advertisement


The watch thread: pocket, wrist, sporty, showy? You name it!

windhoek said:
I see the new Explorer is 36mm. I reckon the 39mm version wears like a 40mm so a 36mm would probably be a better fit for me as well. I might pop into town tomorrow and see if there's any in Watches of Switzerland, Glasgow. I wouldn't be surprised if they don't have any in stock and that I've no chance of buying one anyway, but it's worth a trip into town just in case. Fwiw, even if they have any in stock, I can't afford one on the spot, but at least I would know whether I'd want to buy one. Suffice to say, interesting discovery about the 36mm option!
Click to expand...
Not a chance they’d have one in stock. 2-3 waiting list already for an Explorer!
 
TheDecameron said:
I’ve got a thing about dual display watches. I nearly bought an Omega Polaris but they’re tiny and the crown/actuator is a weak point on these. Then my attention turned to the Breitling Aerospace.

https://www.jurawatches.co.uk/products/breitling-aerospace-avantage-e7936210-b781-130e-watch-btl-377
Click to expand...
The font on the numerals is almost identical to that on my Vostok Amphibian. Very 60s, I like it. Mine doesn't have the digital display. Then again, it was about £3,035 cheaper.
 
That's a classic, of course. Those old Seikos are fantastic and I am a great fan. But even Seiko have bumped up their prices on their mid tier watches. They are now more in the $700-1000 range and while their more entry watches have only gone up slightly, they are of lower quality and specs than before.

martin clark said:
I've been wearing my orig Seiko Orange Monster much more recently. It just makes me smile

It's also really rather nicely made, almost unbelievable for the comparatively modest price quite some years ago. 'Diver watches' that size aren't really my first choice, but it is very orange - while a lovely old Doxa, frankly, is way out of what I'd fancy paying for ..a watch.

oblig daft pic -7oz of 'lume':
IMG_8003%20Orange%20Monster_500px.jpg
Click to expand...
 
I find the machinations of the whole sector of luxury goods (of which watches is a subset) to be absurd and fascinating enough to be worthy of serious study. 99% of all watches are products of not terribly sophisticated manufacturing (I am excluding here the very high end watches that are truly hand made in small numbers) and hence all limited availability and "wait lists" are just the consequence of manufactured scarcity. The only real sophistication lies in the marketing and the creation of desire.

If you don't already know, the profit margins of the successful luxury brands are obscene compared to other sectors.
 
narabdela said:
I'd rather that they shared a large part of their profits with their customers.
Click to expand...
I’m happy for Rolex to charge whatever their customer base will pay, provided they pay their staff well, and pay their taxes. Luxury goods are one way that money from the wealthy is recycled back into the system, rather than into tax havens.
 
Rolex and the ilk are the result of very very advanced marketing techniques. That's it. Sure, there is a solid base of 'good quality' manufacturing - but rather like Kellogs Cornflakes - you are not paying for the cornflakes- heck even the packaging and transport is worth more than the product inside. Rolex (and all the other uber-brands such as the LVMH stable, some fashion ones, Tiffany etc) are all about 'creating excitement', managing the amount that is supplied and other marketing specialisms. A Rolex listed at £10K probably 'cost of materials' back at the factory.....only a few hundred pounds maybe?

The Rolex parts are not intrinsically more expensive than those of a £500 Seiko. They may have been polished more, or some more expensive materials used in the casing - but that becomes the 'jewellery' aspect rather than just the 'watch'.

I bought my wife a 64 diamond encrusted, Mother-of-Pearl faced Longines dress watch last year - and it was largely a jewellery purchase. It was our Silver Wedding Anniversary - and she did not have a 'dress' watch. The watch might maintain some value over the long term - but because of the jewellery, not the mechanism. Longines seem to be well made things but they are not in the same LVMH/Rolex class of marketing games - and seems better value, to us, as a result. Nice, but less bling bling.
 
Oh I’ve seen some extremely bling Longines watches over the years, especially in the Middle East.
Rolex have their own foundries etc, all metal is to their own spec, for what it’s worth.
Some of the better fakes out there are now well over £1k, so the ‘few hundred quid’ argument doesn’t really hold up. Unless you don’t want anyone to earn a living!

Edit: https://www.bestreplica1.sr/product-category/daytona/
 
I very nearly pulled the trigger on one of these yesterday

TAG-Heuer-Carrera-Calibre-16-Chronograph-7.jpg


while wandering through Bicester Village. I have a soft spot for blue/white. But then I took my glasses off, and I had no way of telling the time other than looking at my phone. Shame
 
Tony Lockhart said:
Ok. A stainless Daytona is about £10k list, but will go straight onto the grey market at about £28k. How much should Rolex give to the original purchaser?
Click to expand...

I'm afraid that I don't understand your question. My post referred to the silly profit margins on list price retail sales.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top