Trying to to buy a "mega-watch". Budget £40,000. Help!

[otherman]

S100HP said:

They make 40k watches?!

It came as a surprise to me. I can't remember the last time I paid less than £500k but some people will mess with these tin contraptions.

[anonymous-user]

otherman said:

S100HP said:

They make 40k watches?!

It came as a surprise to me. I can't remember the last time I paid less than £500k but some people will mess with these tin contraptions.

The 005 and 010 are out of production but readily available for that sort of money.

Currently still increasing in price.

[Yipper]

Rolex Sky-Dweller.
Omega Spacemaster Z-33.

Worth a read.

http://time.com/money/4058109/watches-value-rolex-...

[justinio]

You know when you're on PistonHeads, when you read a thread about a £40k watch purchase, whilst glancing at your £9.99 Timex.

[anonymous-user]

Sheetmaself said:

My money would go on a Richard Mille too but there hardly in keeping with the rest of the selections the op has liked are they!

Just read the OP properly and I am indeed talking complete bks. No way you can get a complicated RM for the budget.

[mikeveal]

Whatever you go for, if you are looking to depreciation proof your purchase you need to go for second hand.

Some people have a problem with this, not sure why. In this category I'd expect the watch to be flawless. If you really don't want to wear anyone else's leather strap (I get that) change it. The strap will be hundreds for sure, but the depreciation will be in the thousands, so you're still quids in.

For that kind of money I'd be considering a tourby.

[CKQC]

mikeveal said:

Whatever you go for, if you are looking to depreciation proof your purchase you need to go for second hand.

For that kind of money I'd be considering a tourby.

Yes, completely agree and not averse to used watches. However, what is interesting to note is the price differential between new, unworn and used is actual quite small at this level. It's only when watches start to slip into lower grade condition that I think there's an actual "saving".

Any tourbillons (with links or pictures) in mind? Cheers.

I have considered a Patek 5130 as it falls into a lower price bracket (£20s as opposed to 30s), but I have this ridiculous notion (that I can't dismiss) that it is a little more of a "common" Patek. I only have the idea because a friend has one, and I reckon it's probably the only one I've ever seen! Also, it's not an annual or perpetual, but it does have an interesting complication. Probably discounted due to lack of annual-perpetual which I am going to stick to!



As you can see, I appear to be quite Patek focussed, so hoping to have my mind opened to a few other options with the annual-perpetual complication.

Edited by CKQC on Tuesday 1st August 09:06

[blindswelledrat]

CKQC said:

I have been focusing my attention on Patek more than any other watchmaker at this point, and I have been very drawn to the 5905, but that would appear to be somewhat above budget. Picture below.

Whilst I see the value in a nice watch, it is incomprehensible to me that something so ordinary looking could be worth that kind of money.
Do you honestly look at that and think it looks really special enough to throw £40k at it?

[ZesPak]

Yipper said:

Rolex Sky-Dweller.
Omega Spacemaster Z-33.

While of course this whole thing is hypothetical, and I like cars too much to ever spend 10k or more on a watch, I do feel like buying a 30k Rolex or Omega is like buying a 5k Timex or Fossil.

[Yipper]

ZesPak said:

Yipper said:

Rolex Sky-Dweller.
Omega Spacemaster Z-33.

While of course this whole thing is hypothetical, and I like cars too much to ever spend 10k or more on a watch, I do feel like buying a 30k Rolex or Omega is like buying a 5k Timex or Fossil.

Read the Time article in previous post. Rolex is really the only major brand that consistently goes up in value over the years and has good liquidity. Patek does well, but is less liquid. Pretty much every other brand in the watch industry waxes and wanes wildly with fashion and very hard to profit from.

The Omega is a cheap punt for something different from the norm.

[mikeveal]

CKQC said:

Any tourbillons (with links or pictures) in mind? Cheers.

Well here's a few, but not all are in budget ('cus I don't have to stick to your budget, I'm not paying! .)

http://www.chrono24.co.uk/glashuetteoriginal/alfre...


http://www.chrono24.co.uk/glashuetteoriginal/panol...


http://www.chrono24.co.uk/jaegerlecoultre/reverso-...



http://www.chrono24.co.uk/jaegerlecoultre/master-g...


http://www.chrono24.co.uk/jaegerlecoultre/master-t...

[PJ S]

CKQC said:

Yes, completely agree and not averse to used watches. However, what is interesting to note is the price differential between new, unworn and used is actual quite small at this level. It's only when watches start to slip into lower grade condition that I think there's an actual "saving".

You're wrong! A Lange & Sohne pre-owned prices are almost half their RRP, and De Bethune are worse still, which makes both a ‘bargain’.
Those are only two examples, but the steel Rolexes and Patek’s Nautilus/Aquanaut/World Timer are the ones which trade at or over retail for new/pre-owned – Hublot, Roger Dubuis, Bvlgari, Grand Seiko, etc, aren’t immune from typical depreciation levels.

