or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread - Part two (Rolex, Patek Philippe, Audemars Piguet, Jaeger LeCoultre, Baume & Mercier and more)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Watch Appreciation Thread - Part two (Rolex, Patek Philippe, Audemars Piguet, Jaeger LeCoultre, Baume & Mercier and more) - Page 181

post #2701 of 3975
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambulance Chaser View Post


The ad campaign ("You never actually own a Patek Phillippe. You merely look after it for the next generation.") is brilliant. I am skeptical that is going to continue to work. Look at the wrists of millenials today. Your son either is going to wear the latest iWatch, or is not going to wear a watch at all.

That's addressed in the Last Psychiatrist article. 


The ads are in the Economist, which is read by people who will be the target demo for Patek in 15-20 years (not the current target demo, who does not impulse-buy a $40,000 watch). They're investing in their future customers and in a way, adding to the intangible value of the signal. If you don't understand why Pateks are worth it, that implies something about your own reading habits and therefore non-belonging to the target demo.

 

I've seen it with strategy consultants and suitcases. I have a friend who was at one of the famous ones for a while, and visiting me in Singapore, he spent half an hour in the Tumi store. Half an hour. Bewildering!


Edited by crdb - 8/12/16 at 7:39am
post #2702 of 3975
Quote:
Damn, that's service. Which country was that in?

I think the core difference is that the VW special projects like the Phaeton and Veyron are loss making (adding value to VW in other ways, mostly free headlines and perception of engineering excellence, like F1), whilst Bentley relies on the intangible value to make its margins work even with low volume.

Dresden

post #2703 of 3975

You'd think they'd at least assemble the Bentleys in a separate room...

post #2704 of 3975

Great read over the last few pages, guys. I'm not knowledgeable enough to chime in but I enjoy reading these opinionated debate. Clearly, some of you have a lot more hands-on experience and knowledge than I.

post #2705 of 3975
Not sure how the cleverness of Patek's marketing campaign indicts the watches. Seems to me if people had real knowledge of declining quality or other issues, they'd be able to speak to specifics.

There have to be more than three or four people in this thread who actually know about watches . . .
post #2706 of 3975
I'm pretty happy to not wear a suit every day and would buy a Patek for myself, not for any "signalling" or whatever the hell else. Haven't read the Economist outside of stray articles for years.
post #2707 of 3975
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

I didn't buy the Panerai for value appreciation. I wanted an archetypical model, and the 372 is almost dead-on for the original 6152. Also, as it was about to be discontinued, it was my last chance to buy one new.

Both that watch and the Tank are gone. Both great watches--the Tank in particular. Set my sights on another target. We'll see if it works out.

I am guessing that might be a Patek?

Great discussion, all around. A lot of very interesting points. I think the Foo is correct - the finishing of a movement is not the end-all-be-all. Just as critical is the design of the movement. With that said - and although this is neither here nor there - Lange, although anachronistic to a fault, to some, in my opinion are at the forefront of movement finishing and design. It always impresses me how Lange constantly updates new movements from the ground up for such similar watches. Although I am certain that some of it is mere romanticism, marketing, etc., as a consumer, I feel like Lange seems a bit more willing to go that extra mile. I feel like your money goes just a little bit further with Lange than Patek. But then, a Lange is not a Patek, and similar to Dino, I grew up wanting a Patek, not a Lange.

With respect to the finishing... I feel like both Lange and Patek are on similar playing fields. Maybe I would give Lange the edge. But Patek is no slouch, still certainly top tier. The differences are more philosophical than anything. The quality of Patek, in my opinion, has not "slipped." However, I do believe that Patek has slipped in design - but only with respect to some of their watches. I like the 5227 (although I think it is egregiously pricey), and I love the 5170 (my favorite Patek in their currently lineup... and maybe the 5712). On the other hand, the 5270 is blah in terms of design, as is the 5146, and so many of Patek's other perpetual calendars and annual calendars. The arial font, the bulge, the cut-out date, scrunchy numbers, subdial location, etc... personally, I prefer the vintage aesthetic. Hell even the 5227 is not as beautiful as some of their previous Calatravas - again, that is just my opinion. I guess, in sum, I do not believe that Patek's modern lineup is very elegant - comparatively speaking, of course.

