbillon not impress this year?
Was the Metamorphosis lacking in innovation?
All partnerships share in the same successes and failures. Thus they should also share in the banner.
Do we not see this in the watch world?
Greubel Forsey, MB&F etc...
I am happy that Montblanc decided NOT to erase Minerva completely from the watch. They could have, but they didn't. In fact they display the name proudly where it belongs...on the movement. The Montblanc name is on the dial, where it belongs because the watch dial and aesthetics are from the MB designers. I cannot think of a more equal way of doing this.
If the original Minerva watch was so beautiful and attractive the original company would have survived...It wouldn't have needed two different partners/owners over the last decade to ensure its survival.
Thoughts about these comments? Please do not take the talking points personally, I am just interested in why you continue to hold the same position as you did back in 2008.
Regards,
Mike