If you were to contemplate the purchase of a Vacheron Constantin Overseas 4500V, you’d be a mug if you paid anything more than 20% off the list price, as that’s the typical dicount achievable, and for an AL&S, you’d be aiming at 30%, so as not to take an absolute hammering on resale.

[CKQC]

PJ S said:

You're wrong! A Lange & Sohne pre-owned prices are almost half their RRP, and De Bethune are worse still, which makes both a ‘bargain’.
Those are only two examples, but the steel Rolexes and Patek’s Nautilus/Aquanaut/World Timer are the ones which trade at or over retail for new/pre-owned – Hublot, Roger Dubuis, Bvlgari, Grand Seiko, etc, aren’t immune from typical depreciation levels.

If you were to contemplate the purchase of a Vacheron Constantin Overseas 4500V, you’d be a mug if you paid anything more than 20% off the list price, as that’s the typical dicount achievable, and for an AL&S, you’d be aiming at 30%, so as not to take an absolute hammering on resale.

Thanks for this. I'd be super grateful to see some comparables, i.e. examples and figures (for annual-perpetual calendar watches) if you can stomach spending the time to do this, for someone you don't know!

ZesPak said:

While of course this whole thing is hypothetical, and I like cars too much to ever spend 10k or more on a watch, I do feel like buying a 30k Rolex or Omega is like buying a 5k Timex or Fossil.

I considered buying another car. However, I am in the privileged position of having what I need. Buying a watch has no running costs: no insurance, no petrol, etc. It has therefore crystallised where the money will go on this occasion unless a very well priced BMW 1m arrives at my door...

Completely agree re Omega and to a lesser degree, Rolex.

mikeveal said:

Well here's a few, but not all are in budget ('cus I don't have to stick to your budget, I'm not paying! .)

Thanks, but not exactly helpful if they’re not in budget. We all know what a tourbillon looks like . Then again, we all love watches so why say no to looking at another one, even if it is off-topic!

Edited by CKQC on Tuesday 1st August 12:52

[mikeveal]

CKQC said:

Thanks, but not exactly helpful if they’re not in budget. We all know what a tourbillon looks like . Then again, we all love watches so why say no to looking at another one, even if it is off-topic!

Some of them were in budget. I've always been a great believer in looking at stuff above budget. One of two things will happen, either you say "Yep, happy with where I set my budget, it's not worth spending more." or you say "hmmn, would prefer to spend x% more and get something that I think is a lot nicer." Both are positive outcomes IMV.
Besides with a bit of hunting, some artful negotiation and some man maths you might be able to bring one of those close enough to your increasingly flexible[-]budget[/-] constraints guidelines.

And yeah, I also though that the PanoLunar was too pretty not to post, regardless of cost!

[PJ S]

CKQC said:

PJ S said:

You're wrong! A Lange & Sohne pre-owned prices are almost half their RRP, and De Bethune are worse still, which makes both a ‘bargain’.
Those are only two examples, but the steel Rolexes and Patek’s Nautilus/Aquanaut/World Timer are the ones which trade at or over retail for new/pre-owned – Hublot, Roger Dubuis, Bvlgari, Grand Seiko, etc, aren’t immune from typical depreciation levels.

If you were to contemplate the purchase of a Vacheron Constantin Overseas 4500V, you’d be a mug if you paid anything more than 20% off the list price, as that’s the typical dicount achievable, and for an AL&S, you’d be aiming at 30%, so as not to take an absolute hammering on resale.

Thanks for this. I'd be super grateful to see some comparables, i.e. examples and figures (for annual-perpetual calendar watches) if you can stomach spending the time to do this, for someone you don't know!

I do it all the time, so it’s no issue – but here’s a prime example of my previous point. And it’s limited to 50 pieces, so possibly rarer than some Patek tourbillons.

Allow me to somewhat ignore the criteria set out in your opening post, and provide you with some food for thought.

My all time favourite PC is that offered by Glashutte Original – no ifs, ands, or buts – followed by the 3-4 times more expensive version offered by FP Journe. One thing though with the latter, is you will get absolutely hammered for servicing, if the price of his regular 3-hander is anything to go by – but then I really do like that Chronometre Bleu.
So, were I to park £40K in a watch (watches) and trying to meet specific criteria, I’d probably go for a steel GO PC and a Laurent Ferrier or De Bethune.

https://www.chrono24.co.uk/all/miscellaneous-glash... – all the PC anyone could ever want, with none of those stupid, hard-to-read sub-dials and hands nonsense!
https://www.chrono24.co.uk/glashuetteoriginal/sena... – darker and guilloché dial version, which you could add the bracelet to, if so desired.
https://www.chrono24.co.uk/glashuetteoriginal/spor... – discontinued line from GO, but still worth contemplating if you’re not looking for something erring on the more formal side. And that bracelet, with its micro adjustment…makes the Rolex look and feel like a toy. Thickness may be the only drawback though.

