Reply With Quote5 :)
Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk
Browsing in a Retailer last week and I was asked if I was a collector, I replied how many do you have to have to be considered as such ?
5 :)
Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk
"Collector" is perhaps the wrong term because essentially it just means someone who collects something and so defining it by the number of things owned doesn't tell you whether they're an enthusiast. I have friends who own more watches than me, but aren't interested in them at all, they have just amalgamated a collection of cheap watches that are purely accessories; they could still be considered watch collectors. If we use the term "Enthusiast" instead then the number of pieces owned is irrelevant. There are probably people on this forum who have a phenomenal knowledge of horology but only own one timepiece. After all, how many posts on this forum are about searching for the "one watch"?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by axb601; 19th August 2017 at 11:24.
I'll go for 3. You can just about see a normal person having a couple - one for daily use; one for best. Any more than that and you've got the disease ....
Any number >0 that you feel qualifies.
A collector can perfectly well just have one, although most likely not for long.
Between the ages of 18 and 40 I had 2 watches. A 3rd for my 40th birthday and was certainly not a collector as far as I was concerned. A 4th watch followed a few years later - still just someone who quite liked watches, but at that point I had still been nowhere near a watch forum.
The point at which, in my mind, I became a collector was when I first started looking at watch forums and actively started thinking about what further watches to buy.
My subjective view is 4 watches. Because 3 means you have a few or a couple of watches. Once you have 4, you have more than just "a few".
But then I prefer to use the term watch enthusiast in most cases.
Good points.Originally Posted by axb601
My wife is a collector of shoes, handbags and other 'stuff'. Doesn't make her an enthusiast, let alone a calceologist.
I think it's more of a mindset than a number.
If you're constantly researching and looking for the next purchase, then no matter what the number you have at that time or your financial circumstances, you're on a slippery slope.
I don't think I'd ever consider myself a collector however many watches I have.
To me, a collection has to have a focus (vintage, Quartz, Rolex, etc). Of course it could be expanded or reduced as required but just accumulating a large number doesn't necessarily make a collection.
That's not to say that others wouldn't consider numbers as the defining factor.
Collectors sell too. It's perfectly feasible for a collector to go down to just one watch, and of course all collections starts with one watch. But, as I said, a collection isn't likely to stick at one watch for long. :-)
Two . . .
F.T.F.A.
Well there is accumulating and collecting.
I collect G Shocks/Protreks but have accumulated many other watches.
Mitch
I reckon 5+ . Can be of any value that's not the issue but 5 or more suggests a deliberate collection rather than accidental accumulation
Probably when you buy 2 or more watches with the same function (i.e. - 3 dive watches).
^This
One for every day of the week or an occasion.
Mine crept up by accident but think I'm up to about 9 of varying values
Another one here who baulks at the terms 'collector' and 'collection'. Like most folks I presume, I have more shirts than watches and various pairs of shoes. Does that make me a shirt and/or a shoe collector?
I suppose it's all a bit subjective. 'I have a collection of watches' and 'I own several watches but am not a collector' aren't contradictory statements.
I think it's more to do with the motive. A collector is someone who acquires the same class of items because he has an interest in the attributes beyond their functional use and is interested in having variants. I don't consider myself a collector because so far my 'collection' is practical. Dress watch, sports watch, one I wear to sleep. I have two dive watches but this is just a result of wanting a different watch and not being able to bring myself to sell the other one. However, I think if I buy another watch it'll be because I want a variant just for the sake of it and I'll probably become a collector at that point.
I'm going to say 4, as having a dress watch, a sports watch and a beater isn't collecting, it's just common sense!
Your post makes me realise that I actually have more watches than I do shirts....
I think it's partly to do with mindset - there is a guy on another forum who seems to buy a watch a day from Argos (literally whatever is on sale regardless of brand) and I consider them a horder rather than collector.
How long is a piece of string?
This is a somewhat of a silly question.
Obviously, there is no arbitrary number or definition.
Collecting means different things to different people.
One way of looking at it is- you are a collector when your number exceeds what you have a practical use for.
