or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Australian Members - Part II - if you read the first post, you'll get what this is all about.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Australian Members - Part II - if you read the first post, you'll get what this is all about. - Page 192

post #2866 of 3516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Petepan View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by LonerMatt View Post

Yeah yeah it's a free liberal world and maybe that guy worked for his money (doubt it), maybe he deserves to spend it the way he wants (disagree with that) and maybe he pays his fair share of taxes (like fuck) so his debt to society is paid. Maybe he saved for years slaving away to get the watch (uh huh) and I guess if any of those things are true for watches that cost as much as houses I'll apologise and eat my words.

Who is this guy??
And does he need financial/super advice?!?
post #2867 of 3516
Thread Starter 

Motor Finance Wizard says YES!

post #2868 of 3516
lonermatt i think you can do with a good hit of mary jane and learn to love yourself a little more.
post #2869 of 3516
Quote:
Originally Posted by sliq View Post

lonermatt i think you can do with a good hit of lorna jane and learn to love yourself a little more.

FTFY
post #2870 of 3516
Quote:
Originally Posted by sliq View Post

lonermatt i think you can do with a good hit of mary jane and learn to love yourself a little more.
Amen to that.
post #2871 of 3516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coxsackie View Post
 

 

Where I do agree with Matt - well, I think I agree with him, although he didn't explicitly state the reasoning behind his statement - is that the luxury goods industry in general is a pretty tawdry space. We are being brainwashed to equip ourselves with all sorts of unnecessary branded goods and gewgaws, the subliminal message being that we are joining some kind of elite by doing so.

 

 

 

A good observation, Cox. 

 

I like watches, but they are most definitely luxury goods, perhaps to an even greater extent than expensive cars. In the "totally unnecessary and overly expensive" stakes, I would think that the only thing ranked higher than mechanical watches would be diamond jewellery. 

 

Let's face it, mechanical watches are totally redundant nowadays. Anything that they can do, battery-powered watches can do better and 99% of the population carries around a phone that contains a clock, calendar and a whole range of other functions, too. 

 

Of course, we men (as it is almost exclusively men who obsess over expensive, mechanical watches) like to say that it's all about the high-end mechanics - the carefully machined movement, the elegance of the case, the carefully applied lume on the dial and so forth. 

 

Frankly, there might be a little bit of that, but most of it is (in my very humble opinion) rubbish. After all, if it was about the movement and so on, we'd all be wearing Grand Seikos or something similar, as they cost less than half as much as a Rolex Sub but are beautifully made (and they've got an in-house movement, too, something that watch geeks love to carry on about!). 

 

Most of the enthusiasm about watches comes down to marketing, or brainwashing as Cox puts it. We're convinced that brand X is better than W, Y and Z because someone wore one of brand X's watches when they were climbing a mountain 50 years ago. There was an interesting discussion over in the watch thread a year or two back where a few people quite frankly commented that even though they rationally know that a brand like Grand Seiko is great, they'd always buy a Rolex or similar watch over a Grand Seiko because they simply don't covet a Grand Seiko, but they grew up knowing about and wanting to own a Rolex. That's the power of marketing and Rolex has very, very expertly harnessed its heritage for use as a marketing tool. 

 

I respect Rolex as a brand, as they've done a fantastic job. I'm a bit surprised at just how popular they've become nowadays - I didn't realise that you had to get on a months-long waiting list to get a plain Submariner watch and that you'd have to pay just under $10 000 for the privilege! I think that the price has more than doubled over the past decade or so. 

post #2872 of 3516
Talking about watches- Rolex. Growing up in Bangladesh our family struggled just like any other families we knew. I remember my father brought home a solid gold Rolex day date , which he was going to take to watch maker for a service next day . This belonged to his boss. I remember he said owning a beautiful watch such as this would be his dream. This was about 27 years ago.
I never liked Rolexes - most people I knew had them were c**ters.
In recent years I have learned what Rolex is about, the history, contributions to watch world and many inventions. And slowly I have grown a need to have a Rolex. Rolex has nothing to do with who wears it. My father couldn't afford to buy such watch .Like many others to my father owning a Rolex is being successful . And I think he would like that for his son.
post #2873 of 3516

Gosh, this discussion comes back every so often (most recently in The Watch Appreciation Thread).

 

I usually like to post these two for consideration:

https://www.quora.com/Why-would-anyone-buy-a-Rolex-watch/answer/Suzanne-Sadedin

http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2011/11/luxury_branding_the_future_lea.html

 

I think the key to understand the value of a Rolex, or a diamond engagement ring, or anything that looks physically and functionally "useless", is to try and understand what it is an excuse for. There is an intrinsic need for a store of value, so the thing that is common enough to store the world's value easily, and hard enough to find that you cannot inflate its supply away, becomes the de facto store of value for millenia (gold). There is a need for a man to prove to a woman he's serious (and perhaps to provide her with an insurance policy should he prove not serious), so De Beers inject themselves into the spot and cause a century of men grief and confusion. 

 

In other words, there is such a thing as intangible value. No man is an island, etc. I think Suzanne Sadedin above nails the relatively complex nature of the intangible value of a Rolex or expensive watches in general, most of which is represented not in the watch but in the knowledge its owner has.

post #2874 of 3516

In fact, the two posts on the engagement ring are classic so I'll post them as well.

 

http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2012/01/what_would_you_do_if_your_fian.html

http://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2012/02/what_would_you_do_if_your_fian_1.html (the best)

post #2875 of 3516
Re Watches and other baubles.

Its simply a matter of status or is it status anxiety. By your works ye shall know them and that is the bottom line. For some people its all about socially defining ones identity by the way one flaunts ones disposable income be it on art, watches, Grange, cars and I could go on.

Or one could say status is all about Cultural Capital/Power. Eg I own a Picasso so therefore I am better that you because you own a Nolan. Or am I? Social cachet is determined not by mere money alone but also by the Milieu one lives in. The former Mrs GF was a dental nurse and her employer had a Picasso print. Well actually he didn't have the complete Picasso art work he had a section of it which was censored.gif absurd. However in his eyes and amongst his peers he owned a Picasso. censored.gif Idiot didn't realise that he did not own a Picasso at all but only a mutilated section of Picasso print along with another 23 fools who bought into this folly.
post #2876 of 3516
I think fathers have a lot to answer for in the watch world.

My dad worked in factories but always had a couple of nice, though not really expensive, watches. He bought us watches as kids and told us to look after them etc etc. It was a sort of bonding thing I think. He wasn't affected by marketing or branding, it was a just a thing that as a man you had a nice watch and you looked after it, and after you were done with it you passed it to your son.

Of course, now this simple act of kindness is just another marketing campaign, just ask Patek.
post #2877 of 3516
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Ernesto View Post

I think fathers have a lot to answer for in the watch world.

My dad worked in factories but always had a couple of nice, though not really expensive, watches. He bought us watches as kids and told us to look after them etc etc. It was a sort of bonding thing I think. He wasn't affected by marketing or branding, it was a just a thing that as a man you had a nice watch and you looked after it, and after you were done with it you passed it to your son.

Of course, now this simple act of kindness is just another marketing campaign, just ask Patek.
My father never gave me a watch but he did give me a cuckoo clock. Think he was trying to tell me something.
post #2878 of 3516
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince of Paisley View Post

My father never gave me a watch but he did give me a cuckoo clock. Think he was trying to tell me something.

To become a missionary and save a village in Switzerland?
post #2879 of 3516
Thread Starter 

post #2880 of 3516

Does it matter that it's a marketing campaign, provided it delivers value to you? 

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Australian Members - Part II - if you read the first post, you'll get what this is all about.