Guggenheim's Rosenfield revives Danish brand selling $450,000 watches
Alex's background is in fashion and beauty marketing, and Andy is a philanthropist and the president of the financial services firm Guggenheim Partners LLC.
The three timepieces represent the revival of a brand that traces its roots to 1773, when Danish watchmaker Jorgen Jürgensen started creating his own pocket watches—far away from the watchmaking heartlands of Switzerland and France.
Later, his son Urban took over the helm. A master of mechanics and crafts, Urban built some of the finest pocket watches of the time. The company was handed down from generation to generation until the early 1900s, when it was sold and, in the ensuing years under several different owners, its popularity declined.
The brand enjoyed a second renaissance when Swiss watch collector Peter Baumberger purchased the company in 1979 and brought British watchmaker Derek Pratt onboard to create beautiful pocket watches, some oval in shape (including the Pratt Oval, a rare masterpiece you can read about here) and others with teardrop-shaped lugs.
In 1996, Baumberger hired cult Finnish watchmaker Kari Voutilainen to work on new movements for wristwatches. Those round wristwatches featured design aesthetics such as teardrop lugs, stepped bezels and small subsidiary seconds dials, embracing a Danish minimalistic, comfortable and functional design style. Voutilainen says he honed his unique finishing skills, the distinctive techniques that define his work, while at the company.
Today, he's one of the most celebrated and award-winning independent watchmakers, known for his mastery of the art of engine turning dials by hand on vintage machines, for his incredibly complex finishes on movement parts and his complicated horological movements. While he was passionate about propelling the brand forward, Baumberger died in 2011, which ushered in a new set of owners and diminished demand.
Then, four years ago, in 2021, watch collector Andy Rosenfield purchased the Urban Jürgensen brand (with a small group of investors), with the goal to propel it into a third golden age. Already an owner of several Voutilainen watches, Rosenfield brought Voutilainen onboard, along with his own son Alex, to act as co-chief executive officers. While the Rosenfields own 85% of the business, Voutilainen (and some family and friends) own the remaining 15%.
Together the co-CEOs vowed to return Urban Jürgensen to its former glory but with a modern twist. 'Our goal is to take our Danish spirit and to create a brand that feels joyful and welcoming. The watches were designed by Kari to be appealing to both men and women,' says the elder Rosenfield.
'He designed a new case and lug shape for the watches that make them sit very comfortably on a smaller wrist.' The round cases are 39mm and 39.5mm in diameter and boast either shortened lugs or reinterpreted teardrop-designed lugs to fit nicely on the wrist.
The new Urban Jürgensen watches are made in Switzerland. They're powered by in-house movements designed by Voutilainen and made in the Urban Jürgensen workshops in Biel. Two of the three watches are based on a preexisting Voutilainen caliber that's been adapted. It features a free-spring balance wheel with direct double-wheel escapement. Each is crafted in limited numbers.
The UJ-1 watch, for instance, is built in a limited edition of just 75 pieces. Also referred to as the 250th Anniversary watch, it boasts a 39.5mm case and houses a complex gold movement with tourbillon remontoir escapement, which compensates for errors in timekeeping due to the effects of gravity and brings constant force for precision.
The watch was inspired by the Pratt Oval, with details such as hand-guilloche finishes, an asymmetric minute track and a gold subsidiary dial. Retailing for 368,000 Swiss francs ($450,000), it's crafted in either rose gold or in platinum and features a hand-finished dial in silver or gray. Three combinations will be offered in runs of 25 of each.
The plan is to create just 75 each of the other two watches as well. The UJ-2 watch (105,000 francs) is an elegant time-only watch. Created in cooperation with another top independent watchmaker, Andreas Strehler, the UJ-3 is a perpetual calendar with an instantaneous jump mechanism at midnight that keeps the moonphase accurate to within one day every 14,000 years. It retails for 168,000 francs.
The brand expects to make fewer than 100 watches in its first year, then double that in the next. Unlike Voutilainen's namesake brand, which makes about 60 watches a year, Rosenfield says Urban Jürgensen will aim to steadily grow over the course of years, focusing on developing new complications.
Currently, the watches are only available directly to consumers online.
'This collection is a tribute to Urban Jürgensen and his unique and extraordinary legacy. It's rooted in everything that defines who we are: precision, artistry, and a profound respect for the value of time,' says Voutilainen.
