The Watch Appreciation Thread - Part two (Rolex, Patek Philippe, Audemars Piguet, Jaeger LeCoultre,

[TheFoo]

Visited a local watch shop/ authorized Patek dealer in Boston. They are closing that branch, and giving up their Patek franchise (not bothering to keep it for one of their other out of state branches). He said the clientele in wealthy suburban areas where their other store are located, just don't buy them. They still have a bunch of complicated pieces left, seems like 15% discount on several of them, although discounts vary according to what I was told. Suddenly, a guy walked into the store and shouted "Steel Nautilus?" The salesman said, "Sorry none." The guy walked right out the door. The salesman said to me, "It's like that all day long." The only models people care about now are the Nautilus and Aquanaut."

There are people who just want Nautiluses and then there people who more generally want Pateks. These days, by pure volume the former seem to outnumber the latter by far. However, Patek’s revenue is still just 30% from steel watches. So, while the latter group is smaller in number, they seem to spend a lot more money.

Do you think this is just a temporary trend or is Patek on an inevitable path to becoming another AP? It seems like the only brand that can still sell dress watches in volume is Cartier.

Temporary. Patek has made more of an effort to stem the tide than AP—in actuality, AP went the opposite direction and embraced it. Not surprising since the Royal Oak line can be said to have saved AP from oblivion. Not the case with the Nautilus and Patek.

 

[TheFoo]

I assume we’ve already talked about the Speedmaster 321? INSANE.

The $14K price tag would represent a crazy value if it were possible to actually snag one for $14K.

One Speedy to Rule Them All.

 

[Texasmade]

I assume we’ve already talked about the Speedmaster 321? INSANE.

The $14K price tag would represent a crazy value if it were possible to actually snag one for $14K.

One Speedy to Rule Them All.

View attachment 1541828

View attachment 1541829

View attachment 1541830

View attachment 1541831

Just buy the platinum 321 and you’ll be at the top of the list for the steel 321.

 

[Ambulance Chaser]

That Speedy is beautiful, but it's for the connoisseur who cares about Ed White, 321, and Dot over 90. It's a tough sell for the average watch collector who wants one Speedy and can get a very similar looking one for less than half the price. (You can't do the same for the Daytona.) I guess there must be enough Speedy connoisseurs out there.

 

[TheFoo]

That Speedy is beautiful, but it's for the connoisseur who cares about Ed White, 321, and Dot over 90. It's a tough sell for the average watch collector who wants one Speedy and can get a very similar looking one for less than half the price. (You can't do the same for the Daytona.) I guess there must be enough Speedy connoisseurs out there.

Anybody willing to spend big bucks on vintage Speedies understands why the caliber 321 is special. Hell, most serious watch collectors understand why that movement is special, irrespective of their interest in Omega or the Speedmaster. As the 15202 is to the the Royal Oak model line for AP, the Speedy 321 is to the Speedmaster model line for Omega. It is the most archetypal, platonically ideal iteration. It’s the version we’ve all been waiting for but never thought would happen.

In another words, it matters not what “average” Speedy buyers or watch collectors can afford or want. This is much bigger than that.

 

[Texasmade]

That Speedy is beautiful, but it's for the connoisseur who cares about Ed White, 321, and Dot over 90. It's a tough sell for the average watch collector who wants one Speedy and can get a very similar looking one for less than half the price. (You can't do the same for the Daytona.) I guess there must be enough Speedy connoisseurs out there.

FOIS for $4500 and an Uncle Seiko flat link or Forestner flat link for like $100 and you have 90% of the look of a 321 EW for like 1/3 the cost.

 

[chocomallo]

Anybody willing to spend big bucks on vintage Speedies understands why the caliber 321 is special. Hell, most serious watch collectors understand why that movement is special, irrespective of their interest in Omega or the Speedmaster. As the 15202 is to the the Royal Oak model line for AP, the Speedy 321 is to the Speedmaster model line for Omega. It is the most archetypal, platonically ideal iteration. It’s the version we’ve all been waiting for but never thought would happen.

In another words, it matters not what “average” Speedy buyers or watch collectors can afford or want. This is much bigger than that.

Are there any watches you like that aren't completely predictable? I mean this earnestly. To assemble the watches you have or have approved of on this thread would be such a predictable selection. It is like you are the human embodiment of internet consensus of classic watches.

