why are pateks sooo darn expensive?

[stewie]

they are like twice the price as rolex and not near as attractive

[Wolfgang427]

One word - Exculsivety. Patek barely makes 25 thousand watches a year, while Rolex makes almost a million. I still like Rolex better.

[applebook]

A single Patek takes a significant amount of time to make because most of the craftsmanship goes into decorating and perfecting the look and functionality of the movement, case, dial, etc.

For any regular Patek, you're basically paying under $1000 for parts and the rest for the labor of the watchmaker. This is fair for those with the means and the desire to purchase a Patek or an Audemars, or a Vacheron, or a Lange & Sohne, etc.

[boa2]

The finish is exquisite, and many of the movements are legendary. They hold their value quite well, with many of the models selling for well over MSRP. They are considered by most to be the top-dog of high-end watchmaking, with an extraordinary brand value.

As far as whether or not they are as attractive as a Rolex, well, that's for you to decide.

[thedips]

i dont even really consider them in the same league as ROLEX.... PATEK is huge into "horology"... very complicated/grand complicated time pieces... i do believe i red an article where they wanted to stick to what they did best... and not really go after any lower end market share..

and i think they are simply beautiful watches... much more of an art piece when compared to rolex.

[unclesallie]

art piece? have you looked recentlyat some of the Patek Phillipes that go for $70,000 or more in a dealership lately? I did. Some of them are damned ugly. Yep. Ugly. They have curved movements which makes them amazing, as you rightly say, from an artistic standpoint, no argument there. But, they are not nearly as rugged nor do they have the dealership/service network anywhere the size of Rolex. As far as sheer artwork is concerned, I'd put up your President, or a Daytona or GMT II-c, or other top end Rolex(turn-o-graph white dial, white gold bezel, stainless steel, too) against a Patek any day of the week....but then, I'm a Rolex fanatic, and it's all subjective anyway.
best, dan

[TARDIS]

It's all a matter of choice.

Patek is a much sought after and coveted brand, by those lucky people who don't have the day to day worries of life and things like mortgages etc.

Patek's are highly regarded by the 'old money' set who own them. This puts the price up to a level where they become available only to those previously described.

Steve

[frostie]

Originally Posted by wolfgang427

One word - Exculsivety. Patek barely makes 25 thousand watches a year, while Rolex makes almost a million. I still like Rolex better.

Like wolfgang said Exclusivity

[Travis]

Originally Posted by thedips

i dont even really consider them in the same league as ROLEX.... PATEK is huge into "horology"... very complicated/grand complicated time pieces...

I agree. Most Rolex models are obtainable by the middle class. Pateks are not quite so affordable.

As with all art, one person may find something ugly while another considers the same piece beautiful.

Patek isn't as durable and does not have an extensive service network. Ferrari is in the same boat but that won't stop those that can afford to play.

[Dan Pierce]

I had a working, 1963 vintage Patek that I took to an AD to request a full service. After a few months the AD said it would take 2 YEARS and about $1500.00 for a complete overhaul. The good news about Patek is they will custom make any parts needed for their vintage pieces but it's gonna cost ya'.
Decided to trade my Patek for a Rolex GMT II and I've never looked back. Both brands do a great job of holding their value. I love Patek but can't afford both so the rest is history.
dP
[Patek pics are borrowed]

[Spark]

Patek make some beautiful watches.
The quality of finish is exquisite on both the movement and case.
As has been already said beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
You can't compare Rolex service centres with Patek as all the watches go back to the factory for service.
It would be like comparing Ferrari and BMW for dealer accessability.
Rolex also make some seriously over priced monstrocities.
The hidious thing below is £50,840 GBP MRSP in the UK pushing it to the over $100,000 USD currently.
If I had that sort of cash to blow on a watch it wouldn't be a Rolex.
Patek along with Vacheron and Audermars make complicated watches.
Rolex only get as complicated as a chronograph or GMT which isn't rocket science is it.
For £50,840 you could have a perpetual calendar with moonphase if that was your bag.
I certaily wouldn't have an Iced out sports watch, but that is just my preference.
If everybody was the same the world would be a dull place

[LawMan]

Pateks line of Calatrava watches start at about 10k. So i don't think they are the exclusive haunt of the wealthy. True the complications can be very expensive, but to enjoy a Patek you don't need to be super rich. In fact you can buy a very beautiful patek for about 17-20, which i think is near the price of a President. Pateks are refined and elegant and the marketing is genius. They are not robust sport watches that you can wear skiing or diving.

