Reduced collectibility?

[cmcm3]

Things that have set watches apart in the past have been short runs with extra flashes of colour here and there, or even things that have turned out to be manufacturing defects such as the dodgy paint on some old faces creating spider-webbing effects and so on. Also things like variations in hands etc, that seem to be less and less prevalent these days. Most recent example I can think of is the II/ll on the outgoing GMT2, although who knows which will end up being the one to have there?

Do you think, as technology progresses, and quality control standards improve over the years, plus as people get wiser to issues that tend to make a watch collectible, that we will see a reduction in "collectible" watches?

For example, when since the "red" sub have rolex done anything different with the Sub's design? Plexi has changed to sapphire, and so on, but there's not really been anything that has lasted a couple of years then gone, and has been something that really sets a watch apart.

There are some obvious exceptions including Zenith Daytonas and the like, but these little quirky changes seem to be reducing.

Thoughts?

[mike]

What future collectors regard as desirable is always the big question and one that no one can answer with certainty.

I do think it's important to realize that rarity alone does not necessarily equate to "collectable". Some excellent examples are the 1655 (a reference made for a number of years and even with the reduced output of the acryllic era not a very rare reference), the 1665, etc....

Even the venerable 5513 has a lot of favor with the collecting community and look how many were made.

I think sometimes we as collectors "create" a desirable piece through Inter net hype. As an example--the spider webbing you mention has several champions, however there are those that simply view it as a "defect" and place no great value on it.

Interestingly "cream Explorer II" also with a paint defect are seen as a very desirable piece.

Since the acryllic age in the Submariner one has to look at the matt 16800, 16660 (NOT counting COMEX and references of that ink which are something all together different) to find what most consider "collectable"

What does the future hold? I haven't the faintest idea. Of the modern references so many factors enter into the equation, but I'd guess if one were willing to hang on and the "Watch Gods smiled" perhaps the 14060M COSC, the 16610LV (especially in the early versions", the 16700 (though GMTs can be frustrating. LOL!

II vs.ll--- I'm not sure about this.


References like the Milgauss GV and DSSD--to early to tell what kind of legs for the long haul, but......

Just some thoughts.

[maverick]

Originally Posted by mike

What future collectors regard as desirable is always the big question and one that no one can answer with certainty.

I do think it's important to realize that rarity alone does not necessarily equate to "collectable". Some excellent examples are the 1655 (a reference made for a number of years and even with the reduced output of the acryllic era not a very rare reference), the 1665, etc....

Even the venerable 5513 has a lot of favor with the collecting community and look how many were made.

I think sometimes we as collectors "create" a desirable piece through Inter net hype. As an example--the spider webbing you mention has several champions, however there are those that simply view it as a "defect" and place no great value on it.

Interestingly "cream Explorer II" also with a paint defect are seen as a very desirable piece.

Since the acryllic age in the Submariner one has to look at the matt 16800, 16660 (NOT counting COMEX and references of that ink which are something all together different) to find what most consider "collectable"

What does the future hold? I haven't the faintest idea. Of the modern references so many factors enter into the equation, but I'd guess if one were willing to hang on and the "Watch Gods smiled" perhaps the 14060M COSC, the 16610LV (especially in the early versions", the 16700 (though GMTs can be frustrating. LOL!

II vs.ll--- I'm not sure about this.


References like the Milgauss GV and DSSD--to early to tell what kind of legs for the long haul, but......

Just some thoughts.

I have to agree that some models are hyped until they become collectible. The Zenith Daytonas really throw me for a loop.
A highly collectible watch with a movement that is not nearly as good as the new ones just because it's discontinued or the axis on the movement makes for a more symetrical design? I could understand more if it had a plastic crystal. JMHO =) maverick

[cmcm3]

Mike, you do make good points with regards to a few models that have been produced in higher numbers that have still become collectible. Its interesting for me to think about this, having just recently become interested in watches to this degree, and being something of a young-pup, because I havent really followed how things have developed over the past 10/20/30/whatever years, and am only really looking at what is in favour NOW.

Maverick's point about the Zenith Daytona is a good one, although I do think the symetry of the face (when you notice it) does add a certain something to the watch. The looks of the face do tend to be fairly high up the list of what makes a watch attractive, although your point about the inferior movement is certainly a good one.

It will be interesting to see how this progresses over the next 10/20/30/whatever years...

[SPACE-DWELLER]

I don't think any currently made Rolex will ever become as collectable as the old, discontinued ones, especially those with plexi crystal.

Yes, the SS Daytona 116520 is very popular, but waiting lists have already gone down from initially up to 9 years to typically about 3 years.

Yes, the Milgauss GV demand is huge, as well. But if more of them were made (apparantly a shortage of supply due to problems with making the GV crystal?), it would not be so popular. We do see both black ("ordinary") and white Milgauss watches in the AD window displays.

The DSSD? Sure, it will become sought-after, but when the news' interest has gone, the waiting lists on this one will be shorter, too.

Actually, I think that if ONE model is to become VERY collectable it just might be the YM II. Yes!....the "Clown-Master II"! It's not very popular at the moment, but so weren't the manually wound Daytonas when they were made...

[Trurolexer]

I have a GOOD feeling about SDDS. I think that watch will be THE NEXT BIG THING!!!

[ROLEX MAN]

Maybe the Yachtmaster II is on it's way!

[artbypaul]

Originally Posted by ROLEX MAN

Maybe the Yachtmaster II is on it's way!

Surely you jest!

Paul

[Howie]

Originally Posted by cmcm3

Also things like variations in hands etc, that seem to be less and less prevalent these days. Most recent example I can think of is the II/ll on the outgoing GMT2, although who knows which will end up being the one to have there?

Aside from the II font on the GMTII, there is another recent dial variation with the Sea Dweller. My Z series SD has spacing between the type '4000 ft = 1220 m'. My friend's Z series does not have the spacing and is '4000ft=1220m'. There are examples of both if you look around.

Just an observation, I have no idea which is more rare or if anyone currently noticed or cares... maybe in 20 years?

[SPACE-DWELLER]

Originally Posted by SPACE-DWELLER

(...)
Actually, I think that if ONE model is to become VERY collectable it just might be the YM II. Yes!....the "Clown-Master II"! It's not very popular at the moment, but so weren't the manually wound Daytonas when they were made...

Originally Posted by ROLEX MAN

Maybe the Yachtmaster II is on it's way!

Originally Posted by artbypaul

Surely you jest!

Paul

It's not easy to foretell things.....especially the future!

However, the YM II being a highly specialized watch, I for my part could well imagine it being very sought after in future, but it would have to be discontinued first, of course.

[Welshwatchman]

There are two key differences between the Valjoux Daytonas and the YM II.

The Daytonas were beautiful and cheap. The YM II is hideously expensive and just plain hideous.

If hideous becomes the new beautiful in the future then what a place that will be.

[Howie]

Originally Posted by Welshwatchman

There are two key differences between the Valjoux Daytonas and the YM II.

The Daytonas were beautiful and cheap. The YM II is hideously expensive and just plain hideous.

If hideous becomes the new beautiful in the future then what a place that will be.

Well I think that about sums it up....

[jasper]

The GMT II vs || thing goes deeper than dial font..it's all about the 3185 vs 3186 movements. I think there's a huge potential for future collectability there. It's a factory frankenwatch. Then again, the transitional 16700 GMT isn't all that collectable is it ? A little interweb hype will fix that though.

I'm just happy I got my plexi GMT before they were priced all the way out of affordability.

[f16570]

One man's meat.............................

[jac67]

Who knows what will be collectable in the future, but currently, it seems plastic sports watches are all the rage.

Personally, I don't understand the "frenzy" surrounding spider webbing, spotted dials (especially on old Subs),etc., etc. I would never buy such a watch, UNLESS it was a one-off (verified by Rolex) or Hans Wilsdorf's personal watch or the watch was used in battle etc!

As collectors, we stress that dial condition as well as hands are everything (up to 80% of the value), then you have these same collectors drooling over sub-standard dialled watches.

I appreciate these old watches, but for the life of me, I don't get it!

Rant over.


John.

[Mrdi]

How unfortunate a tecnical advancement as intuitive as that of the YMII is subject to neophytic criticism based on aesthetics.

[springer]

Maverick, I haven't met a watchmaker yet that thinks the new Daytona movement is better than the Zenith movement used in them from around 1988 to 1999.

[jasper]

Originally Posted by Mrdi

How unfortunate a tecnical advancement as intuitive as that of the YMII is subject to neophytic criticism based on aesthetics.

Is that a fancy way of saying that it's too bad the clown master is so ugly?


Sorry, that was neophytic of me.

[ral]

None of the watches that have a great value today at auctions were ever really collected. If we had a few dozen NIB Red Submariners for sale on eBay, I don't think they would be fetching high prices today.

I wonder how many green glass Milgauss watches are sitting on shelves waiting for the time when they become rare.

[Howie]

it reminds me of comic books. In the 60's and 70's very few people collected them, they simply read them and tossed them in a box at best. As such, a number of these titles became highly collectible. By the mid to late 80's, collecting was all the rage - plastic mylar sleeves, acid free backing boards, etc. The comic book companies capitalized on this with limited editions, bagged editions, etc. etc. and just about everyone had mint copies of anything worthwhile. As such, very little from that era ever became valuable. I myself have 2 copies of the "Death of Superman" still sealed in the original black "S" bag along with countless mint #1's of new series. Now Rolex's aren't comic books, for one thing the majority of the population can barely afford one, let alone multiple pieces to keep in a safe. But there are some parallels...

[cmcm3]

I agree Howie. As limited editions are made for the "collector" market, inevitably anyone with half an interest gets one for its "limited" status. Harder with a £4k watch, but the principal is still there.

[Spark]

Originally Posted by jac67

Who knows what will be collectable in the future, but currently, it seems plastic sports watches are all the rage.

Personally, I don't understand the "frenzy" surrounding spider webbing, spotted dials (especially on old Subs),etc., etc. I would never buy such a watch, UNLESS it was a one-off (verified by Rolex) or Hans Wilsdorf's personal watch or the watch was used in battle etc!

As collectors, we stress that dial condition as well as hands are everything (up to 80% of the value), then you have these same collectors drooling over sub-standard dialled watches.

I appreciate these old watches, but for the life of me, I don't get it!

Rant over.


John.

John,
Totally agree on the spotting and spider webbing, dealers hyping defects for profit in my opinion

[mike]

Originally Posted by Spark

John,
Totally agree on the spotting and spider webbing, dealers hyping defects for profit in my opinion

I'm with you Mark.

[jasper]

Originally Posted by Howie

it reminds me of comic books. In the 60's and 70's very few people collected them, they simply read them and tossed them in a box at best. As such, a number of these titles became highly collectible. By the mid to late 80's, collecting was all the rage - plastic mylar sleeves, acid free backing boards, etc. The comic book companies capitalized on this with limited editions, bagged editions, etc. etc. and just about everyone had mint copies of anything worthwhile. As such, very little from that era ever became valuable. I myself have 2 copies of the "Death of Superman" still sealed in the original black "S" bag along with countless mint #1's of new series. Now Rolex's aren't comic books, for one thing the majority of the population can barely afford one, let alone multiple pieces to keep in a safe. But there are some parallels...

Same goes for Hotwheels. Best to enjoy these things for what they are, not what they might become.

[Marrk]

Is it logically consistent to love, for example, patinated lume (tritium dials, etc.) and not care about spider-webbing, etc.?

("Bo, please call your office.")