The largest independent, non-commercial, consumer-oriented resource on the Internet for owners, collectors and enthusiasts of fine wristwatches. Online since 1998.
Informational Websites ChronoMaddox -- the legacy of Chuck Maddox OnTheDash -- vintage Heuer website Zowie -- Omega information
Discussion Forums ChronoMaddox Forum Heuer Forum Omega Forum
Counterfeit Watchers ChronoTools Forum ChronoTrader Forum
Vintage Heuer Discussion Forum
The place for discussing 1930-1985 Heuer wristwatches, chronographs and dash-mounted timepieces. Online since May 2003.
OnTheDash Home What's New! Price Guide Chronographs Dash Mounted Collection
I Have Also Puzzled Over This, and May Have Seen 1863
In Response To: Re: 1864 or 1860? ()


I have noticed this, but never brought it up for discussion. I believe that I have also seen references to "1863" as the year when the company was founded. I have no idea where I saw the 1863 reference, but if I ever spot it again, I will bring it to the forum.

Mark's explanation -- focusing on the distinction between the workshop and the creation of a company -- may explain this use of different years.

Jeff

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

: Interesting question Jarl.

: The modern catalogues make no mention of 1864 at all and nor does
: the virtual museum.

: The text for 1860 does change from saying Edouard Heuer opened a
: watchmaking workshop in 1860 to saying he founded a watchmaking
: company. I wonder whether that is the difference - 1860 was the
: foundation of the workshop and maybe the company as such was
: only formally incorporated four years later perhaps? Though the
: 1860 date does seem to be attributed for the foundation of the
: company now too. I guess the older the better when you're a
: Swiss watchmaking company.

: What does annoy me in the post-TAG brochures though, is the
: attribution of everything to TAG-Heuer rather than Heuer. With
: no mention of the time machine that would allow them to do that,
: which you would think would be most worthy of mention... ;)

Messages In This Thread

1864 or 1860?
Re: 1864 or 1860?
I Have Also Puzzled Over This, and May Have Seen 1863
Current Position
Chronocentric and zOwie site design and contents (c) Copyright 1998-2005, Derek Ziglar; Copyright 2005-2008, Jeffrey M. Stein. All rights reserved. Use of this web site constitutes acceptance of the terms of use. CONTACT | TERMS OF USE | TRANSLATE