'We want to keep the brand rare, and while we want to grow it, we can't grow too fast. We want to keep building the most sophisticated movements and create watches with a soul.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Fashion Network
4 hours ago
- Fashion Network
UK secures action from Amazon to tackle fake reviews
Amazon has committed to do more to tackle fake reviews, including sanctioning British businesses that boost their ratings through bogus posts, the country's competition watchdog said on Friday. Following a four-year probe, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said Amazon's undertakings also addressed its concerns about 'catalogue abuse' where sellers use the reviews of well-performing unrelated products to boost ratings and mislead customers. Companies that break the rules could be banned from selling on the e-commerce giant's platform altogether, while users who post fake reviews could be banned from posting reviews. Amazon also committed to robust processes to quickly detect and remove fake reviews and catalogue abuse, the CMA said. The regulator, which estimates that 90% of consumers use online reviews to inform purchases, began investigating Amazon and Google in 2021 over possible breaches of consumer protection law. It secured similar commitments from Google in January. "These new commitments matter and help set the standard," CMA boss Sarah Cardell said in a statement. The watchdog is conducting an initial sweep of review platforms following the release of new reviews guidance in April, seeking to identify platforms that may need to do more to comply with consumer law. Under its newly-granted powers, the CMA can independently decide whether consumer law has been infringed and take action in case of breaches, including issuing fines and ordering businesses to improve their practices.
Fashion Network
5 hours ago
- Fashion Network
UK secures action from Amazon to tackle fake reviews
has committed to do more to tackle fake reviews, including sanctioning British businesses that boost their ratings through bogus posts, the country's competition watchdog said on Friday. Following a four-year probe, the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said Amazon's undertakings also addressed its concerns about 'catalogue abuse' where sellers use the reviews of well-performing unrelated products to boost ratings and mislead customers. Companies that break the rules could be banned from selling on the e-commerce giant's platform altogether, while users who post fake reviews could be banned from posting reviews. Amazon also committed to robust processes to quickly detect and remove fake reviews and catalogue abuse, the CMA said. The regulator, which estimates that 90% of consumers use online reviews to inform purchases, began investigating Amazon and Google in 2021 over possible breaches of consumer protection law. It secured similar commitments from Google in January. "These new commitments matter and help set the standard," CMA boss Sarah Cardell said in a statement. The watchdog is conducting an initial sweep of review platforms following the release of new reviews guidance in April, seeking to identify platforms that may need to do more to comply with consumer law. Under its newly-granted powers, the CMA can independently decide whether consumer law has been infringed and take action in case of breaches, including issuing fines and ordering businesses to improve their practices.
Euronews
18 hours ago
- Euronews
Can the EU lower the cap on Russian oil without the US?
The European Union is readying a new round of sanctions against Russia to pile extra pressure on the Kremlin and pressure it to agree to a 30-day unconditional ceasefire in Ukraine, a step that Western allies consider indispensable for serious peace negotiations. Ursula von der Leyen has already provided an outline of what that package, the 18th since February 2022, is supposed to target: Russia's financial sector, the "shadow fleet" and the Nord Stream pipelines, which are currently non-operational. On top of that, the president of the European Commission has pitched a downward revision of the price cap on Russian oil to further squeeze profits from worldwide sales, a crucial cash flow to sustain the full-scale invasion of Ukraine. "We need a real ceasefire, we need Russia at the negotiating table, and we need to end this war. Pressure works, as the Kremlin understands nothing else," von der Leyen said earlier this week after meeting with US Senator Lindsey Graham. But there's a catch: unlike other sanctions the bloc has imposed on Russia, such as the multiple export and import bans, the price cap has a political and practical dimension that exceeds the institutional sphere of Brussels and stretches across the ocean. More specifically, to Washington, DC. The price cap on Russian oil was introduced in December 2022 by the Group of Seven (G7) under the initiative of the Joe Biden administration. It was hailed as an ingenious, ground-breaking mechanism to mobilise the collective power of Western allies and cripple Russia's high-intensity war machine. As part of the plan, the G7, together with Australia, passed laws prohibiting their domestic companies from providing services, such as insurance, financing and flagging, to Russian tankers that sold seaborne crude oil above a predetermined price. The secret lay in market power: for decades, Western firms, particularly British ones, have dominated the sector of Protection and Indemnity (P&I), a type of insurance that gives shipowners broad protection and allows them to cover potentially huge costs from any accidental harm caused to the crew, their property or the environment. Due to the inherent risks of moving oil in high waters, P&I is today considered the norm in maritime trade and a must-have to be accepted in a foreign port. By leveraging their leading firms, the G7 intended to create an extraterritorial effect that would cap the price of Russian oil not only within their jurisdictions but all around the world. Following intense behind-the-scenes talks, the cap was set at $60 per barrel, a compromise between hard-line and cautious member states. The strategy only worked up to a point however. Although the price of Russian Urals oil gradually decreased, it consistently remained above the $60 mark, often exceeding the $70 threshold. The blatant circumvention was attributed to the "shadow fleet" that Russia deployed at high sea. These tankers are so old and poorly kept that they fall outside P&I standards and rely on alternative, obscure insurance systems that escape G7 surveillance. By the time