Quote :

"nicer clothes or a nicer car."

But the base of these things have much more functionality than a watch.

Quote :

"It's America. People spend money on nice things. Get over it."

I'm "over it"...I just don't agree with it nor do I practice it.

11/17/2011 11:38:40 AM

Quote :

"But the base of these things have much more functionality than a watch."

Yes and no. The only advantage you're gaining by buying a $35k+ BMW over a 15k$ Kia is feel, looks, and power.

Same with a watch. You're paying for the nicer materials, better quality build, warranty and certification, and looks.

Sure you could buy a $50-100 watch every few years or spend more and get a nicer watch that will last for decades.

11/17/2011 11:41:09 AM

Quote :

"I don't think it's any different than any other luxury item. A nicer watch may not have much more utility than a cheaper watch but it's not any different than buying nicer clothes or a nicer car. You get what you pay for. A nicer watch is going to last longer and look better. "

Question: If you have a smart phone, did you buy the phone right away, or did you get a more expensive plan that gave you a reduced price on the phone?

The arguments for discount rate are going to be just plainly wrong, since we're talking about $1k watches, that sort of thing. But even without getting into that, I think the same people who advocate buying an expensive watch because it would last longer also will default to leveledized costs (vs upfront costs) in other cases.

11/17/2011 11:51:49 AM

Quote :

"Yes and no. The only advantage you're gaining by buying a $35k+ BMW over a 15k$ Kia is feel, looks, and power."

I'm arguing you get a lot more than just feel, looks, and power...but that's a whole separate argument.

Here's my point:

A car is a mode of transportation. There are other ways to get from point A to point B (walking, riding a bike, mopeds, etc)...but I think we can all agree that most people need cars for transportation. So you pretty much have to purchase a car. If you have the money, I don't see the problem in paying a lot of money for a nice vehicle that has more features and much better performance.

A watch is used to tell time. It's also used as a fashion accessory. A lot of people can use their phones to tell time as well as there being clocks everywhere (in offices, in your car, on your computer, etc). So the functionality of a watch is much less than that of a car. So I think the majority of the people buy nice watches because they like the way they look and feel.

So you're still spending a lot of money on an accessory.

11/17/2011 12:05:07 PM

A lot of people require a watch. I don't always have my phone on me and I'd be lost without one. If i'm hiking, camping, out running, or simply don't want to have my phone on me I like having a watch as an option. I don't see the problem in investing in a nice one.

Quote :

"but I think we can all agree that most people need cars for transportation. So you pretty much have to purchase a car. If you have the money, I don't see the problem in paying a lot of money for a nice vehicle that has more features and much better performance."

There are plenty of people who don't need cars for transportation. And how is paying for nice features and performance any different than paying for a watch that is well built, lasts a long time, and has a decent warranty?

Quote :

"So you're still spending a lot of money on an accessory."

Again if you ONLY see it as an accessory I agree with you. There's a lot of people who see it also as a WATCH.

11/17/2011 12:45:28 PM

Quote :

"There are plenty of people who don't need cars for transportation."

Nevermind. You're obviously missing the point here. Have fun with your pretty watch.

11/17/2011 12:52:55 PM

Quote :

"but I think we can all agree that most people need cars for transportation. So you pretty much have to purchase a car."

I just don't fully understand that statement. You don't need a car to get around. There's plenty of other options. You don't need a watch to tell the time. There are also plenty of other options. I guess I missed the analogy.

11/17/2011 12:54:52 PM

The majority of people NEED cars. Most people don't live that close to work and school and the US public transportation system blows. So while some people could do without cars, the majority can't.

Most people don't NEED a watch. If you have a cellphone, you don't NEED a watch. If your cell phone isn't on you, all you need to do is find a clock, look at your computer screen, or your car dash to tell the time.

This is what I'm trying to say: Watches are much less of a NECESSITY than cars.

11/17/2011 12:59:17 PM

Quote :

"The majority of people NEED cars. Most people don't live that close to work and school and the US public transportation system blows. So while some people could do without cars, the majority can't."

