That's a link to all 457 VC Overseas. Which one is yours? 😂
In the app it opens to his one for me.
Weirdly! On Desktop I cannot find my watch listed, but!
As Frank has said, on mobile it does open the correct listing in the app. Below is their website listing.
Bloody hell! That's better than BTC 🤣
I know!!! Blue dial madness? Or a complete over estimation of the potential value?
I look forward to finding out and in the meantime, I'm trying to do a deal on an Omega 2535.80 to at least keep a blue dial in the rotation 😉
Less said about my BTC positions currently the better tho😏 I went to all cash positions in Crypto at the start of Sept with a very confident buy of 35.5k set for BTC....
Much to my chagrin, it hit $39.5k and rather than pile in? I held my nerve and have it watched it soar without me this time....! Its a mantra I have repeated for years! Don't try and apply rationale to crypto, it doesn't work! Its certainly hit my paper worth and added a few taxable events to my next return. Equities are really doing a good job for me currently tho, and if Boeing continues its slide into this week? I'll own some more "blue" things by the end of it I suppose🤣
Quartz is also more boring, there's something to be said for the ingenuity that goes into creating a complicated movement for a watch.
If you're the type who likes gazing through an exhibition caseback or boring your non-nerdy friends describing the finer points of mechanical movements then yes.
I've got the quartz version of the Omega Seamaster Professional 'GoldenEye' and it's just as good looking and comfortable as the automatic. 'But the second hand doesn't smoothly sweep', so what.
Sure if you're into mechanical things then fine but otherwise the advantages of quartz are undeniable.
Why you waste money on that Omega AT then? The exceptional co axial 8500 is one of the main reasons I purchased it.
Yoh could have had the quartz version brand new for a grand less than you paid for the auto second hand.
I like quality mechanical watches not because they are superior, but because they persist despite their flaws and are cooler because of them. Mechanical watches are so unnecessarily complex and intricate, trying their best to do a job half as well as a 10 euro quartz.
You can make this same argument about ebikes, ICE cars versus EV's, books versus kindle. Real versus synthetic diamonds, precious metal versus non precious alloys, emails versus letters, computer synthesis versus real instruments, digital versus film photography, digital versus vinyl music and on and on.
I dont think anyone denies the advantages of quartz, all the big swiss brand make quartz models. but quartz watches dont seem to be as cherished or as precious in the hobby. Personally I find quartz watches far more boring than mechanical ones, but each to their own. You can continue the conversation to its logical conclusion and just use your phone, I use a watch more as the only acceptable piece of male jewellery, and a cheap looking quartz watch does nothing for me. Maybe a good quality one is good but then you really bore your non-nerdy friends describing the finer points of haute quartz movements, and in the watch space your ability to bore others is not really effected by the movement of your wristwatch. The top tier manufacturers tend not to show their virtuosity in quartz either.
A good line from a TV show I was watching about a expensive watch the other day springs to mind. Fellow shows his friend a Patek and says "its the most accurate watch in the world"... comedic pause, "every time you look at its it will tell you precisely what your time is worth".
Can you provide a link to an Omega Aqua Terra 'Skyfall' brand new that's for sale?
Not much point looking for a watch brand new today when you have the watch 12 months or more?
Or did they not make the blue version in quartz and you are trying to be smart in a your usual passive aggressive way instead of just stating that they didn’t make it?
Eitherway the quartz version of the Vertical teak dial (in what ever colours it came in) was around 2k RRP and regularly on TZ for 1200-1500.
Thanks for the info.
I prefer mechanical watches but I’m not against wearing or buying a watch with a battery providing there is something else to them be it solar powered, kinetic or a unique style . I would also like to try a spring drive at some stage , most likely the GS snowflake .
I find quartz watches and particularly g-shocks can be a bit of fun for low cost and a nice reminder that watch collecting doesn’t always have to be about high cost luxury brand watches.
You are most welcome. Glad I could help.
Tally ho
I neither enjoy looking at exhibition casebooks (in fact i have no watches other than the Solas Starlight with one) or discussing the finer points of movements, not that i know enough about them to do so anyway.
I won't argue that a Quartz watch can't be as comfortable or as functional, of course they can be, and are arguably more functional. None of that changes the fact that by their very nature mechanical watches are far more interesting. Look at the repeater; invented in 1687 but never actually a necessary or particularly useful function in the grand scheme of things., but theres no denying that it is a fascinating achievement, made for achievements sake, and quartz watches simply don't have that.
That's fine. You find mechanical movements interesting and that's an important aspect of watches for you.
I think there's no reason why a quartz watch can't have a repeater function.
what would be the point of having that complication on an electronic watch?Complications such as that are in part to show the watch makers abilities and craftsmanship. Putting it on a battery powered by watch would be pointless.
It can, it's just that theres no complexity in implementing it, they can even have complications that would be impossible on a mechanical watch. But theres also plenty of boring mechanical watches out there, they aren't always more interesting, but as a category i think they are when compared to quartz for the skill and ingenuity that goes into designing them.
If it's only value is to demonstrate the watchmaker's skill then yes obviously putting it in a quartz watch using a programmed micro chip or whatever would be pointless. The point I was making is that it could be done not that there would be much point in doing it other than maybe as a curiosity.
@Cyclingtourist not that there would be much point in doing it other than maybe as a curiosity.
That’s a good enough reason for most high end watch complications
Yes and they can be done electronically also, so it's down to the consumer whether it's more important to have it done mechanically and if they are prepared to pay the premium.
Smart watches have really killed the classic quartz watch...fully programmable and more useful...most people I see with a watch have a smart watch of some sort. Mechanical watches going strong it's the quartz that's in trouble.
anyone else here wear a Fitbit on one arm and real watch on the other ?
I used to and it drove me mad having something on my left wrist so i stopped. If i want a wearable i just use my apple watch.
I wear a Fitbit on my right arm .Have done so for about 18months now.Brilliant tool to help with weight loss which is why I started wearing it but couldn’t bring myself to stop wearing a real watch.I’ve the smallest Fitbit available so not bulky to wear.
Yep, have a miband on my right wrist. Great battery life and activity tracking and fairly unobtrusive to wear.
Wear a Fitbit Inspire myself on right wrist. It's not much bulkier than one of those silicone charity bands that used to be popular. Barely notice I'm wearing it and battery lasts over a week and 10minutes on charge will top it up by a few days.
For those who (like me until 2 minutes ago) have no idea what a minute repeater is.
Wear an Apple Watch while working or exercising, proper watch outside of that. Apple Watch is great, but it’s nice to leave behind the greater feeling of being “connected.”
The idea of two watches at the same time doesn’t appeal
what’s the model number of the smallest fit bit? Might give it a whirl