I mean, come on, this:



Compared to this:



To me, at least, it is a no-brainer. The vintage variant does not feel like it is a perpetual calendar chronograph. It has an ability to make the display of all that information effortless. You wouldn't even know it was a perpetual calendar chronograph unless you really looked at it. On the other hand, the modern iterations have a feeling like Patek is trying to show the consumer all that the watch can do. It feels less subtle.
post #2708 of 3975
Quote:
Originally Posted by crdb View Post


On the finishing/ultra high end side, I don't really want to step into a discussion where my knowledge and experience is really quite far behind some of the posters here, but at the very least I'd put forward the Credor Eichis (https://www.hodinkee.com/articles/with-the-seiko-eichi-ii-versus-dufour-and-ferrier).

Now there's some first tier finishing...
post #2709 of 3975
I can't think of any Patek that I really want, although I admit I haven't tried very hard and my tastes are more circumscribed than most here. So show me them. Here is what I am interested in:
1. Elegant dress watch - good for more formal suits. o.k. with black tie if white gold.
2. All-rounder - very legible, all purpose watch. Should not be super delicate. OK with casual clothes and with suits, even if not perfect if trying to be dressed up. Not interested in Nautilus for this.
3. Sports watch. Must be highly legible and durable. Nautilus isn't good here, either. Not really that legible. I wonder if Aquanaut is better.
4. Rugged chronograph. Could wear anytime but the most formal of occasions. I assume this is where Patek shines.
No day counters, please. Perpetuals, or even annual calendars, which have real date functions are respectable, and even admirable, though I don't really want one.

p.s., I have something that works for each of these, except I could use a nice white gold dress watch. But from time to time, I think I could replace what I have with something nicer/better. Then I realize there is really no reason to do so.
post #2710 of 3975
Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcomer View Post

Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
I am guessing that might be a Patek?

Great discussion, all around. A lot of very interesting points. I think the Foo is correct - the finishing of a movement is not the end-all-be-all. Just as critical is the design of the movement. With that said - and although this is neither here nor there - Lange, although anachronistic to a fault, to some, in my opinion are at the forefront of movement finishing and design. It always impresses me how Lange constantly updates new movements from the ground up for such similar watches. Although I am certain that some of it is mere romanticism, marketing, etc., as a consumer, I feel like Lange seems a bit more willing to go that extra mile. I feel like your money goes just a little bit further with Lange than Patek. But then, a Lange is not a Patek, and similar to Dino, I grew up wanting a Patek, not a Lange.

With respect to the finishing... I feel like both Lange and Patek are on similar playing fields. Maybe I would give Lange the edge. But Patek is no slouch, still certainly top tier. The differences are more philosophical than anything. The quality of Patek, in my opinion, has not "slipped." However, I do believe that Patek has slipped in design - but only with respect to some of their watches. I like the 5227 (although I think it is egregiously pricey), and I love the 5170 (my favorite Patek in their currently lineup... and maybe the 5712). On the other hand, the 5270 is blah in terms of design, as is the 5146, and so many of Patek's other perpetual calendars and annual calendars. The arial font, the bulge, the cut-out date, scrunchy numbers, subdial location, etc... personally, I prefer the vintage aesthetic. Hell even the 5227 is not as beautiful as some of their previous Calatravas - again, that is just my opinion. I guess, in sum, I do not believe that Patek's modern lineup is very elegant - comparatively speaking, of course.

I mean, come on, this:



Compared to this:



To me, at least, it is a no-brainer. The vintage variant does not feel like it is a perpetual calendar chronograph. It has an ability to make the display of all that information effortless. You wouldn't even know it was a perpetual calendar chronograph unless you really looked at it. On the other hand, the modern iterations have a feeling like Patek is trying to show the consumer all that the watch can do. It feels less subtle.

Now here is a thoughtful, well-considered perspective. Agree with you for the most part.

I like Lange very much, but the philosophy behind the brand and design is off-color to me. Don't like the synthetic history and overt grab at superficial symbols of tradition. Can border on pastiche.

