What watch do you wear?

Man of Honour
Joined
5 Dec 2003
Posts
20,148
Location
Just to the left of my PC
Already got a couple of omegas and various other watches of differing values, I wouldn't buy a fake watch. Don't see the point, one it's fake and if I can't afford it I can't afford it. Not keen on Rolex myself, tried a Daytona on in a shop I've got good relations with and I kinda liked it, it's being added to a waiting list and I wouldn't pay more than list price for a watch unless it was one I Really liked and warrants a higher price tag due to rarity, etc. Rolex are too show offy for me(is that a word?:cry:).

Anything's a word if you want it to be. Maybe 'vulgarly ostentatious' would be more correct, but 'too show offy' works well enough. Showing off is the point of jewellery, but there are definitely degrees of subtlely in doing so. Some watches are well into into "look at my wad, loadsamoney!" territory.
 
Soldato
Joined
21 Jan 2010
Posts
11,032
I know all of their watches are assembled by hand and are premium, but no Patek Philippe has ever appealed to me in looks, until I discovered this beauty.
HT4-A2826-561x700.jpg

Priced at a very reasonable £375,000

Didn't I hear something about how they've made a hairspring thinner than a human hair, for a thinner watch? The movements and the history sound impressive but I don't really like the price tags and the designs. I wear a watch I like the look of and it's not all about the movements for me.
Does any Patek Philippe watch appeal to you?
That thing is gorgeous. Given someone recently sold a $35k stainless model for $490k (given, it was in factory seals which Patek are totally against), I can imagine this going for quite a bit more than 375k.

And as Patek famously imitated Debeers - you don't "own" a Patek, you simply look after it for the next generation :p;)
 
Associate
Joined
25 Feb 2007
Posts
2,058
Location
Bedfordshire
That thing is gorgeous. Given someone recently sold a $35k stainless model for $490k (given, it was in factory seals which Patek are totally against), I can imagine this going for quite a bit more than 375k.

And as Patek famously imitated Debeers - you don't "own" a Patek, you simply look after it for the next generation :p;)

It's a 5976/1G 40th Anniversary which are typically around the £350k mark - https://www.chrono24.co.uk/search/i...e&searchexplain=1&watchTypes=&accessoryTypes=

That said the price of Patek on the grey market is just ridiculous at the moment. Take the 5980 in rose gold, a £80k rrp watch is around the £180k. Even if I had all the money in world I don't think I could justify paying that sort of mark-up.
 

mrk

mrk

Man of Honour
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
90,800
Location
South Coast
Have you had a look at chrono24 for any grand Seiko's? Obviously I don't know of the particular models you like the look of but they've certainly got a number of Japanese dealers active on there.

I haven't actually looke don there have to say, will do at some point nearer the time the itch gets a little more evident though!
 
Associate
Joined
7 Jul 2021
Posts
136
Location
Warwickshire
It's a 5976/1G 40th Anniversary which are typically around the £350k mark - https://www.chrono24.co.uk/search/i...e&searchexplain=1&watchTypes=&accessoryTypes=

That said the price of Patek on the grey market is just ridiculous at the moment. Take the 5980 in rose gold, a £80k rrp watch is around the £180k. Even if I had all the money in world I don't think I could justify paying that sort of mark-up.

It looks a very exquisite watch indeed, as you say though I wouldn't pay 350k for one even if I was on the rich list. Makes the price of a Rolex on the grey market look like a steal.
A bargain then really! :p
Truly a bargain, just need to find those extra few pennies down the back of the sofa now:D
 
Caporegime
Joined
20 Jan 2005
Posts
42,578
Location
Co Durham
It's a 5976/1G 40th Anniversary which are typically around the £350k mark - https://www.chrono24.co.uk/search/i...e&searchexplain=1&watchTypes=&accessoryTypes=

That said the price of Patek on the grey market is just ridiculous at the moment. Take the 5980 in rose gold, a £80k rrp watch is around the £180k. Even if I had all the money in world I don't think I could justify paying that sort of mark-up.

Problem is that for £350k you could buy several very nice and exquisite watches, say 7 at £50k each. I know what I would rather have.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
5 Dec 2003
Posts
20,148
Location
Just to the left of my PC
That’s a woman’s watch

It's a watch. It doesn't currently belong to anyone, of any sex. If I buy it, it'll be my watch. The strap will probably be big enough - I have quite small wrists for a man.

