> movement isn't part of the brand. It's not part of the signal. The case/dial/sometimes band are the brand

The movement was the expensive part. Audemars, Vacheron and Patek only made movements. The retailer would then put it in a case. That’s the entire point of PG’s essay.

> if you couldn't tell them apart, they wouldn't be any good at signaling, the entire point of wearing them

Which might lead you to revise your hypothesis around why these watches were bought and made in the “golden age of watches.” Then as now there is such a thing as quiet luxury.

> Patek only made movements

I don't think thats really true, Audemars & Patek deffo made entire watches in the 50s.

Don't get me wrong they also designed movements, but by the time of the quartz crisis, Patek bought in movements from outside.

It doesn't really help that omega and tissolt were merged with Certina, ETA, hamilton when then turned into swatch, which basically dominates the entire swiss watch industry along with rolex and richemont(who own Vacheron)