So, I think after a decade of marketing, the Swiss watch industry has successfully convinced folks that watches that use movements made by the same folks whose name appears on the dial is better than buying a watch having a movement made by a third party. The marketing to that effect was largely a means for the likes of Rolex, Patek Philippe, and others like them to rebuff Swatch/ETA, seeing as all those makes cost a great deal more (to buy and to maintain) than a typical ETA-inside watch and, quite frankly, for uncomplicated watches and chronographs, don't perform materially better.
Also, at least one Chinese watchmaker is 100% in-house: Seagul. Nobody ever seems to complain about that brand's products being not tough enough or not accurate enough either, although I don't believe they have any watches that have been shown the equal of the chronometer standard. (That's not to say they have none, just that I'm not aware of any.)
So here we are now and that in-house story has proven for many brands hard to live up to; moreover, it's showing itself to be a double edged sword. Yes, Rolex is 100% in-house, but among the pricey brands they are one of the very few who are. PP isn't. ALS isn't. VC isn't. AP isn't. Many others aren't either. Almost without exception (Rolex is one), Swiss watch companies have to buy their springs (without which one doesn't have a working watch) from an external supplier. On the other hand, Seiko and Citizen both are, and have been for longer than has Rolex, 100% in-house for every watch they make, be it pricey or not.
Now, I cannot imagine anyone actually wanting to be a watch snob, but there's no shortage of folks who are.
Well, if one has a Seiko or Citizen, one can be just as much a snob about watches. Seiko has the history, the quality, the reliability, wide assortment of styles and market penetration to hold its own against any of the smaller, pricier Swiss makes. Plus, they best every one of them on the in-house-ness of their products, quartz or mechanical. Whereas Rolex took nearly 100 years to achieve the 100% in-house manufacturing capability (they didn't start making their own chrono movement until the early 2000s), Seiko all but started out that way.
Just an interesting observation I thought I'd share. It remains to be seen how much longer the Swiss will keep harping on about "in-house." Sooner or later, they are bound to realize that saying in-house is better necessarily pits the Swiss pricey brands against many a far less dear watch. I wonder what they are going to say when the general public starts to realize that one can get in-house fabrication in a watch costing a couple hundred bucks? Knowing the Swiss, they'll, despite the learnings of the Industrial Revolutions, try to convince us that some production inefficiency with which they all suffer is better than having a tightly controlled and consistent, automated manufacturing process. Who knows?
All the best.