Two years ago I owned fifty-fifty watches, mostly of an oversized cheap quality like costume jewelry I used to find in my grandmother’s jewelry box. When I was six, I’d pick up these giant fake diamond broaches from her dresser and say this is the best one upon which my grandmother would say, “That’s junk.”
So I had fifty-five pieces of junk and then as I learned more about watches, I bought higher quality ones I could afford, ones that had professional lume and some that had more expensive sapphire crystal.
These entry-level watches cost about $300-$500. Very soon, my collection dwindled to its current 14, which is comprised of 10 respectable watches and four junkers, which I keep mostly for sentimental reasons and for the occasion of washing my car and not wanting to scratch one of my better watches.
One thing about being bit by the watch bug is that I’m never content with my collection. I’m always exploring new watches and looking for ways to pique desire for watches I don’t have.
Part of this “piquing of desire” is looking at more and more expensive watches, “climbing the consumer ladder,” as it were, so that the watches I desire now cost closer to a thousand dollars.
I keep telling myself that having a stable of a dozen watches all worth $500-$1,300 will sate my appetites, but I doubt it. I’m probably on a stepping stone to watches that cost $3,000-$5,000, but my income can’t sustain those kind of appetites.
Another impediment to buying watches that price is the matter of cliché. While I love Breitling, Rolex, Panerai, etc., there’s something predictably cliché about them that I find off-putting. Having a less common microbrand diver watch or an Orient Saturation Diver or a Citizen Grand Touring, which is similar in quality to watches costing thousands more is more appealing to me.
One of the disturbing trends of watch obsession is the matter of wanting to connect with something meaningful. Connecting with watches and exploring them is fun and suits my personality, but there needs to be balance. Connecting with people, music, art, etc., has a place and I want to remember that even as I acknowledge that I’m a watch obsessive, or as one of my Japanese students called me, a “Watch Otaku.”
I really hear what you're saying about the predictable cliche of the Rolex, Breitling, Panerai, etc. I like the idea of the micro-brand - a small, boutique company that makes watches out of love, and also unfettered by tradition or expectation, and of course with the "name brand factor" that multiplies the price tag.
I've also found that micro-brand companies are very friendly; I had a back-and-forth email exchange with Ben, the owner of Tempest (can't remember his last name). He was very friendly and his love of his product quite
I have found that most of the watches I'm interested in are in the $500-$1500 range, which offers a lot of great watches and I can remain in that range for years to come. But there are a few watches in the $2-5000 range that I do want eventually, like an Omega Seamaster, Breitling Avenger or Chronomat, various Kobolds, and my all-time favorite, the Seiko SDBD001. I could see myself getting one in that range every few years, although not for some years yet (although a used Omega might be in my not-too-distant future).
In the Swiss world of watches, you've got the affordable Tissot and then a solid jump up to Oris and Tag Heuer, both of which make watches on the upper end of the range I like, around $1-2K. I think those offer a lot of the "Swiss appeal" and quality without the price and baggage of Rolex.
As for the last paragraph of your post, I think this is where its good to differentiate things a bit. If you can keep watch to a kind of play, then I don't think it will be more than what it needs to be. Find meaning through relationships, especially with your wife and daughters, and through some creative practice - like writing - and of course work. And even then, that should (in my opinion) be approached in the spirit of play. But if watches become a surrogate for other types of experience, well, we get the neurotic tinges that you and I are both prone to and have talked about.
Posted by: jonnybardo | January 03, 2014 at 10:08 AM
Among the more expensive brands, I like Rolex and Omega (The Seamaster is just classic). And I think the well known luxury brands, as cliché as they might be----are "safer" when you're spending in the thousands of dollars. I understand the allure of microbrands and I'm someone who loves being "different" in what I wear, what I drive, etc.----but I think there's an inherent risk in a microbrand that is simply not there with a prestige, well known watch----that can at times, gain value as oppose to losing it. A company like Rolex has spent generations building a reputation for excellence and the watches really are good----as are Breitling and Omega watches and the others you've mentioned. The factories are advanced---the suppliers are the best in the industry----the retail outlets will stand behind the product and so will Rolex (and the others) and it's doubtful that they are going anywhere, anytime soon (i.e. out of business, with no support or parts availability). That's the practical side of me speaking. I'll probably never buy a Rolex for myself----but who knows? I'm going to eventually sell my wife's Oyster and hope to get a couple thousand for that----but I don't think I'd plow it back into a watch purchase.
Posted by: Angelo | January 03, 2014 at 10:56 AM
In the realm of more affordable watches, I just bought a Casio G-Shock GW2310-1.
http://gshock.com/watches/Classic/GW2310-1
This is my first G-Shock, and I like it quite a bit. It's solar powered and has atomic time setting. I like the layout of the display, which is sharp and contrasty. It wears a little smaller than the stated dimensions might suggest, because some of the width is due to the button guards and some of the thickness is due to the crystal guard. The strap is a little on the short side and is somewhat stiff, but it works fine for me (using the 4th hole). Those with large wrists, like Jeff, will likely find the strap too short.
I like that it takes just one button press to swap the Day and Date for the World Timezone and Time on the main timekeeping screen. The "power wheel" on the display looks cool. It shows if PowerSave mode is enabled, and also the level of battery charge.
It seems very well built and is light on the wrist. One downside is that the alarm is relatively quiet, but this seems to be a common issue with G-Shock models. Another issue is that the display is somewhat small compared to the width of the case, so the digits are on the small side for a watch this size.
Overall, I recommend it.
Here's a short YouTube review of the GW2310-1. There are more detailed reviews of the negative display version available on YouTube as well.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vy4RsPBwXSY
Posted by: Gary | January 06, 2014 at 05:14 PM
An English professor should know that the nation comprises states and the states compose the nation.
Posted by: Carlos Edwards | January 06, 2014 at 07:22 PM