Agree that Patek case and dial design were generally better 10-15 years ago. But quality and caliber design has only marched forward. I would also argue that while Lange certainly puts more emphasis on finishing flourish, Patek movement design and innovation is far ahead, which returns to your point about differing philosophies. Lange will always be tethered to forcing the appearance of tradition in a way that Patek needn't be. This forces compromise in design. The three-quarter plate and screwed chatons are good examples. With modern alloys and techniques, you don't need a three-quarter plate for stability or durability, but it adds thickness and makes the watch harder to service (also, it's less pretty to look at). Screwed chatons take extra effort too, but for what? They aren't needed to secure the jewel bearings anymore. This is ornamentation some might see as "going the extra mile," but I see it as less honest finishing and a diversion of resources. Also, at the complicated end of the spectrum, I think its safe to say Patek is undisputed king.
post #2711 of 3975
Quote:
Originally Posted by dopey View Post

I can't think of any Patek that I really want, although I admit I haven't tried very hard and my tastes are more circumscribed than most here. So show me them. Here is what I am interested in:
1. Elegant dress watch - good for more formal suits. o.k. with black tie if white gold.
2. All-rounder - very legible, all purpose watch. Should not be super delicate. OK with casual clothes and with suits, even if not perfect if trying to be dressed up. Not interested in Nautilus for this.
4. Sports watch. Must be highly legible and durable. Nautilus isn't good here, either. Not really that legible. I wonder if Aquanaut is better.
3. Rugged chronograph. Could wear anytime but the most formal of occasions. I assume this is where Patek shines.
No day counters, please. Perpetuals, or even annual calendars, which have real date functions are respectable, and even admirable, though I don't really want one.

p.s., I have something that works for each of these, except I could use a nice white gold dress watch. But from time to time, I think I could replace what I have with something nicer/better. Then I realize there is really no reason to do so.

Dopey, just so happens I was working on a post with current production Pateks I like. May not all fit your specific requirements, but take a look.

5196
6kFfNV2yn8WzqzQdEPTbhg.jpg

5296
5296G-011.JPG

5227
patek_image.3645513.jpg

5711
Patek-Philippe-Nautilus-5711-Collectors-Series-5.jpg

5146


5170


5235
_img.jpg?ixlib=rails-1.1.0&fit=crop&ch=Width%2CDPR%2CSave-Data&fm=jpg&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&w=1500&s=7e64d84496220ca2609aa94d5531f897

5396


5327
Patek5327-5.jpg?ixlib=rails-1.1.0&w=1500&s=45544f71b2c824dad39c7496e812cc7a

5370


5950
post #2712 of 3975
Quote:
Originally Posted by dopey View Post

I can't think of any Patek that I really want, although I admit I haven't tried very hard and my tastes are more circumscribed than most here. So show me them. Here is what I am interested in:
1. Elegant dress watch - good for more formal suits. o.k. with black tie if white gold.
2. All-rounder - very legible, all purpose watch. Should not be super delicate. OK with casual clothes and with suits, even if not perfect if trying to be dressed up. Not interested in Nautilus for this.
3. Sports watch. Must be highly legible and durable. Nautilus isn't good here, either. Not really that legible. I wonder if Aquanaut is better.
4. Rugged chronograph. Could wear anytime but the most formal of occasions. I assume this is where Patek shines.
No day counters, please. Perpetuals, or even annual calendars, which have real date functions are respectable, and even admirable, though I don't really want one.

p.s., I have something that works for each of these, except I could use a nice white gold dress watch. But from time to time, I think I could replace what I have with something nicer/better. Then I realize there is really no reason to do so.
Quoting and responding to my own post, just because.
1 - the gold standard for me is that Vacheron ultra thin posted above, in white gold. Does Patek have anything as nice?
2. This is an open category and maybe Patek has something that I haven't thought of. Lots of room in this category - hard to beat a simple Explorer or Datejust but I wouldn't be surprised if Patek has a nice, legible solid time only that I haven't thought of.
3. Like the above, Rolex seems to be the best bet here with either an Explorer or no date sub. What does Patek have?
4. Interested to see what people say. Seems you have the Daytona/Speedy in one corner and something fancier but a little more delicate from Patek in the other.
post #2713 of 3975
Quote:
Originally Posted by mafoofan View Post

Dopey, just so happens I was working on a post with current production Pateks I like. May not all fit your specific requirements, but take a look.

5196


5170

Thanks. These are the two winners for my interests. The first is good for category 2 - legible all rounder. OK in gold or steel. The chrono is also great (I don't have any interest in the more complex chronos), but, wow - not cheap.
post #2714 of 3975
Before getting into all of this, I guess I ought to preface the below. What maddens me about Patek is not that they are not beautiful, well finished, etc. What irritates me is that they just aren't as well designed as they should be for the price that you pay. I can't help that they pay heed to "modern" tastes, often at the expense of design. If you look in their archives, there are just better examples of just about everything in their current lineup. And the fascination with "Arial" font is absurd. Are they doing this with Paint?

