MING x Massena LAB 17.09 Review

Like the broader watch market in general, interest in micro watch brands has exploded in recent years, with each subsequent season and release drawing more attention than the last. With increasing frequency, the release of new, especially limited edition, watches creates such a tidal wave of hype and speculation surrounding the resale market, that the watches themselves start to become overshadowed. The latest and loudest example of this is the Ming x Massena LAB 17.09 collaboration.

With all of the hype and controversy surrounding the launch - we’ll get to that a bit later - it can be easy to forget what watch we’re even talking about in the first place. Ming watches have always had a very understated, futuristic cleanliness to them. For the uninitiated, including myself, the aesthetics of the 17.09 series might not enrapture you right away. It’s a slow burn. 

While there are plenty of curious details to enjoy, none of them leap off of the wrist at you. Like all of Ming’s designs, it’s a very distinct watch - modern without being austere, futuristic without being garish. Were it not for the modified Sellita SW330-2 mechanical movement inside, one might describe these watches as “high-tech”, like the dress watch of some cyberpunk dystopia. 

The hexagonal honeycomb dial, unique to this collaboration, is presented in either black or a metallic honey yellow, and is framed by a brushed circular ring that has a subtle three-dimensionality to it. The honeycomb pattern was not arbitrarily chosen, but rather is a modern interpretation of the vintage ‘honeycomb’ Rolex dials. The depth of the dial is further emphasized by the floating hours, a further distinction between the limited editions and the normal 17.09, which are laser etched on the sapphire crystal, with the logos of Ming and Massena LAB at 3 o’clock and 9 o’clock respectively. The luminous skeletonized handset is prominent but not out of place, and results in a highly legible dial. While the 17.09s in general are more understated than some of the other more Tron-esque designs in Ming’s archive, they are no less striking or elegant. These two honeycomb dial variants are no exception.

The case is beautifully finished with clean, modern lines and curiously flared lugs which don’t extend too far off the case. It is perhaps due to the shape and size of the lugs that the watch actually wears a bit smaller than one might expect, visually closer to 36mm rather than the actual 38mm case diameter. The signed crown is of a comfortable size and is easy to articulate, and the caseback is engraved with a rather elaborate facsimile of the dial pattern, and an intentionally nonspecific engraving of “One of 200”. If I have any real nitpick about this piece, it is with the caseback, as the texture is so prominent that I felt it against my wrist from time to time.

 This release from Ming, set to be the last in the 17 series, is also the first collaboration for the young independent brand. But before the collab was even available for purchase, the drama was already brewing online. Prior to this release, Ming announced that the 17.09 would be the last of the 17 series, and did so with the drop of blue and burgundy guilloche dial variants, which are absolutely beautiful watches in their own right. In order to make sure everyone who wanted one actually got one, they implemented a tiered ordering system, wherein priority was granted to existing customers, followed by new buyers. Orders were placed and calendars were marked for what looked to be a long production lead time – though some will arrive in 2021, orders that were placed later in the tiered system would likely not be fulfilled until 2022.

Following this decidedly egalitarian preorder, the Massena LAB collaboration was announced. Because the Ming x Massena LAB production run of 200 pieces had been decided in advance, those who purchased the honey or black Massena LAB dial variants will ultimately receive their watches before those who preordered a blue or burgundy 17.09, which frustrated some people who ordered those versions.

New drops from Ming usually draw a fair amount of attention from the enthusiast community, regularly selling out within minutes of launching. For this release, the sale was set to go through Massena LAB’s website instead of Ming’s. When the moment finally arrived, Massena LAB’s site crashed. Apologies were made and the sale was rescheduled for the following day, but there was so much traffic and so many buyers (or bots) attempting to log on that it looked as though Massena LAB was the victim of a DDoS (distributed denial of service) attack. In order to navigate the unprecedented demand, a lottery was set up where email addresses would be collected, deduped, and assigned a sequential number that would be randomly selected by a number generator, and the email address associated with the winning numbers sent a purchase link.

With all of the hype surrounding its release, it can be easy to forget that Ming’s watches are intended to be accessible – these are not the six figure titans of haute-horology often associated with the independent watch world. Perhaps it is, at least in part, because these watches are accessible in price that they are so sought after. Perhaps it is because they are both unique and well executed. Perhaps it is because they simply don’t make that many. Likely, the reason for all of the hype is somewhere at the intersection of all of the above.

The furor surrounding the Ming x Massena LAB 17.09 launch caused some of the more level-headed among us to take a step back and ask just what hell is happening in this curious corner of our already nichey hobby. When new watches are announced and the conversation immediately becomes what it might be worth on the secondary market, even before a single case has been strapped to a wrist, what is it that we are actually excited about? While investment is certainly something to be considered when purchasing a watch, has it become our primary motive? Are we watch collectors or day traders?

The answer to that question will lie somewhere in between, and likely vary from watch to watch and from collector to collector. But for those more inclined to the former, we can only hope that the people who received links to purchase the final 17.09s were those whose motives were that of an enthusiast and not of a flipper.

Written by Troy Barmore

Photography by Jack Koto

Edited by Kathleen McGivney