or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Watch Appreciation Thread - Page 1181

post #17701 of 34964
.. Dp
Edited by apropos - 2/4/13 at 4:48am
post #17702 of 34964
Quote:
Originally Posted by Superfluous View Post

Tell me about it, foo.gif. I have a vintage IWC cal 89 (I'm guessing it's basically the portofino from the 1960s), and it's about 5mm smaller than the current Portofino. I like Breitling as well; I have 1 currently and about to get another one. They are some of the smallest men's Breitlings at 41mm and 42mm, yet they are still quite large. If they were chrono, they'd be larger/taller. Hopefully these brands will start dialing back the size of the watches. I think I like about 38-40mm.

There was an Asia only LE version of the navitimer called the navitimer 92, which was a very nice 38mm, they are cheap on the secondary market and easy to service as they use a valjoux 7750 ebauche, might be worth checking out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeff13007 View Post

Can anyone tell me more about Chopard? Im trying to help my friend decide between 3 stainless steel models; a Cartier, a IWC, and a Chopard. Ive always felt Chopard was more of a jewelry maker more than a watchmaker and is almost a whole tier lower than JLC or Cartier, is this a misconception?

Chopard is better known as a jewelry maker, but as mentioned earlier by comrade dino the LUC movements are highly regarded.

There is a standout model in the series, the XPS, which is sensibly sized and imo a better proportioned dress watch than a calatrava.

I mean, just look at that:


Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

while i think its true that some people buy items just to show that they can, i think that assuming that about someones purchase, is unfair. people buy a great many things for a great many reasons, and assuming what that is is generally an error, imo.

I think it's fair game, if only for the reason that we do judge what people buy, we do think about their reasons for purchasing things anyway, and to even attempt to pretend it doesn't happen is somewhere between silly and naive.

At the very least when we discuss these potential motives we can correct our own false paradigms and gain an alternative pov or insight that we would otherwise never have reached otherwise by ourselves.

At the best a potential regrettable purchase is avoided by someone who realises the error of his ways, so it's a win-win in my books. smile.gif
Edited by apropos - 2/4/13 at 3:31am
post #17703 of 34964
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

while i think its true that some people buy items just to show that they can, i think that assuming that about someones purchase, is unfair. people buy a great many things for a great many reasons, and assuming what that is is generally an error, imo.

Your on'a roll, I wasnt as sharp as you @30 (just adding a few cents)!  One of those many things has to be stupidity , with maybe a little sales rep. coercion, got me this for 1g,back in 01'! Look the princess has no jewel (my MB pen after washing and 15min. in the dryer)crackup[1].gifI would have the watch from this brand to show you but,

 

 I sold itlol8[1].gif 

post #17704 of 34964
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

 

As for saying "To wear a Rolex is to make the statement that you felt the need to spend [$5,000] for the same luxury experience desired by a McMansion-dwelling frat boy."  I think that can be applied to anything.  To wear a Patek Philippe is to say you felt the need to spend X amount for the same luxury experience desired by a gangster like Tony Sopprano.  To wear a JLC is to say you felt the need to spend X for the same luxury experience desired by Leonardo DiCaprio .  To drive a Mercedes Benz is to say you felt the need to spend X amount for the same luxury experience desired by Paris Hilton.  With statements like that at what point can one buy something without worrying that someone is going to think that I bought something to try to experience some part of someone else's lifestyle?   Again, IMHO life is to short to worry about other peoples' impressions of my purchases.

Agree.

post #17705 of 34964
Quote:
Originally Posted by apropos View Post

There was an Asia only LE version of the navitimer called the navitimer 92, which was a very nice 38mm, they are cheap on the secondary market and easy to service as they use a valjoux 7750 ebauche, might be worth checking out.
Chopard is better known as a jewelry maker, but as mentioned earlier by comrade dino the LUC movements are highly regarded.
There is a standout model in the series, the XPS, which is sensibly sized and imo a better proportioned dress watch than a calatrava.
I mean, just look at that: Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

that is beautiful
Quote:
I think it's fair game, if only for the reason that we do judge what people buy, we do think about their reasons for purchasing things anyway, and to even attempt to pretend it doesn't happen is somewhere between silly and naive.
At the very least when we discuss these potential motives we can correct our own false paradigms and gain an alternative pov or insight that we would otherwise never have reached otherwise by ourselves.
At the best a potential regrettable purchase is avoided by someone who realises the error of his ways, so it's a win-win in my books. smile.gif

im not sure we speaking to the same idea. i was just saying that to assume someone buys a rolex, or any other watch, only as a status symbol, with no indication that is the case, is imo, wrong. so is making any assumption about a person with no indication that your supposition is correct.

