So, How Many Watches Got Made Today?

[Kent]

While looking for something else (and never finding it), I came across an Interesting Table (http://www.knology.net/~ksinger/output_1889.jpg) from 1889. Even that long ago, mass production was truely massive.

Kent

[Kent]

While looking for something else (and never finding it), I came across an Interesting Table (http://www.knology.net/~ksinger/output_1889.jpg) from 1889. Even that long ago, mass production was truely massive.

Kent

[Jack wagner]

Hi Kent

The post got me to thinking?.

My sense of the "pocket watch world" in 1899-1900 was one where a watch was a substantial purchase. The buyer spent a month to two months salary ("cash on the nail" ? little consumer credit). The buyer also expected the watch to give him good service for may years, in many cases, the rest of his/her life. I felt this is one of the reasons we enjoy the output of these fine craftsmen today. Unlike today, it was not a throw away society.

In thinking about the post, It brings to life the question of how many of these turn of the century watches a really out there. Assuming 6k (k=thousand) per day and 250 production days per year (365 days per year less holidays weekends etc.), equates to about 1.5 million watches per year. The total population of the U. S. and Canada was about 81 million. Without doing a lot of research, the society in 1900 was still largely agrarian and about half (40 million) were in the ages of 20 - 64.

Considering the cost of a decent watch, the large portion of the population who did not really need a watch (working sun up to sun down), the daily output does seem a bit (OK more than a bit) high. Just one mans opinion.

[John Cote]

Press releases from industrial concerns from which data like this is culled have always tried to make the numbers look better than they really are. Maybe the numbers quoted in the article are slightly skewed. Whatever the case it is evident that our watch industry produced a staggering amount of watches.

As to many in our "Agrarian Society" not needing watches, I have purchase many good and bad watches which have been in farm families for generations.

Also, we have to remember that the biggest part of this production were not high quality, expensive watches, but low to medium quality, relatively inexpensive stuff which was a lot better than what you could buy 20 years earlier. How many times have you been shown "Great Grandpa's old RR Watch" only to see a 7j Elgin?

Thanks for the post Kent.

JohnCote

[Kent]

Jack:

Well, that was part of what was interesting about the table.

However, the watches weren't as expensive as you're thinking. First, the Waterbury's output of 1K/day was all "dollar watches." This might be a day's pay to a lot of people, but that's far less than a month or two's salary. Then, $10 to $15, a week's pay would get you a 7 or 11-jewel watch in a plain case. Maybe a week's pay, which was still pretty sustantial, but not a month's pay. Those are the largest number of watches being made. The expensive ones, that we collect, were only a small portion of the total.

Still, where were all those watches going? It makes you realize what a huge market the U.S. was, and still is.

Kent

[BUZZ BAZARNICKI]

Kent,

They weren't nescessarily all going to just the U.S. market......Not meaning to start an argument...Just a point...But,I do agree it's still a lot of watches given the numbers,all things considered.


And just imagine,that was 4 years before a real watch (Hamilton!!) was made!! :biggrin:... http://www.nawcc.org/ubb/tongue.gif

------------------
BUZZ BAZARNICKI
ANTIQUARIAN HOROLOGIST
HAMILTON SPECIALIST
MEMBER #120851 NAWCC
PAST V.P.CHAPTER # 52

[This message has been edited by BUZZ BAZARNICKI (edited 07-08-2001).]

[Jack wagner]

Hi all,

John <been in the family for years> --That was part of my point. One one was needed (used?) over long periods of time.

Kent I doubt the average farmer was seeing $10 - $15 in sendable cash. Good project for an accountant type (me!).

Ok BUZZ Meet you out back with Minute hands at 20 paces. Actually, I think Hamiltons were at the top of the list in overall consistant quality!!

Jack

[Steve Maddox]

Hi Kent and all!

Thanks for all the great information!

I have no idea if this was typical, but I recently read an article in a 1978 NAWCC "Bulletin," about the J. G. Hall Mfg. Co., manufacturers of watchmakers' tools at Roxbury, Vermont, from about 1870 until about 1900. This article included a copy of a note written in 1964 by a Mr. Claude A. Roys, who had been an employee of that company. In part, Mr. Roys reports, "My hours were 7 AM to 6 PM (with an hour out for dinner) six days a week and my salary was $2.00 a week." At this rate, assuming he didn't spend any money on anything else (!) it would have taken Mr. Roys 6 weeks to earn enough to buy a $12 watch, or half a week (in his case, about 30 hours) to earn enough to buy a dollar watch.

In the late 1800s, complete Hall watchmakers' staking tool sets (their most expensive product) containing about 65 pieces sold for $13.50. As an additional comparison, the 1900 Benjamin Allen & Co. catalog shows advertisements for "Fine Standing ["Jewelers'"] Regulators," in Oak or Walnut, 8 feet 8 inches tall, with 12 inch dials, gridiron pendulums, etc., ranging in cost from $46 to $52 (retail).

It really makes you think! (And wonder if the "conversion" charts for converting currency of the late 1800s to ours today, are really all that accurate!)


------------------
Steve Maddox
VP, NAWCC Chapter #62
North Little Rock, Arkansas