Wrist Check 2017

[Blown2CV]

battered said:

Blown2CV said:

battered said:

Except that Rolex are very much in fashion at the moment. This hasn't always been the case. I remember in the 90s and probably the 0ies they weren't very fashionable at all in the eyes of the general public. They were just an expensive watch rather than the current general perception of being "the best".

You are right that fashion comes and goes while style remains, however some things do manage to lose style as a result of becoming too fashionable. Look at Burberry in the 90's. One minute they were the Queen's coat supplier, next everybody had to have the stuff, a year on it was in every market stall and nobody who considered themselves to have any class would be seen dead in the stuff. Where the brand is now I woulldn't know, it never appealed to me in any of its guises.

not sure i really agree with it. Those that are swayed by fashion may not have like a rolex in the 90s, and even if they do currently, they'll be on to something else soon enough. You don't buy stuff like this for fashion reasons unless you're a bit of a bell. Nothing loses style by being too fashionable because fashion is a perception of the consumer. They lose style by diluting their brand values to capitalise on fashion i.e. changing entire product lines to capitalise on intra-decade sales trends. These are brands with hundreds of years behind them, and a responsibility for whoever curates the brand to not destroy it for the sake of pushing numbers.

That's mostly true, but you most certainly can lose style by being too fashionable. David Bowie had amazing style (but no fashion) when he reinvented himself every few months, by the time every other kid at his concerts looked like Ziggy Stardust the moment had passed. As for responsibility to a brand, absolutely. Someone should have told Burberry.

we're talking about some similar things, but Bowie reinvented himself to avoid all that, so he never really became a cliche. It comes down to who is chasing who. He didn't really do it in order to sell more stuff. Arguably his fans possibly had a hard job keeping up over the years. Many fans drop away if you're constantly trying new things, but that's being innovative, and you get new fans. Luxury brands are kind of the opposite of that, or are meant to be. They change even tiny details and all the enthusiasts go nuts. There is a design language and brand ethic that does not really change. So, it should be that the fans follow the brand, not the other way around - i guess that's my point.

[InductionRoar]

battered said:

Blown2CV said:

battered said:

Except that Rolex are very much in fashion at the moment. This hasn't always been the case. I remember in the 90s and probably the 0ies they weren't very fashionable at all in the eyes of the general public. They were just an expensive watch rather than the current general perception of being "the best".

You are right that fashion comes and goes while style remains, however some things do manage to lose style as a result of becoming too fashionable. Look at Burberry in the 90's. One minute they were the Queen's coat supplier, next everybody had to have the stuff, a year on it was in every market stall and nobody who considered themselves to have any class would be seen dead in the stuff. Where the brand is now I woulldn't know, it never appealed to me in any of its guises.

not sure i really agree with it. Those that are swayed by fashion may not have like a rolex in the 90s, and even if they do currently, they'll be on to something else soon enough. You don't buy stuff like this for fashion reasons unless you're a bit of a bell. Nothing loses style by being too fashionable because fashion is a perception of the consumer. They lose style by diluting their brand values to capitalise on fashion i.e. changing entire product lines to capitalise on intra-decade sales trends. These are brands with hundreds of years behind them, and a responsibility for whoever curates the brand to not destroy it for the sake of pushing numbers.

That's mostly true, but you most certainly can lose style by being too fashionable. David Bowie had amazing style (but no fashion) when he reinvented himself every few months, by the time every other kid at his concerts looked like Ziggy Stardust the moment had passed. As for responsibility to a brand, absolutely. Someone should have told Burberry.

Oscar Wilde said:

Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months.

[burty39]

Just arrived after a mini clear out on Chrono

[inco]

Going green tonight

[130R]

New strap for my U1 since the leather one broke

[TimLambert7]

burty39 said:

Just arrived after a mini clear out on Chrono

How does a clear out result in a new watch arriving?

Please teach me your ways, master.

[Nomal]

Hulk for me today .

[DJT14]

25 years old and two generations... I've been looking at a Chronomat 44 to replace it but Brietlings seem to age badly

[CardShark]

[Caruso]

[Nomal]

Caruso said:

I really like that !

[So]

Nomal said:

Caruso said:

I really like that !

So do I.

I've been looking at Day/Dates a lot recently thinking I want one. I couldn't bring myself to pay what Rolex is asking for one now though. They're heading towards £30k.

[Caruso]

So said:

So do I.

I've been looking at Day/Dates a lot recently thinking I want one. I couldn't bring myself to pay what Rolex is asking for one now though. They're heading towards £30k.

Thanks, although I can't quite decide if I'm a dozen years too old or a dozen years to young for it!

[So]

Caruso said:

So said:

So do I.

I've been looking at Day/Dates a lot recently thinking I want one. I couldn't bring myself to pay what Rolex is asking for one now though. They're heading towards £30k.

Thanks, although I can't quite decide if I'm a dozen years too old or a dozen years to young for it!

You're early 40s right?

I just think it's cool whatever. Is it actually a fairly old one on a new strap?

[Caruso]

So said:

Caruso said:

So said:

So do I.

I've been looking at Day/Dates a lot recently thinking I want one. I couldn't bring myself to pay what Rolex is asking for one now though. They're heading towards £30k.

Thanks, although I can't quite decide if I'm a dozen years too old or a dozen years to young for it!

You're early 40s right?

I just think it's cool whatever. Is it actually a fairly old one on a new strap?

I can still just about claim to be mid 40s! Yes it's a 1974 vintage one on a Hirsch strap.

[So]

Caruso said:

can still just about claim to be mid 40s! Yes it's a 1974 vintage one on a Hirsch strap.

It looks no different from the current DD offering, many of which come on straps.

Is yours 36mm?

[Caruso]

So said:

It looks no different from the current DD offering, many of which come on straps.

Is yours 36mm?

Yes, 36mm. The foreshortening effect of having the camera lens so close makes it look bigger than it is. It's an 1803 model which means no quickset date, but it does have the hacking movement.

[Pupp]

Day one pic so no patination so far... might be in a bag with a boiled egg in the next day or two if it doesn't calm down a bit - rather 'gold' currently, especially in artificial light

[bunglesprout]

Pupp said:

Day one pic so no patination so far... might be in a bag with a boiled egg in the next day or two if it doesn't calm down a bit - rather 'gold' currently, especially in artificial light

I love everything about these apart from the case size. If it was 40mm, I'd have one like a shot. Lovely lovely watch, and the canvas strap suits it perfectly.

[Soov330e]

My new flavour of the month.

£39 Sekonda Daytona (rrp £90) on a red NATO. Cheap as chips and a lovely thing.