I don't know. As of 2007 isn't most of the population of the world living in cities now? I wouldn't say the majority of people in the world get to work by car at all. Maybe in America.

Quote :

"Most people don't NEED a watch. If you have a cellphone, you don't NEED a watch. If your cell phone isn't on you, all you need to do is find a clock, look at your computer screen, or your car dash to tell the time."

You're making a pretty big assumption here. There are people who do other activities that may require a watch. As I mentioned...hiking, running, scuba, vacation...

I'm simply saying watches still have utility to a good portion of people and in many parts of the world watches are NOT less of a necessity than cars.

11/17/2011 1:06:22 PM

expensive watches are socially acceptable Man Jewelry.

end of story.

11/17/2011 1:07:41 PM

Quote :

"expensive watches are socially acceptable Man Jewelry. end of story."

NAH MAN...THEY ARE A HUGE PARTY OF MY EVERYDAY LIFE!!

But really...this post is true. And I don't like jewelry.

11/17/2011 1:09:01 PM

So just to clear things up. If someone requires a watch for certain activities it has to be a cheap watch? If it's an expensive watch it's automatically disregarded as a necessity for said activities?

The whole "OMG I NEED MY CELL PHONE AT ALL TIMES" argument gets old. I find it nice NOT to have my cell phone sometimes but still have a watch for time without wasting the time it takes to find a clock somewhere. Especially if I'm out in the middle of no where or on a run or out on a kayak.

So in certain instances a watch is a necessity to some people. Me being one of them. So if that's the case what's wrong with it being a nice one?

11/17/2011 1:17:24 PM

nothing wrong with it.

just admit that it's man jewelry.

A $2000 Tag or Brietling offers no utility over a $100 seiko.


it's jewelry.


not hating, if that's what grills your cheese-- go for it.

11/17/2011 1:19:13 PM

^this

11/17/2011 1:22:06 PM

Quote :

"A $2000 Tag or Brietling offers no utility over a $100 seiko."

That's a different argument and I'm not THAT big a watch guy but there are plenty of people that will tell you there's a huge difference in utility especially if you abuse your watch. The Tag is going to last longer, be more durable, sapphire crystal won't scratch over time, warranty, etc, etc. I don't really care to make that argument though.

Quote :

"just admit that it's man jewelry."

I just think this carries too many negative connotations. It's man jewelry that provides me with an essential function. I use it a lot. I just feel like there's too much hating on watches ITT. Expensive or not. If you use something a lot then why not get something that will last? I've had cheap Seikos, Timexs, etc in the past and they break every couple years. Why not get something that lasts more than 5 years?

If you don't use your watch at all it's purely man jewelry I agree. I just think you're downplaying the population who really do rely on watches.

11/17/2011 1:26:59 PM

I have 2 seikos, one is 10 years old, and the newer one is 5 years old. Even if I replaced it every 10 years, i wouldn't live long enough to buy enough watches to have to buy a $2000 watch, even if I were to assume that it would last a lifetime (which I don't).

Watch quality is a logarithmic curve with respect to price, not an exponential one.

After a certain pricepoint (in my opinion about $150), there's no additional value in spending more for a standard analog watch. Certainly a GPS/HRM watch will cost a lot more, but you're paying for advanced technology, not precious metals and jewels.

11/17/2011 1:38:05 PM

Yeah but it's a Seiko....

Kidding. Some people have disposable incomes for expensive watches. It's America. Whatever. Sure it's man jewelry but unlike other jewelry it has some utility.

11/17/2011 2:21:32 PM

cool, i think we're basically in agreement then!

11/17/2011 3:21:08 PM

If everyone dressed only for function, ate only for nutrition, worked only for an income, and never pleasured themselves to luxurious items the world would be quite a different place. I doubt anyone here can say they don't indulge in something.

11/17/2011 3:54:33 PM

Quote :

"After a certain pricepoint (in my opinion about $150), there's no additional value in spending more for a standard analog watch."