the cap entered into force, Moscow "had spent months building a 'shadow fleet' of tankers, finding new buyers like India and China, and creating new payment systems, to the point that its oil does not need to be greatly discounted to sell," Luis Caricano, a professor at the London School of Economics, wrote in a recent analysis. "What should have been a blow became a manageable problem," Caricano said. With few sectors in the Russian economy left to sanction, Brussels has turned its sight to the cap as a means to tighten the screws on the Kremlin and secure a ceasefire in Ukraine. The Commission has reportedly pitched a revision between $50 and $45 per barrel, which the UK and Canada are believed to support. However, the US has so far refrained from endorsing a lower price cap, raising the stakes ahead of crunch talks at the G7 summit in Alberta, scheduled for mid-June. Now, a tough question emerges: Can the EU dare, and afford, to go it alone? In the strictest legalistic sense, the EU could, indeed, establish a lower price cap on its own. After all, the G7, as an organisation, lacks regulatory powers: each ally amends its laws individually to fulfil a collective mission. In this case, the EU introduced new legislation to prohibit EU companies – rather than, say, American or British companies – from servicing Russian tankers that bypassed the $60-per-barrel cap. Similarly, the bloc could now change the text to adjust that prohibition to a tighter price without waiting for other allies to reciprocate. Here appears the first roadblock: any change to sanctions must be approved by a unanimous vote among member states. It is highly unlikely that all 27 countries would choose to move forward with a lower cap without having an explicit guarantee that Washington will follow suit. Hungary, in particular, has fully aligned itself with the Trump administration and could veto any proposal opposed by the White House. Even if the bloc managed to overcome internal differences and agreed to a lower cap on its own, more formidable obstacles could impede its success. The bloc's revised cap would have to co-exist with America's existing cap. This means that one side of the Atlantic Ocean would apply a $50-per-barrel limit while the other side would apply a $60-per-barrel limit, creating a cacophony for all actors involved. "Different price caps across G7 countries could confuse maritime service providers and weaken overall enforcement," Petras Katinas, an energy analyst at the Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air (CREA), told Euronews. "A solo move by the EU could cause friction within the Price Cap Coalition, damaging trust and coordination, both of which are crucial for keeping pressure on Russian oil revenues," Katinas added, warning the project could be rendered "largely symbolic". The legislative chaos would immediately benefit the Kremlin, which has long sought to exploit loopholes to evade and undermine international sanctions. Moscow, though, would also face hurdles: the continued crackdown on "shadow fleet" vessels has forced the country to increase its reliance on G7 insurance, which, in theory, could make it easier for the EU to apply the revised measure. "If the EU alone decides to tighten the screws on the cap, it's an additional constraint on Russia's oil exports but not as tight as with a whole of G7 approach," said Elisabetta Cornago, a senior researcher at the Centre for European Reform (CER). Besides practical snags and legal matters, there is geopolitics to consider. One of the reasons why the G7 initiative has fallen short of expectations is that, as the name suggests, it has remained a G7-exclusive plan. Countries in Asia, Latin America and Africa have refused to play along and join the coalition. China and India openly buy Russian crude oil, sometimes to refine it and resell it under a different label. Having the EU and the US go separate ways would further destabilise the Western alliance and create the impression of a transatlantic break-up. But for many, that is already a reality: the "Coalition of the Willing", born after Donald Trump unilaterally launched negotiations with Vladimir Putin, bears testament to the political divide. "The price cap was a G7 + EU initiative, and so in its current form, I do not see any pathway in which the EU could adjust the cap without the support of the broader coalition, including the US," said Ben McWilliams, an affiliate fellow with Bruegel. "That said, the EU is free to implement whatever measures it wants on its own domestic ships and insurance companies, which it could likely encourage the UK to join," McWilliams added. "So the EU can still move ahead – it would just need to be under a different institutional format than currently exists." This week we are joined by Mika Aaltola, a Finnish MEP representing the centre-right European People's Party, Dorota Bawolek, a seasoned EU correspondent for Polish broadcaster TVP and Ian Lesser, Vice President of the German Marshall Fund, the transatlantic think tank. US President Donald Trump's renewed trade offensive has left Brussels rather stressed with sweeping tariffs hitting European steel, aluminium, and car exports — and threats of more to come. European Trade Commissioner Maroš Šefčovič is trying to defuse the crisis, warning that retaliatory EU measures could kick in as early as July 14. MEP Mika Aaltola blasted the US approach as 'unfair treatment'. The OECD also warned this week that Trump's tariffs are dragging global growth to its weakest levels since the COVID-19 pandemic. In a very tight presidential race, Poland elected conservative Karol Nawrocki, a nationalist and eurosceptic, narrowly defeating pro-EU candidate and Warsaw mayor Rafał Trzaskowski. The result marks a blow for Prime Minister Donald Tusk who has called for a vote of confidence in his government early next week. Nawrocki's rhetoric — emphasizing national sovereignty, anti-migrant policies, and a rejection of 'Brussels diktats' — has alarmed Europhiles. However, his nationalist platform resonated with a rather divided electorate. "He's not very presidential", Dorota Bawolek told the panel adding that history shows Poles prefer an 'ordinary guy'. Finally, the panel discuss the Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez' diplomatic setback after the EU Council rejected his proposal to make Catalan, Basque, and Galician official EU languages. The move, promised to Catalan separatists in exchange for political support, was rejected by member states over fears of a domino effect involving other regional languages. Watch the full episode in the player above.
