Investing in a family heirloom watch - some guidance please

gerfmurphy

Wibbs wrote: »

Oh god don't get me wrong G, they're a very nice quality piece of kit*, I just meant in my humble they're more a fashion of the now kinda thing.


sorry if I appeared in anyway short, I just did not want to dribble on about my opinion of panerai on someone else's tread
its all a personal thing, and for me its the best watch i have owned.

54and56

gerfmurphy wrote: »

I gotta say I would have agreed with you on this at one time but not now.
Panerai is the best watch I have owned in my opinion.
I don't want to go off on a tangent to the original post so won't elaborate too much.
Je suis Jean all the best with your purchase.

Hi Ger,

If I was just purchasing a watch for myself and not factoring in what future wearers of the watch might like/not like I may well have gone for the Luminor 1950 Black Dial Automatic as I think it's stunning but I'm trying to cover a number of bases not just my own personal preference so I think the GMT II is more likely to continue to be "classic" looking in the long term whereas the Luminor may look more dated (not necessarily a bad thing) in 20-50 years time.

No right or wrong answer and please feel free to take the thread in whatever direction you wish as I've gotten what I wanted from it.

If I happen to fall into a spare €7,000 in a year or two I might justify putting the GMT II into safe keeping (on an automatic winder) for my successors whilst I slum it with a new Luminor. Best of both worlds.

54and56

Maybe I should take a trip to La Chaux-de-Fonds http://www.bbc.com/travel/story/20150504-where-the-worlds-most-expensive-watches-are-made before finalising my decision

Cyrus

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

Hi Ger,

If I was just purchasing a watch for myself and not factoring in what future wearers of the watch might like/not like I may well have gone for the Luminor 1950 Black Dial Automatic as I think it's stunning but I'm trying to cover a number of bases not just my own personal preference so I think the GMT II is more likely to continue to be "classic" looking in the long term whereas the Luminor may look more dated (not necessarily a bad thing) in 20-50 years time.

No right or wrong answer and please feel free to take the thread in whatever direction you wish as I've gotten what I wanted from it.

If I happen to fall into a spare €7,000 in a year or two I might justify putting the GMT II into safe keeping (on an automatic winder) for my successors whilst I slum it with a new Luminor. Best of both worlds.

Like this ?

54and56

Cyrus wrote: »

Like this ?

Yes, just a bit :cool: Looks really cool. If I could afford two serious watches I definitely think a Luminor (probably in black) would be my next buy.

steppen

If you're going new buy a submariner when your child is born. I bought myself a birth year sub when I got my first job.

Mredsnapper

Don't worry about scratches on the polished center links of the GMT they can always be brushed or polished when the watch is serviced. Lovely watch IMHO, infact I'd like one myself and I think your justification for purchasing is excellent[1] but I would agree with others that it would not be sensible to view any current new watch purchase as an investment or to assume that it will as valued in the future as it is in the present.

[1] Must explain to Mrs. Redsnapper that I have to do the same for my kids.

54and56

steppen wrote: »

If you're going new buy a submariner when your child is born. I bought myself a birth year sub when I got my first job.

Too late for something as symmetric as that, my kids are already into double digits!!

54and56

Mredsnapper wrote: »

I think your justification for purchasing is excellent[1] but I would agree with others that it would not be sensible to view any current new watch purchase as an investment or to assume that it will as valued in the future as it is in the present.

I'm using the term "investment" loosely. What I mean by the term is that the watch will be valued by the recipients as a high quality and functional keepsake rather than something whose financial value will increase. If the former happens I'll be happy. If the former and latter happen even better but if the former doesn't happen, the latter does and some great grand descendant decides to bring it to whatever the equivalent of Pawn Stars will be in 50 years time so he can have money to buy a nuclear powered smartphone I'll turn in my grave!!!

mad m

Was in Weirs today checking to see if my brother in laws watch was in. I was looking at Panerai watches, lovely watches. One had a strap buckle on it nearly the size of my belt buckle:D

Lex Luthor

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

Too late for something as symmetric as that, my kids are already into double digits!!

Plural? Maybe you need more than one purchase then?

My 2 lads have already put a dibs on a watch each of mine...i think the best thing to do is find one with a dial that will still look good in many years to come....keep it simple and don't over think it too much

If it was me I'd have suggested something from Stowas marine range. These babies with the silver dials are going to stand the test of time

A 1938 chronograph and marine chronograph would leave you change for a nice holiday and a couple of great watches to boot

gerfmurphy

mad m wrote: »

Was in Weirs today checking to see if my brother in laws watch was in. I was looking at Panerai watches, lovely watches. One had a strap buckle on it nearly the size of my belt buckle:D

Some of them straps are big.

CarltonBrowne

Je_suis_Jean wrote: »

Maybe I should take a trip to La Chaux-de-Fonds http://www.bbc.com/travel/story/20150504-where-the-worlds-most-expensive-watches-are-made before finalising my decision

Yes, you should.
http://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.php?68950-Bienne-bugger!-Mais-La-Chaux-de-Fonds-c-est-formidable!