[boa2]

Originally Posted by frostie

Like wolfgang said Exclusivity

Vacheron makes no more watches than Patek does, and A. Lange & Sohne far fewer. But they do not hold their value across the board like a Patek. The brand name itself--not including the assets--is said to be worth well over $400 million.

You will find many collectors who have both Rolex and Patek, and despite claims made to the contrary, there are a lot of folks with day jobs who own a Patek. While their complicated watches are out of reach for many folks, a Calatrava or Aquanaut is no more expensive than some of the offerings by Panerai, Piguet, or Rolex. In fact, either will cost you less than a WG Daytona.

[Spencer]

Originally Posted by stewie

and not near as attractive

Really?

With the exception of a few Rolexes like a WG Daytona, I think nearly every Patek is more attractive than a Rolex.

[haakon59]

Pateks are exclusive watches which have a great deal of finishing and adjustment by hand, which is part of the reason why it costs more. Rolex makes around 750,000 watches a year while PP makes around 35,000. Rolex and Patek are in completely different markets, but both hold their value well. As far as looks are concerned, that is a matter of taste certainly. But PP watches are extremely well made and most last more than a generation.

[Mort]

Attractive is a matter of taste. I think in most every watch line there is a few watches that do not appeal to some people. Look a Zenith.

I bought a Patek because it is a watch I have always aspired to own ever since I really got familiar with higher end watches. My 5107 is every bit as nice as my President. My Patek has a very nice fit and finish and for a simple dress watch, it weighs a lot more than one would think.

With the Patek, if I knew I could never buy another watch again, this will always be my treasured one and I would be happy just for the fact I could afford this one. And it is a lower tier model for Patek.

[bran]

I just about bought a Patek 5146 in yellow gold last month. The AD had a great no interest payment plan for 12 months; however, I decided not to and instead will buy a WG daytona with a meteorite dial.

Patek's are beautiful, but to have my watch serviced every four years as my AD advised, and to be without a $28k watch for 9 - 11 months, I just couldn't do it.

[digdug]

The fit and finish of Patek is incredible. Below are a couple pics of my Sub Date and my Nautilus 5711/1A:

[DSJ]

I aspire to own a Patek too.

My grandfather had one that he hid before he died, and we never did find it...

[applebook]

Digdug, I bet that your Nautilus is as durable as your Sub ;)

[applebook]

Originally Posted by Mort

That's stunning, Mort. It's my favorite dress watch (along with a rose gold Portugueser).

[stewie]

the patek's dont looks as "attractive" as rolex's.....

[Spencer]

Originally Posted by stewie

the patek's dont looks as "attractive" as rolex's.....

Not with you on this one buddy...





Just to name a few

[TARDIS]

I like this one:

[boa2]

Originally Posted by TARDIS

I like this one:

One of my favorites as well. It's absolutely stunning!

[frostie]

Originally Posted by TARDIS

I like this one:

[Otto]

Originally Posted by boa2

The finish is exquisite, and many of the movements are legendary. They hold their value quite well, with many of the models selling for well over MSRP. They are considered by most to be the top-dog of high-end watchmaking, with an extraordinary brand value.

As far as whether or not they are as attractive as a Rolex, well, that's for you to decide.

My grail watch is the 5146 YG with cream dial. It is undoubtedly one of the most beautiful watches I've ever seen.

[Spark]

Originally Posted by digdug

The fit and finish of Patek is incredible. Below are a couple pics of my Sub Date and my Nautilus 5711/1A:

Your a lucky man I am saving for a Nautilus myself

[BigHat]

We all come to this hobby from different directions.

Some start out loving Rolex and evolve to appreciate the offerings of other makers. Some start out with other watches and grow to appreciate Rolex.

In any event, it's silly to say Rolex is better, more attractive etc. OR VICE VERSA. As you grow in experience, you'll learn to appreciate the merits (and maybe downside) of all the top watch makers. As a avid collector or watch lover, one should also diversify at least a bit.

[TARDIS]

Originally Posted by BigHat

We all come to this hobby from different directions.

Some start out loving Rolex and evolve to appreciate the offerings of other makers. Some start out with other watches and grow to appreciate Rolex.

In any event, it's silly to say Rolex is better, more attractive etc. OR VICE VERSA. As you grow in experience, you'll learn to appreciate the merits (and maybe downside) of all the top watch makers. As a avid collector or watch lover, one should also diversify at least a bit.

I absolutely agree