or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...) - Page 3022  

post #45316 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazelle View Post

However I don't buy into the 'regular service' stuff. Get it serviced if and when it runs dry or goes wrong.
This is my policy as well. I have several watches that I got new 25+ years ago that have never been worn (much less serviced).They've been sitting in their cases collecting dust though every couple of years I'll give them a wind and they run fine, albeit a few minutes slow per day. I've shared this with a few people who are very knowledgable about watches and they were neither surprised (that they were running so well) nor horrified (that they'd never been serviced.)
post #45317 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazelle View Post
 


Some good and valid points. However I think that the sales of certain 'luxury brands' is also attributable to people's relative wealth. Income was relatively very poor for most in the 60's and 70's and I wonder how many people stacking shelves in Sainsburys chose to spend there money on Rolex watches as I did?

 

I think and hope that if you were to offer the Sub in 70's guise rather than the later incarnations, their sales would be equal to today's market and I think most would prefer the 70's styling. Apparently the movements pre fastbeat were better quality too.

 

Perhaps you can liken the whole thing to the vintage Les Paul market. You can buy a good new Les Paul but everyone, with an ounce of common sense, wants a 58, 59 or 60 Standard sunburst.

 

The points you make about servicing are valid. However you can take your watch into most quality jewellers and without opening the back, they can advise you if it is running dry. As far as I am aware in a dustproof watch that will be the main concern. The price to service a vintage Rolex is prohibitive as I am on limited funds.

 

Interesting thought about the spare parts for service. It is very true that as the vintage market becomes more popular the demand for spares will exhaust any stock they keep.

I'm not quite sure what your point is when you say "the sales of certain 'luxury brands' is also attributable to people's relative wealth."  Are you saying people had less money back then, so Rolex (and other luxury brands ) sold fewer watches?  Sure, I'd believe that.  In addition, remember the quartz revolution was in full force in the 1970s, and most watch companies making automatic and manual wind watches were not doing well back then.  Actually, the Oysterquartz became their top of the line watch with a higher MSRP than a Sub, SD, GMT, Explorer II etc. 

 

As for the movements being better quality back then, sorry, but that's nonsense.  Yes, there are people that pine for the old days, and old ways, and that's ok.  I have heard people say, that vintage Rolex, PP, VC, AP etc movements are higher quality than they are today.  However, I've also talked to people with extensive experience and who have examined old and new movements.  The old movements were the best quality the companies could do back then and it was very good, but they aren't actually higher quality than they are today.  The current movements are as well made if not better in most cases. 

 

Regarding your Les Paul point, yes that is true.  However, I'd guess that in 1965 or 1975 a 1959 Les Paul was merely an old used guitar and plenty of people would have bought a new one rather than a used one.  I wonder how many people would want a 59 because its sounds or plays better?  I'd be willing to guess that as values have gone up interest in vintage guitars to some degree has increased.  Your example is much like a 1956 Mercedes 300SL Gullwing, which in the 1970s was merely an old sports car that had depreciated and could be bought for $7,000.   People couldn't give them away.  Yet today, they are over a $ 1 million and most collectors would rather have an original 1950's 300SL over the modern SLS gullwing of a few years ago.     

 

The idea of Rolex selling as many units today if selling a watch in the 70's guise...I think there would be a market for it, but its tainted by people who are enamored with the values of vintage items (and that goes both for dealers and buyers), than with the actual item itself.  I've heard people selling modern orange hand Explorer 2s, and as a selling point saying , "The vintage versions sell at auction for 2-3 times the price of a current new one.  Making the new one a bargain and it will probably go up in value."   There are people that fall for that.  What sellers leave out is that the modern ones are made in much greater numbers, so they will never be as rare as the original.  In addition, its easier to come across more recent NOS condition watches than mint condition to NOS watches of the 1960's and 70's because people wore and used their watches back then.  Few people saved them and rarely wore them with the idea that someday they would be collectible (just look at all the modern Pateks that are available in unopened packages on various websites...collectible but they will never be as rare or valuable as the models from the 1950s). 

