What does your watch say about you?
Discussion
[quote=tuscaneer]
i'm certainly not defined by what I own ...
You are, you know, whether you want to be or not. Other people are defining you (and all the rest of us) all the time by what we say, do, buy and wear, then making associations, slapping very superficial labels on, and passing subjective judgement. You are defined: "wears a Rolex, drives a Ferrari".
i'm certainly not defined by what I own ...
You are, you know, whether you want to be or not. Other people are defining you (and all the rest of us) all the time by what we say, do, buy and wear, then making associations, slapping very superficial labels on, and passing subjective judgement. You are defined: "wears a Rolex, drives a Ferrari".
Perhaps this is more what other peoples watches = in my mind
Rolex = dodgy wideboy geezer, probably fake or nicked.
Breitling = wishes they were John Travolta, or a red bull air races pilot
Omega = wishes they had a Breitling or a Rolex
Seiko = quality watch without being flashy
G-Shock = Chunky tonka toy Casio
Casio = the first watch you owned at school
Tag Heuer = Poor quality watches for a high price
Timex = see Casio
Feel free to continue adding to the list, generally the bigger the watch face the less I trust the person wearing it.
Rolex = dodgy wideboy geezer, probably fake or nicked.
Breitling = wishes they were John Travolta, or a red bull air races pilot
Omega = wishes they had a Breitling or a Rolex
Seiko = quality watch without being flashy
G-Shock = Chunky tonka toy Casio
Casio = the first watch you owned at school
Tag Heuer = Poor quality watches for a high price
Timex = see Casio
Feel free to continue adding to the list, generally the bigger the watch face the less I trust the person wearing it.
Edited by hman on Wednesday 22 October 08:56
RobCh]uscaneer said:
i'm certainly not defined by what I own ...
You are, you know, whether you want to be or not. Other people are defining you (and all the rest of us) all the time by what we say, do, buy and wear, then making associations, slapping very superficial labels on, and passing subjective judgement. You are defined: "wears a Rolex, drives a Ferrari".
yeah, conceded , you make a valid point....however, I should have written " I certainly don't define myself by what I own"......but i'm splitting hairs now!You are, you know, whether you want to be or not. Other people are defining you (and all the rest of us) all the time by what we say, do, buy and wear, then making associations, slapping very superficial labels on, and passing subjective judgement. You are defined: "wears a Rolex, drives a Ferrari".
I think we are very often perceived by others as something entirely different to what we actually are...........
Lorneg said:
Ahh, well in my mind at least all Breitlings are Ford Mustangs. Unfortunately this particular model is a Ford Mustang in bright orange with a personal plate that says I'm a C**ck. Sorry, personal opinion only!
Yep, its definitely that sort of watch. Bought it to tick a box, had always seen the Emergency in magazines and stuff when I was growing up and obviously it was way out of reach financially, bought it on a whim one day., had a fake one when I was 19.hman said:
Perhaps this is more what other peoples watches = in my mind
Rolex = dodgy wideboy geezer, probably fake or nicked.
Breitling = wishes they were John Travolta, or a red bull air races pilot
Omega = wishes they had a Breitling or a Rolex
Seiko = quality watch without being flashy
G-Shock = Chunky tonka toy Casio
Casio = the first watch you owned at school
Tag Heuer = Poor quality watches for a high price
Timex = see Casio
Feel free to continue adding to the list, generally the bigger the watch face the less I trust the person wearing it.
Vacheron Constantin/Patek Phillipe - Loves watches, probably has several.Rolex = dodgy wideboy geezer, probably fake or nicked.
Breitling = wishes they were John Travolta, or a red bull air races pilot
Omega = wishes they had a Breitling or a Rolex
Seiko = quality watch without being flashy
G-Shock = Chunky tonka toy Casio
Casio = the first watch you owned at school
Tag Heuer = Poor quality watches for a high price
Timex = see Casio
Feel free to continue adding to the list, generally the bigger the watch face the less I trust the person wearing it.
Edited by hman on Wednesday 22 October 08:56
Panerai - Aware of trends.
Hublot - Plays football for a living.
AP - Has a golf handicap of <15.
Richard Mille - Has the keys to a Ferrari in his pocket.
Ari said:
I'm afraid our friend SJ above is like the people that don't understand German car quality and bang on and on about just a 'bit of soft touch plastic' bring the only difference between a Citreon and a Mercedes, everything else must, therefore, be 'snob value'.
Or to put it another way 'I dun get it so there can't possibly be anything to get'.
And they never will so best to just smile and pay them in the head.
If the reason for buying a quality watch was quality, it wouldn't be advertised the way it is - purely and simply by association to cool stuff.Or to put it another way 'I dun get it so there can't possibly be anything to get'.