https://www.chrono24.co.uk/glashuetteoriginal/sena... – new caliber version which sees a leap year sub-dial instead of the trademark subtle red dot, and power reserve almost double to 100 hours. Compared to the regular Senator version, I don’t like the loss of the Roman numeral markers, which has been forced by the orientation of the moonphase. If long PR is of greater importance, then this would be the one to go for, but I much prefer the standard Senator, which replaced the first two links above.

https://www.chrono24.co.uk/laurentferrier/galet-mi... – needs no introduction or explanation. LF was formerly creative director at Patek, and since his departure in 2008, we now have the ‘wonderful looking’ 24 hour indication on the 5726 and concentric chronograph dial a la 5990!

https://www.chrono24.co.uk/debethune/db27-titan-ha...
https://www.chrono24.co.uk/debethune/debethune-dbs...
https://www.chrono24.co.uk/debethune/db25l--id3463...

At this stage, with independents like LF and DB, you’re at a whole other level compared to serial production pieces from Patek, Audemars, and Vacheron.
Both combined wouldn’t even make the 900-1000 watches H Moser & Cie or FP Journe produce annually.

And if you want to use up all your budget with just one watch, then you might want to consider the RM005 from Richard Mille – it isn’t depreciation-proof, but it is one of the more sought after pieces.
https://www.chrono24.co.uk/richardmille/rm-005-unw...

[Hoofy]

blindswelledrat said:

CKQC said:

I have been focusing my attention on Patek more than any other watchmaker at this point, and I have been very drawn to the 5905, but that would appear to be somewhat above budget. Picture below.

Whilst I see the value in a nice watch, it is incomprehensible to me that something so ordinary looking could be worth that kind of money.
Do you honestly look at that and think it looks really special enough to throw £40k at it?

You could probably pick up a Chinese knock-off with the same functionality for under £100. It's what is going on behind the face that is the real difference.

[CKQC]

PJ S said:

I do it all the time, so it’s no issue – but here’s a prime example of my previous point. And it’s limited to 50 pieces, so possibly rarer than some Patek tourbillons.

Allow me to somewhat ignore the criteria set out in your opening post, and provide you with some food for thought.

Thanks for this. Have to be honest and say that none of them feel as elegant as the Pateks do to me. Taste is such a subjective thing! I was hoping you could point me to excellent deals in the used market for the sort of thing I'm looking for?

Hoofy said:

You could probably pick up a Chinese knock-off with the same functionality for under £100. It's what is going on behind the face that is the real difference.

Purely out of pure curiosity, really? I doubt anyone who knows watches would be fooled?

[Hoofy]

CKQC said:

Hoofy said:

You could probably pick up a Chinese knock-off with the same functionality for under £100. It's what is going on behind the face that is the real difference.

Purely out of pure curiosity, really? I doubt anyone who knows watches would be fooled?

You probably could. It might not even be a straight knock-off as it'll just have a random brand on the face. Of course, anyone with a passing interest in watches would know but that isn't the point. It's just about having a watch that looks like one you like if you can't afford a £40k watch.

[anonymous-user]

Hoofy said:

CKQC said:

Hoofy said:

You could probably pick up a Chinese knock-off with the same functionality for under £100. It's what is going on behind the face that is the real difference.

Purely out of pure curiosity, really? I doubt anyone who knows watches would be fooled?

You probably could. It might not even be a straight knock-off as it'll just have a random brand on the face. Of course, anyone with a passing interest in watches would know but that isn't the point. It's just about having a watch that looks like one you like if you can't afford a £40k watch.

Somebody posted a wrist shot of the same Patek a few months ago - I'd of thought it was a cheap knock off if it hadn't been explaned why it wasn't. (that and the one with the world in different colours)

[Hoofy]

desolate said:

Hoofy said:

CKQC said:

Hoofy said:

You could probably pick up a Chinese knock-off with the same functionality for under £100. It's what is going on behind the face that is the real difference.

Purely out of pure curiosity, really? I doubt anyone who knows watches would be fooled?

You probably could. It might not even be a straight knock-off as it'll just have a random brand on the face. Of course, anyone with a passing interest in watches would know but that isn't the point. It's just about having a watch that looks like one you like if you can't afford a £40k watch.

Somebody posted a wrist shot of the same Patek a few months ago - I'd of thought it was a cheap knock off if it hadn't been explaned why it wasn't. (that and the one with the world in different colours)

The market is flooded with watches of all designs and shapes, some close copies of sought-after watches. Some are fake, others are just cheap Chinese brands.