Christopher Ward

thomasm

Sorry to do this to your credit cards but there is a good sale on here currently


https://www.christopherward.eu/events/summer-sale#


Just ordered a trident with 40% off



I think these are great watches

thelizardking1

I found that old version of the Trident a bit uncomfortable, the crown really dug into my wrist/hand when I moved it a certain way. Never happened with any other watch.

Otherwise they're a superb watch for the money. The bracelet and clasp beats any Steinhart or Longines that I've ever owned.

I am tempted by the newest iteration but with prices starting at €1,000 on a bracelet I think I'll wait for used versions to pop up as they tend depreciate rapidly.

thomasm

thelizardking1 wrote: »

I found that old version of the Trident a bit uncomfortable, the crown really dug into my wrist/hand when I moved it a certain way. Never happened with any other watch.

Otherwise they're a superb watch for the money. The bracelet and clasp beats any Steinhart or Longines that I've ever owned.

I am tempted by the newest iteration but with prices starting at €1,000 on a bracelet I think I'll wait for used versions to pop up as they tend depreciate rapidly.

I'll give it a try and see how it goes. They seem to have a strong 60 day no quibble return policy

fret_wimp2

They are generally well made, good quality watches, but their main problem is they have massive sales, slashing the price by 40 and 50 percent, meaning they have no resale value, if you wanted to just try one out and eventually flip it.
Slashing that much off a product doesn't instill a feeling of quality either, more the tactics of a shopping channel brand.

They are also having a lot of quality and support issues in the last few months, lots of threads in the cw forum giving out about poor qc and no responses from support. A thread or two on tzuk about them too. Unknown why there's a dip as they used to have very good qc and support.

I think they are mostly good watches, but aim to keep it or expect to sell it at a big loss.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Lads dont spend that much money on that crap....garbage brand priced to make you impulse buy.. Sorry to burst any bubbles, and I am happy if you like yours. but these type of watches are dangerous. They pay people to shill their watches all the time, and you will find many glowing reviews but they occupy that area to tempt you to spend your savings on a watch you really dont want, and put that nice watch you dream of just a bit further out or reach.

Wibbs

fret_wimp2 wrote: »

They are generally well made, good quality watches, but their main problem is they have massive sales, slashing the price by 40 and 50 percent, meaning they have no resale value, if you wanted to just try one out and eventually flip it.
Slashing that much off a product doesn't instill a feeling of quality either, more the tactics of a shopping channel brand.

They are also having a lot of quality and support issues in the last few months, lots of threads in the cw forum giving out about poor qc and no responses from support. A thread or two on tzuk about them too. Unknown why there's a dip as they used to have very good qc and support.

I think they are mostly good watches, but aim to keep it or expect to sell it at a big loss.

Good advice from FW. I've seen two in the flesh and they looked pretty OK to me for the price point(sales level). I wouldn't pay retail for one myself, like FW said I'd wait until the sales.

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

Lads dont spend that much money on that crap....garbage brand priced to make you impulse buy.. Sorry to burst any bubbles, and I am happy if you like yours. but these type of watches are dangerous. They pay people to shill their watches all the time, and you will find many glowing reviews but they occupy that area to tempt you to spend your savings on a watch you really dont want, and put that nice watch you dream of just a bit further out or reach.

I dunno. Look, all the watch brands "shill" to one degree or other. Watch journalism is almost without exception press releases by the big names with the "journalist" signing their name to it at the bottom. Most "histories" claimed by the big Swiss marques are filled with hyperbole and outright nonsense. Patek Phillippe claimed an history in pilots watches only to wheel out two they ever made(and never sold) and they were to a late 30's specific design by the German airforce. Others purposely pinch production to keep up the hype and prices. Almost all of the Swiss brands have massively increased their prices over the last 30 years and in particular the last 10. Zenith did it one year in the middle of the model run overnight. Just cos. Omega's Speedmaster has quadrupled in price compared to inflation/wages/cost of living since the Moon landings 50 years ago and you can't turn around without them releasing yet another "limited edition" of many thousands every other day. Longines for the most part are rereleasing new "vintages" and little else. Rolex have been giants of marketing from day one, restrict supply and egg on the hype, but have learned to let their buyers do the hyping for them. Plausible deniability and all that. There was a report from a watch journo invited by Rolex to their factory and it was a riot of daft to the point of hilarious claims that Rolex invented everything(They most certainly didn't. They invented feck all actually), including "spinning bezels". :pac: IWC's history is full of BS and remember the time the one time CEO of the company had his "Ratner moment"?

With damned near every watch out there beyond the 100 quid "fashion" watches you are paying for the name more than anything else pretty much. Yes the big names are quality timepieces, but it is the name that adds to the price, so if a Chris Ward watch appeals to you, is what you want as a "good watch" then you should go for it(at sale prices) and wear it in good health. It's your money and your wrist at the end of the day.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

see Wibbs I have to have a long rant here...while I agree that there is a lot of nonsense here in watch brands there is something a little more sinister with these "shidder" watches, especially the more expensive ones like Christopher ward, squale etc....this is certainly my story and the story of a lot of people.

I am not talking here about the vintage watch collector...thats its own specialised rabbit hole.

Your a guy (we are nearly all guys lets be honest) getting into watches....you know that a nice mechanical watch is classier, especially since a wristwatch is jewellery and serves no real purpose in this day and age, so a mechanical watch is cooler...good for you. You do the right thing and get your first seiko 5 or SKX...bingo job done.

You then look at your new watch and think...thats nice, now maybe a dress watch or a watch in a different colour...you buy them, you buy some homage watches, you look online and get whatever the reviewers tell you to get (they are being paid in watches or commission to give these good reviews and make you feel good about these impulse purchases). You get a watch box...and you fil all the slots.

One day you look at your so called collection and its just a bunch of trash. There is nothing to be proud of. Nothing classy, nothing that speaks for itself, everything would need tedious explanation as to why its of any value. Nothing there is a nice piece of jewellery (I think as a man if your watch is you only piece of jewellery you should have something of value to you not something disposable, this varies from person to person). Everything watch has a story, but some stories are not worth telling.

Now is the dangerous time. You want a Omega Seamaster, a speedmaster, a IWC Portuguese, a Rolex submariner, a JLC or whatever... but dude thats expensive. You are working hard and you deserve a nice piece of jewellery, but saving is hard, so after a few months you buckle and branch into something like, a Ginault, a Chrisopher ward, a Tag....expensive but affordable. You get it, but its not what you really want. Your heart sinks.

You try to flip it...and you take a 50% loss. For example there are two Tudor GMT Pepsi on Adverts a 2019 and a 2018. Both barley worn. Why....because the collector wanted a Rolex but settled for a Tudor...he realised...****, this is a wannabe watch, nobody else has a rashers what it is or that it cost 4 grand everyone thinks its a homage. Your sick of people asking is it a Rolex only for you to explain how its not...but but but..., better flip and get back what I can. They will both take a 1000 euro loss on that (they think they wont but they will).

Ok so IWC, Patek, AP, VC and Rolex and Omega spout a bunch of toss (none of the desirable watch brands give reviewers free watches or comishion for amazon sales, they dont sell like that), but if you buy one of them you have a decent watch...the exchange is fair. With Christopher ward what you get is nothing, you get an expensive watch, of unoriginal design, with no brand name, no quality, no desirability and no resale value. The fact they all lie does not somehow add credibility to these brands. No, the desirable watches are just that, desirable. And undesirable watches are just that, undesirable.

These flash sales are there like junk food, to satisfy you desire to purchase, but like junk food leave you unsatisfied. Our collector personalities are being manipulated...Bí cúramach

fret_wimp2

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

you know that a nice mechanical watch is classier, especially since a wristwatch is jewellery and serves no real purpose in this day and age, so a mechanical watch is cooler.

I would respectfully disagree. Ive been into mechanical for many years, but my G-Shock GW5610 is one of my fav watches, its just so functional and it has the all important heritage that the WIS crave. Its based on the original G-Shock, its as functional as a watch gets, solar powered, the power cells are known to last 20+ years, i dont even have to set it, its radio controlled. Its not the mechanical thats the draw, its the heritage, the fact that its innovation in the watch world, its real watch history.

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

Now is the dangerous time. You want a Omega Seamaster, a speedmaster, a IWC Portuguese, a Rolex submariner, a JLC or whatever.

I have no draw to any of those brands. my aspiration was a stowa flieger, and i got it, and it was exactly what i hoped for.

I may get a sinn556i eventually, i could get it now, but half the fun of watches is the research, the anticipation, the waiting and actually deserving the watch.

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

Ok so IWC, Patek, AP, VC and Rolex and Omega spout a bunch of toss (none of the desirable watch brands give reviewers free watches or comishion for amazon sales, they dont sell like that), but if you buy one of them you have a decent watch...the exchange is fair. With Christopher ward what you get is nothing, you get an expensive watch, of unoriginal design, with no brand name, no quality, no desirability and no resale value. The fact they all lie does not somehow add credibility to these brands. No, the desirable watches are just that, desirable. And undesirable watches are just that, undesirable.

These flash sales are there like junk food, to satisfy you desire to purchase, but like junk food leave you unsatisfied. Our collector personalities are being manipulated...Bí cúramach

An awful lot of very subjective opinion here.
My opinion is if you want an expensive brand/model, but try and satiate that want with an homage then yea, theres a chance one is wasting their money, it wont scratch the itch and now it will just take longer to get the real deal.

But maybe, some people may like a CW or a squale or whatever, for exactly what it is? in which case sales like this are awesome, a chance to own a nice watch at a good knockdown price.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

fret_wimp2 the worst lies are the ones well tell ourselves. I used to convince myself that desirable watches did nothing for me, I was a unique flower and a proper enthusiast not succumbing to the usual brands. Funny how the watches I could afford or was willing to fork out for, were the ones I wanted

I think you deserve better.

Wibbs

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

see Wibbs I have to have a long rant here...

Coolaboola.

One day you look at your so called collection and its just a bunch of trash. There is nothing to be proud of. Nothing classy, nothing that speaks for itself, everything would need tedious explanation as to why its of any value.

Meh, it's entirely down to one's perception and the perception promoted by advertisers. I come from a generation that when Rolex comes up thinks fake/used car salesman/terribly nouveau. If this were 1960 and I lived outside the UK and its ex colonies I'd likely have even never heard of them. Their watches were the same pricepoint as similar from Omega, Longines and others(and their movements weren't within an asses roar of any of them. They couldn't even rattle out their own chronograph movement). IWC? Until their DaVinci came out they were almost unknown. Heuer? Made some lovely designed watches back in the day, but weren't inhouse until much later, their records are nonexistent and when TAG got involved quality went way up. And they stopped looking at going bankrupt every other month. Breguet has as much to do with the original chap as I do. And so forth.

These flash sales are there like junk food, to satisfy you desire to purchase, but like junk food leave you unsatisfied. Our collector personalities are being manipulated...Búramach

And Rolex doing a DeBeers with supply and Omega firing out a new "limited edition" moon watch every week aren't? They're doing exactly the same thing. They're just better at the BS. Brands like that may be junk food, but most of the main premium brands for ordinary men are all a decent steak and veggies. Omega just change the colour of the plates every week and Rolex make you wait six months for a table and both charge like wounded rhinos for the privilege. Why do you think the fakes are freaking them out more than ever? Oh it was easy to dismiss when they were running a cheap quartz movement, but when they're getting closer and closer to the real deal with every year, yet at a tenth or less of the price? That makes people wonder. Is a steel Rolex better quality than the equivalent high end Seiko or Omega, or a few others? Nope. It isn't. You are paying for the name and the bragging rights, almost exclusively to oneself.

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

fret_wimp2 the worst lies are the ones well tell ourselves.

I think you deserve better.

Which could be written by an advertising copywriter.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Wibbs wrote: »

You are paying for the name and the bragging rights, almost exclusively to oneself.

Aye....here is the crux of the matter. When you actually think on this and whether. its good or bad, and why you want jewelry, and what this jewlery says about you to yourself and to others, and how it makes you feel, and what you had to do to get it...you have your answer. We can pretend that our internal dialogue is all that matters, our own person truth...but as social creatures there is value in external validation and the hierarchy of values.

I am not talking to you here wibbs, you collect for different reasons than 99% of people out there, and you collect totally different stuff to most. However I would be interest to see how peoples attitudes will have changed in 10 years, and with 10k in watchbox filler watches behind them, how I would love to go back and tell myself to just buy Submariner and be done trying to be a smart arse. I see it all the time...fret_wimp2 on this thread is where I was 5 years ago, but more polite than I would have been. In 5 years he might think back on that dick on boards and how right he was.

Advertising Copywriters speak to what we know or hope is true and what we want, thats why I sound like one. I am very philosophical this evening.

Wibbs

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

I used to convince myself that desirable watches did nothing for me, I was a unique flower and a proper enthusiast not succumbing to the usual brands. Funny how the watches I could afford or was willing to fork out for, were the ones I wanted.

Different strokes and the like. I've been in the enviable position of having the means and sometimes the means to burn and that didn't figure for me.

Now I'd be different as it was nearly always in the vintage realm and it was before the mainstream watches as jewellery bit really kicked in. Take Rolex as an example. Again my perception was a bit Delboy Trotter swanning about on the Costa Del Crime, so current models never really did it for me. That said I always loved their Milsub and was offered one in the early 90's. Two or three odd grand at the time. I liked it, but not that much and as I say at the time, it wouldn't have been much of an ouch to fork it over. Hell I paid that for a fishing holiday and the fishing rod cost 600 quid outside of that. My only regret is the investment end Doh! Plus at the time and pretty much still, though I bloody love military watches I felt well I didn't earn it diving in the North Sea or whatever(hence I generally went German mil stuff, cos if they were nazis, meh). I did have a Rolex Cellini which was a nice watch actually and almost ignored these days. I also had a collection of early Oysters and Bubblebacks and a couple of 50's "dress" Rolex oysters. They taught me a lesson too, when the hype over them came, went utterly nuts in the early days of the interwebs with "experts" reckoning fantastic investments and then crashed overnight. Luckily I got out before they did and covered my arse and them some. I had a Speedy for a time too, a pre moon with it. Didn't get on with it for some reason(ditto with the Seiko Pogue, mustn't like the space watches ) and sold it. Double doh!

If I could jump the queue would I buy a brand new Rolex sports model today? Sure, and then flip it for cash from the currently gullible which they want to buy and buy the kind of watches I'd want to buy. Which for me is unusual, actually rare, or innovative, or quirky, or modernist, or even daft.

Like I say, different strokes. And it's all good.

Thirdfox

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

Your a guy (we are nearly all guys lets be honest) getting into watches....

I did manage to get MsThirdfox interested in watches "ooh a tourbillon is quite pretty! And you say there's "technically" a functional reason for them?" Hopefully someday she'll be able to do the same for me and luxury bags :pac:

One day you look at your so called collection and its just a bunch of trash. There is nothing to be proud of. Nothing classy, nothing that speaks for itself, everything would need tedious explanation as to why its of any value. Nothing there is a nice piece of jewellery

Hmm - these terms all seem to be rather subjective to me. If someone finds Invicta "classy" and is proud of their watch (though of course that does raise a question of why would you be proud of an inanimate object you purchased) who are we to say they're wrong? I may think that a diamond stud on the tooth isn't classy or a lovely piece of jewellery for a man but I recognise that thousands or millions of people may disagree with me.

so after a few months you buckle and branch into something like, a Ginault, a Chrisopher ward, a Tag....expensive but affordable. You get it, but its not what you really want. Your heart sinks.

Ouch - separate to the overall thrust of my post Tag are going to be pretty hurt you've put them in the same category as say CW or DW etc. Their mikrograph and that amazing new escapement (that they've had to hand over to Zenith due to internal LVMH politics) show that they are certainly still innovating - the escapement in particular seems to me to be a gamechanger for mechanical timekeeping devices - I made a thread about it some time ago:
https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=106880800 - accuracy rated at 7.5 seconds per month (Tag researched this and gave(!) it to Zenith to use in the Defy).

You try to flip it...and you take a 50% loss. For example there are two Tudor GMT Pepsi on Adverts a 2019 and a 2018. Both barley worn. Why....because the collector wanted a Rolex but settled for a Tudor...he realised...****, this is a wannabe watch, nobody else has a rashers what it is or that it cost 4 grand everyone thinks its a homage. Your sick of people asking is it a Rolex only for you to explain how its not...but but but..., better flip and get back what I can. They will both take a 1000 euro loss on that (they think they wont but they will).

My Pelagos was flipped at no loss to myself - good pieces are good pieces no what what brand is on them.

With Christopher ward what you get is nothing, you get an expensive watch, of unoriginal design, with no brand name, no quality, no desirability and no resale value. The fact they all lie does not somehow add credibility to these brands. No, the desirable watches are just that, desirable. And undesirable watches are just that, undesirable.

Now the statements may be an exercise in subjective hyperbole - but I think it's quite unfair to say that CW is unoriginal (those hands don't seem to be based on other brands?) And just like Apple trying to sue for "slide to unlock" - there's only so many things a watch can look like...

Quality: - the watch doesn't seem to break down right? There is an intrinsic quality to the mechanism - aren't they Sellita/ETA movements?
Resale value: - sure they won't have a Rolex's resale value but there is still some value to be had.
Desirability: maybe some people desire a watch that is "Swiss Made", functions as advertised and looks "good" in their eyes? Who are we to say that's not desirable?

These flash sales are there like junk food, to satisfy you desire to purchase, but like junk food leave you unsatisfied. Our collector personalities are being manipulated...Bí cúramach

Some people are immensely "satisfied" with junk food :pac:

Wibbs

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

Aye....here is the crux of the matter. When you actually think on this and whether. its good or bad, and why you want jewelry, and what this jewlery says about you to yourself and to others, and how it makes you feel, and what you had to do to get it...you have your answer. We can pretend that our internal dialogue is all that matter, our own person truth...but as social creatures there is value in external validation and the hierarchy of values.

I am not talking to you here wibbs, you collect for different reasons than 99% of people out there, and you collect totally different stuff to most.

To be fair FG, you hear people say they don't care about that stuff; I actually don't. Never really did for some reason. I'm just wired differently. For a while in my 20's I did care that I didn't care and tried to fake it, but couldn't. IIRC it was because of a woman as these things often are My idea of purgatory is being in a group dressed in tailored suits to cover up their well fed gut, while discussing in their best telephone voice the merits of their Lexus's/Lexi as a golf club transportation device. Or office politics and that(never worked for anyone else but myself. Hell, I wouldn't hire me ). Now of course that's an exaggeration of the social position jockeying stuff but I just couldn't get into it and as I say I could have at various points in my life. I dunno, among the normal DNA nucleotides of ACTG scattered about I also have D and F which gives rise to DGAF along the chain.

Which can be a pain in the arse. It's so much better to be "normal", but one positive is that over the years I've found it has helped me avoid much of the BS and empty currency of the current. Saved a few quid too.

fret_wimp2

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

I used to convince myself that desirable watches did nothing for me, I was a unique flower and a proper enthusiast not succumbing to the usual brands.
I think you deserve better.

I dont have to try to convince myself of anything, i just have no attraction to to what you might call a "desirable" brand.

Ive gotten to try a few Rolexes and a few omegas. They are nice, but I never found them nicer than a lot of what you might call "junk, even before considering their cost.

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

I was a unique flower and a proper enthusiast .

you still are, a lovely unique individual snowflake.

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

I think you deserve better.

I do too, i always deserve better! I just have not found anything better for me than my stowa Flieger!

Wibbs

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

Advertising Copywriters speak to what we know or hope is true and what we want, thats why I sound like one. I am very philosophical this evening.

More they speak to some very basic needs within the human psyche, at least in the general population. Doubly so for mass produced luxury veblen goods. The idea of both exclusivity and perceived rarity, while somewhat contrarily belonging to the wider group that gets the "value" of the good in question. The telegraphing of social status and "snob value". The latter is about the name and often the price being less an indicator of actual quality and practical use and more an indicator of cost as quality.

In the watch world you tend to see this more illustrated with US based forums and other social media. It's more an aspirational culture where being nouveau is seen much more as a positive, rather than the negative it can be seen in the old world. A site like Hodinkee's sales section illustrates this. Anyone with even a passing interest in reading about vintage watches will quickly find out their prices and quality of goods on offer are daftly overpriced and often misdescribed or even junkers, yet they sell their overpriced stock in double quick time. I've regularly read people being quietly proud that their [insert Swiss brand here] watch's service costs are higher than another brands.

However I would be interest to see how peoples attitudes will have changed in 10 years

I have a strong feeling we've passed the peak of "watch". The exception being the current company driven artificial rarity of steel Rolex sports model and the hype around that. To the point that if Tudor once had the rose as a logo steel Rolex should have a tulip... The signs of a contraction are most certainly there in the vintage and secondhand markets. The above Hodinkee and their dealer buddies are writhing around looking for and hoping to hype the Next Big Thing™ and failing dismally as people are beginning to question their "experts". The comment section of their "Bring a Loupe" section has changed a lot in the last year with more and more asking questions of their choices and the prices attached, and that's just the comments that are approved. Indeed the number of comments themselves on any section has dropped off.

My angle has always been and remains; buy and wear what you want and like to wear, whether that be an Argos Casio or a Patek(on the wrists of billionaires you're as likely to see the former as the latter). The plain fact is outside of some rare enough social jockeying environments like a Dubai business meeting or whatever almost nobody else will notice or care. Like I noted in the pics thread of all the watches I have ever owned the one that gets the most attention and enquiry and general nods of approval by a long margin is a weird looking yoke that most watch aficionados wouldn't strap on if you paid them*.

When non watch folks have asked me what Good watch for life ™ to buy my advice such as it is also remains the same: A mid range Seiko Diver, or a steel Rolex, or Omega Seamaster and if you prefer a dial with more going on an Omega Speedy(for a dress watch if that's a consideration a "basic" Patek Calatrava). Job done.





*I actually wore it on the regular of late and within about a week I had a few stares and two people asked me about it directly; a lass at a checkout in Tesco and a bloke in a garage when I was paying for petrol.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

fret_wimp2 - A stowa Flieger is very similar to the superior iwc schaffhausen or a Zenith Pilot type or a Junghans Pilot or dare I say it and airking or Explorer, or just about every panerai... or how about a Patek Philippe Calatrava Pilot Travel Time (a superb watch) . If you have found nothing better, might I respectfully suggest you are not looking hard enough. I quite like a stowa, but there are a lot of watches I would get first....

Wibbs - we know you are special case (maybe nut case) . But you have to say that usually when people say they are not into a 80 grand patek its more that patek is not into them, or that they cannot imagine a time where such a purchase would be feasible for them with their currently held values. If they were to be gifted one, (and enough money that selling it was unnecessary) you can bet they would suddenly be super into it.We are all social apes, and its important. We all jocky for position be it with superior knowledge, superior resources, superior looks or physical characteristics or superior personality and coolness...thats how the world works and we all fall into or aspire to, at least one category.

On your "One and done " watch recommendation I agree..I also agree about the watch market, but the last gasp of a dying animal are dangerous. They do stuff like 50% off flash sales.

Thirdfox - Yes different strokes for different folks, but not all strokes are equal and if its junk food you consume in large amounts its a stroke you will have.

On a side note retail on your pelagos is €4290 (I am sure you got a discount) and you sold it for €2300 or €2600 asking price having dropped it from 2750...I tell myself such deals are not losing money also ...but they are. It lost nearly 50% of its value in two years, holy crap. Maybe you really lost no money but buy god some sucker did after flipping it quick from new.

Here is a little secret...nobody actually cares about movement innovations. Once its reasonably accurate, easy to service, robust and reliable thats all that matters. If its accuracy your after look at your phone. The Co-axial movement is only now getting reliable, they were god awful at the start, very unreliable, and at the end of the day pretty pointless, just like spring drive (or as I would call it stealth quartz). In House movements are more desirable, but only if the house they are "in" is big enough to ensure parts availability and servicing. What differentiates most good movements from lesser ones is the finishing.

I stand by my point. Cristopher Ward is a dangerous watch. priced to stimulate a reflex purchase without consideration to those with disposable income to spend on jewellery but not enough experiance to see the long term ramifications of this. It will never be serviced, and once its broken it will be disposed of. The Wibbs of 2089 will not have cristopher ward in his collection. Any cristopher ward found in your positions after you die will be broken and sold in a charity shop for a euro.

fret_wimp2

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

fret_wimp2 - A stowa Flieger is very similar to the superior iwc schaffhausen or a Zenith Pilot type or a Junghans Pilot or dare I say it and airking or Explorer, or just about every panerai... or how about a Patek Philippe Calatrava Pilot Travel Time (a superb watch) . If you have found nothing better, might I respectfully suggest you are not looking hard enough. I quite like a stowa, but there are a lot of watches I would get first....

IWC are giagantic, as is the Zenith & its styling does not appeal to me, Junghans pilot is downright ugly to my eye, airking is tacky looking, again to my eye and Panerai are also very large and of a very specific styling.
I dont aspire to a Patek, it doesnt provide anything to me that warrants the cost.

The stowa is the watch i want, and i have it. Just got lucky i guess. Ive handled many of the more expensive watches, I just dont see the quality being 3x - 6x of the stowa, even if the price is.
Might i respectfully suggest you seem to be swayed a little too much by the luxury brand names. I mean i quite like them but there are many watches i would get first.

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

Here is a little secret...Most people dont care about movement innovations.

Fixed it for ya.
the majority dont care, but people on these forums, and the thousands on TZUK, WatchUSeek etc all have some interest. If they didnt things like spring drives wouldnt sell at all.
It sounds more like you dont have an interest in movements, but assume this applies to the general watch buying population.

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

It will never be serviced, and once its broken it will be disposed of.

Would you believe I've had seiko 7s26 divers serviced, at a cost not much less than the watch. Why? Because i dont like to throw something away while its useful, because i have value on the watch, because it has proved itself reliable up to that point where a replacement has yet to prove itself.
Id have no problem servicing a reliable CW, or any watch.

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

Any cristopher ward found in your positions after you die will be broken and sold in a charity shop for a euro.

So what, I am dead, i enjoyed the watch while i was alive and now its not a worry for me! What has the value of the watch got to do with anything to a dead man? Even in life, if the item provides enjoyment and doesnt cause financial strain, then what does the value matter?

btkm8unsl0w5r4

I think I have made my points well, and the responces have highlighted the exceptions that proves the rule. fret_wimp2 I am glad you like your Stowa, and I am pretty sure there will be many many watches you will buy before your succumb to the virtues or the more recognisable brands.

I can tell you didnt inherit your fathers watches. My kids will , and they will each treasure theirs because I valued and wore the watches, and worked hard for the watch and cared for the watch, and I carefully considered what watch to get (getting something classic and unchanging that people will still want to wear in 40 years), and waited for it, and if they get into trouble when I am dead they can sell them and I will have helped them one last time.

fret_wimp2

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

I think I have made my points well, and the responces have highlighted the exceptions that proves the rule. fret_wimp2 I am glad you like your Stowa, and I am pretty sure there will be many many watches you will buy before one of the better brands.

I'm pretry sure there won't. It was always my aspirational watch and it turned out to meet my expectations. Of the dozens of 3k+ watches I've handled, not one of them met my expectations.

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

I can tell you didnt inherit your fathers watches. My kids will, and they will each treasure theirs because I valued the watches, and worked for them and cared for them, and if they get into trouble they can sell them and I will have helped them one last time.

No, thankfully he is still alive and kicking, inheriting his watches is not a thought I relish as I rather him than jewelery.

But whatever he does leave me, be it a monetarily valueless seiko or a luxury brand, it would be priceless as it's his, he wore it, he used it and he felt it worth passing on. The monetary value would be irrelevant.

Not to give you parenting advice, but there are much better things you cna leave your kids that have no monetary value or even physical presence.

funkyouup

TLDR, Rolex good, everything else ****e.

Cienciano

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

I think I have made my points well, and the responces have highlighted the exceptions that proves the rule. fret_wimp2 I am glad you like your Stowa, and I am pretty sure there will be many many watches you will buy before your succumb to the virtues or the more recognisable brands.

I can tell you didnt inherit your fathers watches. My kids will , and they will each treasure theirs because I valued and wore the watches, and worked hard for the watch and cared for the watch, and I carefully considered what watch to get (getting something classic and unchanging that people will still want to wear in 40 years), and waited for it, and if they get into trouble when I am dead they can sell them and I will have helped them one last time.

I'm going to use that one so the wife will allow me to spend €15k on the watch I want. "It's actually not for me, it's for the kids". :pac:

Wibbs

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

fret_wimp2 - A stowa Flieger is very similar to the superior iwc schaffhausen or a Zenith Pilot type or a Junghans Pilot or dare I say it and airking or Explorer, or just about every panerai...

Taste comes into it too. Panerais either appeal or they don't. You can pick up a "homage" for a couple of hundred quid and they'd not appeal to many. The Zenith? The first one with the pocketwatch NOS 50's movement was pretty cool if daftly massive, the latest ones are veering into tacky with their faux patina. Wouldn't be my bag TBH and I have an actual original one once worn by a lad who did 90 degree screaming dives over the Russian plains. The Junghans are appealing alright. The Rolex are a very different style, though the Explorer is nice.

or how about a Patek Philippe Calatrava Pilot Travel Time (a superb watch).

Ah the Patek.. From their website:
Patek Philippe Calatrava Pilot Travel Time Ref. 5524 With its new Ref. 5524 Calatrava Pilot Travel Time, Patek Philippe pays tribute to the courageous pioneers of aeronautics, recalls milestones in aviation, and touches upon the fact that the eminent family-owned Genevan manufacture also contributed to the conquest of the skies.

Touches upon the fact? :pac: I love their "fact". They made three "pilots"(actually navigators) watches in their entire history as a brand. To a very specific template by an outside source(Luftwaffe B-Uhr late 30's spec) and never sold them for some reason. Likely because they were too expensive and offered no real world benefit, rather like the way the French airforce told Breguet to take a hike in the early 70's over the costs of their Type XX offering. Three. And one was a pocket watch. Of course it's a quality timepiece, but the rest is complete BS from their marketing department and a great example of same. It's faux authenticity. All surface authentic. Just like some brands and their aged lume.

Wibbs - we know you are special case (maybe nut case) . But you have to say that usually when people say they are not into a 80 grand patek its more that patek is not into them, or that they cannot imagine a time where such a purchase would be feasible for them with their currently held values. If they were to be gifted one, (and enough money that selling it was unnecessary) you can bet they would suddenly be super into it.

Actually my dad had a Patek and left it to me, rose gold Calatrava on a leather strap. Sadly it was lost a few years ago(long pain in the arse story) along with his 50's Longines of a similar dressy style. I'd prefer the Longines back funny enough. Again the old perception comes into it. As a kid I thought Patek were "oulfellas" watches.

We are all social apes, and its important. We all jocky for position be it with superior knowledge, superior resources, superior looks or physical characteristics or superior personality and coolness...thats how the world works and we all fall into or aspire to, at least one category.

Well one could go back and forth on that. At a very basic level, at least for a man, the top of the tree is how much free time one chooses to spend, how immune one is to consequences, how attractive one's partner is. Even in something like debt; if the bank rings you and you gulp, then you're under the guy that when the bank rings him they gulp. On on even more basic darwinian level, the guy of variable employment with four kids from three different women is "ahead" of the middle management accountant with the corner office, expense account, homely wife and one kid. Depends on how one looks at things. Now granted as you point out I do have an odd way of looking at things.

On your "One and done " watch recommendation I agree..I also agree about the watch market, but the last gasp of a dying animal are dangerous. They do stuff like 50% off flash sales.

Oh sure and I'd only buy at 50%.

I stand by my point. Cristopher Ward is a dangerous watch. priced to stimulate a reflex purchase without consideration to those with disposable income to spend on jewellery but not enough experiance to see the long term ramifications of this. It will never be serviced, and once its broken it will be disposed of. The Wibbs of 2089 will not have cristopher ward in his collection. Any cristopher ward found in your positions after you die will be broken and sold in a charity shop for a euro.

And yet there are Swatch collectors and some can go for a pretty penny. At one time when another bubble was in play some went for daft money. Some Mickey Mouse watches go for many thousands. I remember a time when all vintage wristwatches were seen as "old" and "old fashioned". Actually my dad got his Patek valued in the mid 80's at 1500-2000(Weirs IIRC). Was a fair chunk, but his Longines VHP quartz cost the guts of a 1000 around the same time. If you got 300 quid for it now... Watches only got interest at general auctions if they were made from gold. There's a reason there are a fair number of old movements sans cases out there. You couldn't give away Rolex Daytonas in the 80's. Hell there's a reason vintage Daytonas are thin on the ground, because even when new they were a hard sell. Heuer couldn't get arrested in many markets and in the US resorted to more cut price models sold off as part of cigarette packet tokens. If we were having this conversation in the 70's or 80's you'd have a very different mindset and your watch choices if you were to make them would aim at something in gold or half gold, or more likely feel watches were a wasted "investment".

Having attended a few relatives funerals and what happened to their stuff after they were gone, intrinsic value had little to do with things and stuff like watches and other jewellery were dispersed among the family. Much of it never worn again because fashions change. Even so called classics today will almost certainly date. That includes items that themselves are dated already for "authenticity's" sake. One thing is pretty sure; what someone has in a collection in 2089 will almost certainly not be what we expect. If watches are even a thing then. Actually I'd maybe suggest getting a secondhand NOS in its box first series Apple Watch and put it away.

Wibbs

funkyouup wrote: »

TLDR, Rolex good, everything else ****e.

:D That can definitely be a thing with some collectors alright and grand. Just a different approach. Tends to happen in any collector market when it goes from small fry hobbyist to more mainstream. I've seen it creep into a fair few forums over the last few years. And again that's cool and the gang. Whatever oils your axle.

Wibbs

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

I can tell you didnt inherit your fathers watches.

TBH FG, you're veering more and more towards sounding pretentious and snooty here. Among other things of "value" like a couple of fountain pens and such, I inherited a Patek, a couple of Longines, an Omega and a Zenith from my father. Did you do similar? I'd be confident enough to bet that's a no. So do I now win the golf club bar willie waving competition? See why it's pointless? There's always a bigger willie in the room. To rip off and tweak a quote from that 80's anti nuclear war flic "War Games"; the only way to win is not to play.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

fret_wimp2 wrote: »

I'm pretry sure there won't. It was always my aspirational watch and it turned out to meet my expectations.

Cienciano wrote: »

I'm going to use that one so the wife will allow me to spend €15k on the watch I want. "It's actually not for me, it's for the kids". :pac:

Well certain watches (not just now in the current madness but over long periods of time) will always be desirable, recognised and of value anywhere in the world. If you are in trouble anywhere in the world your Rolex/Patek/AP/VC will buy you a ticket home and a lawyer. Any pawnshop will give you money for it. Its an asset, worth insuring and an asset you can pass to your children (tax free I would add these grey assets). Enjoy wearing it, and sell it for actually what you paid for it or maybe a little more. If you have your ultraman speedmaster on, or your stowa or your seiko you have greatly limited your options.

Why do these watches have this characteristic...answer is the very same reasons these watches do nothing for the cool kids.

You go back in history and the brands were younger and were still playing at being useful tools rather than jewellery. I cannot every see a time in the future where a 6 digit Rolex submariner for instance is worth less than retail (mostly cause retail is undervalued due to Rolex's funny nature). People attitudes to watches have changed so much. The asian market is huge (and they love their quality brands) and the apple watch and fit bit are putting things back on peoples wrists.

Wibbs I am sorry about your Dads watches, I am sure you would love to have them, and you certainly could tell a few tales around them.

I think you were mistaking my interest in that Patek. I was merely point out that if you like a Stowa then you would probably like one of those Pateks. I dont expect my pilots watch to be used by pilots (lets hope they are not reliant on a mechanical watch), or my chronograph to be used by race care drivers, these are merely design language names we place on watch types all harping back to a time when different professions needed different types of watches. Pointing out the fact that its all faux heritage is not news to anyone, but i understand it offends you specific sensibilities. Expensive watches and shidder brands tell the same bull**** tales, but you buy a patek and you have a patek. Buy a shidder and you have a shidder.

EDIT......Now......

This "TBH FG, you're veering more and more towards sounding pretentious and snooty here" comment. This is the racism card of watch collecting. You cannot dislike anything because to do that is to be a watch snob. This claim of snobbery now overrides all my points and is a low blow. Yeah I am now just another rich prick here to swing my Rolex micky about. I am not a real enthusiast, I have just bought my way in, and my taste is only for money and prestige....This is totally unfair, espically from a man whose father left him a patek. I bought my father his only good watch with my first paycheck a quartz seamaster. I am out.

Tldr....Christopher ward is a brand designed to part fools and their money.

Strawman attacks..see below

fret_wimp2

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

This "TBH FG, you're veering more and more towards sounding pretentious and snooty here" comment. This is the racism card of watch collecting.....This is totally unfair, espically from a man whose father left him a patek. I am out.

You come onto the forum, tell everyone who doesnt buy an expensive watch that they dont know their own mind, they are fools with their own money, their collection is worthless as its not made of luxury brands, piss on any watches my dad might leave me because they may not be expensive, but then take umbrage to the suggestion you may be a little snooty and pretentious!

Wibbs

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

Well certain watches (not just now in the current madness but over long periods of time) will always be desirable, recognised and of value anywhere in the world.

This is the bit you are simply not getting FG. You're speculating they will be, but this was not the case even a generation ago and could be the case again a generation hence. A steel cased Rolex/omega/whatever was an old watch and not nearly worth what you seem to think they were. I know FG, I bought them and for little more than "pocket money". Why do you think the Rolex president was a fave of drug dealers, potentates and other undesirables? It was made of gold with diamonds on top(though diamonds aren't worth much secondhand). The gold was the actual intrinsic value. Much like silver and gold cased pocket watches in times past(one of the most common items in the 18th century pawned and left in wills to and by women was a precious metal pocket watch. Portable cash) The steel cased trend is just that, a trend and a current one, like not much more than two decades current. If I were buying a big name brand for the purpose of a cash replacement should it be needed and for future "investment" I'd be going deeply unfashionable and buying a solid gold Rolex or whatever.

Why do these watches have this characteristic...answer is the very same reasons these watches do nothing for the cool kids.

and what's cool keeps on changing.

You go back in history and the brands were younger and were still playing at being useful tools rather than jewellery.

Nope. With few exceptions they've always been jewellery. The "tool watch" on the wrists of those who never lift a tool heavier than a ballpoint and a mouse is a very recent thing. If you wore a divers watch in the 50's or 60's you were almost certainly a diver by trade or recreation. Large pilots watches ditto, their size alone made them deeply unfashionable for most of the 20th century(those of the professional classes wouldn't be seen dead in a tool watch before the 60's, if not the 70's). The fictional James Bond wore one to show the audience that under the suit he was a military man(and he noted they made a good knuckle-duster). The vast majority of "good watches" sold in the 20th century were of the dressy kind in gold or gold plate. That's what sold. Not tool watches. One big reason steel cased vintage watches are seen as more valuable is because they were quite simply rarer in the first place. Steel cased Pateks are insane money today, because when they were made almost nobody ordered a luxury watch like that in steel, they went for gold or platinum. The two periods where tool wristwatches were the majority was at the very start circa WW1 and the last couple of decades.

I cannot every see a time in the future where a 6 digit Rolex submariner for instance is worth less than retail (mostly cause retail is undervalued due to Rolex's funny nature).

Retail is undervalued? Man that's really drinking the current koolaid. No luxury brand is undervalued, that's one of the biggest points of a veblen good. The Rolex Sub of today is many times more expensive when compared to all cost of living metrics than they were in say 1970. When they were also more handmade and in fewer numbers with it. Before the Swiss gathered together most of the brands under different conglomerate umbrellas and tiered them by perceived status if you wanted to buy a "quality diving watch" the offerings from Rolex, Omega, Longines, Blancpain, Doxa et al were at the same pricepoint(in the US market around the 2-300 dollar mark). They had to be, they were competing with each other in the same shop windows.

People attitudes to watches have changed so much. The asian market is huge (and they love their quality brands) and the apple watch and fit bit are putting things back on peoples wrists.

Yeah, apple watches and fitbits. EG In 2018 Apple sold more watches than all of the Swiss marques put together.

Wibbs I am sorry about your Dads watches,

Cheers FG, I wouldn't have minded if they ended up with someone else, even stolen because somebody would have worn them, but a relative with dementia threw them out and off they went in the wheelie bin. Yup. I didn't discover this until weeks later as I only wore them on high days and holy days.

I think you were mistaking my interest in that Patek. I was merely point out that if you like a Stowa then you would probably like one of those Pateks. I dont expect my pilots watch to be used by pilots (lets hope they are not reliant on a mechanical watch), or my chronograph to be used by race care drivers, these are merely design language names we place on watch types all harping back to a time when different professions needed different types of watches. Pointing out the fact that its all faux heritage is not news to anyone, but i understand it offends you specific sensibilities. Expensive watches and shidder brands tell the same bull**** tales, but you buy a patek and you have a patek. Buy a shidder and you have a shidder.

The Stowa is a nice quality watch and nice to look at(way more "history" in aviation behind the name too, if that's someone's thing). The Patek is also a nice quality watch and nice to look at too. It's a higher quality timepiece certainly, is it worth well over ten times the Stowa? While that's debatable, something like a Panny is much less so. In the end you pays your money you makes your choice.

Wibbs

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

This "TBH FG, you're veering more and more towards sounding pretentious and snooty here" comment. This is the racism card of watch collecting. You cannot dislike anything because to do that is to be a watch snob. This claim of snobbery now overrides all my points and is a low blow. Yeah I am now just another rich prick here to swing my Rolex micky about. I am not a real enthusiast, I have just bought my way in, and my taste is only for money and prestige....This is totally unfair, espically from a man whose father left him a patek. I bought my father his only good watch with my first paycheck a quartz seamaster. I am out.

You've completely missed my point FG, or to be fair I may have made it roughly, though your post to Fret saying "I can tell you didnt inherit your fathers watches" came across as more than a little pretentious. I'm sure you didn't mean it, but when I reflected something similar back you reacted yourself.

My point was that this whole prestige thing is a game best not played IMHO. It leads to stuff like this. It always ends up in mickey waving(there are a few forums out there I tend to avoid of late because of this more recent nonsense).

Tldr....Christopher ward is a brand designed to part fools and their money.

and going on a waiting list for an artificially constrained steel watch that costs over ten grand isn't? One could argue on both sides. Again I wouldn't TBH, because again it's down to choice and what you want. As the fella said a ten quid Casio is the better timepiece of all of them. After that it's choice and long may it continue.

I'm not pushed on a fair few watches out there, new and vintage. Big whoop, others like them and fair play. That's all that matters as far as I'm concerned. I am most certainly not going to disparage their choices. If asked I might suggest maybe waiting until there's a sale(as I did here) or suggest something else that they might get better value from. Even if it's a little more expensive. And I most certainly wouldn't suggest that they're fools because they buy a cheaper watch because they don't know their own mind yet, are "lying to themselves" and will eventually buy a [insert brand here] when they somehow come to their senses about what true quality is. Nor would I suggest anybody's "so called collection" is "just a bunch of trash", or that it was what someone could afford was the true reason for their choices. These were your "points"? And you wonder why you might get some pushback over them? There was certainly a better way to put across your points than this way.

Thirdfox

Indeed the best response would have been to note that CW are pretty famous for having Harvey Norman "big sale"(s) - but it doesn't mean DFS sofas are trash etc

And I think another thing on a forum such as this is that we're supposed to be helpful and courteous to one another - if I went onto a pen forum and said Mont Blanc are having a sale! and then someone told me actually they're kinda meh in quality I'd be a disappointed after splashing out for one and having it in the post - I guess if people didn't ask for comments on quality (and we're not addressing whether CW is "quality" or not) then the helpful thing to say would be to let people know that CW often has sales... or that say Invicta (used to? don't know anymore) have super high RRPs to offer 70% off etc "deals" - it doesn't mean that the invicta watch is bad - the marketing method might be a bit suspect however. Do Ball actually fall into the "big sale" category too - I vaguely remember something about them.

With 40% off are the CW watches approaching microbrand prices i.e. 150-200% of a microbrand using Seiko NH35 movements? That would seem to be a good price point for the watch (especially if you like the design).

As for my old Pelagos - it wasn't bought new - but who am I to say that the first owner didn't enjoy the boutique experience of being the first owner and priced that experience as being worth a few thousand euro to them? To some (especially if they have the monetary means to do so) they can flip watches at 50% "loss" because it's chump change to them - they've enjoyed being the first owner.

Just bought a bicycle for €330 that cost the owner €3000+ to assemble - but he got years of service out of it and enjoyed it for what it was. I get a great deal and top spec stuff for a lot less. I think concentrating on retained value is a little near sighted - most goods are expected to fall in value on resale - and if we only buy watches for "investment value" then that's pretty sad in my opinion.

Buy what you like - and what you can afford

edit:
Just checked - so a 2824 diver costs €495 now - that's a fine price for what it is I would have thought. Seiko NH35 divers are around 200-300 from the homage brands.

And not to completely disagree with all of your points I do agree that sometimes some purchases are "bad" - i.e. the item really actually isn't fit for purpose. I bought a few strap changing tools from China wanting to save a few euro (€1-2 vs €24)...in the end I still bought the Bergeon tool - if I bought the tool in the beginning I would have saved more money than faffing about with tools that unfortunately weren't good enough to be used.

I just think that criticising the CW watches is the wrong hill to die on - if you said something about the €1 Chinese springbar tools I'd be in full agreement with you! And hey China's going to make better tools in the future too (or maybe they already do - but I guess at a certain price point the thing is just "too cheap" to be made correctly) - if I bought a €15 Chinese tool it might have been fine - though at that point people ask why not just get the Swiss tool instead.

thomasm

Back to the Trident. For context I currently have a Seiko Premier and Dan Henry 64 so this is a new ‘level’ for me. First thoughts are

1) Packaged like a proper luxury item. Very impressive.
2) Watch looks better in the flesh.
3) Looks and feels a quality piece with the caveat I’ve never handled a high end watch before so have no benchmark
4) The strap smells and looks like good quality leather
5) Lume is excellent
6) Only Gripe is it’s a little pronounced on my wrist and although I have skinny square wrists the Dan Henry with beads of rice bracket sits better. I’m hoping when leather breaks in this will not be an issue

Would I pay €900 for this, I don’t think so. Is it worth €500, I think it is

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Wibbs wrote: »

You've completely missed my point FG, or to be fair I may have made it roughly, though your post to Fret saying "I can tell you didnt inherit your fathers watches" came across as more than a little pretentious.

I promised myself I would not respond here cause its the land of inverted snobbery but people are quoting me a lot out of context and editing my quotes to suit the strawman they are building.

Wibbs my comment "I can tell you didnt inherit your fathers watches"was made in direct and contemporaneous response to this quote from fret_wimp2 above my post (with whom I was having a perfectly interesting and stimulating debate) "So what, I am dead, i enjoyed the watch while i was alive and now its not a worry for me! What has the value of the watch got to do with anything to a dead man? "...you responded twice to my posts in a cordial manner, and then decided to throw in the F.U. part about being a pretentious snob in another post 9 minutes later. Now thanks to that, the debate is over, because the moderator of the forum has just dismissed all my previous points, like a corrupt coppers past convictions, meaning my points no longer need addressing just attack the man...which was dutifully done.

I assure you I do not pretend to be anything I am not, nor would I wear anything pretending to be what it is not. I dont pretend to congratulate people on their bad decisions, find the good in their folly and patronise them by chocolate coating the turds in a veneer of garrulous historical perspectives and insincere positivity. I dont apologise for what I have and I dont begrudge others what they have.

thomasm - have to say the dial on that watch is quite jarring with very odd symmetry, and looks like its taken bits from a lot of other watches (tudor BB heratage burgandy bezel crossed with a early 2000's Seamaster,) . 500 euro is a fair chunk of money to me anyway, look on the stienhart website at the ocean one range for some comparison, A GMT function and bracelet to boot on those..albeit some people have issue with homage watches. I think if you had a 500 euro budget and a style of watch in mind, few would have advised you to buy this. Sorry. A "Corgeut Men's Analogue Sapphire Glass Automatic Watch Leather Strap Red Bezel" for 100 euro would do the job as well.

Wibbs

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

I promised myself I would not respond here cause its the land of inverted snobbery but people are quoting me a lot out of context and editing my quotes to suit the strawman they are building.

You still can't see never mind acknowledge how you may come across?

Wibbs my comment "I can tell you didnt inherit your fathers watches"was made in direct and contemporaneous response to this quote from fret_wimp2 above my post (with whom I was having a perfectly interesting and stimulating debate) "So what, I am dead, i enjoyed the watch while i was alive and now its not a worry for me! What has the value of the watch got to do with anything to a dead man? "...you responded twice to my posts in a cordial manner, and then decided to throw in the F.U. part about being a pretentious snob in another post 9 minutes later. Now thanks to that, the debate is over, because the moderator of the forum has just dismissed all my previous points, like a corrupt coppers past convictions, meaning my points no longer need addressing just attack the man...which was dutifully done.

Again you seem completely oblivious to your own comments about fools and their money, buying a cheaper watch because they don't know their own mind yet/are too poor to buy it, "lying to themselves" and how they will eventually buy a proper watch when they somehow come to their senses that their "so called collection" is "just a bunch of trash". Fret wimp himself noted this. You seem to missed that in your perfectly interesting and stimulating debate you thought you were having.

Oh and for one complaining about putting words in other's mouths, my exact words were "TBH FG, you're veering more and more towards sounding pretentious and snooty here". I didn't say you were, I said it sounded like. I had hoped you might see how this might be perceived. Clearly in vain as leaving aside the previous posts, even in this post you continue on and crap on a fellow members actual purchase.

Oh and for the record Fitzgeme, folks in this community have posted everything from their ten quid Casios to 15K Pateks, through smart watches, homages, new, vintage and every brand under the sun and not once, not a single time has any other poster crapped on their choices, or if they felt it they had the cop on to not post it. If that according to you is inverted snobbery I dunno what to say. I will say I for one am happy it's like that and it'll stay that way. There are too many forums out there where it isn't.

Wibbs

Cienciano wrote: »

I'm going to use that one so the wife will allow me to spend €15k on the watch I want. "It's actually not for me, it's for the kids". :pac:

They beat ya to it CC.



Very clever ad campaign to be fair.

thomasm

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

I promised myself I would not respond here cause its the land of inverted snobbery but people are quoting me a lot out of context and editing my quotes to suit the strawman they are building.

Wibbs my comment "I can tell you didnt inherit your fathers watches"was made in direct and contemporaneous response to this quote from fret_wimp2 above my post (with whom I was having a perfectly interesting and stimulating debate) "So what, I am dead, i enjoyed the watch while i was alive and now its not a worry for me! What has the value of the watch got to do with anything to a dead man? "...you responded twice to my posts in a cordial manner, and then decided to throw in the F.U. part about being a pretentious snob in another post 9 minutes later. Now thanks to that, the debate is over, because the moderator of the forum has just dismissed all my previous points, like a corrupt coppers past convictions, meaning my points no longer need addressing just attack the man...which was dutifully done.

I assure you I do not pretend to be anything I am not, nor would I wear anything pretending to be what it is not. I dont pretend to congratulate people on their bad decisions, find the good in their folly and patronise them by chocolate coating the turds in a veneer of garrulous historical perspectives and insincere positivity. I dont apologise for what I have and I dont begrudge others what they have.

thomasm - have to say the dial on that watch is quite jarring with very odd symmetry, and looks like its taken bits from a lot of other watches (tudor BB heratage burgandy bezel crossed with a early 2000's Seamaster,) . 500 euro is a fair chunk of money to me anyway, look on the stienhart website at the ocean one range for some comparison, A GMT function and bracelet to boot on those..albeit some people have issue with homage watches. I think if you had a 500 euro budget and a style of watch in mind, few would have advised you to buy this. Sorry. A "Corgeut Men's Analogue Sapphire Glass Automatic Watch Leather Strap Red Bezel" for 100 euro would do the job as well.

Interesting comments on the CW Fitzgeme. I was close to getting the steinherart ocean one but many reviews said it sat quiet high due to straight lugs. With no disrespect the Corgeut looks low quality from the pics I’ve seen and not in the same quality league as the CW.

While I like the CW I still have the option of sending it back and what would cause me to do this is the way it sticks up on my wrist. Im open to suggestions of a diver style with a max of €500 budget.

beauf

I think what he meant to say was know the value of a watch and don't over pay for it. Especially where there are fake sales to make you think a watch is worth more than it is. There is better value in a more expensive watch if bought astutely.

I expect the passion for the subject got the better of him here.

fret_wimp2

thomasm wrote: »

Interesting comments on the CW Fitzgeme. I was close to getting the steinherart ocean one but many reviews said it sat quiet high due to straight lugs. With no disrespect the Corgeut looks low quality from the pics I’ve seen and not in the same quality league as the CW.

While I like the CW I still have the option of sending it back and what would cause me to do this is the way it sticks up on my wrist. Im open to suggestions of a diver style with a max of €500 budget.

How proud a watch sits can sometimes depend on your wrist, if its quite wide, any relatively thick watch will look quite proud.

In my experience, i found the seiko sumo to sit quite low on my wrist, it has nice curve on the lugs that made it feel a little more low profile. Can be found for sub 500 quid 2nd hand.

Edit: 2_shea from the forum has one on adverts right now for sub 500 quid. Definitely worth trying out to see how it feels.

Wibbs

Aye, lugs make a big difference alright. The largest watch I have is 43mm and sits more flush and comfortable because the lugs are more curved. Another is a slab of a thing at the same size, but lugless and that shrinks it down again. Yet another watch I have is only 36mm, but it has straighter lugs and is 13mm thick, so looks and feels huge.

thelizardking1

Did you buy the 38mm Trident Thomas?

beauf

fret_wimp2 wrote: »

How proud a watch sits can sometimes depend on your wrist, if its quite wide, any relatively thick watch will look quite proud.

In my experience, i found the seiko sumo to sit quite low on my wrist, it has nice curve on the lugs that made it feel a little more low profile. Can be found for sub 500 quid 2nd hand.

Edit: 2_shea from the forum has one on adverts right now for sub 500 quid. Definitely worth trying out to see how it feels.

I can't comment on expensive watches I have none. But I used to think G-Shocks would wear massive. But then I got one and the stap with the wings makes it so comfortable I don't notice it. I think it's so individual to the each watch you have to try it in person.

thomasm

thelizardking1 wrote: »

Did you buy the 38mm Trident Thomas?

I did, I posted some comments earlier in the thread

Time

thomasm wrote: »

Back to the Trident. For context I currently have a Seiko Premier and Dan Henry 64 so this is a new ‘level’ for me. First thoughts are

1) Packaged like a proper luxury item. Very impressive.
2) Watch looks better in the flesh.
3) Looks and feels a quality piece with the caveat I’ve never handled a high end watch before so have no benchmark
4) The strap smells and looks like good quality leather
5) Lume is excellent
6) Only Gripe is it’s a little pronounced on my wrist and although I have skinny square wrists the Dan Henry with beads of rice bracket sits better. I’m hoping when leather breaks in this will not be an issue

Would I pay €900 for this, I don’t think so. Is it worth €500, I think it is

In both pictures it looks like the bezel has a mark on the 11 minute marker on the bezel?

Alanstrainor

thomasm wrote: »

Back to the Trident. For context I currently have a Seiko Premier and Dan Henry 64 so this is a new ‘level’ for me. First thoughts are

1) Packaged like a proper luxury item. Very impressive.
2) Watch looks better in the flesh.
3) Looks and feels a quality piece with the caveat I’ve never handled a high end watch before so have no benchmark
4) The strap smells and looks like good quality leather
5) Lume is excellent
6) Only Gripe is it’s a little pronounced on my wrist and although I have skinny square wrists the Dan Henry with beads of rice bracket sits better. I’m hoping when leather breaks in this will not be an issue

Would I pay €900 for this, I don’t think so. Is it worth €500, I think it is

Looks great! Enjoy it!

btkm8unsl0w5r4

thomasm wrote: »

Interesting comments on the CW Fitzgeme. I was close to getting the steinherart ocean one but many reviews said it sat quiet high due to straight lugs. With no disrespect the Corgeut looks low quality from the pics I’ve seen and not in the same quality league as the CW.

While I like the CW I still have the option of sending it back and what would cause me to do this is the way it sticks up on my wrist. Im open to suggestions of a diver style with a max of €500 budget.

I think if you not really happy I would send it back. Its going to be hard to try sell later. I would agree that a Seiko sumo wears nicely and can be had in a range of colours. Get a bracelet and change to a strap or Nato. The seiko is unlike me unpretentious. Doesn't keep legendary time but is a solid watch.

The great thing about Stienhart (wears like a bigger rolex, nice watch IMHO) and to a lesser extent Seiko is that they sell second hand in a flash. Now you can claim that thats irrelevant if you "love it" but just like a prenuptial agreement, you will be glad its there if/when the love is gone. Stienharts sell in a flash on adverts, Seikos a little slower but good market for them too. There is zero market for a CW unless you price it as dog muck.

I bet you would really like the look of a Omega Seamaster 300?

Wibbs

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

I bet you would really like the look of a Omega Seamaster 300?

It seems you misread T's post.

thomasm wrote: »

Im open to suggestions of a diver style with a max of €500 budget.

€500, not 5000.

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Wibbs wrote: »

It seems you misread T's post.

€500, not 5000.

No you misread mine and not for the first time. I bet he would like..the look...of a seamaster 300. And I bet he would...if he answers that he would I will advise that he can get a quartz one for under a grand, or an automatic for for around 2300 euro on ceramic. If he is not there I will advise he waits...if he doesn't want to wait I will advise something else that's not a waste of time and has the look he is after

Read my words not what you think I wrote.

Wibbs

Nope I read his words. Five hundred quid max. Not under a grand or two plus grand, or waiting until he gets a proper watch by your measure.

Though I agree with you re the Steinhart or Seiko Sumo. Better watches for the money and saleable if it comes to it, with little of a hit to the pocket, especially if going secondhand.

thomasm

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

There is zero market for a CW unless you price it as dog muck.

Just out of curiosity have you held or owned a Christopher Ward.

There is a really active resale market on the CW Enthusiasts Facebook page

btkm8unsl0w5r4

Wibbs wrote: »

Nope I read his words. Five hundred quid max. Not under a grand or two plus grand, or waiting until he gets a proper watch by your measure.

Though I agree with you re the Steinhart or Seiko Sumo. Better watches for the money and saleable if it comes to it, with little of a hit to the pocket, especially if going secondhand.

Nope Wibbs try again, go back and re-read the secret is in the words "look of". At this stage you just trying to find fault with me. I asked him does he like the LOOK OF the omega seamaster, ie its appearance, its style. I then suggest you had again misread MY words. I though remembering things you read its your super power.

Thomas - I am sure there is great resale of anything on its own fan FB page...even Daniel Wellington. I have held one (strangly on a guy that bought a seamaster off me hence my question to you) and saw nothing in it that would make me buy one over a Seiko SKX on a nice Strapcode bracelet or if your into straps a nato or leather/nubuck. The steinharts feel superb in the hand, if a little unrefined but they are big watches. Could you push your budget up to say a grand if you waited a while longer?

Thirdfox

thomasm wrote: »

Im open to suggestions of a diver style with a max of €500 budget.

One quick way to have an idea of what's available on the market (just to quickly check if you like a certain look) is to check chrono24 and put in say a €750 limit on dive watches. This will give you a general idea of what can be bought at around €500 in "real life" conditions - here's the search btw (some of the watches are new, some are second hand):
https://www.chrono24.com/search/index.htm?disableCtr=true&dosearch=true&maxAgeInDays=0&pageSize=60&priceFrom=0&priceTo=750&query=dive+watch&redirectToSearchIndex=true&sortorder=0&styles=1811&waterproof=912&waterproof=913&waterproof=915&waterproof=920

Out of the results I see some of the ones that stand out to me include:
New Alpina (if "old" Swiss brand is important to you) - https://www.chrono24.com/alpina/alpina-seastrong-diver-300-automatik---achtung-415-gespart--id7667854.htm

New Citizen titanium diver (if you like titanium over steel and Citizen is an "established" brand too of course, less than €500 even on chrono24) - https://www.chrono24.com/citizen/divers-automatic-super-titanio--id11256540.htm

New Bulova devil diver (pretty unique look that doesn't remind me of anything else - "old" US brand now Japanese (Citizen) owned) - https://www.chrono24.com/bulova/oceanographer-special-edition-devil-diver--id9796497.htm

Used Hamilton Khaki chrono frogman (super unique look, has chronograph too, old school US brand now Swatch owned (like Omega, Breguet, Mido etc. etc.) - https://www.chrono24.com/hamilton/hamilton-frogman-automatic-chronograph-diver-old-skool--id10389236.htm

And something not on Chrono24 but often suggested (and I have two myself for fun) - Vostok Amphibia - costs anything from 50-100 euro and is an amazing piece of tech from USSR/Russia - it's innovative, cheap and super distinctive. It's more a Lotus Elise than a Ferrari - a true functional timepiece:
https://meranom.com/en/amphibian-classic/

I'd have no problems leaving a Vostok on to my children - if they're anything like me they'd love to learn about its O-ring innovation, "loose" crown (that's a feature) and utilitarian looks - oh and if you spot someone else wearing an Amphibia on their arm they probably are a "watch lover" too

Brooks Howling Martini wrote: »

...Doesn't keep legendary time but is a solid watch...

Thought that people didn't care much about watch movements and accuracy?

fret_wimp2

Thirdfox wrote: »

One quick way to have an idea of what's available on the market (just to quickly check if you like a certain look) is to check chrono24 and put in say a €750 limit on dive watches.

watchrecon.com is also a good place to get a rough estimate of the value of things.