I am sorry but a person with one watch, no matter how much of a WIS he is, is not a collector. Not that there is something great about being a collector.
There is no difference between hoarding and collecting- it is just a way of putting someone down.
Same here
I own a lot more watches than shirts or any other items of clothing.
I collect military watches (some of which I do not wear but they fit in to my collection). I am also an enthusiast with regard to all watches. I like to read and learn about watches even those that I may not necessarily like or wish to own.
I think a collection has to centre on one type of object, where as an enthusiast wants to know about the wider world of the object they are interested in.
Well, I consider myself to be an enthusiast - at least to the degree that I follow this forum and a few blogs. However, I'm not really a collector, I have just a few watches and just one I consider as a keeper.
Edit: I'd say you are a collector if you have at least more than five watches, maybe even ten.
Last edited by china; 19th August 2017 at 16:57.
4 is a number.
I own one for the office, one sporty/ weekend and one dress watch.
But I'm not some freaking collector
It's not about how many you own...
It's how much time you spend browsing watches in every facet of your life!
I subscribe to the one watch can be a collection philosophy, as long as that is how you feel about it.
It's just a matter of time...
Collector comes from the word-collect.
The Latin root is Colligere which means to gather together.
You cannot gather together one watch.
One watch does not make a collection or a collector.
Just plain silly to suggest otherwise.
One can be a hobbyist or an enthusiast even without a single watch.
Next people will be sugggesting you can be a watch collector even without a watch!
Again, it is not necessary or important to be a collector. It is just words.
No, I'm re-iterating and clarifying the substantive point that I previously made. No splitting of hairs, just saying exactly what I mean. :-)
This is a very good point. I think it is essentially why I think that just one can be a collection. It is motive (possibly unwitting!) that counts more than anything.
Isn't this just splitting hairs, to use the argument-dismissal technique demonstrated by others?
More seriously, I think you are being overly-literal. The exact number of watches in a collector's collection really don't seem to me to matter, not even if it's one (and, as I mentioned, for someone with a collector's mindset it is unlikely to stay at just one watch for long). One can be just the beginning or part of the process.
What matters instead is motive or mindset.
I agree on this point. In our context in practice, there is no important difference in my opinion between "collector", "hobbyist" or "enthusiast".
23...
+1
Someone who lies about the little things will lie about the big things too.
I suppose collector would need to be defined numerically as accumulation necessitates the name, but I think you can be an enthusiast / wis / other descriptive with zero so long as the interest and accumulation of info and reading is there.
I'd put a collector as 3 or more i think.
+1
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
3+ Imo
7 exactly 7.
Suppose, one gets a watch case, what would be the optimum number of slots? 6, 8 or More? What would mean n+1 watches since one is being worn or taking a nap on nightstand.
10+ 😊
Now that I think about it, every collector has to start somewhere. So as mentioned, the collecting mentality needs to exist. So I think "1+looking for next aquisition" has to be the right answer.
There can also be a situation where a person has completed a collection of X watches and is no longer looking for the next piece. That person would be an ex-collector. He is no longer collecting but has collected a collection already.
I had many and then one day realised that for several reasons I didn't want most of them.
Soon I'll be down to 4. But I won't be adding any.
I suppose 4 will be a 'collection', but I won't any longer think of myself as a collector.
Won't stop me being interested in watches or admiring them in other people's collections tho.
Collector could be also defined, if you're buying an item not to regularly wear it or use it (like shirts or shoes), but just to have/own it or even keep it in a safe.
If my wife is reading - at least 40 watches. Anything less is just an innocent hobby.
Sent from TZ-UK app on an iPhone
Basic collector, 10 watches; High end collector, £100K.
A person with only one watch is only a potential collector.
R
Ignorance breeds Fear. Fear breeds Hatred. Hatred breeds Ignorance. Break the chain.
The watches I class as part of my 'collection' are the ones I 'collected' and don't wear. My rotation watches are just my watches. Most in my 'collection' category are rare, hard to find, or modern watches I've taken a punt will increase and I'll sell them at some point.
When you count them up in your head and forget 1 or 2.
Posting Permissions
