CORDER’S COLUMN: What will Rolex do with its third watch brand

I’ve been waiting for somebody with more expertise and insider’s insight than I do to write about Rolex and Carl F. Bucherer.

But nobody seems to be joining the dots, so I will bring it up.

Not so much with precision analysis, but perhaps something to chat about over the Christmas turkey.

In case you missed it, when Rolex bought Bucherer, its watch brand Carl F. Bucherer was part of the deal.

This means the foundation that owns Rolex now owns Tudor and CFB.

Tudor has been successful in its own right, but there is no doubt its retail partners, who might start with Tudor, alone, put maximum effort into the brand because it is seen as a step away from The Crown.

On the consumer side, Tudor is viewed by many watch lovers as the diffusion line of Rolex, so it punches above its weight.

My question is whether CFB could also ride on the coat tails of Rolex?

Not necessarily.

CFB is viewed by watch enthusiasts and collectors as a bit of a derivative brand, which is strange because it has serious horological chops including its own in-house tourbillon movement and its watches have a certain je ne sais quoi — occupying a space between the jewellery brands like Chopard, Cartier, Gucci and Piaget and the tool watch brands such as TAG Heuer and Breitling.

Retailers have been put-off because it is seen as the in-house watch brand of Bucherer.

But if CFB gets its proposition right in terms of margin and the sort of marketing that will boost sales — and why would this not happen under Rolex — retailers may see it as a solid punt in its own right, and a potential path to its parent.

I off this as no more than a slim-to-medium possibility, and one that will take years to develop, but it will be interesting to watch whether CFB gets a boost now it is owned by the mighty Rolex.