 

[TheFoo]

You are just the kind of customer Patek wants its AD to sell a shop worn chrono at a discount and then invite to Geneva for the red carpet treatment. "You never actually own a Patek Philippe, you're just wearing it for your wife's boyfriend until he finishes ******* her."

I am exactly the sort of customer Patek wants — i.e. someone who actually buys their watches.

 

[chocomallo]

I am exactly the sort of customer Patek wants — i.e. someone who actually buys their watches.

But you haven't bought the 5170 yet. You own a 5296 only, which is meaningless from the perspective of Patek. So far you are a nothing customer to them. In fact, the 5170 you are looking at is also a meaningless sale for them. And here you are spouting off on StyleForum and Watchprosite demanding VIP passes to the Geneva museum while also trying to bully some AD into replacing the case of the watch for a small amount of shop wear. Then again you pulled the same move on Hermes with a wallet so why not step it up to Patek.

 

[TheFoo]

Are there any watches you like that aren't completely predictable? I mean this earnestly. To assemble the watches you have or have approved of on this thread would be such a predictable selection.

Oh please. Are you going to rant about how we don’t talk more about quirky independents?

If you have been in this hobby as long as I have, you would have learned quite a bit of skepticism around fads. It takes huge scale and/or huge expense to properly develop, build, and service a watch. Then there is the track record necessary for a rational customer to have faith that his watch will still have parts available in 20+ years. Independents almost always fall short in at least one significant way.

Take Laurent Ferrier for example. Love their aesthetic and ethos. But there was a big controversy a few years ago when it was exposed that they contract out development and don’t make their own parts. This has not changed, although now at least they are upfront about it. Still, who is to say how long the firm will be around and for how long they will have the resources to service or repair your watch? If they can’t make parts now, how can you expect them to in the future when you need them?

Now look at a Dufour or Roger Smith. No doubt the two greatest living watchmakers (plus Journe). But neither has a clear-cut apprentice to take up the helm when they retire or pass. Who the **** are you going to trust to service your Simplicity or make parts for it after Dufour himself is gone? That is, assuming you pay up the $200K+ to buy one after waiting however many years for your number to come up.

It's all ***** and giggles and Hodinkee comments fodder until you're forced to take real issues of ownership into consideration—i.e. when it's your money and your watch.

Don't be the asshole who says the Speedy is cliched and thinks he’s being clever. Of course it’s ******* cliched. But it is cliched because it is awesome. And it is awesome for many reasons that will never occur to silly internet hecklers.

 

[TheFoo]

But you haven't bought the 5170 yet. You own a 5296 only, which is meaningless from the perspective of Patek. So far you are a nothing customer to them. In fact, the 5170 you are looking at is also a meaningless sale for them. And here you are spouting off on StyleForum and Watchprosite demanding VIP passes to the Geneva museum while also trying to bully some AD into replacing the case of the watch for a small amount of shop wear. Then again you pulled the same move on Hermes with a wallet so why not step it up to Patek.

Did I say I was a hotshot VIP customer? No. But unlike most who inhabit internet watch forums and comment sections, I am not just an observer. They are not doing ME a favor by selling me watches, after all.

Any idiot who knows how to ask can get “VIP” passes to the Geneva museum, by the way.

“Pulled the same move on Hermes?” Man, I must be some real monster for getting a company to sell me the wallet I want. I mean, what the **** was I thinking, right?

 

[chocomallo]

Oh please. Are you going to rant about how we don’t talk more about quirky independents?

If you have been in this hobby as long as I have, you would have learned quite a bit of skepticism around fads. It takes huge scale and/or huge expense to properly develop, build, and service a watch. Then there is the track record necessary for a rational customer to have faith that his watch will still have parts available in 20+ years. Independents almost always fall short in at least one significant way.

Take Laurent Ferrier for example. Love their aesthetic and ethos. But there was a big controversy a few years ago when it was exposed that they contract out development and don’t make their own parts. This has not changed, although now at least they are upfront about it. Still, who is to say how long the firm will be around and for how long they will have the resources to service or repair your watch?

Now look at a Dufour or Roger Smith. No doubt the two greatest living watchmakers (plus Journe). But neither has a clear-cut apprentice to take up the helm when they retire or pass. Who the **** are you going to trust to service your Simplicity or make parts for it after Dufour himself is gone? That is, assuming you pay up the $200K+ to buy one after waiting however many years for your number to come up.

It's all ***** and giggles and Hodinkee comments fodder until you're forced to take real issues of ownership into consideration—i.e. when it's your money and your watch.

Don't be the asshole who says the Speedy is cliched and thinks he’s being clever. Of course it’s ******* cliched. But it is cliched because it is awesome. And it is awesome for many reasons that will never occur to silly internet hecklers.

I wasn't talking about independents. I have never advocated for independents. I merely asked if there is a watch that isn't within the top ten currently most popular watches that you would recommend? You hide behind heritage and brand and whatever you claim but you never offer original thought. Point out one watch that you actually find to be appealing that isn't the usual trope. I don't have a problem with the Speedy. It is a fine watch. You didn't actually respond to my question at all.

 

[chocomallo]

Did I say I was a hotshot VIP customer? No. But unlike most who inhabit internet watch forums and comment sections, I am not just an observer. They are not doing ME a favor by selling me watches, after all.

Any idiot who knows how to ask can get “VIP” passes to the Geneva museum, by the way.

“Pulled the same move on Hermes?” Man, I must be some real monster for getting a company to sell me the wallet I want. I mean, what the **** was I thinking, right?

Any idiot? I guess you are dumber than most then since you had to ask for advice on how to get access on Watchprosite. Dummy.

Some customers just are not worth it. You are a Karen through and through.

 

[TheFoo]

Any idiot? I guess you are dumber than most then since you had to ask for advice on how to get access on Watchprosite. Dummy.

Reading comprehension. I asked about taking delivery of a watch at the Salon that was purchased at an AD. Nobody knows the answer, it would seem.

 

[TheFoo]

I wasn't talking about independents. I have never advocated for independents. I merely asked if there is a watch that isn't within the top ten currently most popular watches that you would recommend? You hide behind heritage and brand and whatever you claim but you never offer original thought. Point out one watch that you actually find to be appealing that isn't the usual trope. I don't have a problem with the Speedy. It is a fine watch. You didn't actually respond to my question at all.

What are the “top ten currently most popular watches”? Why do you seem to be equating taste with originality or oddity?

Truth is, there are very, very few watches—modern or vintage—that I like at all. I have written essays worth of commentary and explanation about this.

From an aesthetic point of view, I prefer a rational, clean dial and a case that appears no bigger than it has to be. I tend to prefer straps over bracelets (which are usually ugly). I have an itch for black dials in white metal cases. I generally dislike roman numerals. Give me sticks or arabics. I dislike fake history or signals thereof (**** you Lange, **** you Breguet). I am not a finishing geek—within the range of “excellent,” I don’t care to parse. I hate structural ornamentation (e.g. fancy lugs).

I’ve owned a Panerai 372 (twice), a Portuguese 5001 (still have it), a 5002 Big Pilot (sadly gone but missed), a Rolex Explorer I (gone after realizing I never felt like wearing it), a steel Datejust with fluted bezel, silver dial, and batons that I put on a leather strap (from the early 2000’s), an extra-flat, rose gold Tank Louis Cartier (gone but missed), a black-dialed ceramic Daytona (sold—oops), and a Patek 5296 (keeper for life). Then there was the 5396 with Breguet numerals I bought for my dad last month, which I would have happily kept for myself.

I want a 3711 Doppelchronograph in NOS condition. If Breguet comes out with a proper Type 20 re-issue, I will buy it. I want some yellow gold monster watch—a gold 15202 would have been nice, but not willing to pay the prices or games. I’ll take a yellow gold Daytona as a consolation prize.

I don’t understand the RO and Nautilus craze. I like the 15202, but at retail, and as a fifth or sixth watch if that. I am not into the Nautilus, though it does wear really nicely and looks much better on the wrist.

Pre-2000 IWC was my soul brand.

I love older FP Journe watches. Ever since they cancelled the 38mm case size, it’s not the same anymore. Though the rose gold Rattrapante with rubber bits is a sexy beast.

If Laurent Ferrier were 50 years older as a firm, I’d be all over a tourbillion in a Galet case.

My grail is a Patek minute repeater. More realistically, would love to get a white gold or platinum 3790 one day. A 5004 would be even nicer, but you know.

5170, in white gold with Breguet numerals on a black dial, is the best looking new watch I can remember seeing in 20+ years. Is that boring? Does that matter? It’s certainly not and has never been a “hot” watch or particularly popular.

None of the above watches are obscure or novel, but I think it’s fair to say they also do not comprise a pre-packaged “top ten” list of any sort.