The Watch Appreciation Thread - Page 1168

On topic, here's a pic to support the notion of heirloom/sentimental value.  From earlier this afternoon - me wearing my museum Movado.  

 

 

 

OMG!  Movado!  Quartz!  But hey, a his-and-hers pair was given to me and my wife when we got married more than a decade ago.  My parents-in-law must have saved up for months to buy that, given what I know of their financial capabilities.  I loved them for it, and honor their gift.  Today they are retired, and we're fortunate to be able to support them as their retirement savings were obliterated by this and that financial crisis.  

 

Yeah, we have several Rolexes and Pateks in our stable now but sometimes I still whip out my Movado. Frankly, I think it works well with the suit/shoe ensemble. :)

looks like you have delicate hands.

Nice story though and it's great that you guys support her parents and are okay with doing so.

 

I guess so.  Despite all my macho bluster I'm really just a desk worker who has calluses from a few gym sessions a week. :)

 

My wife contributes her fair share. For years she made more money than I did when I was in grad school.  

 

My three better quality watches for your ridicule or praise as the case may be.  Please excuse the poor iPhone photo.

 

The Oris was my first good watch.  I loved it a little too much and the crystal is the worse for it.  Not an economical fix I suspect.  The bracelt is off as I was going to put an appropriate black strap on it, but I ran out of steam.

 

The Tissot caught my eye in an AD a year or so back and my subsequent research brought me to a great review by Teeritz on Watchuseek.  Not the finest piece around but a pretty good no-nonsense watch.

 

Finally, the Submariner.  I had always liked the Explorer, but when I went in to an AD to try one on the sales assistant suggested I try this one on too.  I'm so glad she did.  It sang to me and there was no turning back.  I received a fantastic deal on it at the time, and it has hardly left my wrist since that time almost four years ago.  And in that time it has seen some pretty serious abuse.  I was in the navy at the time of purchase, and it saw service in many different and unforgiving environments.  It has a few scuffs to show for it, but I love the fact that my Submariner was actually worn by a submariner in a submarine, keeping periscope or bridge watches, and it's done its share of diving too.  The submarine connection was a cliche that I was initially keen to avoid, but I'm glad I got over that.  I now work in oil and gas, and this watch continues to serve me well, and it's probably quite thankful for the respite it's been given.  I'd buy it in an instant if I had my time over again.

no frills - great story, and way to pay it forward. deets on shoes and tie plz.

Im gonna go out on a limb here, Tie is Tom Ford, and shoes are Berluti???????? am i at least close?!

Shoes are Corthay Satan.

+1

Thanks for sharing the story behind your Movado.

What did you get your PhD in? Also, please tell me that grad school ends. Here in midway-through-land, it's all that can be seen going forward and backwards.

Great story and the watch looks killer with that suit. Well done!

they are amazing. i need to get in on that. just have to add it to the list.

Deets on tie and shoes?

I've said it before and I'll say it again: What's on one's feet has far more impact on overall appearance than what's on one's wrist.

This photo is a perfect example; at a glance, that could be any slim watch from an inexpensive Skagen to a platinum Altiplano — and it doesn't even remotely matter, as you look absolutely minted with those kicks. It always amazes me when certain watch-nerd types have no problem spending multiple thousands of $/€ on man-jewelry but balk at paying for decent shoes. Oh well, different strokes for different folks. I know which one I'd prioritize if forced to choose, though.
Funny thing about that watch; as much a vocal minority of WUSsy types like to dismiss it as the default choice of the least discerning — as if any normal person would notice and then judge what kind of watch you're wearing as long as it's not some truly obnoxious POS — it's chosen by a quite a few of those who are the most discerning about their watches as well. I don't think you could have picked anything better, and in the real world, it's near-impossible to trump a Submariner that's being worn by somebody who uses it for its intended purpose. It's up there with astronaut watches that have been worn by actual astronauts.

Also, why would you not want something that's going to look better and become even more desirable with age? You can still be wearing and enjoying it ten, twenty and forty years down the road. Not to mention that you'll still be able to get parts and service at that time if necessary.

Fantastic watch, and many thanks for sharing the still-developing story behind it.
Edited by Belligero - 1/31/13 at 1:47am

Belligero, watches for me are a private pleasure, and I'm sure at least some people here feel the same way, so I'm not sure that shoe comparison might work in every situation.

And re the second part of your reply, there is a particular 'class' of watches which can tell you a lot about their owners!

I know what you mean, it's just that I would have a hard time justifying expense on a luxury like a watch without having the foundation well taken care of. It's not only that low-quality shoes look shabby, they also have physiological drawbacks. I should have mentioned that it's not only for reasons of vanity that I'd rank... uh... hoof-ments over movements. I do realize that it's a bit apples-to-oranges, though.

Yes, yes, I'm trying to be a bit diplomatic there. A watch definitely can carry certain connotations, positive or negative. But it's normally not the only signal, either.