Again, would I kick a Patek out of bed? Hell no. And there are certain models I think are gorgeous. I would sell my liver for the 5170. But their tip-top models fall short in terms of design, and they do so in a manner that is not forgivable to me.

For example. In my opinion, the 3940 is worlds above the 5396. Better font, subdials look cleaner, etc. Just not sure how you can have this disconnect?

One of my goals in life is to acquire a Patek at some point. But in my opinion, my $10,000 JLC MUT Moon is more elegant than a $50,000 Patek. There is something deeply, deeply wrong with that.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
5196


5296


5227

I actually quite like the 5196, 5296, and 5227. A bit drab, perhaps. But still nice enough. My favorite of the three is the 5227. That is probably one of my favorite current references.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
5711

I love the 5711. Always have.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
5146

Date window on the 5146 bothers the hell out of me. Not my favorite reference. Annual calendar as well... meh. Stylistically, I don't think it is a very good watch. Feels like it was made for their customers. Everything seems tacked on.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
5170

The Creme de la creme. The 5170 is the best current production Patek. One of the few greats from their current lineup.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
5235
_img.jpg?ixlib=rails-1.1.0&fit=crop&ch=Width%2CDPR%2CSave-Data&fm=jpg&q=55&auto=format&usm=12&w=1500&s=7e64d84496220ca2609aa94d5531f897

I enjoy the 5235. I think it is neat. Probably wouldn't buy it though.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
5396

The date window on the 5396 is just unnecessary. Not a big fan of the GMT function on this one. Still, not bad. I think that they have done previous iterations (sans date window) that have looked more elegant.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
5327
Patek5327-5.jpg?ixlib=rails-1.1.0&w=1500&s=45544f71b2c824dad39c7496e812cc7a

The font on the 5327 is garbage. The breguet numerals are nice. Hate the date wheel.
Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
5370


5950
[/quote]

The 5370 and 5950 are both superb. Some of the best modern references.
post #2715 of 3975
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coxsackie View Post
 

 

 


Much of this I would agree with, but a lot of it is purely subjective opinion masquerading as fact.

 

On what metric do you class Rolex as "strong"? Sure, they have the highest turnover of any watch company; but given that their immediate competitors are the likes of Tissot and Fossil, this doesn't mean a lot to anyone serious about watches. Their movements are hidden away because they mostly have some plasticky-looking parts which Rolex wouldn't want people to see. And their only "innovation" consists of putting hideous new green and pink dials on boring old models.

 

Having said that, yes, they do make some nice stuff. They fixed up the short-hands problem with the new Explorer, and it's now just about the one Rolex I could bring myself to buy. (OK, the rose gold/black dial dual-time Cellini is pretty sexy too, but it's already discontinued.) And surely there are plenty of chronographs out there which are more interesting than the Daytona.

 

The rest of your specific commentary places great emphasis on tradition and history, which is fair enough when considering resale value; but others have pointed out that Patek is relying way too heavily on their name and history, while ramping up production and reducing quality. I've heard so many horror stories from Patek owners trying to get their pieces serviced. There was a Sky-Moon Tourbillon floating around that had never worked; it kept going back, for months at a time; the owner eventually gave up and sold it. I pity the new owner.

 

You completely dismiss GO, Breguet, IWC and Omega; but they all have some really interesting current models (mixed in with a fair bit of dross, admittedly).

 

Spot-on comment regarding AP though. Apart from the 15202 - which is simply stunning, through and through - they have been the most disappointing of the Big Three. And yet - their modified Robin escapement is a true gift to modern horology.

 

But I'm coming from a different direction than you. In the past I've been known to drop over $60K on a single watch, but guess what my last purchase was? A Seiko. And guess what I've got my eye on now? A Casio MR-G. That's right, a quartz watch. I don't give a shit about resale value. I'm interested in the actual piece; how well it's designed and made; how it stands out from all the other myriad new releases clamouring for my attention.

 

Basically, what I'm saying is that it's ok to buy a watch simply because something about it excites you.

Channelling the Watch Snob! I love it! Glashutte Original is reallythat bad? Not so sure. Rolex (I have a Sub date in SS) is fadish and way overpriced. Apparently vintage Rolexes are overpriced as well. Still love it, though.

 

Neat forum.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › The Watch Appreciation Thread - Part two (Rolex, Patek Philippe, Audemars Piguet, Jaeger LeCoultre, Baume & Mercier and more)