I have always had a soft spot for underdogs.
In sports, business, and life, I instinctively find myself rooting for the person everyone has already counted out. The one who hasn't yet proven everything. The one who isn't supposed to win. The one who is expected to politely accept their place and wait their turn.
Perhaps that's why I have always been fascinated by competition. Not because of the trophies or accolades, but because there is something deeply inspiring about standing shoulder to shoulder with the very best and earning your place through determination, preparation, and execution.
As I continue my journey in watchmaking, I am fully aware that some people look at my background and ask questions such as:
"He's never worked for a watch manufacturer."
"He has no experience in the watch industry."
"Where is his credibility?"
Coming from a highly competitive sports background, I tend to read these comments a little differently. They often remind me of the top-seeded player who, before a match even starts, is already explaining how the underdog might get lucky today.
It's an interesting mindset.
But in fairness, the watch industry is not a tennis court, and the comparison only goes so far. So let's talk about reality.
Many successful independent watch brands were not founded by individuals who spent decades assembling movements on a workshop bench. More often than not, founders identify an opportunity, create a vision, assemble the right team, coordinate resources, and execute a plan.
They commission designers. They partner with engineering firms. They work with movement manufacturers. They source suppliers. They hire branding specialists, graphic designers, photographers, marketers, and advisors.
In short, they build a team.
Nobody questions this approach because that is how complex products are created.
Now let's consider the actual liability involved.
What's the worst-case scenario for a watch manufacturer?
Perhaps a water-resistance issue allows moisture into a case during a shower. Certainly frustrating. Potentially expensive. But generally fixable.
Now let's compare that to architecture.
As an architect, I am responsible for coordinating design teams, engineers, consultants, contractors, authorities, building codes, clients, budgets, schedules, and countless technical requirements.
The projects I work on often carry construction values measured in tens of millions of dollars.
And the liability?
A building failure.
Water intrusion causing millions in damages.
Structural deficiencies.
Lawsuits.
Financial consequences capable of wiping out decades of work.
When an architect places their professional stamp and signature on a set of drawings, they are accepting a level of responsibility that is difficult to overstate. There is no room for guesswork. There is no room for shortcuts. The only way forward is through rigorous attention to detail, discipline, and accountability.
Designing and delivering a building requires managing an extraordinarily complex network of people, systems, regulations, and risks. Success depends on leadership, coordination, precision, and relentless quality control.
Ironically, those same skills happen to be incredibly valuable when creating a watch.
A watch may be smaller than a building, but excellence still demands the same mindset: thoughtful design, meticulous execution, selecting the right partners, managing the right resources, and refusing to compromise on quality.
The scale changes.
The principles do not.
So when someone asks whether I am qualified to create a watch, I find the question fascinating.
Not because I claim to know everything about watchmaking—I don't. Nobody does.
But because my entire professional career has been built around creating complex products where mistakes carry consequences far greater than a scratched crystal or a faulty gasket.
If I can successfully manage the design and construction of buildings worth tens of millions of dollars while navigating risk, liability, engineering complexity, and client expectations, is creating an exceptional watch really beyond reach?
I'll let others answer that question.
As for me, I've always liked being the underdog anyway.
