| Post Reply | Forum | Previous | Next | Edit |
|
Hey Michael... by archiegoodwin Date: 12/19/2001, 22:31:25 In response to: RE: Thanks robin.... -- Michael Khalil |
We must have the same uncle (or similar). What I admire about my uncle is that he understands intrinsic value and is skeptical of perceived value. It is not a matter of paying $30,000 for a watch--but which one. There are $30,000 watches that really may be worth close to that amount as opposed to the ones that are mostly profit. The real fun in watch collecting is studying and knowing and making informed choices. My (yours too) rich uncle is right about the $100 watch because it represents intrinsic value for that category of object. My uncle rides in a Nissan President because the various years of Rolls Royce have all had niggling problems. Of the many houses he owns I am sure one has as bedrooms and baths that you mention (one has 3 tennis courts and I know he has been there only once because it is in Africa and not convenient), but usually my uncle is very practical about such matters too--not too many rooms and no need to show off. Sadly, many people buy the hype and crave the lifestyle of illusions (young, thin, handsome, well-traveled, decked out, seen in all the "right" places)--usually wondering why they are not as happy as they deserve to be. Being a genuine watch collector (or any true collector) means that one sees beyond those illusions. The only way to do that is to acquire knowledge before acquiring the baubles. I had a second thought about a Patek that might cost $26,000 and is fairly new--the 10 day wonder. If you like the Manta Ray case (supposedly requiring 188 separate processes to make) then it might be for you. Horologically it is a milestone. It was made in limited quantities, but pops up for sale. You might check it out. Best wishes. Robin |
| Post Reply | Forum | Previous | Next | Edit |
Followups:
- Thanks again for the post.... - Michael Khalil - 12/20/2001, 10:57