Attraction or Value?

[Soulo]

Originally Posted by Dave O

100% for the attraction. I am a watch lover first and foremost. I do not view watches as investments, just as I don't view buying a car an investment. I have no intent in ever selling any of my watches. But if I do, I'll get what I can get just as if I were to sell one of my cars.

I have 5 Rolex's, 2 Tudor's, an Omega Seamaster and a Breitling Navitimer. The moment I walked out the door with the Seamaster and Navitimer I lost money. But I don't care as I never plan to sell them and the Navitimer (mint green dial) is one of my top one or two favorites regardless of the fact that I lost money the moment I bought it. If you aren't buying watches for the love of them, then you might as well just invest your money in something else. Just my opinion for what it is worth.

To be fair, Rolex's hold value better than most vehicles.

I do understand about purchasing for the love. My gold Day Date was my grail that I always wanted and my No Date Sub was one that absolutely wanted to have so I feel like they were money well spent.

Now that I am browsing other brands, I find many of them attractive but also want to feel as though I'm making a wise financial decision. This is what prompted my original post as I have come across some beautiful pieces in the category and price range of what I am looking at but due to their lack of value retention, I find myself back at Rolex which I feel like my money would be safe.

[Soulo]

Originally Posted by omar-rye

I'm still interested to hear what watches in the price range of retail Rolex look more pleasing to you

I could name some but out of respect of those here who may own those peices I rather not as I would not want them to feel like their watch is being looked down on due to me speaking on value retention.

[Timetaker34]

100% attraction. My OP39 Rhodium is neither valuable nor desirable on the market. I don’t care if I lose money on it or if it quadruples in value. To me it’s just as attractive as my more expensive watches I owned, because I value the design, the dial colours and the knowledge of it being a sporty workhorse.

I also love that almost no one appreciates it. It’s no hype piece, never will be and unlikely to be noticed in public. So it’s only there for one thing: my own pleasure. That’s how I know I won’t part with it for another watch which is the current flavour of the month.

[Dave O]

Originally Posted by Soulo

To be fair, Rolex's hold value better than most vehicles.

I do understand about purchasing for the love. My gold Day Date was my grail that I always wanted and my No Date Sub was one that absolutely wanted to have so I feel like they were money well spent.

Now that I am browsing other brands, I find many of them attractive but also want to feel as though I'm making a wise financial decision. This is what prompted my original post as I have come across some beautiful pieces in the category and price range of what I am looking at but due to their lack of value retention, I find myself back at Rolex which I feel like my money would be safe.

But that's my point. Just as I don't buy a car to hold it's value, I don't buy watches to hold their value either. Do Rolex's hold their value better than a car - yes. But I could care less and would still buy the Rolex's I own even if they dropped in value the second I walked out the AD like my Breitling and Omega did.

To me, and it may just be me, I buy watches because I love them. It's no different for me between buying a watch, buying a car or going on a vacation. When I go on vacation I go places that I love to go, and I am not looking for a wise financial decision when I do. Do I look for the best rates - absolutely. But I may spend $10k on a vacation, which is all money down the drain except for the memories. With a watch, for me, it's the same. I buy them solely on the looks/history/feel/function of the watch and if they move me. They are works of art to me, and I get just as much pleasure out of purchasing/owning them as a vacation does. The financial piece just doesn't play a role in it for me.

I do understand how it might play a role with others. To each there own, and there is no right or wrong answer.

[amphr1]

For me it's often a question of how sure I am of loving a time piece long term. And with experience, I know that only time can tell whether I bond with a certain watch or not. And having the option to exchange it for another after a year or so is a critical factor in deciding to buy a Rolex.

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

[Soulo]

Originally Posted by Dave O

But that's my point. Just as I don't buy a car to hold it's value, I don't buy watches to hold their value either. Do Rolex's hold their value better than a car - yes. But I could care less and would still buy the Rolex's I own even if they dropped in value the second I walked out the AD like my Breitling and Omega did.

To me, and it may just be me, I buy watches because I love them. It's no different for me between buying a watch, buying a car or going on a vacation. When I go on vacation I go places that I love to go, and I am not looking for a wise financial decision when I do. Do I look for the best rates - absolutely. But I may spend $10k on a vacation, which is all money down the drain except for the memories. With a watch, for me, it's the same. I buy them solely on the looks/history/feel/function of the watch and if they move me. They are works of art to me, and I get just as much pleasure out of purchasing/owning them as a vacation does. The financial piece just doesn't play a role in it for me.

I do understand how it might play a role with others. To each there own, and there is no right or wrong answer.

Comparing watch purchases to cars and vacations are kind of drifting away from the topic but I understand your point, you purchase your watch strictly for the attraction which is a beautiful thing.

[Soulo]

Originally Posted by amphora001

For me it's often a question of how sure I am of loving a time piece long term. And with experience, I know that only time can tell whether I bond with a certain watch or not. And having the option to exchange it for another after a year or so is a critical factor in deciding to buy a Rolex.

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

So you lean more on the side of value, I understand.

[TheDogHouse]

Attraction first

[amphr1]

Originally Posted by Soulo

So you lean more on the side of value, I understand.

Put it this way:

I will never buy an ugly watch that is high value.

I may buy an attractive (to me) watch that doesn't retain value.

I will probably buy a watch that is both attractive and retains value.

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

[hambone1983]

I've never sold a watch and have no intention of doing so. While I occasionally take a look at what my watches go for, it's really nothing more than an amusement. I'm glad that most Rolexes retain or even appreciate in value, so I can't say value is of no interest. I'll say I'm 90-10

[amh]

Toolishness is the right answer.

[amphr1]

Originally Posted by hambone1983

I've never sold a watch and have no intention of doing so. While I occasionally take a look at what my watches go for, it's really nothing more than an amusement. I'm glad that most Rolexes retain or even appreciate in value, so I can't say value is of no interest. I'll say I'm 90-10

You've never regret buying a watch that you thought was the right one but turns out not to be?

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

[amphr1]

Originally Posted by Soulo

So you lean more on the side of value, I understand.

True story, I bought the Tag Heuer Carrera twice before deciding it was not the right watch for me, losing thousands in the process.

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

[WilsdorfNDavis]

Originally Posted by Tim Plains

Value and resale is irrelevant to me. I would have still bought mine if it was worthless the moment I walked out of the store. Same goes for my other watches.

Same.


When I purchase a watch, regardless of the price, I consider that money "gone".

[Soulo]

[QUOTE=amphora001;12820377]True story, I bought the Tag Heuer Carrera twice before deciding it was not the right watch for me, losing thousands in the process.

Sent from my SM-G973U1

Ouch, you live and you learn...

[tictoc1]

For me the initial purchase is based on whether I like the watch or not , value is a consideration but not the main motivator.

Beyond the initial purchase though, its a different story. Having a watch that retains its value makes it more attractive and easier to hold onto.

[Rolex1982]

Originally Posted by BDII

Value retention is an undeniable part of it at this point. The love for the watches came first, but the value retention made spending the money a lot less painful.

50/50 at this point for me.

What’s not to love about a Rolex? Love the look, the feel, the history and the functionality. I also like anything that holds value.

This, only for me the attraction part is more than the value part but retaining value makes a purchase easier. If after a few days/weeks/moths/years i’m not really feeling the watch anymore than i sell/trade it in for a different watch.

[rmlovett1]

Values don’t come into play when I’m purchasing.

[Lew_Ashby]

60:40 But I’m also a bit impetuous

[Dave O]

Originally Posted by Tim Plains

Value and resale is irrelevant to me. I would have still bought mine if it was worthless the moment I walked out of the store. Same goes for my other watches.

Originally Posted by WilsdorfNDavis

Same.


When I purchase a watch, regardless of the price, I consider that money "gone".

Couldn't have said it better myself. I feel exactly the same as the both of you. If the rest of the world thought as we do we wouldn't be in the mess we are in with long wait times for watches, people hording them/selling them to the grey market for investment purposes etc.

[DG123]

Rolex stainless professional models are in high demand because people want to buy something with a market value higher than what they pay for it.

[JSCP]

100 % attraction, any watch, any brand.
Then value.

But value is important factor. For example, a high cost watch from Hermes or even Omega, well better really be highly attracted to the model.

[Kenny G]

100% attraction.

As with anything, value can go up or down and I couldn’t care less.

[YoyoGift8]

Originally Posted by tictoc1

for me the initial purchase is based on whether i like the watch or not , value is a consideration but not the main motivator.

Beyond the initial purchase though, its a different story. Having a watch that retains its value makes it more attractive and easier to hold onto.

+1

[dlddrrr]

50-50. Let’s be honest here, who amongst us wouldn’t see Rolexes in a different light if their price dropped 50% when you walked out of the store with it? Maybe a small section of the population wouldn’t care - but if you’re a logical buyer and not an emotional buyer, the resale value / price appreciation has got to come into the buying decision.

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by Soulo

Out of 100%, how much would you say that your Rolex purchase is made out of attraction and how much out of value?

As I browse several different brands, I see watches that are more visually pleasing than Rolex, but of course when spending several thousands, you want your value to remain as well.

FYI, I currently own a Rolex 118238 and 124060 and are currently in the market for an addition to my collection.

It depends.

Of the 3 I have currently, I bought my stickered NOS 16600 with zero value consideration. In fact by removing the stickers and wearing it I reduced its value.

My TT CHNR was bought "grey" with very little value consideration. There is no question that value retention made the decision to pay over retail a little easier.

With my 115609, however, whilst I think it's a beautiful watch and I absolutely love it, would I have dropped that much coin on a watch that was going to tank in value? Probably not...

[SS Oyster]

My experience with two very stupid (and financially poor) choices proved to me that now my watch buying is based 100% on brand love, which is attractive to me.

Bad choice #1: At the time, I could only afford 1 nice luxury watch. Traded Hulk (116610LV) for Blancpain Fifty-Fathoms. Fell almost immediately out of love with the BPFF and wanted my Hulk back, only to learn that wasn't possible without adding around $3k to a trade. Lesson learned (you would think).

Bad choice #2: Same scenario and after getting burned once, you would think I would learn, but NO ... I traded another Hulk (yes, after reacquiring) for a IWC Big Pilot. Same thing happened, but this time the penalty was worse and I never did get the Hulk ever again. Prices went crazy for it and I wasn't able to convince myself to pay those prices to get the Hulk back. Eventually, AD was able to allocate a 12LV for me as a consolation prize.

Not sure if anyone else has ever gone through such a thing, but I have learned my lesson. I no longer get bored with my Rolex watches. I love them for what they are and my eye doesn't wander like it used to. Of course, it helps that I now have more Rolex options to wear.

[boltz]

90% of value and 60% of what i like.

[Subb]

i like what i buy.

[thesharkfactor]

I have two Rolex, 126710BLRO and 16613LB, those are the two most attractive watches to me.