To sum things up...as long as consumers continue to purchase Seiko, Seiko QC will maintain the status quo.

Your videos are a refreshing break from those that are just shilling the same current watches making the KZfaq circuit. Rather than more "Insane Value", "Buy This, Not That" and "Swiss Killer" carnival barker cane waving you provide a more global view of the hobby that few others are providing. It may not always appeal to those who are just attracted to bright and shiny things with little interest in enhancing the space between their ears but I hope to learn more from you.

I feel like I just gained a business degree by watching this video.

Over the past year, I bought my first four Seiko watches, three of them brand new and one used on eBay. First was the SRPG33 Seiko 5 field watch, the second was the SSK003 "Blue Berry" GMT, the third was the SRPE03 King Turtle and the last was an SKX007K that I bought used from eBay in excellent condition from 2017. All four have had good build quality with fit and finish excellent. All of them run between 5-8 seconds fast per day which is well within Seiko's published specifications. The King Turtle bracelet I replaced with an Uncle Straps stainless steel bracelet, the SKX007 has a new Super-J Strap Code bracelet I bought from Long Island Watch, and the SRPG33 has a new Barton leather strap and the SSK003 has its stock Seiko jubilee style bracelet it came with. I love all four of these watches. For the price I paid for each and the overall good quality fit and finish, I am happy with these, and I wear them in rotation daily. Maybe I got lucky, but I agree with your comments in this video. Thank you.

I never paid attention to Seiko until the QC issues were well known, but the loyalty and interest the brand obtains even now is fascinating. I know plenty of people who claim they have a rule about not getting Seiko watches now, but often they add exceptions (such as they just won't buy Seiko models that cost them over $1,000 but under that and they'll still purchase).

Another factor is that if they make the QC better on their lower end sub-400 euro watches, it gives the customers less of a reason to look at the 1000-2000 euro range.

The poor quality of Seiko will bite the company hard. It may not be now, but it will be in the future once customers wake up. QC issues may be tolerable in Seiko 5 Sports, but not in the Prospex line and above, when that line can be more than $1000 and a lot more. Is a misaligned bezel or a skewed dial acceptable in a watch $1000 and above? We are not talking about imperfections in case finishing, the hands, the indices or the lume application, which may not be immediately visible to the naked eye; we are talking about misaligned bezels and skewed dials that are noticeable, that the users have to look at when they check the time on their wrist, and have to live with for a long time. If a company deems $1000-and-above price tag as not an important market segment to offer acceptable quality, that is frankly insulting to consumers who save up money to buy at that price segment. When other big Japanese watch brands can do better QC on the same price/product segment, what Seiko fails to do is inexcusable.

Materials has nothing to do with QC. They tell us whether a model uses hardlex or sapphire, aluminium or ceramic etc. So we know exactly what materials we’re getting before we buy! QC is purely about keeping alignment, fit and finish etc to a certain standard. Every one of us buyers will have a different opinion on what we deem acceptable. I’ve seen what I’d consider to be totally unacceptable misalignment (of the number batons for example) in pictures on a website. This is an exception however and mostly I would accept very slight misalignment which is only really noticeable under a magnifier.

This video has superior writing, production, and presentation!! I think that you explained the decisions that Seiko makes very well. As others have said it will be interesting whether this remains a viable way to operate or it becomes a noticeable deterrent to future sales. As a new subscriber I look forward to new videos from you and your channel!!

It is a shame that a company that is vertically integrated and with so much technology at there disposal can't get a bezel insert or chapter ring lined up. No other watch company is this bad. How do Citizen manage it? (but then Citizen are guilty of using too much mineral crystal as well). Nowadays Seiko just isn't the value proposition a lot of people would like to have us believe. So many Ali-Express brands, and microbrands are able to offer so much more quality, value, and sapphire! If any other brand offered a watch with folded end links, pressed clasp, mineral crystal and shody allignment for £350 they wouldn't get away with it, but Seiko get a pass!

Excellent analysis. The only comprehensive discussion i have found on this matter. Well done. Btw, i just found your channel and have subscribed. All the best 👍

So in another words, Citizen made a better job in the investment side ? For me Seiko preferred to make a profit to the detriment of investing in more precise machines. They still increased the prices of the Seiko 5 recently without seeing any progress in the QC, right ? It's clear the more you delay investing, the more expensive it will become in the end. For me, if i need buy an Japan watch, i prefer buying a Citizen over a Seiko (in the normal prices segment) this days. I buy more swiss made watches (like Mido, Certina and Tissot, Swatch) ... i live in Swizerland in the same time ;)

Great video. I haven’t experienced any significant issues with the Seiko 5 line and lower priced Prospex models but maybe I am not looking close enough.

Honestly I'm never going to buy another Seiko watch ever since they told me I can no longer get a band for my Kinetic Arctura. No longer selling the band not even 5 years after purchase, then when it died 2 years later they are not able to fix it. And this model is supposed to be the predecessor to the Spring Drive? What happens if I were to buy a Spring Drive and it need repairs after 5 years? I have a modern Rolex 16570, Rolex can easily fix it without issues even down to adding a link. The watch came back good as new.

