i was thinking of this thread ..
and browsing Amazon, a whole bunch of really cool looking watches..
for example, this Megalith cost $19,400
absolutely stunnning. And this one is cheaper too, at just $11,900.
hang on ... i'm not sure i got those numbers right.
Yeah i must have copypasted the wrong page, these two watches are $20 each.
If you are buying a watch because it looks cool, you might as well buy a $20 watch. If you buy a watch because it's a time-keeping device, you might as well buy something accurate, and it won't cost you more than a hundred bucks.
There was a tme when beauty and accuracy were inseparable, but that's no longer true.
This is what i got on right now:
It's accurate to a few seconds a day and looks pretty good. Well .. looks like a watch. Up close you can tell it's not a million dollar watch, but if that's the effect you want, then a high quality rolex replica will do you, at $999.
*replica* means they are practically rolex. the only thing missing is that, well, they are not rolex. built by the same materials, same QC.
i envy the time you have to maintain these watches.Thanks. They should take a knock usually watches like these will be built using various standards (ISO/DIN) one of which will be "survivability". The watches are mechanical though with moving parts and I know from experience if you drop a mechanical from a height of ~5 feet onto a hard surface that's all she wrote.
Servicing isn't cheap. It's at least 1k to have the grand seiko serviced and it has to go back to seiko in japan. The other two I can have serviced in australia but there is only one place that can service those watches. The Sinn has an inert gas filling as well as a copper sulphate capsule so it requires special equipment and the dornblueth has a highly modified eta/unitas 6498 which requires training from the manufacturer in germany to service.
Still that's the cost of ownership. Just like having to regularly service your car but with watches it's a lot less frequent.
i have no reason to lie. i needed a watch to be accurate on my time breaks at work, and this watch was £17 shipped ($20) from amazon. it looks IRL exactly as it does in the photo, and after a month wearing it without any particular care, i have zero scratches on either bezel or glass.
(this is where i must mention that my Nixon the Banks watch, £250 new 7 years ago, i scratched the glass the first day i wore it; apparently, one a PLASTIC handrail)
now, as i said, i have a rolex replica that looks real, has the 3d sticker, 4 ticks per second, winds automatically and has about the same accuracy as a standard submariner. the print, font, luminescence, all are of good quality, and while i'm not sure the ACCURACY of the replica is high (i.e. a professional could tell it's not a rolex) it acts and FEELS as a rolex - which is why people like that brand.
Rolex watches are not worth $10k. You are paying a huge premium for the brand name, aftersale care, design, R&D, marketing, dealer presence, and so on.
At some point, it doesn't matter than one is a rolex and the other isn't. The rolex itself IS NOT "enter brand name here" but one is not better than the other, or at least, not $10k better.
Now, some hugely complicated watches can cost half a million dollars, and you pay for having a watch that is genuinely hard to make. It's still vanity, more so when you can have a $150 seiko that keeps time more accurately and under worse conditions, and when the Grand Seiko and the Citizen Chronomaster can give you a 5 second/ month accuracy for anything between $1500 and $3k.
(im on purpose leaving out radio-control watches, which are 100% accurate)
Watches are no more and no less than jewelry - you buy it because it's expensive .. and also because it's pretty, but mostly because it's expensive. And that's why Rolex are so popular, because you know EVERYONE will be able to tell you have a $10k watch, but most normal people will ignore your Officine Panerai watch (it looks like a Diesel watch) , your Patek Philippe looks like your grandma's watch, Luis Monet makes watches that look like $20 chinese imports, so unless the person looking at your watch KNOWS that it's a $35k watch, you miss out on the main purpose, which is to impress.
i envy the time you have to maintain these watches.
Calibre 2100 keeps popping back in to rotation from my Citizen collection. I have both the "Panda" and the titanium versions.
They are very reasonable for an eleven jewel movementOoh, I like that one. Not stupidly expensive either. I've always wanted a nice watch with a 24 hour face instead of 12.
i have no reason to lie. i needed a watch to be accurate on my time breaks at work, and this watch was £17 shipped ($20) from amazon. it looks IRL exactly as it does in the photo, and after a month wearing it without any particular care, i have zero scratches on either bezel or glass.
(this is where i must mention that my Nixon the Banks watch, £250 new 7 years ago, i scratched the glass the first day i wore it; apparently, one a PLASTIC handrail)
now, as i said, i have a rolex replica that looks real, has the 3d sticker, 4 ticks per second, winds automatically and has about the same accuracy as a standard submariner. the print, font, luminescence, all are of good quality, and while i'm not sure the ACCURACY of the replica is high (i.e. a professional could tell it's not a rolex) it acts and FEELS as a rolex - which is why people like that brand.
