Reply With QuoteAre you actually on the same planet as the rest of us?Originally Posted by Huertecilla
Simon
Perfect, just perfect. This comment has made my day verv :)
Simon
Are you actually on the same planet as the rest of us?
Simon
Some yes, some no.
I'm pretty sure this has been conclusively resolved before
M
Now, to the point of are they ugly. The simple answer is no for me.
I can see the 5712 having a bit of an ugly tag - but that could be said for lots of asymmetrical dials, and maybe one of my favourites the PanoInverse. But the case is beautiful, the 3712 maybe having a slight edge. The bracelets are very well made and for me exceptionally comfortable.
I bought a 5711, and can honestly say it's one of my all time favourite watches now. I'm glad I made the sacrifice to make it happen, and it hasn't disappointed. Some are looking for different things in a watch and that's fine too - I think a lot of that comes down to what other watches you also own though. It might be a bit brave to own a 5711 as an only watch, but I could happily live with one alongside a sports Rolex.
I'm looking forward to picking up a 5167 at some point when my name comes up, and then, apart from trying out the odd watch every now and again, I think I'm out of the watch game ;)
It's just a matter of time...
Yes that's true. I really don't know why I bother at times... but occasionally I just can't help myself!I'm pretty sure this has been conclusively resolved before
M
Simon
Then you get to pay for the kids' education. Then for the divorced wife too.
Very few are lucky enough to earn enough to STILL buy a Veblen product which is probably why it is such a desireable symbol.
You could improve the odds by not getting a mortgaged home and not marry thus not divorce et al leaving enough money to buy whatever you like which again makes the Veblen product something to be aspired.
The latter does mean that you need to devise a cunning plan to still be able to pass on your PP to your son.
p.s. as to being on the same planet. Obviously yes, even in the same cultural group. Just not plodding on the conservative, conventional middle of the road.
That results in a widely varying peer approval pattern which frees one from the striving for it which lowers thresholds to stray further still from the trodden routes. Which in my case results in having worked out the cunning plan.
So... thanks for that too.
Last edited by Huertecilla; 20th February 2017 at 13:42.
I think the three-hand Nautilus with blue dial really is a thing of beauty, the black dial not far behind it. If a micro-brand were to produce a version that wasn't a copy of it, but rather an hommage to it, then I'm sure it would sell really well. However I bet they stay away from it because it's so distinctive.
The beauty of this hobby is that we all have different tastes, like and dislikes. I don't expect, or need, others to like what I like.
Last edited by TaketheCannoli; 20th February 2017 at 13:44.
One has only to look at Steinhart and Rolex sub or even closer to home Eddies take on the Explorer to see that this is a non reason.
Imo without the PP brand the Nautilus is simply not attractive to a wide enough public for to to be economically viable to micro brands.
I have a visually quite accurate fantasy branded copy of the white/silver dialed moon phase Nautilus which, as a dial variation of a fake industry one, is a totally different economic picture; additional market/profit for just about no extra expense.
Thanks for reminding me, I was about to write a reply but apparently I've already said everything I'll ever need to on the subject a couple of years back. In summary, it doesn't have to be beautiful when it's that sexy.
Next up, perhaps another discussion of why the Royal Oak has hexagonal screws in the bezel, or perhaps on what's wrong the Rolex cyclops.
Well if anyone want a 1970's throw back then how about this 2014 beauty.
You would have very few choices of movements to do a Nautilus homage - otherwise you'd have an Omega esq thick case in a PP looking design - not a match made in heaven.
Id still want a Swiss movement in a homage of a Swiss watch, or a Japanese movement in a homage of a Japanese watch etc.
It's just a matter of time...
Most SS Rolex models have well finished and made but ultimately simple cases. The Nautilus not only has a case orders of magnitude more complicated to copy, but then there are fewer variations with which to make homages of. So the economies of scale are not there in my opinion.
Furthermore, it also has a very slim case - clearly not something a homage would require, but I would expect it would change the dynamic of the watch to the point it would significantly less elegant with even a 2892 or equivalent inside.
PP have exceptional marketing, but compared to many brands, I think there is 'value' there, in so much as any watch brand adds value. Take the Rolex OP. £4k - expensive for sure. Healthy profit margin - absolutely. But how many watch brands give you an in-house, chronometer certified movement, a bracelet, 10-year servicing and with a 5 year warranty for that price? Makes various IWCs etc. look really silly. I think PP are the same - plenty of brands out there selling stuff at the £15K+ mark but don't use gold rotors, full in-house movements, hand finishing. Yup, the prices are silly, but I'd rather have a PP than countless other high-end makes.
Really like the look of the Aquanaut.
Not so sure about the others, but then I do prefer three handers.
Each to his own I guess.
So put a handwound one in. Or a quartz; would be more accurate and cheaper to service too. We are after all talking look-a-like, NOT the same thing.
As to complicate case, well there is a multitude of fakes, some just about impossible to distinguish and that business is not in the business to lose money on it!
To put 'complicated' in perspective have a look at the Hublot Big Bang family. Replicating that case design involves not only fabricating rather a lot of unique parts in different materials but also an extra assembly phase.Yet the fake business has nooooo challenge even there and pumps out veryVERY good copies at quartz engined fashion watch prices.
I must admit I am not a fan of PP's sports watches.
I really think the bold Gerald Genta '70's designs look a bit dated now, although would go well with some flares and a large collared shirt.
I do love their conventional three handers and chronographs though.
Cheers,
Neil.
I look at PP in the perspective of Morgan cars. Same thing about craftsmanship and all.
Now, because they are used in modern day traffic, Morgans have been upgraded with modern tech brakes and modern engines.
Because a wristwatch is worn in a world where time is everywhere, very much in contrast to the Morgan it's original function is no longer important. The watch performs a totally different role, especially on male wrists as is about the only universally accepted jewelry for men.
The value of the luxury watch is totally detached from the performance/function as a time keeping instrument.
It is as a statement that luxury watch has it's primary function. See there the added value of the PP brand. Even when on the dial of a duckling too ugly for popular digestion. In fact, that makes it more of a statement and as such is ideally suited to the role it has.
Not ugly but plain really. Without the name on the dial they would appear to be a 70's watch with that TV screen shaped dial ( the old fat TVs of course)
Aramar watches have produced a homage.
It's the first homage to the Nautilus I have seen. The original is not a looker in my eyes and the homage is no better.
http://www.aramar.nl/index.php?item=...n#.WKsNKTzfWEc
John
Last edited by Sinnlover; 20th February 2017 at 16:51. Reason: I can't spell for toffee
That's pretty much where l am.I must admit I am not a fan of PP's sports watches.
I really think the bold Gerald Genta '70's designs look a bit dated now, although would go well with some flares and a large collared shirt.
I do love their conventional three handers and chronographs though.
Even having handled a nautilus but once, that clearly lacks a bit of the detail and is also 2mm thicker despite being quartz AND having a solid caseback. Also, the clasp looks awful. At £100, maybe, but £200, not so much thanks.
A great many things look dated - Buckingham Palace, the E-Type Jag, the painting of Picasso... It does't stop them being things you might like to own though, given the option.I must admit I am not a fan of PP's sports watches.
I really think the bold Gerald Genta '70's designs look a bit dated now, although would go well with some flares and a large collared shirt.
God no to Buck House, imagine the heating and window cleaning bills and as for all the gawkers:)
True, but you could sell it and buy half a Nautilus with the proceeds ;-)
hehe, does that one have sticky out ears? (joke)
I´d prefer a painting by Picasso although preferably not one of a bird with an eye in the middle of her forehead;)
They're definitely unconventional looking. As is the APRO. They grow on you - or not.
Can't get overly excited about these, also it's not really possible to ignore the price.
Unconventional - yes.
Ugly - no.
These are not really the top of my wish list but then I currently have very modest wishes.
That said, watches like these and the RO equivalents are appealing more to me with time; by the time I can afford one I might just nibble !
Nope, sorry, none of those either.
In answer to the original question-I don't find the PP sports watches ugly. I wouldn't buy one though. I must confess I haven't actually tried one on but I have seen plenty of pics and real life examples and they don't do anything for me tbh. I am however a big fan of the dress watches, I'm not sure I could walk into the AD with my £24k for a 5712 and not walk out with something more like this instead:
http://www.jomashop.com/patek-philip...6000g-012.html
(Not my favourite PP just one for a similar price I like-unlike the 5712 you even get a discount!!)
That's a pity, I was planning on giving you a Picasso for Christmas, I'll keep it now. You could have sold it and bought a very large number of gold quartz Seikos.
My point though, was that one man's dated is another man's classic. The Nautilus is without doubt very 70s, but arguably in a good way. A lot of the 70s design was kind of ugly, or challenging, but also somehow great.
Sure there are many desirable items from ages past. However the 70's wasn't a decade that produced many desirable styles in fashion or design.
I'd debate that - a lot of the 70s has been reassessed and has become inspiration for cool designers of today - many contemporary interiors owe a lot to a mish mash of 70s style and mid century Scandinavian modern. For a long time we thought of it as the decade style forgot, but that's when we were rebounding from it. Now it's the 80s that looks really dreadful, while there's plenty to enjoy from the 70s.
Regardless of the price point I don't like the design of this watch or indeed most of the PPs I have seen in AD windows. It's all down to personal taste of course.
I think i read somewhere that PP took their design inspiration for the watches in question from a porthole. Firstly if correct i think that is a pretty daft thing to do and secondly i've never seen a good looking porthole, so no wonder these watches are a bit ugly.
Ha! Not as daft as it may seem though, portholes and diving helmets were inspirations because they were successfully waterproof.
Use your imagination a bit more.
I certainly wouldn't say they're ugly, the quality and finish is there for all to see but they're just not me I'm afraid.
But, that said, I like TAG Carrera's so what do I know.
This, on the other hand gives me a twitch in the trouser area. https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=pp...1eKiVfGzg7hFM:
Like the look of these, shame there all quartz. Any other homages out there?
Can we ban the word Veblen please
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I know not of which word you speak.
Hahahha brilliant!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'm another who can't quite "get" the sports Pateks, even in the flesh. I like their more discreet Calatravas, world timers etc and cannot really offer a strong reason to dislike the sports... other than, they're not for me. Can appreciate why others might like them though.
Especially since it doesn't even apply. Double the price of a patek and demand goes down - way way way down.
A moot point.
Yes they're really ugly. I think anyone who owns a 5711 with full box and papers should sell me theirs at a discounted price. I'd be doing you a favour...
Oh man I love the sports Pateks! They r so damn good looking. I don't understand attraction of Richard Mille's - but that's not the question!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I think perhaps many of us on TZ are like PP sports.
Strangely shaped face and hands.
Looks weird in pics but better in real life.
Expensively dressed.
Overlooked by the masses.
Appreciated by the few.
Not suited to mountain climbing, deep-sea diving or concreting a driveway.
But of great quality.
Ha. Well put.
Posting Permissions