Fantastically insightful video and something you, my friend, have mulled about for a while (obviously). Thank you for this sharing. The Japanese horological titans (Seiko and Citizen) certainly have carved out a place for themselves. What is interesting next is to compare these two and how they have secured their places and where they are going in years to come! Kicking off looking through that future telescope- I do know that Citizen has over the years acquired a few brands, and also companies in the more and more important, watch components business. Owning Accutron for example, it secures their commitment to the futuristic perspective taken by that brand. For the traditional watchmaking, they also own Arnold & Sons- and they make some fantastic watches. Acquiring Angelus, they were also hoping to cover sports high horology fans with their unique offerings. However, these brands are all suffering slow growth and I am not entirely sure if marketing is entire to be blamed for that...there must be other factors at play. As for Seiko, they have plodded on to do well, covering most of their bases under their umbrella name. Some key highlights include the acceptance of Grand Seikos as something worth looking at both from a superior product offering and from a value standpoint; partly thanks to COVID and sharp demand hikes for Rolex, Patel and AP over that period. Credor also managed to win a key GPHG Award recently, getting recognition for their watchmaking prowess (akin to being the world championship team in F1). Anyway, I am ranting...keep up the great content.

Thank you for the great content! I enjoy my Seiko watches just as much as my high end Swiss watches. I also enjoy the history of the Seiko cup checking the Swiss brands with the quartz crisis.

I have a number of older Seikos which are pretty good. Have seen some new ones in shop and they don't feel the same quality anymore. I have now been on the swiss microbrand and aliexpress chinese watch roller coaster and have to say the price to quality ratio is so much better with the bespoke swiss micros and most importantly with the chinese homages - even Pagani Design can do something better than seiko and use a seiko movement - for sometimes a 10th of the price. But then there is my casio fetish... I now have around 70 watches and I must admit, in terms of on wrist time, the seikos don't really get a look in anymore..

MWJ, I have been a fan of yours since the beginning since you bring a unique slant as an economist. I am going to respectively disagree without being disagreeable with your opinion that poor QC is acceptable at any price. It does not cost more to build a product and correct manufacturing errors in production. It is also unacceptable to knowingly pass along a defect to the consumer! I flat out totally disagree with this video regarding Quality Control (QC); especially, in 2024 Japanese manufacturing! I agree with the premise that Seiko (like any watch maker that makes watches under $5,000) needs to make trade-offs in material and suppliers for a sub-$500 watch. However, QC is the bread and butter of manufacturing since Edward Demming developed how to measure QC in manufacturing and the Japanese manufacturers were early adopters! The Japanese are maniacal about producing a high quality product and eliminating defects to the best of their ability. Seiko having a misaligned bezel is totally unforgivable! Seiko could use Demming's techniques and reprogram its machines to eliminate misaligned bezels. It does not take that much effort. As a Seiko buyer since the 1970's, it is only in recent years that the bezel issues came to light. If Seiko is too bothered to fix a visible issue in its production process, then what about the QC in their watches that we can't see? Maybe collectors should shift to Citizen which does not have these issues. Even Orient (owned by Seiko) does not have a misaligned bezel issue. Finally, I want to add one more point when it comes to QC. Your opinion reflects exactly how General Motors in the 1960's felt when they owned over 50% of the US automobile market. GM executives passed defects onto their customers, just like Seiko is doing. So how did that strategy work given that the US Federal government needs to bail GM out of bankruptcy as market share plummets from competition! Poor QC is never acceptable. Ever!

Well, no disagreement here but the fact that Casio and Citizen can achieve high levels of qc at similar price points tells me Seiko management is to blame. I bought an "Arnie" and returned it. All the best.

1st comment! I purchased SBSA009 specifically because it's "Made in Japan" thinking the QC would be better. Bezel and chapter ring are aligned. Overall I'm very happy with the QC but the 4R36 "Made in Japan" movement runs -8 s/d and 1.2ms beat error dial up. My San Martin NH35 runs +8 s/d and 0.2ms error. I have to regulate my "Made in Japan" Seiko. Maybe San Martin regulates their watches. What's the difference between SBSA009, SRPD59 and SRPD59K1? Does QC vary depending on factory location?

How is Orient QC compared to Seiko? Both Epson subsidiaries. Orient's price points are very competitive.

I think they simply don't care to be better if people buy for the name . Ali mushrooms can sell sapphire, solid bracelet, aligned nh35 auto for 70 eur. But without a name they must sell specs not excuses.

So, why Citizen (another japanese watch giant) in the same price bracket, hasn't the same QC issues? I'm sure that it has some, but not nearly in the same quantity. The excuse of "Seiko has poor QC because QC is expensive" is justification for fanboys let Seiko of the hook for overcharging on poorly made products. I have had 4 Seikos and 1 had a misaligned bezel and other has a crooked crown tube, wich crooked all the movement and dial inside the case (in a US$500 Prospex). Not to mention crooked dials and QC issues i've seen in Seikos even on shop windows. Let's abandon "the flat earth theory" of that is a feature and call Seiko out for his mistakes.

Seiko make great watches for every price point. Always over delivering for the cost.

No solutions, only trade offs.

This seems like you are making excuses for Seiko. Plenty of companies for example Casio have much better quality control.

The title is smelling like clickbait. There was not much “really shocking” in your video was it? More like analyzing the market approach of Seiko.

What is the 'shocking truth'? That you 'discovered' that Seiko 5s aren't of the same quality than Grand Seiko? Really.

Find Seiko has much loser tolerances on their QC than Citizen and other similarly prices and even lower priced watches. Think the fact just is that their buyers are just either people who are just normal people who don't mind, or they are a enthusiast that feels good about "winning the seiko lottery", when they get a good one, or might also push their enthusiast customers to go and pay more at a AD for a watch that can be inspected. I also find it interesting how people see it as "wow, the seiko is running so much more accurate than specified". But in reality the large "acceptable" tolerance is there, to make sure it becomes extremely rarely for Seiko to have to regulate a watch under warrancy. I like my Seiko watches a lot, but I am getting a bit tired of the seiko fanboys.