Imagine a watch so exclusive, so coveted, that only a handful of people in the world own it. That’s the story of Audemars Piguet’s Royal Oak Selfwinding Flying Tourbillon Openworked in white ceramic—a timepiece that sparked curiosity and controversy long before it hit the wrists of the lucky few. But here’s where it gets controversial: Was this watch meant for the masses, or was it always destined for a select elite? Let’s dive into the full story.
It all started during a frigid Wisconsin winter, as I scrolled through Instagram, seeking refuge from the -15ºF wind chills and snowstorms. Among the endless feed, a wrist shot caught my eye—a stunning Audemars Piguet Royal Oak Selfwinding Flying Tourbillon Openworked in white ceramic, its bright blue bridges gleaming under the sunlight. My first thought? ‘This has to be an old photo.’ After all, this was the piece AP had created for OnlyWatch, a unique charity auction piece that was never sold. So, how was someone casually wearing it outdoors?
I brushed it off, but the image lingered in my mind. Then, another post appeared, and another, until I saw a photo with three of these watches in one frame, shared by the account @Chronopeace (https://www.instagram.com/chronopeace/). My curiosity peaked, I reached out to Audemars Piguet and a few collectors. The truth? The watch wasn’t just a one-off—it existed in multiples, and a few fortunate souls already owned one. Here’s what we uncovered.
Audemars Piguet confirmed the watch’s production, sharing a full spec sheet. Originally intended as a unique piece for OnlyWatch, it was pulled from the auction alongside other brands like Tudor, amid criticism surrounding the charity’s operations. And this is the part most people miss: The decision to produce more of these watches came nearly two years later, driven by a flood of client requests. Collectors were practically begging for the chance to own it, and AP responded to the demand.
A total of 50 pieces were made (as confirmed by caseback markings), and according to buyers, they were offered at Audemars Piguet’s Social Club event in Milan. This was the same event where John Mayer announced his partnership with AP and unveiled his limited edition Royal Oak Perpetual Calendar “Crystal Sky.” Ironically, Mayer was later spotted wearing what appears to be this very watch—though his version might feature a black bridge treatment, adding another layer of intrigue.
It would’ve been a tragedy if AP had shelved this masterpiece after all the effort put into its design. Take Tudor’s “Big Block” chronograph, for example—another OnlyWatch prototype that never saw the light of day. Just as the Big Block is iconic to Tudor, the self-winding flying tourbillon is quintessentially AP, and this is only the second openworked version they’ve produced.
Audemars Piguet’s history with tourbillons dates back to 1986, when they introduced the world’s first self-winding tourbillon wristwatch. Designed by Jacqueline Dimier, it placed the tourbillon front and center—a design philosophy that continues today. Over the years, AP experimented with various interpretations, from the 25th-anniversary Royal Oak 25831ST to the “Tradition of Excellence No. 4” in 2004 (https://apchronicles.audemarspiguet.com/en/asset/135_carouselchap1305). But it wasn’t until 2012 that the Royal Oak and tourbillon truly harmonized, with the openworked ref. 26511PT released for the Royal Oak’s 40th anniversary.
Fast forward to today, and the new ref. 26735CB embodies everything that makes Audemars Piguet legendary. Measuring 41mm by 10.6mm with 50m water resistance, it pairs white ceramic with striking blue accents on the skeletonized mainplates. The hand-polished V-angles, traits tirés, satin brushing, and snailing showcase AP’s commitment to high-end finishing. The Caliber 2972 operates at 3Hz with a 65-hour power reserve. As for the price? That remains a mystery, though the Sand Gold version retailed for $270,000—so feel free to speculate.
Now, here’s the question: Was Audemars Piguet right to produce more of this watch, or should it have remained a unique piece? Does exclusivity enhance a watch’s allure, or is it better to share such artistry with the world? Let us know your thoughts in the comments—this is one debate that’s sure to spark differing opinions.