Bit it's Japanese movement, short battery life and plastic face are just as good as any £70k watch

For the purposes of functionality, yes. Nowadays, even a very cheap watch is accurate enough for daily use. Most likely it will last a couple of years. Probably longer if I replace the battery rather than replacing the watch. But let's say only 2 years. 100,000 replacements before the cost is the same. So if the £70K watch remained functional for 200,000 years and I remained alive for 200,000 years then the £70K watch would be just as good as the £7 watch. 200,000 years is really rather optimistic for either of those things.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
5 Dec 2003
Posts
20,148
Location
Just to the left of my PC
Are watches more of a jewellery fashion item these days and not for functional use?
Surely most people just use their phone to tell the time?

IME most people ask someone who's wearing a watch because that's generally more convenient than using your phone as a clock unless you already have your phone in your hand. Not as convenient as wearing a watch yourself, of course, but watches are unfashionable nowadays unless they're a fashionable brand name and then only amongst fans of such things. Most people would only recognise the name of one or two of the fashion houses that make watches and wouldn't recognise a watch from any of them. It's a niche fashion thing. Most people do use their phones to tell the time...unless there's someone nearby wearing a watch. Wristwatches are as functional as it gets for telling the time, at least until we're all walking around with HUDs or internal computers connected to our brains.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
5 Dec 2003
Posts
20,148
Location
Just to the left of my PC
Nico's back on rappers and watches :D

That satellite dish Rolex though... [..]

That gives me an idea. Vambraces as jewellery. They have a much bigger area so a lot more sparkly rocks could be glued to them. Even better than a satellite dish Rolex! Gotta be "worth" at least a couple of million dollars! I could be Jack the Jeweller in no time.
 
Soldato
Joined
24 Apr 2006
Posts
6,231
Location
SE England

OK, hi guys.

I can't handle him anymore. It's not April, right? How is this even a suggestion? To strap a digital watch to the underside of your watch...

The '6 Items EVERY man should own by 35' video triggered me some what. But now we have the above.

He is smug, yes. Annoying, yes. Puts out some good content, (annoyingly) yes. But I'm done.

OK, ciao.
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
8 Sep 2005
Posts
26,733
Location
Utopia
Nico's back on rappers and watches :D

That satellite dish Rolex though...

Wow, that is one unfunny and attention whoring youtuber. The constant camera cuts and forced and unfunny one liners makes it ook like he targets his show ADHD sufferers. Awful.
 
Soldato
Joined
20 May 2007
Posts
7,216
Location
Location: Location:
the purposes of functionality, yes. Nowadays, even a very cheap watch is accurate enough for daily use. Most likely it will last a couple of years. Probably longer if I replace the battery rather than replacing the watch. But let's say only 2 years. 100,000 replacements before the cost is the same. So if the £70K watch remained functional for 200,000 years and I remained alive for 200,000 years then the £70K watch would be just as good as the £7 watch. 200,000 years is really rather optimistic for either of those things.

Lol, what's the +/- a day on that then ? How many years will you save / lose over the 200,000 tears ?
 
Soldato
Joined
20 Feb 2011
Posts
2,858
It's a watch. It doesn't currently belong to anyone, of any sex. If I buy it, it'll be my watch. The strap will probably be big enough - I have quite small wrists for a man.

Fair enough. To me that’s like wearing women’s clothing though. Nothing wrong with it at the end of the day but distinctly odd.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
5 Dec 2003
Posts
20,148
Location
Just to the left of my PC
Fair enough. To me that’s like wearing women’s clothing though. Nothing wrong with it at the end of the day but distinctly odd.

The power of labelling. Imagine there are two identical pairs of socks. Same colour, same size, same shape, same everything. One is labelled "men's" and one is labelled "women's". Is that different labelling of an identical product really enough to make it important which pair a person wears?

The same watch is also labelled "unisex", by the way. Does that make a difference to how you perceive it? What if I decided to label it "men's"? Would that make a difference to how you perceive it? If labelling is all that matters, does it matter who labels it?
 
Soldato
Joined
18 Feb 2006
Posts
10,586
@mrk you probably have some recommedations. Been tempted to buy another colour or two straps for my Hamilton. Any brand(s) you've come across/liked that you've bought?
 
Top