I think the whole point of in-house calibers is hugely overblown also, why bother reinventing the wheel if you're not going to add value to the customer? Might as well reduce the cost of ownership and improve reliability. Not to mention many brands are calling off the shelf movements "in house" even high end (looking @ you Panerai)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45105992)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45109669)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45109562)

I bought my Tudor GMT new for $3K, also my old two-tone datejust that I sold to a poaster.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45105819)

I agree anything in this price range from LVMH, Swatch, Richemont, etc is not worth it though.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45105847)

BTW even Patek made a quartz Calatrava lmao so much for being prestigious.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45105907)

If you go quartz, you may as well just get a casio digital watch. There is no shame in it.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45109375)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45109658)

Practical, accurate timekeeping is a problem that has been solved for generations. The quartz revolution *was* without question, horologically important. I'd go further, and say that the initial quartz offerings of the 60s are probably the most historically important watches since the invention of the wristwatch.

The problem with quartz is not it's accuracy. The problem is that quartz is too practical to be valuable as a veblen good.

The unfortunate truth is that the cheapest smartphone will provide more practical functionality than even the most complicated mechanical watch. But in the same way, even the shittiest instagram photo will be more picture-accurate than the Mona Lisa. But the Mona Lisa is a priceless work of art, while your instagram photos have no value.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45109699)

On the other hand, you have a watch. It tells time. Less accurately than a bunch of other options (such as your phone or smartwatch).

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45106683)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45109646)

This is a car noob way of thinking. A $75k BMW 7 series has a lot of luxury features the Kia doesn't have but isn't specced for performance. It doesn't shit on an M3 or M4 (approximately the same money, much better performance) or an i4 M50, or an M550. All are much better choices than a Kia for that price range.

It isn't even the best budget performance option. Something like this is: https://www.lexus.com/models/IS500

All of that is beside the point, which is if you're talking about a $100k+ watch while driving a Kia most people will think you're dumb as shit.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45109946)

For other normal watches, finishing and mechanical complications increase pricing.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45105924)

it's an enthusiast collector item. They look nice, can have a history/story behind the design and the mechanics are mildly interesting. They also convey status.

There is no real justification to pay a lot for a fancy watch and people, i think, pretend to care about or understand horology to justify obsessing about collecting jewelry and rationalize a silly and vain hobby.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45105947)

the most expensive watch i have is a $400 citizen i bought 12 years ago.

i browse watches online and sometimes a certain model will capture my imagination, but i'd feel too guilty spending thousands of dollars on a watch until i've got my kids needs through college taken care of.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45105991)

Tell me you don’t know what the fuck you’re talking about, but subtly.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45107005)

what i mean is, for sure with exhibition case backs, you get a peak at the movement with the small gears and internal machining. It's mechanically impressive and also can be beautiful to look at.

But i think anyone who isn't an actual watchmaker or who doesn't spend time disassembling and servicing his own watch has a very superficial appreciation of the mechanical workings of it and his experience of the quality and craftsmanship is similarly passive and superficial.

So it kind of raises the question that if your interest in watches is the craftsmanship or precision of the engineering, do you really need to spend thousands upon thousands of dollars to own one versus simply appreciating that someone somewhere is making these things?

it seems even more strange with closed case backs where the entire value of the item is something the user never even gets to see or enjoy with the function of the product essentially mimicking something that can be purchased at wall mart for $20.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45107752)

just admit that you decided you are too poor to buy a watch after months of openly lusting after one, instead of trying to explain to us why we probably shouldnt want one either.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45107848)

i don't think that's inconsistent with what i said.

the desire to collect and acquire is irrational. my thought is it's better to understand that rather than pretend to have a deep interest in horology.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45107888)

https://www.jaeger-lecoultre.com/us-en/watches/master-ultra-thin/master-ultra-thin-moon-stainless-steel-q1368430

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45106072)

Anyway, so I went to my father and said "Tommy's daddy, gave him a Rolex!!!" And all I got was an Omega.

A...quartz Omega. Didn't even know they made those. =/

Omega Constellation two tone quartz. God has a sense of humor I guess.

https://shop.connoisseuroftime.com/products/omega-constellation-mens-35mm-quartz-day-date-stainless-steel-18k-gold

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45106207)

https://imgur.com/N9eSY8D

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45106307)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45107056)

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45109542)

In my opinion, and in the opinion of most reasonably-experienced watchmos, watches fall into two general categories:

1. Practical, day-to-day pieces.

2. Veblen goods that stand a chance at maintaining, or appreciating in value, and have a social signaling mechanism that justifies their price.

As far as practical, day-to-day pieces, no watchmo would shame you for wearing a simple G-Shock (in fact, some G-Shocks are collector's pieces in and of themselves, check out the Casioak, for example). There are respectable sub-$1k fashion watches, like the the Tissot Gentleman and PRX lines, and Seiko dive watches. Hell, even cheap nostalgia watches like the Casio calculator watch, which cost practically nothing, but are well-respected among watch geeks. Finally, there is nothing wrong with an apple or samsung smart watch. They are functional, and fulfill their function well.

The second category, however, is reserved for timepieces that have social signaling function. They should be rare, have a history, and their price has to be justified by their function as heirloom pieces, or conversation starters with folks who understand horology.

There is little functional difference between, for example, a patek philippe Calatrava (sans complications), and a Junghens Max Bill watch. They are both beautiful, well made dress watches. But the Calatrava is a veblen good that will hold its value for generations, while the Max Bill will not.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45109605)

Thanks very much.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45109633)

too expensive to throw away, too cheap to service

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5184128&forum_id=2#45119494)