Rolex watches are not worth $10k. You are paying a huge premium for the brand name, aftersale care, design, R&D, marketing, dealer presence, and so on.
At some point, it doesn't matter than one is a rolex and the other isn't. The rolex itself IS NOT "enter brand name here" but one is not better than the other, or at least, not $10k better.
Now, some hugely complicated watches can cost half a million dollars, and you pay for having a watch that is genuinely hard to make. It's still vanity, more so when you can have a $150 seiko that keeps time more accurately and under worse conditions, and when the Grand Seiko and the Citizen Chronomaster can give you a 5 second/ month accuracy for anything between $1500 and $3k.
(im on purpose leaving out radio-control watches, which are 100% accurate)
Watches are no more and no less than jewelry - you buy it because it's expensive .. and also because it's pretty, but mostly because it's expensive. And that's why Rolex are so popular, because you know EVERYONE will be able to tell you have a $10k watch, but most normal people will ignore your Officine Panerai watch (it looks like a Diesel watch) , your Patek Philippe looks like your grandma's watch, Luis Monet makes watches that look like $20 chinese imports, so unless the person looking at your watch KNOWS that it's a $35k watch, you miss out on the main purpose, which is to impress.
do you value these two differences $10.000 ?Actually, it is 8 ticks per second.
My Rolex doesn’t have any stickers on it.
do you value these two differences $10.000 ?
i'm sorry that you do not immediately see the point of my statement.
a watch, like any object, is worth more or less depending on it qualities. a Lamborghini is worth more than a Fiat because of the styling, the materials, the maximum speed, horsepower, aerodynamics, and so on. And yes like any other brand, you pay for R&D and marketing and so on.
So you got two cars, one a lamborghini and another not-a-lamborghini, and the real one "goes to 230Mph and the other doesn't" which is a factual difference in quality.
I have no idea if it's 8 ticks or 4 ticks, i though rolex had 4 ticks, but yes it does have a sticker. That doesn't make it a fake, what makes it a fake is the bit where i said ITS A FAKE. Just the fact that it's a fake does not imply that it's not worth as much as an original (regardless of its cost), as you should be considering the QUALITIES associated with the object. You get a replica watch that uses high quality movements - potentially even superior to the ones rolex uses - quality components, comparable build quality, and so on, and there really isn't enough left to warrant the additional cost. Just because there might be some microscopic differences, that does not mean ione is inferior to the other. The more expensive model needs to be factually better.
Would you pay half a million bucks for a Fiat if you could have a Ferrari for five grand? (yes, not the other way around. i'm guessing you will say things like "brand recognition" now.)
i thought i covered this before but apparently it went over your head.
fake rolex movements are not the same as real rolex movements, and real rolex movements are NOT the same as fake rolex movements. you then go ahead to imply that rolex are better because the movements are better. besides the fact that this is arguable, and with rolex you pay a lot for very little quality increase, this means that a watch with a movement far superior to that of rolex, say, the Chronomaster, or even a simple radio-controlled quartz (which i will repeat, because i find it amusing) is ALWAYS 100% ACCURATE are intrisically better than a rolex; because of what YOU said.
a fake rolex is worth what it costs. a real rolex isn't worth what is costs. i would say that fake rolex are possibly worth more than real ones. the issue with you, like everyone else that chooses rolex, is psychological. if i take a audemars piguet and put it in a shitty rolex case, and stamp a fake rolex logo on it, you will still think that your $10k watch is better than the $125k watch because "it's not real".
Wearing this one today. A german made testaf certified flieger from stowa.
I like! I have a vintage Flieger dial that fits a ETA/Unitas 6498-2. It will be my first build and hopefully I can get going on it after Christmas.
I like! I have a vintage Flieger dial that fits a ETA/Unitas 6498-2. It will be my first build and hopefully I can get going on it after Christmas. The 99.1 you have in post 37 appears based on the same movement
i thought i covered this before but apparently it went over your head.
fake rolex movements are not the same as real rolex movements, and real rolex movements are NOT the same as fake rolex movements. you then go ahead to imply that rolex are better because the movements are better. besides the fact that this is arguable, and with rolex you pay a lot for very little quality increase, this means that a watch with a movement far superior to that of rolex, say, the Chronomaster, or even a simple radio-controlled quartz (which i will repeat, because i find it amusing) is ALWAYS 100% ACCURATE are intrisically better than a rolex; because of what YOU said.
a fake rolex is worth what it costs. a real rolex isn't worth what is costs. i would say that fake rolex are possibly worth more than real ones. the issue with you, like everyone else that chooses rolex, is psychological. if i take a audemars piguet and put it in a shitty rolex case, and stamp a fake rolex logo on it, you will still think that your $10k watch is better than the $125k watch because "it's not real".
So, what would you say my watch is worth? $100? I guess I overpaid for it...