WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I own a Rolex GMT Master II, a Breguet Classique and a few other cheaper watches. The only watch I really thought looked amazing was a cheap Armani fashion watch. It's also the watch that received the most amount of compliments.

I was planning on selling off my whole collection of watches and just get a single new one. So I'd like to get a high quality watch that I can wear for 20-30 years (or more). But I can't find a si gle watch in the $3,000-30,000 that I think is strikingly beautiful. But I can find to s of $100 watches that look amazing.

How come no high end watch maker makes really fashionable and good looking watches? I realize this is all about taste...but when my cheaper watches (Armani, Frederique Constant, Maurice LaCroix etc) all receive more praise from others than my Rolex or Breguet, doesn't that mean I'm right?

What I want is a simple watch that pops. That's all I'm asking for.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,208 Posts
Oh dear. Collecting high end watches is not about how pretty they look and definitely not about what other people think.

Perhaps you should have a think as to why you really want a high end watch.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
843 Posts
If you have ever been to a brothel you know they have all shapes, sizes and races of product. That's because there's a customer for every product, it is all ALL about personal preference, what floats your proverbial boat. The truth is though, you have a better chance getting the "clap" from a street walker than a high end call girl, but at the end of the evening, both can leave you broke and alone.

I find the same to be true with watches. To me the UN Freak looks like it could be an Invicta, and the guy that likes the latter may think a DJ is a silly girls watch. I'd still take the UN any day. Hope that helps
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
69 Posts
I mean, it doesn't seem like you actually appreciate horology as much as aesthetic appearance, which is totally fine. If you're happier with a fashion piece on your wrist then that's all that matters. Don't let people on here hate on you, at the end of the day it's pointless to wear a Rolex or Patek on your wrist if you appreciate the look of another watch more. Do what makes you feel good and you'll also likely save thousands of dollars in the process.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,424 Posts
Not going to rise to the troll bait. If you can find tons of $100 watches that you like far more than any high end watches, pick one and buy it. You’ll have saved yourself tens of thousands of dollars. Oh, and you can then also stop posting in the high end forum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
562 Posts
I was weak and bought a Gucci once. Its design was definitely inspired by Rolex Submariner. Most watches get their design from each other. If you can’t find a luxury piece that “pops,” then you’re not looking very hard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
500 Posts
someone got their first job. Congrats. I suggest not buying anymore high end watches until you are able to identify what makes them special; it will be a waste of your money.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
500 Posts
Not going to rise to the troll bait. If you can find tons of $100 watches that you like far more than any high end watches, pick one and buy it. You’ll have saved yourself tens of thousands of dollars. Oh, and you can then also stop posting in the high end forum.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This. And its not combative. Buy what you like - otherwise this hobby is way too expensive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,703 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,885 Posts
I dunno if it's trolling. This topic comes up so often it's a cliche.

Since it's a cliche topic, let's go with the cliche car analogy:

Yes, your Fast-And-The-Furious styled Honda Civic with pearelescent purple paint and neon green ground effects is going to elicit more gawking from strangers and queries about how fast it goes... than your BMW M4 GTS.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,646 Posts
I think you’ve hit upon a mostly misunderstood aspect of art appreciation - be it music, sculpture, painting, photography, design, etc...

Popularity/commercial success does -not- equal strength of work. In many cases it seems to be just the opposite. Chalk this up to lack of art education and maybe in some cases the capacity to truly ingest and understand it.

Years ago I was participating in a workshop that was being given by a somewhat mediocre photographer who had built some commercial success around his landscape images. He had honed his skills after being thrust into some small town photojournalist duties when he staffed a paper years ago. I was mostly there for the excursions to the various sites on the itinerary, but also attended some after-shoot discussions, etc...

On the last day of the workshop he flashed pairs of images on a screen and asked us which we thought was the “better” piece. Despite the workshop’s focus being about artistic merit, he used his commercial success as the metric by which to make this assessment. In nearly every case, my pick (the stronger artistically) was the less purchased image, which only drives home a simple fact. The vast majority of people don’t know what good art is, and don’t fundamentally understand the merits that are meaningful to its appreciation (which are not popularity/commercial success).

In other words, just because people like your $100 fashion watch doesn’t make it a better design. Many of the most iconic and long lasting watch designs were hated initially. Many of the now unobtainable vintage Rolexes sat languishing for most of the 1980s and 1990s before an appreciation grew for their brilliance.

There’s a place for designs that you know won’t last and are too trendy. Manufacturers don’t make these types of products to last, and if as a consumer you indulge with such a purchase, you probably don’t care that it won’t last long because you know that very soon you won’t be caught dead with it once it goes out of style.

Commercially, these trendy designs’ optimal forms are the cheapest and flimsiest versions people will buy (preferably requiring multiple purchases before said fad dies). This is antithetical to sound horological values.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: Actium and sailon01

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,122 Posts
I own a Rolex GMT Master II, a Breguet Classique and a few other cheaper watches. The only watch I really thought looked amazing was a cheap Armani fashion watch. It's also the watch that received the most amount of compliments.

I was planning on selling off my whole collection of watches and just get a single new one. So I'd like to get a high quality watch that I can wear for 20-30 years (or more). But I can't find a si gle watch in the $3,000-30,000 that I think is strikingly beautiful. But I can find to s of $100 watches that look amazing.

How come no high end watch maker makes really fashionable and good looking watches? I realize this is all about taste...but when my cheaper watches (Armani, Frederique Constant, Maurice LaCroix etc) all receive more praise from others than my Rolex or Breguet, doesn't that mean I'm right?

What I want is a simple watch that pops. That's all I'm asking for.
Yes you're right. Find a nice simple watch that pops and post it please. I love fashion watches too. Cartier, the Slim d'Hermes Email, and Ralph Lauren's 867 to name a few. Please also report how much praise it gets from others.

P.S.: I didn't know that FC and Maurice LaCroix count as fashion watches.

:D :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
818 Posts
Reminds me of discussions on all those microbrands for a while

A F F O R D A B L E L U X U R Y - D I S R U P T I N G T H E I N D U S T R Y

:)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,127 Posts
Not sure why I'm responding to this however as others have mentioned, just because its popular doesn't necessarily make it better.

Justin.jpg

vs

Paco.jpg
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
Top