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

The Watch Appreciation Thread - Page 1478

post #22156 of 39315
Nice Sinn Winot - I dig the all black look, and legibility is top notch. Well, I just arranged to re-purchase a watch that I had sold to good friend and fellow watch nut some 10 years ago. Hopefully I will be able to pick it up on the way home from work - pics to follow. Hint - it's a distant cousin to the Speedmaster, but it's not an Omega.
post #22157 of 39315
Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post

Newcomer, does it still count as a "Frills pose" if I'm not wearing a beat up white t-shirt?

 

Posing is posing,  my friend,  but for this look I think you've got the watch all wrong.  While waiting (again) in a certain mall, I couldn't help but look at this for you:

 

 

 

 

But just in case you're not quite manly enough yet for the "SAS" edition and its camouflage and "trigger", there's always this:

 

The "Swordfish"...which has to be a bit like a Nautilus, right? (Click to show)

 

 

 

 

And if you're getting all that love, you can't forget Madame Frilly:  that thing on the dial moves around with the rotor.  Apparently it's a new-Perrelet patent.  That not so many will want to steal...

 

Ladybling (Click to show)

 

 

 

 

 

Don't say I never do anything for you. lol8[1].gif

 

Oh...yeah, the minute repeater's OK.  But of all your watch wonders, I also like the 3970 best. 

post #22158 of 39315

^^ Hah hah hah I love everything you just wrote above, mimo!

 

Not everyone loves the 3970.  I have a friend who was enamored of the idea of one, until he actually tried one on the wrist and found that its 36mm was too small for him. 

 

He's putting it up for sale here:

 

http://market.watchprosite.com/?show=collection.detail&id=161568

 

This is a 3970 in rose gold, circa 1997.  Looks mint, hallmarks crisp.  How in the world you fall out of love with a piece like this, I do not know.  But hey, to each his own. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Regularly retails for between $115 to $125K - a steal at $108K!  Anyone interested....?

post #22159 of 39315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cant kill da Rooster View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by Winot View Post

New Sinn 856s (I won't usually be wearing this with a suit): Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
atuzu3a8.jpg
G]

Nice, but I would love to see a better pic (less blurry) with the jacket and shirt cuff.

As requested, with added turn back action (still a crappy iPhone pick though I'm afraid):

4e4aqyta.jpg
post #22160 of 39315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Winot View Post

New Sinn 856s (I won't usually be wearing this with a suit):

atuzu3a8.jpg

who makes those pants?
post #22161 of 39315

Winot, I think it's cool.  But not as cool as your suit, and you're right about putting them together!

 

Frilly, a bit beyond my budget, by about five digits...OK six.  But I will console myself with the fact that I don't wear gold so I couldn't anyway. Although I do think rose gold is incredibly beautiful.  Maybe I'll get one for the lady in my life...!

 

As for my previous post, always happy to entertain!  And you know you want one!

post #22162 of 39315
Steven Hitchcock. It's a Smiths cloth.
post #22163 of 39315
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

Winot, I think it's cool.  But not as cool as your suit, and you're right about putting them together!


Thanks - here's the watch I actually put on this morning: Eterna-Matic Centenaire 61

5ujesa5e.jpg
post #22164 of 39315
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

 

But just in case you're not quite manly enough yet for the "SAS" edition and its camouflage and "trigger", there's always this:

 

The "Swordfish"...which has to be a bit like a Nautilus, right? (Click to show)

 

 

 

 

 

This one, I definitely like.  Why does it remind me of Brooklyn Decker for some reason?


OT: Just watched "Battleship" last night and was impressed by Ms Decker's sublime acting skills.


NOT OT: Pic of Ms Decker and her gold Rolex Daytona here:

 

post #22165 of 39315
Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post

...

I know, I was reading it and honestly feeling a little bit irritated! I mean, I guess I understand what SJX is saying... but when you are talking about a $125,000 watch which is still retailing for absurd amounts, it is just kind of silly. And I am not a big fan of the whole argument that "x" is better than "y" because of its rarity. I understand the premise, of course, but it is just a very strange argument to make. The fact more 3970s were made does not make it less valuable. And honestly, I think it is a bit too early in the game to be sounding the death knell for the collectability of the 3970.

I feel like we have similar tastes in teh womenz Frilly.
post #22166 of 39315
Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post

Wanted to share this pic with you all. 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

Friend of mine attended a collector-exclusive Patek event last night in NYC - minute repeater and chronograph exhibition.  You'll probably see pics of a similar event from Wednesday night in various forums, as they held one for the media and ADs then; the one on Thursday was for owners/collectors, limited to 100 peeps, and included guys like Michael Ovitz and John Mayer.  Friend confesses that he wheedled his way in and jumped through hoops to get an invite - although this is also a guy who was in Geneva from June 9 to 14 on Patek's dime, so it's not like he has a puny collection.

 

 

I

 

This bad a** piece is a 5074 perpetual calendar minute repeater in platinum.  Retail price is $630,000, if you can even get one since it's an application piece.  Interesting aesthetics, and at 42mm the case and numeral design reminds me a lot of the 5070 (sans the chrono, plus a perp cal and minute repeater). 

You are spot on with your assessment of that watch.  The case, lugs, numerals, hands, and modified chapter ring, look like they were basically taken right from a 5070.  I thought the same thing when I saw photos of one some time ago.  It definitely highlights how versatile the case and many other elements of the 5070 are, and I think the 5074 is a knock out!   

Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

 

Posing is posing,  my friend,  but for this look I think you've got the watch all wrong.  While waiting (again) in a certain mall, I couldn't help but look at this for you:

 

 

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

 

 

But just in case you're not quite manly enough yet for the "SAS" edition and its camouflage and "trigger", there's always this:

 

The "Swordfish"...which has to be a bit like a Nautilus, right? (Click to show)

 

 

 

 

Don't say I never do anything for you. lol8%5B1%5D.gif

 

Oh...yeah, the minute repeater's OK.  But of all your watch wonders, I also like the 3970 best. 

Look at all the things SF's are willing to go through for fellow SF's.  I still find the Graham watches almost like a caricature of a a chronograph.  To me the pusher mechanism is so exaggerated that its almost comical.  Some designs are a study of minimalism and only what is absolutely essential to the design is used...well this is clearly the complete opposite.   But I suppose if they sell enough units maybe it justifies the existence of such a watch.  

Quote:
Originally Posted by no frills View Post

 

Hah hah hah, I really enjoyed reading this article.  

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)

 

So many references and statements about how the 3970 basically "sucks" compares to its "cousins" (the 2499 and the 5970 come up repeatedly):

 

"Widely regarded as less desirable than the preceding Ref. 2499 or subsequent Ref. 5970, the Ref. 3970 is nevertheless a significant timepiece."

 

"After those two came the ref. 3970 but it has never been seen in the same light. On the secondary market the ref. 3970 is the least expensive of all the Patek Philippe chronographs with perpetual calendar.

Because of the relatively large numbers produced - the commonly cited figure is about 4000 for the ref. 3970 while for the ref. 2499 it's only 349 - the ref. 3970 has never been as sought after. Even its successor, the larger ref. 5970 with an identical movement, is more valuable because of its shorter production run and presumably fewer numbers."
 

"The ref. 3970 will never eclipse its cousins in collectability or rarity..."

 

Not that I was actually gunning for a 2499 given its $300K entry price, but I did give the 5970 versus 5270 versus 3970 decision a whole lot of thought.  It is true that 3970 pricing is cheaper than for the other references (which my wallet very much appreciated).  I suppose it really is less desirable in the collector's market. 

 

 

 

But ya know what?  I love my 3970.  I love 'em both. More than the 5970s and the 5270s I've seen.

 

*

 

And in the end, that's all that matters.  To me, at least.  biggrin.gif

The important part is that its a beautiful watch, top quality workmanship, you love it, and you enjoy it.  Besides, its somewhat relatively more "affordable price" and "high production crackup[1].gif" Helped you to be able to get one for each wrist!  Most of us enjoy drooling over them, and we are only looking at them in photos.  The press isn't always kind to things when they are new or only a few years out of production...but often times whether its a car, or a watch or some other item, they often become highly coveted.   Enjoy them, they are beautiful.  

post #22167 of 39315
mimo - those grahms are sooooooooooo bad. but i think that perrelet ladies watch is beautiful.

frillsameisterdood - quite like that patek. i tried the 5159 on in NYC for fun. i was very disheartened that i felt it looked too small on my wrist. frown.gif

[img]
post #22168 of 39315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcomer View Post


I know, I was reading it and honestly feeling a little bit irritated! I mean, I guess I understand what SJX is saying... but when you are talking about a $125,000 watch which is still retailing for absurd amounts, it is just kind of silly. And I am not a big fan of the whole argument that "x" is better than "y" because of its rarity. I understand the premise, of course, but it is just a very strange argument to make. The fact more 3970s were made does not make it less valuable. And honestly, I think it is a bit too early in the game to be sounding the death knell for the collectability of the 3970.

I feel like we have similar tastes in teh womenz Frilly.

Rarity is doesn't make something better, it may simply explain why it appeals to some people, or through basic supply and demand why one items costs more than another.

 

In the end, when someone is discussing a product that involves buyers who can afford anything, and price is not a limiting factor, then often times what becomes important to prospective clients is exclusivity.   It doesn't make a 2499 better than a 3970, its simply that it may have more snob appeal to be able to say that only a few hundred were produced, and it limits one's chances of ever being someplace and seeing someone with the same watch.  I usually think if someone has the same watch as me...they must have excellent taste wink.gif, but not everyone is like that.  

post #22169 of 39315

 

Frilly, your obsession with skinny blonde women I do not share.  But I wonder if it's something to do with the subdials? Then again, you do "associate" quite a lot of things with women of this type. :)

 

Dino, you're right, they're extremely silly.  In a way, I think it's a good idea gone wrong.  I mean, coming up with that "trigger" and crown guard contraption was something original.  If they'd  kept to fewer models, and tried to develop a single "classic" as their signature piece, it could have gone better.  Maybe they should have been more serious on the military references with a matte case and simple dial, or whatever.  I mean, of course it looks ridiculous to start with, but once upon a time, so did a 47mm Panerai.  All these colours and endless specials for such a new brand, just make them look cheap to me.  They've clearly got some fresh ideas and challenging new shapes is fine, but it seems like an opportunity wasted with all that kitsch.

 

Stitchy, I too tried the 5159 a while back - I think it was the only man's watch in the new PP boutique!  The size is OK for me, perhaps because I wear a slightly smaller one most of the time.  But one thing I loved was the caseback cover.  Gave it a beautiful feel in my hand...like a golden Strepsil!  But not much love on here for this model - don't get Belligero started on fonts...quick..hide it before he gets here...

post #22170 of 39315
Quote:
Originally Posted by in stitches View Post

mimo - those grahms are sooooooooooo bad. but i think that perrelet ladies watch is beautiful.

frillsameisterdood - quite like that patek. i tried the 5159 on in NYC for fun. i was very disheartened that i felt it looked too small on my wrist. frown.gif

[img]

Stitchy, yeah, if you felt that the 5159 wore small for you, the 3970s at 36mm would probably feel even smaller.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread