or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Poor man's watch thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Poor man's watch thread - Page 408

post #6106 of 6362
Hahaha! Oh no, I wouldn't/didn't!

The Seafarer II is $450 on their site. Looks great value!
post #6107 of 6362
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

Hahaha! Oh no, I wouldn't/didn't!

Well, that's something at least happy.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

The Seafarer II is $450 on their site. Looks great value!

Fantastic value.
post #6108 of 6362
Quote:
Originally Posted by RogerP View Post
 

Today:

 

 

Hosting provided by FotoTime 

Very cool watch

post #6109 of 6362
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWraith View Post

Omeagas and Tags are ALWAYS better suited to the TWAT thread. Always have, always will. Don't be afraid to show off your pieces there, vintage or new, they're most welcome there.

As for the Seafarer II, it's got a Miyota automatic movement and it's around $500 - $600 if memory serves. Very sturdy watches from past experience.

Sorry, but unless I missed the memo where you were appointed the official spokesperson for all participants in this thread, I will ignore your views on what "always" should be posted elsewhere. Again, I recommend that you simply ignore my posts of vintage pieces if they don't interest you. That way we can all go back to talking about sub-$1k watches.

Thanks for the info on the Seafarer.
post #6110 of 6362
Quote:
Originally Posted by MSchapiro View Post

Very cool watch

Thanks my man. Although it's a small watch, it's one of the more legible pieces that I own - a factor I have really grown to appreciate as my eyesight isn't what it used to be.
post #6111 of 6362

I, for one, appreciate the fact that @RogerP posted that vintage Omega.  One, to appreciate a beautiful time piece, but, more importantly, to open my eyes to the fact that such a beautiful time piece can be had for sub $1,000.  I'm not sure I have the knowledge, patience and risk tolerance to enter the vintage world, but I am intrigued.

post #6112 of 6362
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Shoes1 View Post
 

I, for one, appreciate the fact that @RogerP posted that vintage Omega.  One, to appreciate a beautiful time piece, but, more importantly, to open my eyes to the fact that such a beautiful time piece can be had for sub $1,000.  I'm not sure I have the knowledge, patience and risk tolerance to enter the vintage world, but I am intrigued.

 

Thanks NS1 - you hit the nail on the head.  In my view, this thread should be about showcasing and discussing pieces that can be obtained for $1k or less, as opposed to a dogmatic (and ultimately unworkable) demarcation of brands.  Some Seikos cost $7k - but we still show and discuss the ones that are less costly here on this thread.  Most Omegas cost well north of $1k, but the ones that don't should be just as welcome for exactly the same reason.

 

$600 can buy you a Miyota-powered dive watch from a micro-brand.  It can also buy you a '50's Omega Seamaster with an in-house movement.  Both are creditable choices, given the wants and needs of the buyer.  But what shouldn't be in dispute is that the $600 buyer IS a PMW buyer, and presenting a range of options to such buyers SHOULD be a foundational aspect of this thread.

post #6113 of 6362
Quote:
Originally Posted by New Shoes1 View Post

I, for one, appreciate the fact that @RogerP posted that vintage Omega.  One, to appreciate a beautiful time piece, but, more importantly, to open my eyes to the fact that such a beautiful time piece can be had for sub $1,000.  I'm not sure I have the knowledge, patience and risk tolerance to enter the vintage world, but I am intrigued.

Take the leap! Vintage watches tend to be on the smaller side and can be finicky. In exchange, you get more beautiful and interesting designs than modern watches (in my opinion) and the possibility of value appreciation. I bought this model of Heuer Camaro over a decade ago for a little over $1K. It runs -6 seconds/day without being serviced while I have owned it, and is now worth between $3.5 and $4K. But it's so nice that I don't think I could part with it unless I had a very good trade offer on the table (i.e., a vintage sports chronograph with three registers).
post #6114 of 6362
If he had posted it in the TWAT thread you still would have received the excellent knowledge, and we all still would have been blessed with his fantastic photo of his beautiful watch. But Omega is NEVER considered a PMW, so some common sense there please. No point having this thread if we start getting into Omegas and Tags and the like here, even if they're vintage, that was never the point of this thread for goodness sake.
post #6115 of 6362
If the poor people start arguing, the ballers win.
post #6116 of 6362
Strictly speaking, this thread is about poor men. The cost of the watch should be irrelevant.
post #6117 of 6362
post #6118 of 6362

Only thing worse than working over a public holiday is the the courier company isn't.  Watch still sitting in a neighbouring country.  Bah.

 

Now then, this vintage/PMW business.  My strongest feeling on the subject is there's no need to be so dismissive of each other.  Really, keep your manners gents, we're all friends here.

 

On the matter itself, I'm diplomatically ambivalent: I agree with @TheWraith that I've always thought of this thread as being about cheaper brands, i.e. what retails new under $1k. I think he winces when someone sneaks in a discounted Baume & Mercier though - strong sense of foul play that I don't entirely share!

 

But from @RogerP's side of the table, if someone asked me what the best watch for under a grand is, I'd tell them to think seriously about something used.  Certainly a vintage Omega, viciously-depreciated Tag or whatever, is excellent poor man's value.  But how far do we take it?  If someone stumbles across a rare steel Patek for $100 at a car boot sale, is it a PMW?  And is a brand new Hamilton for $1005 not one?  

 

On balance, I think perhaps the subject of bargain vintage watches might be worth its own thread.  Nobody's wrong here, and all watches can be discussed in TWAT.  But I'm leaning to the idea that this thread makes more sense talking about cheap, accessible brands, and that another one talking about the great value in used watches and sharing the specialist knowledge needed to find it, might be a really interesting standalone.

post #6119 of 6362
My take: As often mentioned, TWAT is welcoming all watches of any price (but the lower priced ones may get more attention here). As for this thread, different people obviously have different opinions, but I like to see it as a place to turn to for watches that reasonably easy can be had for less than a grand. As such, the lucky flea market Patek find doesn't really fit in, but other vintage watches, used watches as well as brands with a higher list price which routinely can be had at a discount, bringing them to about the 1k price point, all fit in nicely here and makes this thread a nice tool for examining *real* options in that range. IMHO, obv.
post #6120 of 6362
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post
 

 

But from @RogerP's side of the table, if someone asked me what the best watch for under a grand is, I'd tell them to think seriously about something used.  Certainly a vintage Omega, viciously-depreciated Tag or whatever, is excellent poor man's value.  But how far do we take it?  If someone stumbles across a rare steel Patek for $100 at a car boot sale, is it a PMW?  And is a brand new Hamilton for $1005 not one?  

 

 

 

That is such an improbable outlier as to be an unworthy metric for this discussion.  Of course if someone stumbles across a platinum Rolex at a garage sale for 50 bucks, that is not a PMW.  But watches that are routinely available to consumers at a sub-$1k price point should be properly discussed here, whether new, used or vintage.  IMO.

 

The problem with segregation by brand is that - as you point out - many brands routinely discussed here span the $1k threshold.  Hamilton and Seiko have several models well north of $1k.  So what percentage of a brand's offerings have to be sub-$1k in order for that brand to be permissibly presented?  How do we determine this?  Who is the arbiter?  Seems like a solution looking for a problem to me. The purchase price of the specific piece is something we can all understand and doesn't require the policing that some seem eager to impose.

 

And more generally, do we really need more division and exclusion in this world?  On this forum? In this thread? What purpose does it serve?  More specifically, how is the thread lessened by including all sub-$1k watches?  Do you perceive the presentation and discussion of vintage watches in this thread to be to prevalent that cheap, accessible contemporary brands are being pushed aside? I certainly don't.

 

I think that if there is a case to be made for a new and separate watch thread, it would be something embracing mid-range watches in the $1-3k zone, because however much TWAT may be technically inclusive of all watches at all price points, it is manifestly, overwhelmingly and indisputably a high end watch thread.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Poor man's watch thread