 

In addition, new watch buyers might like the looks of the vintage pieces particularly the dials.  Every year people on TZ and other places predict and hope for a new SS Daytona with an original Paul Newman style dial.  While they want the look of a rare Paul Newman Daytona, they want it without the expense of the original.   The people in the market for a new but vintage style looking Rolex are not true vintage watch buyers.  They want the solid end links, bracelet links and machined clasp of a new one, along with the modern movement with 72 hr power reserve, and some even want a date added...particularly when they are spending $12K+.  The people buying vintage and who value originality are a different market than many new watch buyers.  I'm not saying their wouldn't be some overlap, just that I don't think Rolex could be continue to sell 70's style Subs at the prices these watches go for today without some modern improvements particularly to the bracelet and clasps.    With Omega, Breitling, and IWC fighting for a larger market share, Rolex can't sell people watches with hollow bracelets, and stamped clasps anymore.  It just won't fly, and I say that as someone who owns several Rolex watches that have stamped steel clasps and hollow center link bracelets.  The old ones work well, but we come to expect higher quality with each generation of watches.  New Subs, Explorers, GMTs etc might not be for you, but there are many fans of the newer watches.  

post #45318 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tried and True View Post


This is my policy as well. I have several watches that I got new 25+ years ago that have never been worn (much less serviced).They've been sitting in their cases collecting dust though every couple of years I'll give them a wind and they run fine, albeit a few minutes slow per day. I've shared this with a few people who are very knowledgable about watches and they were neither surprised (that they were running so well) nor horrified (that they'd never been serviced.)

On a waterproof Rolex, sure I think a 5 year service interval is way too short, and it can go well beyond that.  However, 25 year old watches that have never been serviced and run several minutes slow per day...sorry but they need a service..I'd be concerned about metal contact, congealed oils, etc.  Your argument is like saying that you have never serviced your car but when you turn the key in the ignition it starts and its just fine, even with lots of smoke pouring out of the exhaust pipe.  Sorry but running a few minutes slow a day is a sign that it needs a service.  That people you told this to didn't say anything, why would it matter to them?  They are your watches and its your money...if you don't want to spend what it takes to take care of your possessions it doesn't affect me, them or anyone but you.   

post #45319 of 48312

Wow Dino 944, have to agree with a lot of what you say :), but of course there is always a however.

Errrm some 59 Les Pauls really do sound better, and many do look better. Gibson sell all sorts of Les Pauls but some of the most expensive custom shop Les Pauls are the historics. So perhaps there may be a market for re issue Subs.

You see the Sub was a Rolex classic not just any old Oyster. As regards whether the movements or construction was better or worse I am no expert so have no opinion. There is no doubt that the resale of a 70's Sub is higher than a current model.

That us English folk have a passion for a thing of character and beauty and history is undeniable. Judge a watch by how well it tells the time will only lead you to the conclusion you need a quartz or similar movement. Judge a watch by it's monetary value and you will only conclude that a  double red Sea Dweller is better than most Patek Phillipe watches. Judge a watch for it's aesthetics and an old Sub is arguably the best looking sports watch of all time...that I dislike new ones is personal to me and I take on board all you have said.

Yes the point about relative wealth was that a greater number of people have enough disposable income to buy into the luxury goods market.

As regards servicing, you seem to be saying that if we do not follow the Rolex service plan we are neglecting are watches. Perhaps it might be better to start from the assumption that Rolex are talking Bolex in getting you to part with your money. It is ludicrous to state that any Oyster needs a service before it runs dry....it is easy to part a fool from his money

post #45320 of 48312
Sorry, guys. @no frills asked for it.

post #45321 of 48312
Indestructible that one smile.gif
post #45322 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by tifosi View Post

Sorry, guys. @no frills asked for it.


Gorgeous watch! Keep 'em coming biggrin.gif
post #45323 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazelle View Post
 

Wow Dino 944, have to agree with a lot of what you say :), but of course there is always a however.

Errrm some 59 Les Pauls really do sound better, and many do look better. Gibson sell all sorts of Les Pauls but some of the most expensive custom shop Les Pauls are the historics. So perhaps there may be a market for re issue Subs.

You see the Sub was a Rolex classic not just any old Oyster. As regards whether the movements or construction was better or worse I am no expert so have no opinion. There is no doubt that the resale of a 70's Sub is higher than a current model.