And they never will so best to just smile and pay them in the head.
80% of the watches everyone fawns over for their 'craftsmanship' have practically-identical ETA movements. It's a charade.
Quality watches might be quality items, but they are primarily jewellery. Signifiers of status and worth.
Wearing them can be justified by straight middle-class guys because they also tell the time. But that's essentially a get-out clause to side-step the wearing of jewellery.
For everyone who claims they just 'appreciate the precision and quality', lets take a poke through their kitchens and tool kits and see if that philosophy to life also extends to items that the guys at work don't get to witness on a daily basis.
Sy1441 said:
Lorneg said:
Ahh, well in my mind at least all Breitlings are Ford Mustangs. Unfortunately this particular model is a Ford Mustang in bright orange with a personal plate that says I'm a C**ck. Sorry, personal opinion only!
Yep, its definitely that sort of watch. Bought it to tick a box, had always seen the Emergency in magazines and stuff when I was growing up and obviously it was way out of reach financially, bought it on a whim one day., had a fake one when I was 19.SpeckledJim said:
Ari said:
I'm afraid our friend SJ above is like the people that don't understand German car quality and bang on and on about just a 'bit of soft touch plastic' bring the only difference between a Citreon and a Mercedes, everything else must, therefore, be 'snob value'.
Or to put it another way 'I dun get it so there can't possibly be anything to get'.
And they never will so best to just smile and pay them in the head.
If the reason for buying a quality watch was quality, it wouldn't be advertised the way it is - purely and simply by association to cool stuff.Or to put it another way 'I dun get it so there can't possibly be anything to get'.
And they never will so best to just smile and pay them in the head.
80% of the watches everyone fawns over for their 'craftsmanship' have practically-identical ETA movements. It's a charade.
Quality watches might be quality items, but they are primarily jewellery. Signifiers of status and worth.
Wearing them can be justified by straight middle-class guys because they also tell the time. But that's essentially a get-out clause to side-step the wearing of jewellery.
For everyone who claims they just 'appreciate the precision and quality', lets take a poke through their kitchens and tool kits and see if that philosophy to life also extends to items that the guys at work don't get to witness on a daily basis.
Was I swayed by what other people were to think of it? course I was but only inasmuch as I wanted something a little classy with a hint of value, are any of us that much different?
I think it was that from the beginning. If I think my watch says X, but everyone else thinks it says Y, then obviously it doesn't say X.
A handsome watch does a good job of saying "I have good taste".
But when handsome watches start at £200 it's hard to wear a £10k watch to say simply "I have good taste" without accidentally, or purposefully saying "I have good taste, and by the way, lots of money".
(frothing PH caveat - no there's nothing wrong with lots of money....)
(please try not to use the word 'jealous' in any replies. I'm not. And the word you mean is 'envious', anyway)
A handsome watch does a good job of saying "I have good taste".
But when handsome watches start at £200 it's hard to wear a £10k watch to say simply "I have good taste" without accidentally, or purposefully saying "I have good taste, and by the way, lots of money".
(frothing PH caveat - no there's nothing wrong with lots of money....)
(please try not to use the word 'jealous' in any replies. I'm not. And the word you mean is 'envious', anyway
)
What my watches say about me are that I like watches.
That's pretty much it - those who know a bit about watches might comment from time to time that they haven't seen that particular one before, or that they particularly like one. My Heuer 45, which I have on today, was the subject of some properly geeky admiration by someone at work a week or so back, but to almost anyone else it looks just like a cheap old watch.
And that's exactly the way I like it. My Sea Dweller has picked up a reasonable number of scrapes and dents along the way, and one of the reasons it's not going back to Rolex (apart from the rubbish job they did on my wife's Oyster) is that I specifically don't want it polished, to have the hands replaced, or to have the glass swapped out. It looks lived in, which is as it should be.
That's pretty much it - those who know a bit about watches might comment from time to time that they haven't seen that particular one before, or that they particularly like one. My Heuer 45, which I have on today, was the subject of some properly geeky admiration by someone at work a week or so back, but to almost anyone else it looks just like a cheap old watch.
And that's exactly the way I like it. My Sea Dweller has picked up a reasonable number of scrapes and dents along the way, and one of the reasons it's not going back to Rolex (apart from the rubbish job they did on my wife's Oyster) is that I specifically don't want it polished, to have the hands replaced, or to have the glass swapped out. It looks lived in, which is as it should be.
pete a said:
tuscaneer said:
You, sir, have impeccable taste......
And you sir have tiny wrists...
tty angle photo that but I wasn't aware I was being analysed so closely.I'll upload a different angle in a minute before my ego gets hurt
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff