1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.

    Cheers,

    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice

HOW MUCH?

Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by ernest, Feb 22, 2005.

  1. Brian SD

    Brian SD Senior member

    Messages:
    9,760
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2004
    Location:
    Tokyo
    Originally Posted by Brian SD,Feb. 24 2005,14:55
    Well, spending $1000-2000 on a "fine watch" is different than just a "watch" in general. Like I said, I would probably buy one dress watch around a thousand dollars and stick to under $500 for the rest.
    As drizzt pointed out, I thought this discussion was concerning goods that would appeal to stylish gentlemen - otherwise, one may assume that a $20 Timex would suffice as well. I don't mean to act rude, but it simply annoys me when people use terms such as "absurd" and "ludcrious" to define extravagant watch purchases but do not hesitate to spend several thousand dollars on clothing. Panzer
    Taking the standpoint that you can buy a standard quartz watch for $20 and get everything you NEED, you do not think spending 50-100 times the bare minimum is absurd? Most people I know would think spending $100 on a watch is pushing the high end. I think $500 is plenty extravagant, and as my post hinted, I find anything above that to be absurd. Hell, I pay "absurd" prices for jeans, because I love jeans. Most people don't even believe me when I say I have paid over $200 for a pair of jeans. I'm not going to try to make euphemisms or excuses because I don't feel comfortable admitting that my hobby costs me a pretty penny. I understand your side and I agree that it is no surprise a stylish gentleman would be willing to shell out a lot more money for a watch, and my input on that is that a stylish gentleman doesn't *need* to pay more than $500 for a watch. I'm sorry that you're annoyed by my opinion. I would think it better to actually have more than one side of the coin in a discussion, instead of everyone just preaching to the choir like an audience at a Michael Moore film.
     
  2. linux_pro

    linux_pro Senior member

    Messages:
    551
    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2005
    I've got to agree with Brian. Style is subjective, and it isn't absurd that someone can spend $5000 on a suit and $200 on a watch. Expensive suits generally are not obviously expensive, except to those who know and love suits. They just look refined and handsome. And I'm all for that.

    A Rolex or Cartier is obviously something expensive, and comes across as a little too "bling-bling" for my tastes. And that term speaks for itself, it doesn't come across as classy to me (personal taste only here). I would no more likely wear a diamond-encrusted gawdy Rolex than walk around with my fingers covered in huge diamond rings. But that's only my personal taste. I liked the Mercier because it was understated and handsome, quite elegant actually. But the average person could not have distinguished that watch from say, a $200 Movado. They might even have thought the Movado was more expensive. That's what I liked about it. It seemed understated, refined and handsome, like the suit I intended to wear with it.

    For me, it just came down to practicality. I didn't want to lose/damage a fine watch like the Mercier. I'd rather that fate befall upon something as easily replaced as the Seiko.
     
  3. Panzeraxe

    Panzeraxe Senior member

    Messages:
    300
    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Location:
    New York, NY
    I'm afraid you've have had very little experience with fine watches. To true watch lovers, Rolex and Cartier are laughable watches (its somewhat akin to saying that Armani and Boss make the best suits). Check out some Blancpain's, Patek's, Vacheron's or JLC's and you'll notice what I mean - spending upwards of $5k on a watch more often than not leads to a very refined 'understated-looking' watch.

    In that sense, expensive mechanical watches are exactly like the fine suits you correctly described - 'refined and handsome' and their quality and prestige evident only to those who know about sartorial matters/horology.

    Panzer
     
  4. Panzeraxe

    Panzeraxe Senior member

    Messages:
    300
    Joined:
    Jan 25, 2005
    Location:
    New York, NY
    (Panzeraxe @ Feb. 24 2005,15:00)
    Well, spending $1000-2000 on a "fine watch" is different than just a "watch" in general. Like I said, I would probably buy one dress watch around a thousand dollars and stick to under $500 for the rest.
    As drizzt pointed out, I thought this discussion was concerning goods that would appeal to stylish gentlemen - otherwise, one may assume that a $20 Timex would suffice as well. I don't mean to act rude, but it simply annoys me when people use terms such as "absurd" and "ludcrious" to define extravagant watch purchases but do not hesitate to spend several thousand dollars on clothing. Panzer
    Taking the standpoint that you can buy a standard quartz watch for $20 and get everything you NEED, you do not think spending 50-100 times the bare minimum is absurd? Most people I know would think spending $100 on a watch is pushing the high end. I think $500 is plenty extravagant, and as my post hinted, I find anything above that to be absurd. Hell, I pay "absurd" prices for jeans, because I love jeans. Most people don't even believe me when I say I have paid over $200 for a pair of jeans. I'm not going to try to make euphemisms or excuses because I don't feel comfortable admitting that my hobby costs me a pretty penny. I understand your side and I agree that it is no surprise a stylish gentleman would be willing to shell out a lot more money for a watch, and my input on that is that a stylish gentleman doesn't *need* to pay more than $500 for a watch. I'm sorry that you're annoyed by my opinion. I would think it better to actually have more than one side of the coin in a discussion, instead of everyone just preaching to the choir like an audience at a Michael Moore film.
    I agree, and apologize for any misunderstanding. The part that I took offense to was when you and linux_pro subtly suggested that spending over $1K on a watch was 'absurd'. Perhaps I misunderstood... Panzer
     
  5. ernest

    ernest Senior member

    Messages:
    2,564
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Location:
    PARIS
    Do you prefer get used out an expensive suit?
     
  6. ernest

    ernest Senior member

    Messages:
    2,564
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Location:
    PARIS
     
  7. drizzt3117

    drizzt3117 Senior member

    Messages:
    13,141
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    Ugh, again, not understanding what I'm saying.

    In my opinion, yes, there is a difference in quality between Edward Green, Crockett and Jones, Grenson, and Allen Edmonds/Alden/Bally, however, they serve as an acceptable minimum for me in my daily wardrobe. However, I don't typically purchase ties with MSRP < $100 for a number of reasons, yes, I have a higher standard for ties.

    There's nothing you can say that will convince me that I need to have a higher minimum price for shoes, so don't bother.

    This is my last post on this subject.
     
  8. ernest

    ernest Senior member

    Messages:
    2,564
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Location:
    PARIS
    So you admit
     
  9. Brian SD

    Brian SD Senior member

    Messages:
    9,760
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2004
    Location:
    Tokyo
    I do think so. The art community laughs at that commercial painter guy who makes crappy paintings of the clouds, (whats his name again?), and of course this logic can apply to different scenes... It's perfectly realistic and I find it even practical for a style-concerned man to spend a lot on a nice watch, but looking at numbers alone, above $1k is in what I would call the absurd range. If I was to get a fine watch, I would probably get a IWC, or a designer watch with an ETA movement. While many admirers of that painter guy get offended when you say he's a horrible artist (or just not an artist at all), I would be pretty impervious to a watch-fanatic telling me that my Diesel watch is a POS. I know there is better, finer, stuff out there that's crafted by hand and uses microscopic mechanical components, but eh, buy what you like.

    And you're also right to assume that I don't know much about fine watches in general. of course it would be downright foolish of me to appreciate a $5000 Voucheron. I could only go by what I hear and not what I really know about how a nice automatic watch functions.
     
  10. ernest

    ernest Senior member

    Messages:
    2,564
    Joined:
    Jan 18, 2004
    Location:
    PARIS
    Vacheron
     
  11. amirrorcrackd

    amirrorcrackd Senior member

    Messages:
    705
    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2004
    Location:
    NY, NY
    Perhaps I misunderstood...
    I do think so. The art community laughs at that commercial painter guy who makes crappy paintings of the clouds, (whats his name again?), and of course this logic can apply to different scenes... It's perfectly realistic and I find it even practical for a style-concerned man to spend a lot on a nice watch, but looking at numbers alone, above $1k is in what I would call the absurd range.  If I was to get a fine watch, I would probably get a IWC, or a designer watch with an ETA movement.  While many admirers of that painter guy get offended when you say he's a horrible artist (or just not an artist at all), I would be pretty impervious to a watch-fanatic telling me that my Diesel watch is a POS. I know there is better, finer, stuff out there that's crafted by hand and uses microscopic mechanical components, but eh, buy what you like. And you're also right to assume that I don't know much about  fine watches in general. of course it would be downright foolish of me to appreciate a $5000 Voucheron. I could only go by what I hear and not what I really know about how a nice automatic watch functions.
    Are you talking about Bob Ross? I'm sure Bob doesn't have an expensive watch, yet he's still happy like his trees. Different strokes for different folks. Dan
     
  12. steven93

    steven93 Member

    Messages:
    20
    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2006
    I only wear second hand clothes from friends
     
  13. LabelKing

    LabelKing Senior member

    Messages:
    25,745
    Joined:
    May 24, 2002
    Location:
    Constantinople
    I don't know about you but I would pay the $1,400,000 for this Breguet:

    [​IMG]
     
  14. DocHolliday

    DocHolliday Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    16,118
    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2005
    Location:
    Tombstone
    Are you talking about Bob Ross? I'm sure Bob doesn't have an expensive watch, yet he's still happy like his trees. Different strokes for different folks.

    I was thinking Thomas Kinkade, the "painter of light."

    Personally, I find Bob Ross very soothing. Nice to take a nap to on a Saturday afternoon.

    I wear an old WWII-era windup watch. It was very inexpensive, yet has a nice sense of style/history about it.
     

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by