How much did you spend on your watches?

[shnxx]

rationale for the numbers were

0-5000 one or two entry level watch.
5-15k multiple entry or mid watches or one entry high-end watch
15-50k several high-end or diversified large collection
50-100k a typical watch collector
100k-300k large collection of watches, some high-end. lots of people who post pictures of their magnificent collection would fall in this category
300k+ i thought these would be the more rare haute horlogerie collectors with grand complication pieces, richard milles, etc.


300,000 USD or more 15 9.26%
100,000 - 299,999 USD 10 6.17%
50,000 - 99,999 USD 30 18.52%
15,000 - 49,999 USD 58 35.80%
5,000 - 14,999 USD 37 22.84%
0 - 4,999 USD

[AK797]

Well this thread suddenly turned into who didn't get laid in high school!

[QueueCumber]

Originally Posted by AK797

Well this thread suddenly turned into who didn't get laid in high school!

I got action in high school. I didn't show up half the time to classes though...

[iim7v7im7]

Originally Posted by QueueCumber

The poll is more accurate, since it is a self-report versus third parties guessing based on pictures.

Not that anyone would ever misreport in such a poll....:-)

[QueueCumber]

Originally Posted by iim7v7im7

Not that anyone would ever misreport in such a poll....:-)

I already articulated that possibility earlier. Since it is an anonymous poll, I still would place it as more accurate than a couple of people guessing people's watch collections based on pictures. Likewise, guessing based on pictures then limits us to those forum participants who post pictures of their watches, so it becomes a continually decreasing population that is not necessarily representative of the people taking this poll.

[iim7v7im7]

One of my favorites...:-)

[QueueCumber]

Originally Posted by iim7v7im7

One of my favorites...:-)

I can't read your post right now. Someone is wrong on the Internet!

[conkers]

Haha, funny banter guys!

[HL65]

Originally Posted by iim7v7im7

One of my favorites...:-)

[BlueHeron]

Originally Posted by shnxx

Categories were chosen according to what I hoped might yield a bell curve.
If they were equidistant, I would have needed about 30 choices to cover the same range.

There are multiple biases involved that make a normal distribution impossible in my opinion -- not just the pre-screen by Rolex forum membership, but then also by the bias of who would answer the poll question (one could argue that big spenders are more likely to respond, for example).

Because of these I would not expect a normal distribution.

[QueueCumber]

Originally Posted by BlueHeron

There are multiple biases involved that make a normal distribution impossible in my opinion -- not just the pre-screen by Rolex forum membership, but then also by the bias of who would answer the poll question (one could argue that big spenders are more likely to respond, for example).

Because of these I would not expect a normal distribution.

A normal distribution has to do with the statistical properties that allow for certain given probabilities, as well as allowing for the convenient mathematical manipulation of data. What you are referring to are not things that determine a normal distribution. BTW, even data that isn't normal can sometimes be manipulated mathematically to fit a normal distribution just for purposes of hypothesis testing. Rather, the issues you refer to affect the generalizability of the results to larger populations.