But what if I want to go diving to 20,000 feet?
http://www.stauer.com/item/Swiss-Military-20,000-Feet-Ultimate-Dive-Watch/18518/3

Or what if I want to know "Perpetual calendar with retrograde date hand Hours and minutes of mean solar time Day, month, leap year by hands Moon age, Sidereal time, skychart, phase and orbit of the moon"?
http://www.jameslist.com/advert/69776/for-sale-patek-philippe-sky-moon-tourbillon- WARNING: PRICE EXTREMELY SHOCKING, CLICK AT YOUR OWN RISK

11/17/2011 4:27:06 PM

there's probably an app for that.

11/17/2011 4:43:11 PM

Drat mine only goes to 1600 feet.

11/17/2011 4:51:43 PM

sounds like everyone is in agreement, so long as we recognize the car argument as stupid.

for example...

Quote :

"And how is paying for nice features and performance any different than paying for a watch that is well built, lasts a long time, and has a decent warranty? "

a watch tells time. that is its only real utility, though of course durability and looks come into play.

for a car, durability (ie not breaking down constantly) and looks come into play, but it does a lot more than just transport you from place A to place B. it has a sound system (with different inputs and quality), it can add gps features, towing capacity and/or storage space, nicer safety features if you get in an accident, etc.

obviously i agree that "just carry your phone" is an equally dumb argument on both sides as well (more so for +watches since if i wasnt going to carry my phone jogging, I'm probably not wearing my $1k watch either).

i bought something in the neighborhood fo $200 to wear for fancy occassions, but that's it. how this got to so many pages, I'll never know beyond the fact that you have trolls (not neodata necessarily) looking to start stuff.

[Edited on November 17, 2011 at 5:08 PM. Reason : i for sure need that moon watch though.]

11/17/2011 5:07:53 PM

i mean really this argument can be said about glasses too. the difference between $100 frames and $400 frames... and glasses are typically utilitarian, they are also fashion statements. the same can be said for watches.

and there's nothing wrong with man jewelry, there's no negative connotation, it's actually positive connotation, it's basically an outlet that tells people a lot about you, similar to glasses or say shoes.

personally i'm a movado fan myself:

11/17/2011 6:09:21 PM

That's exactly his style. Very sleek and classy. How does Movado compare to other brands? I'm not familiar with it.

[Edited on November 17, 2011 at 6:21 PM. Reason : K]

11/17/2011 6:20:33 PM

Quote :

"To add to that...I would say Charleston is probably the most fashionable Southern city."

this is old news from Page 1. But I just want to say that I totally agree. Charleston is a very well-dressed city. Even the tourists look better than usual.

11/17/2011 6:33:42 PM

^^

Quote :

"Movado Group, Inc. designs, manufactures, and distributes Movado, Ebel, Concord, ESQ by Movado, Coach, Hugo Boss, Lacoste, Juicy Couture and Tommy Hilfiger watches worldwide."

They're a Swiss luxury watch manufacturer, most well known for the Museum Watch, the first watch to be put in MoMA, the gold dot represents the sun and the hands suggest movement of the earth...



2-year warranty, so not sure how that stacks up... pretty sure Tag Heuer is 2-years as well.
http://www.movado.com/customer-service/warranty-information/

[Edited on November 17, 2011 at 6:57 PM. Reason : ,]

11/17/2011 6:52:04 PM

if you are going with movado, you HAVE to go with the style that movado is famous for and is known worldwide for, the movado museum watch

11/17/2011 10:52:22 PM

They should make an analog (as in, uses hands) watch that uses bluetooth to get the accurate time from your cell phone.

Call it "Irony"

11/19/2011 1:19:06 PM

Quartz watches are pretty accurate. Only 30-60 second loss over a year.

Or just get an atomic watch. They're going to be accurate 100% of the time.

11/20/2011 11:41:00 AM

I have an atomic solar watch - nerd alert - but it's not 100% accurate. I have to adjust it for daylight savings time, might not all be like that, but would be awesome if it could go oh yeah I'm on the East Coast, time is 12:37 PM, must change. Being that you have to do this stupid sequence of button pushes I've just opted to not wear it for the next few months.

11/20/2011 12:37:25 PM

As stated earlier in this thread, I am not of the mindset that watches are "required" menswear if you are to be taken seriously or professionally. I take the stance that jbrick83 does: most watches are worn as accessories. I obviously have nothing wrong with watches as I spend time on the way I dress and am not completely utilitarian about it so I understand wearing them as accessories too. I'm just not compelled to wear watches often.

With that being said, I got some money from my grandfather to go toward a watch since he asked my parents and they said I didn't ever wear one. Thoughtful gift even though I make enough to buy one if I really wanted one. However, I used the money for its intended purchase and picked this up:



Re-issue of a Dieter Rams designed watch. Normally I find a large majority of men's watches gaudy. The ones I usually see on a model or on sites I browse that I do actually like are quite often vintage pieces. Thus, this worked out well to find a reasonably priced re-issue of a mid-century minimalist watch.

[Edited on December 29, 2013 at 8:41 PM. Reason : ]

12/29/2013 8:41:21 PM

I like it.
I also did not know Braun made watches, unless it's not the same company that makes appliances.

12/29/2013 9:39:47 PM

Thanks And it actually is the same company. The only reason I even know that they make watches is because of the watches Dieter Rams did for them. He gets brought up in furniture design blogs or magazines I read so I had seen the original version of his watches for them before and liked them. Before that, I never thought of them doing watches but I guess they did a lot of watches and clocks back in the day.

[Edited on December 29, 2013 at 9:46 PM. Reason : ]

12/29/2013 9:46:42 PM

now that cell phones are ubiquitous, how many people actually wear watches anymore? I haven't worn one since the 90's.

12/30/2013 1:14:07 AM

I wear one every day. It feels really odd not to, plus I like not having to pull my phone out to check the time. I currently have seven of them, five of which are in regular rotation. None are very expensive (I don't think any were over $200) but it's just something I enjoy wearing and having a selection to choose from.

12/30/2013 2:00:04 AM

^ word.

For those who like minimalist watches, check out Mondaine.

They are based on the iconoclastic Swiss railway clock design. Utterly simple and gorgeous.

12/30/2013 2:16:03 AM

I ran across a few of theirs when looking for the braun watches. The one thing I didn't like was that the thicker hands and time hashes seemed to dominate the face/detract from the minimalism some compared to the Braun I ended up with.

12/30/2013 8:18:36 AM

i would enjoy wearing a watch more, but with the kind of work i do they always become uncomfortable and end up just sitting in my desk drawer. and then the habit of not wanting to wear one to work carries over into my social settings as well.

12/30/2013 8:51:09 AM

yeah we'll see how often I actually wear the one I just got. I'm thinking it will be reserved as an accessory for dressing up or maybe worn at work some days I roll my sleeves up (but I dislike wearing a watch while typing so that will probably be limited as well).

12/30/2013 9:01:34 AM

how thick is the body/face of that Braun? It looks like it's pretty thin, which i like. i'm not a big fan of big bulky watches, but that one looks like it's very streamlined.

12/30/2013 10:04:18 AM

40mm face and 8mm thick. I ordered it online because a seller (with order fulfilled by Amazon) had it for about 20% cheaper than anywhere else I saw so I can't take a picture of it in person yet - it arrives today. The manufacturer has a 360 view of it on their site though: http://www.braun-clocks.com/watch/BN0032_MHG

12/30/2013 10:23:18 AM

watch came in the mail last night and I really like it. Scale of the face, band, thickness etc. all work very well for me and the style is very in sync with my aesthetic. The adjustable clasp on the stainless mesh band was easy to adjust too (no messing with removing links or anything). Extremely happy for the price I paid, even if I only wear it every so often.

12/31/2013 8:55:04 AM

Got a used Tag off ebay for xmas

1/2/2014 12:35:44 PM