That us English folk have a passion for a thing of character and beauty and history is undeniable. Judge a watch by how well it tells the time will only lead you to the conclusion you need a quartz or similar movement. Judge a watch by it's monetary value and you will only conclude that a  double red Sea Dweller is better than most Patek Phillipe watches. Judge a watch for it's aesthetics and an old Sub is arguably the best looking sports watch of all time...that I dislike new ones is personal to me and I take on board all you have said.

Yes the point about relative wealth was that a greater number of people have enough disposable income to buy into the luxury goods market.

As regards servicing, you seem to be saying that if we do not follow the Rolex service plan we are neglecting are watches. Perhaps it might be better to start from the assumption that Rolex are talking Bolex in getting you to part with your money. It is ludicrous to state that any Oyster needs a service before it runs dry....it is easy to part a fool from his money

I'll take your word for everything you say about Gibsons.  I'm not a musician and I know very little about guitars. 

 

It's clear that you love your vintage Sub and Sea-Dweller.  Your passion for them is rather catchy.  

 

Still at no point did I suggest one should judge a watch by its accuracy or its value.  However, there are folks who are easily swayed by rarity, or having something with a very high value.  When Paul Newman Daytonas were new, dealers couldn't give them away even with a strong discount.  Now, they are one of the darlings of the vintage Rolex world (as are orange hand Explorer 2s).  I've even heard newbies in the watch world talk about the auction values of PN Daytonas...but they can't tell you much about vintage Daytonas in general. 

 

Subs are great looking watches.  I like both vintage and new ones.  It's clear you like what you already own, which is great.  However, I don't think Rolex would be here today if they stopped developing and improving the Subs, SDs, Daytonas, and Explorers.  The vintage ones are great watches.  However, they appeal to a small market that is willing to live with certain compromises.  Other people want modern versions of classic with whatever improvements have been added over the years. 

 

As for the last section of your post,  at NO point did I say ever if you do not follow Rolex service plans you are neglecting your watches.  Not sure where you made that one up?  In fact I said in post 45318, "On a waterproof Rolex, sure I think a 5 year service interval is way too short, and it can go well beyond that."  So I have no idea where you get such nonsense that I said if you don't follow the Rolex service intervals you are neglecting your watch.  However, if you are going to say I said something please try to be accurate.  I don't appreciate someone attempting to reinterpret what I said into something I never said.  As for the idea its ludicrous to service a watch before it runs dry, sorry but considering the other poster said he hasn't serviced his watches in 25 years and they run a few minutes slow per day, what should he be waiting for before servicing them?  Does he need to wait until they don't actually run?  What is the point of having a nice watch that can't tell time well.  At that point its no more useful than wearing a decoration.   

 

I guess I do believe in a bit of preventative maintenance even with a water resistant Rolex, maybe at the 10-12 year mark or if it starts running poorly before that. If that makes me a fool, what does it make a person who wears expensive watches that are not accurate? Never mind I can answer that myself. 

post #45324 of 48312
Manfridays ? Think I recognize that ceramic BP. Would love to make it up there one of these days!
Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post


Hahah! It does look a bit blue, doesn't it?  Trick of the light only, unfortunately (fortunately?)...

Lunch with fellow watch enthusiasts.


post #45325 of 48312

Urgh...really feeling that SD!

post #45326 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

Urgh...really feeling that SD!
Who's the pernicious enabler, now???? (Insert evil laugh).
post #45327 of 48312
Good vocab word!
post #45328 of 48312
Visited a local used luxury watch dealer today, OC Watch Company, to shoot some pics for the week of Aug 3 when I will be the guest Instagram editor for Styleforum. Here is an out take. More details are on my Instagram. https://instagram.com/p/5a0yLlsjG8/?taken-by=guswalbolt

post #45329 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by tifosi View Post

Who's the pernicious enabler, now???? (Insert evil laugh).

 

I hate you people!

post #45330 of 48312
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnguy001 View Post

Manfridays ? Think I recognize that ceramic BP. Would love to make it up there one of these days!

Yes, the ManFridays crew assembled on a Monday. Craniotes was back from his Europe jaunt and had fun stories to share.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
This thread is locked  
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Breitling, JLC etc...)