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

The Watch Appreciation Thread (Reviews and Photos of Men's Timepieces by Rolex, Patek Philippe, Brei

Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by gdl203, May 20, 2007.

Tags:
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. academe

    academe Senior member

    Messages:
    1,861
    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2008
    Location:
    Initium sapientiae timor domini
    

    I've never disliked the large size of the Panerais, as they are true to the brand's original DNA, as you rightly point out...It's more that the designs have appealed but never enough for me to consider buying one, if that makes sense? On the other hand, even though I'm a big AP fanboy (with 3 of them in my family, AP RO Dualtime, my wife's and father's Jules Audemars watches), the large Offshores put me off... I also find many of the IWCs just a bit too large for my tastes, because - other than their tool watches like the Pilot, Aquatimer and Ingenieur lines - there is nothing that necessitates >42mm size for more dressy watches like the Poruguese or Portofino collection... And don't even get me started on Hublot... :facepalm: What I like about Panerai is their design integrity and clear sense of identity. They are not trying to be anything other than what they are, and have a clear design language of their own. In some respects, I even like the plain but efficient looking finishing on their in-house calibres; it sits well with the overall gestalt of Panerai (whereas the sometimes the more decorated Unitas movements somehow seem at odds with the almost minimalist dials of the watches themselves)...And that plexiglass is pretty sexy. :satisfied:
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 14, 2014
  2. academe

    academe Senior member

    Messages:
    1,861
    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2008
    Location:
    Initium sapientiae timor domini
    deleted
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2014
  3. academe

    academe Senior member

    Messages:
    1,861
    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2008
    Location:
    Initium sapientiae timor domini
    

    Nice to see you hear RSS! It's the only thread I still post on here - glad you've found your way back, even if it's only an annual visit. Would love to see your other watches paired perhaps with your Richard Anderson tweeds? I understand you have a few JLCs and a Vacheron or two in your collection??? :tounge:
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2014
  4. in stitches

    in stitches Senior member Moderator

    Messages:
    68,895
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2010
    Location:
    Charm City
    That really is a great looking watch, Foo.
     
  5. TobiasGendrick

    TobiasGendrick Member

    Messages:
    22
    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2014
    

    I don't consider it stupid, necessarily, but I don't think that a prestige watch brand is ever an investment. It will never produce reliable income. At best, there is now and then a particular model that ends up being desirable to collectors and increasing in value.

    To be clear, though, this is speculation, nt investment. Warren Buffet would be quick to point this out.

    I have only bought a couple of high end watches new. The rest I've bought used or inherited. The used market often shaves 50% or more out of a watch in great condition. A few scuffs on the case and bracelet would be inevitable anyway. And a good movement kept well serviced will last for generations.

    I doubt I will ever buy Patek, Nardin, etc, and other "super prestige" brands. I imagine the price of manufacturing is closer to 10% of those list prices. They remind me of the infamous Hermes alligator peacoat. It costs 250,000. A top quality alligator skin goes for around 2k. It might use 2-4 skins. A great tailor works for $60-80 an hour. So even if the materials were 8,000 and manufacturing cost were 3,200...that would be 4.48% of the MSRP.

    To me, that much markup will always be insane. That's the domain of the ultra wealthy who have forgotten what savvy spending is, and looks like. I have much more respect for someone who makes a great secondhand Rolex purchase. Just my opinion.
     
  6. jbarwick

    jbarwick Senior member

    Messages:
    2,979
    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2012
    Your IG is full of amazing cars, watches, and food. You have great taste in my favorite food course...the desserts!!!
     
  7. RFX45

    RFX45 Senior member

    Messages:
    16,316
    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    

    Need a lumeshot of how much that thing glows.
     
  8. in stitches

    in stitches Senior member Moderator

    Messages:
    68,895
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2010
    Location:
    Charm City
    

    This is usually true.

    As is this, but there is certainly an appeal to buying new.

    Interesting juxtaposition.

    This is flat wrong. You have to remember that many high end watches, specifically ones with high complications, or various innovations, and delicate case and movement making, take years and years and millions and millions of dollars in R&D. That cost has to be recouped. As does packaging, and advertising, which are part of their costs, and things we all benefit from. Not to mention that skilled master watchmakers command nice salaries and can spend up to a year on just a few pieces, and some pieces might take a full year.

    Lastly, manufactures do not get MSRP for their watches. They sell to ADs at 40-50% below retail. That cuts the margin right in half off the bat. Factor in the above paragraph, and they are far from making the profits you wrongly assume.

    Then you have the ADs, who sink huge amounts of money up front into inventory. As such, you have time value of money, while they sit on many pieces for quite some time, and, they are not public service operations, they are business out to make money. On top of that, they rarely get full mark up anyways with the huge amount of gray market competition and pre-owned sales, that are out there.

    There is this tendency to blame businesses, especially luxury business, of gouging, or to assume they are out there just making a killing, raking money into their coffers, laughing at the silly customers who walk through their doors. That is generally a fallacy. Its a complex business, like so many others, that creates huge cash flow strains, and a constant requirement to be on top of your game as the competition is stiff and vast, and technology is ever changing, and the customer base is fickle.

    Im not saying that there are not many extremely wealthy brand execs and jewelry store owners out there, but there is no reason to harbor resentment against them any different than any other wealthy and successful business owner. Its not like they are a mafia or gang, they are all legitimate business that take huge amounts of savvy and business knowledge to be as successful as they are.

    Over simplfying it like you did is a disservice to everyone. Yourself included. Im not saying everyone needs to buy new, or from an AD, but at least address that avenue with the proper mindset.

    I dont even know where to start with this asinine comment. Its a blanket statement, and its thoughtless, empty, condescending, and wrong. Respect whomever you want, but dont throw people under the bus just because they approach things differently than you do.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2014
    2 people like this.
  9. mafoofan

    mafoofan Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    20,795
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    

    I agree with you about IWC, except to say that even the so-called tool watches are now a travesty and I think the Portuguese gets an excuse because it was originally designed to be a larger pocketwatch-based dress watch in the 30's. Actually, to my mind, the Portuguese series is the only IWC model line that is currently worth considering, and even then, the individual models are hit or miss.

    Hublot makes me want to vomit. RO Offshore is not much better.
     
  10. mimo

    mimo Senior member

    Messages:
    7,382
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2012
    Get off the fence, Foox, and say what you really think.
     
  11. in stitches

    in stitches Senior member Moderator

    Messages:
    68,895
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2010
    Location:
    Charm City
    I dont hate all the Hublots or all the ROOs. Some are turrble, but some are cool.
     
  12. academe

    academe Senior member

    Messages:
    1,861
    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2008
    Location:
    Initium sapientiae timor domini
    

    The only Offshores I really like are the Diver and the latest generation of 42mm Offshores. The styling and case size of the new 42mm Offshores is more restrained and shows much greater refinement with some of the detailing, such as the ceramic pushers and subtle changes to the dial detailing/mega-tapeserie.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2014
  13. mafoofan

    mafoofan Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    20,795
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    


    FOO HATE ALL.
     
  14. academe

    academe Senior member

    Messages:
    1,861
    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2008
    Location:
    Initium sapientiae timor domini
    

    My dislike of Hublot's is sadly not objective. I could see how - individually - they might be nice design objects, but something about the brand just screams nouveau riche mobsters.
     
  15. academe

    academe Senior member

    Messages:
    1,861
    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2008
    Location:
    Initium sapientiae timor domini
    

    :lol:

    How about Richard Mille?
     
  16. mafoofan

    mafoofan Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    20,795
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    

    I am not down on Richard Mille. Unlike Hublot, the concept is not intrinsically wrong or ugly, though I personally wouldn't wear one of the watches.
     
  17. in stitches

    in stitches Senior member Moderator

    Messages:
    68,895
    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2010
    Location:
    Charm City
    

    SHOCKING!

    Also, c'mon now, its THE FOO


    Well, that is a lot of the crowd that bought into the brand post revival. But I think their history is cool, and Biver is a genius.


    Love the concept and mechanics, hate the aesthetics, so would never kop outside of flipping to make $$$.
     
  18. mafoofan

    mafoofan Senior member Dubiously Honored

    Messages:
    20,795
    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2007
    

    Biver is a great businessman and CEO, but that doesn't make Hublot watches less ugly. Also, what history? I thought the brand came about in the early eighties, pointedly attempting to copycat the porthole concept from Audemars, and predominantly based on quartz movements.

    I remember very distinctly, about 8-9 years ago, when the revived Hublot came on the scene. Timezone was still an independent forum and much, much more active. It was the Styleforum of watches. Everyone hated the Big Bang. It was universally made fun of and verbally assaulted. Then, out of the sky blue, a very influential member announced he acquired one and started posting pictures of it. Next thing you know, everyone else is pouring praise all over the damned thing and more and more specimens starting popping up in the picture threads. Sad. I always wondered if that member (can't remember his screen name) got a freebie from Hublot. If so, Biver truly is a genius.
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2014
    1 person likes this.
  19. jbarwick

    jbarwick Senior member

    Messages:
    2,979
    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2012
    I really like the ROO Safari for some reason. Best of the bunch.
     
  20. mimo

    mimo Senior member

    Messages:
    7,382
    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2012
    I don't lust after it, but I like it. It's sufficiently silly to lack any pretence. I'd wear it for sure, and grin every time I looked at it.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by