Are the Simpler In-House Seiko and Orient Movements More Robust Than Swiss ETA and Other Swiss Movements?

I don't want to spend $800 and up for a luxury watch that uses a Swiss movement like ETA, and then always be at the watch store getting it serviced, pouring more money into the investment. 

Here's an article, granted it could be biased, but it explains why in-house Seiko and Orient movements just might be more reliable, rugged, and maintenance-free.  

Related articles

Balancing Act Between Seiko and Invicta Continues

First Look: Seiko Gunmetal Kinetic Diver SKA427

The Mysterious Power of a Brand Name: Seiko

First Look: Seiko 5 SKZ267P1

Comments

[Angelo]

Wow, this indeed makes a strong case for the Orient/Seiko movements. Aside from the "collectibility" aspect of owning the more complicated Swiss movements---this seems like a no-brainer. In all things mechanical (at least all things I can think of) if you find a way to use fewer moving parts to achieve the same results---or even better results---that is what you do. Some might point to the Mazda/Wankel rotary engine and say that had fewer moving parts but wasn't/isn't as good as a traditional push rod or overhead cam engine. But to be clear, the rotary does not give you the same results, so it's not a good comparison. In the case of these watches (no pun intended) the Orient movement seems simpler, more robust----keeps time at least as well or even better---should actually last longer----and will require much less maintenance. Again, aside from collectibility, tradition or snobbery, what argument can be made in favor of the Swiss movement? Appreciation? I think that falls under collectibility.