im not saying people dont judge people, im not pretending anything. im just saying that i am not a fan of judging someone, when i have nothing leading me that my assumption is right.

smile.gif
post #17706 of 34964
Agree here. We can talk about certain watches being stylish and what-not and that's always debatable. As much as some people assert there are rules for taste and style, in the end it's subjective. More to the point, make whatever assumption you want about someone's style as it relates to what they've chosen to wear (watches, suits, shoes..) etc, but I wouldn't assume to judge someone's character based on their material goods. Yes, they've chosen to buy it, but maybe it's because they really like the way it looks or makes them feel.. Doesn't necessarily make them wrong. Choosing to wear a large "blingy" timepiece makes them no more a d**che, than wearing a tiny 'simple' watch makes them an effeminate wannabe hipster. Either conclusion based on a timepiece is speculative at best.

For better or worse how a person acts, talks, and treats others is more indicative of their character IMO.


Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post


im not sure we speaking to the same idea. i was just saying that to assume someone buys a rolex, or any other watch, only as a status symbol, with no indication that is the case, is imo, wrong. so is making any assumption about a person with no indication that your supposition is correct.

im not saying people dont judge people, im not pretending anything. im just saying that i am not a fan of judging someone, when i have nothing leading me that my assumption is right.

smile.gif
post #17707 of 34964
post #17708 of 34964
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

im not sure we speaking to the same idea. i was just saying that to assume someone buys a rolex, or any other watch, only as a status symbol, with no indication that is the case, is imo, wrong. so is making any assumption about a person with no indication that your supposition is correct.

im not saying people dont judge people, im not pretending anything. im just saying that i am not a fan of judging someone, when i have nothing leading me that my assumption is right.

smile.gif

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by rnguy001 View Post

Agree here. We can talk about certain watches being stylish and what-not and that's always debatable. As much as some people assert there are rules for taste and style, in the end it's subjective. More to the point, make whatever assumption you want about someone's style as it relates to what they've chosen to wear (watches, suits, shoes..) etc, but I wouldn't assume to judge someone's character based on their material goods. Yes, they've chosen to buy it, but maybe it's because they really like the way it looks or makes them feel.. Doesn't necessarily make them wrong. Choosing to wear a large "blingy" timepiece makes them no more a d**che, than wearing a tiny 'simple' watch makes them an effeminate wannabe hipster. Either conclusion based on a timepiece is speculative at best.

For better or worse how a person acts, talks, and treats others is more indicative of their character IMO.

 

Right.

post #17709 of 34964

Really learning a lot from this thread!

post #17710 of 34964
Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Quick hello to you all - thanks to Dino944 and johanm for an always engaging and respectful discussion.  Always learn something new from reading this thread.

Are you guys watching the Super Bowl?  I am busy with business meetings in the West Coast from today through Tuesday, but for some mysterious reason all meetings ceased when the games began airing about an hour ago. smile.gif

In the meantime, here's my 3940P keeping me company while I'm away from my family:





I know, it's getting a bit staid since I keep posting pics of just the same watches... BUT!  Stitchy and Belligero, I may have interesting new pictures to share about a new addition to my small collection by Wednesday.  Shout out to Dino944 for helping affirm my choice - I pulled the gun last Friday and am expecting a delivery by Tuesday evening... smile.gif

I wonder if I fall into apropos' category of jeweled DD or leopard print Daytona owners, or Explorer I and no-date Subs.....

Interesting side note: guy behind me on the plane clearly a WIS.  Notices my 3940P and holds forth on his collection (he was wearing a white dial AP RO and says he has a bunch of other watches; said he almost pulled the trigger on a Patek WG 5035 but got the RO instead).  Nice guy, seemed like he wanted someone to talk to.  He also liked my 3940P.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Hi Frills,

Hope your business trip is going well. Always a pleasure to see your stunning 3940P! Your photo shows some nice detail and depth to the subdials within subdials...I love it!

Congrats! I look forward to seeing some photos of your latest edition soon! Not sure if your wife will continue to let you chat with me if I had some influence on you moving forward with an addition to your collection. Last time I had some influence on a friend, he bought a new Porsche...his wife wasn't so happy with me;)

Yea...I have no idea which of Johan's catagories I fall into as a Rolex owner. I'm sure I can live with whichever catagory I fall into.

Hopefully, meeting a fellow WIS made the travel time out there pass by more quickly. Usually, I just get crazy people seated next to me on planes, you lucked out. Congrats on your new addition, looking forward to seeing pix soon.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dino944 View Post

  Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
Hi Johan,

On some levels each of our perspectives are probably correct depending on where one is coming from and our experiences.

1. I'm glad you enjoyed my rant on limited editions.  I think limited editions can be good, if they are only produced occasionally and they actually honor someone or something of importance. 

2.  I also have questioned Rolex's choice to head further into the $10,000+ price range.  I think all watch prices have gotten crazy in recent years.  I questioned if I was nuts spending what it cost to get an all steel RO.  I love it and IMHO its one of the best watch purchases I've ever made.  I have no regrets about it, but it was still a lot of money for a steel time only watch.  Times change, markets change, and maybe they are going where they feel a broader a wealthier clientel exists.  There are more millionaires and billionaires than ever before, and someone making six figures is not as unusual as it was 15-20 years ago.  There is a very high end clothing store near me.  They used to have moderate priced suits Huge Boss and Zenga soft for their younger buyers, and then Luciano Barbera, Oxxford, Kiton, Brioni and Isia for people with more money.  In the early 90s their entry level suits were about $900 full retail, and better suits were$1,500-2,400.  They decided entry level clients weren't worth it for them (I would have thought its better to groom buyers from a young age, start with Boss/Zenga Soft and as their careers develop along with incomes, they move them into Oxxford then Brioni etc).  They decided to go up market where there may be fewer buyers but the buyers are less effected by swings in the economy and now their suits range from $3,000-6,500.   In the end everything has gone up in price, cars, clothing, and watches.  All watch companies have moved way up in price...Omega, Breitling, Rolex, Cartier, VC, AP, PP, Lange etc.  $10,000 is a lot of money and a drop off point for many buyers, but its still far from the rarified range that new Pateks, Langes, APs, etc cost. Its not as if you can spend say $12K and get a new Patek.  Right now $10-15K is a largely untapped market for a steel sports watch now that PP, AP, and VC are often close to $20K or considerably more.  If Rolex doesn't go there other companies will.  As for Omega going after the $4-8K range, that might push people to other brands also.   A friend that always avoided Rolex in the past, instead buying Zeniths, Omegas, and Breitlings, finally gave in and bought a Rolex Explorer 2.  His take on things was that with what Breitling and Omega are now charging for some products they are not the bargain they once were, and it helped him justfiy spending a bit more for a Rolex.  His other revelation was he wished he had bought it sooner when t would have cost him less money.  Whether going up market will work for Rolex we will have to wait and see.   

3.  Yes city living versus being on a deserted island are two extremes.  My point was that we may all adore the "Top of the line brands" but many are a bit delicate to be our only watch or to use if you have a very active lifestyle.  As for lifestyles in the city or suburbs, no matter where one lives there are always people that are "Keeping up with the Jones" and people that have to "one up" the people around them.  Not sure those people ever truly find happiness or satisfaction in anything.  Everything they do or own is for show, rather than for themselves. 

I respect and understand that you don't care for Rolex.  We all have likes and dislikes.  However, I have to disagree with your final paragraph.  You say "I'd personally be uncomfortable to wear a Rolex as I'm pretty sure that people around me would notice and draw undesirable inferences without a chance for me to respond." I've seen similar statements, made by other WIS.  I find it interesting that WIS spend a great deal of time worrying about the impression that wearing any watch makes on others.  Do you worry about the impression your car makes on others?  Do you worry about the impression your suits make on others in the real world or here on SF?  In reality, I find very few people in the real world care what watch you wear (most won't notice, much less comment on it, or judge you for it).  I've owned a Rolex of some form or other for nearly 30 years, lived in big cities, small cities, and suburbs, and the number of comments outside of jewelry stores or watch functions regarding my Rolexes have been very few and far between.  WIS are a very small segment of society, but they are often the biggest and only critics of the watches we wear.  The friend I mentioned earlier, who gave in an bought an Explorer 2, works on Wall Street for a huge banking/investment company.  He was concerned it would draw unwanted attention or comments, so in the beginning, he only wore it occasinally.  After a few months he discovered, no one cared, no one noticed, and no one commented on it.  He's had the watch now for 3 years and never had anything arise out of wearing a Rolex.  It was a concern he conjured up that never happened.

I work in very concervative field in an office where much as you described, people either don't wear watches or they wear a Casio Ironman.  A few guys know I like watches because they have seen me on a watch site here or there, but no one asks about my watches, no one comments on them and they just don't care about them.  Life is too short to worry if somone approves of your watch, car, house, suit, or anything else.

As for saying "To wear a Rolex is to make the statement that you felt the need to spend [$5,000] for the same luxury experience desired by a McMansion-dwelling frat boy."  I think that can be applied to anything.  To wear a Patek Philippe is to say you felt the need to spend X amount for the same luxury experience desired by a gangster like Tony Sopprano.  To wear a JLC is to say you felt the need to spend X for the same luxury experience desired by Leonardo DiCaprio .  To drive a Mercedes Benz is to say you felt the need to spend X amount for the same luxury experience desired by Paris Hilton.  With statements like that at what point can one buy something without worrying that someone is going to think that I bought something to try to experience some part of someone else's lifestyle?   Again, IMHO life is to short to worry about other peoples' impressions of my purchases.

Again thanks for some very thought provoking writing. 

Thanks for the comments guys. Can't blame anyone for not parsing each word of these dense and lengthy posts, but would just like to clarify that I did not mean to condescend Rolex owners, and it was actually apropos who proposed a dichotomy between owners of certain Rolex models vs others. I'm actually a big fan of many Rolex watches (to distinguish from the Rolex brand), and in fact I posted only a couple of weeks ago about how taken I was by a Green Hulk I spotted by chance in the window of a Diamond District storefront.

The goal of my posts was to push back on the pro-Rolex arguments based on the brand's superiority to peer brands like IWC, JLC, GO. Basically I was analyzing the Rolex "brand" in the abstract and suggesting that it (i) may not be especially desirable in some contexts and (ii) may actually be in decline in comparison with some of the peer brands. I was embracing the stigma that many people (increasingly?) associate with Rolex and took a shot at giving it a rational articulation. Did not mean to embarrass Rolex owners in any way, but rather to throw another point of view into the mix. I think it's amusing how whenever Rolex is discussed, the given venue invariably develops a groupthink one way or another; Rolex has to be either completely tacky and shameful or it's the only valid choice of a true connoisseur.

I do respect the notion of wearing what you want strictly for personal pleasure without worrying about how you are perceived by others. To me, it's not so simple. I'm not under any delusion that I'll make friends or win respect through my choice of clothes and/or watches, but I do view both as an expression of my taste, knowledge, and personality to some degree, and I also try to be careful about associating myself with conspicuous or controversial brands that could attract unwanted judgment. On whether a watch is something that would realistically ever be noticed, I guess we all have to form our own thoughts on that based on our environments and experiences with having our watches noticed. I know from personal experience that I was well aware of both the Rolex brand and the designs of Rolex watches many years before I had any interest or knowledge about any other watches, having heard the name so often referenced in TV/film/music and having been exposed to their ubiquitous magazine/billboard advertising since childhood.
post #17711 of 34964
Believe it or not, an average person doesn't know how much a Rolex cost. All they know it's an expensive watch brand. This is why Rolex can get away with their pricing.
post #17712 of 34964
Also, I believe a watch doesn't define a person.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnguy001 View Post

For better or worse how a person acts, talks, and treats others is more indicative of their character IMO.

EDIT : I just caught this. Right on icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif
post #17713 of 34964
Nice SDR
Quote:
Originally Posted by Axelman 17 View Post

post #17714 of 34964
Full, unspoilered quote because the pics are nice and because titanium is such a nice match for the Luminor case and because that BP is nicer than the ones that followed icon_gu_b_slayer[1].gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by gdl203 View Post


post #17715 of 34964
Quote:
Originally Posted by rnguy001 View Post

Sandwich lumeC18C32C6-B1F9-4692-8061-1553E6680A9E-1965-000000B630E42A1C.jpg
sandwich + 1950 case= smile.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread