That's my way of looking at it. Reducing a big collection down to two or three watches, can be good for the soul. What's more, you can afford (arguably) better models. But most important of all....
You have to decide what aspects of a watch you really care about. So, three watch maximum. Two is better.
And there will be a few brave souls who decide to shrink to one watch. My heroes.
Last edited by paskinner; 8th December 2018 at 14:23.
I largely agree that quality is more satisfying than quantity, but I just don't understand the idea that a watch enthusiast should aim for a single watch. One watch is for people who don't give a monkey's about watches, not the person who appreciates the nuances of this hobby.Originally Posted by paskinner
The idea of owning one watch is as vacuous as suggesting you should only own one tie, one pair of shoes or one CD.
These days, I think I do only own one tie....and no CDs.
I get the concept and have indeed got down to three at one point and then up again, then down, then up.... and so the circus continues.
Why is the hobby dependent on how many watches you own? Does owning ten watches make you twice as keen as someone with five? And is someone with a single watch automatically not interested in the hobby?
Is someone with a single car disqualified from being a car enthusiast?
Anyone interested in the hobby is surely part of the 'community', regardless of ownership,or money spent. It's all about attitude......not possessions. Nice as they are.
It doesn't matter how many watches you have. You want to cut your collection to one? OK, sell both your PM Rolexes, and get one really properly-good (drop the mic) watch. Maybe a PP perpetual calendar or chronograph. Even better, look at the top-end independents like Roger Smith, FP Journe, Laurent Ferrier, Voutilainen, et al. and own something truly special that you will never ever see in the wild.
Having a couple of mass-produced Rolexes pales by comparison, IMO.
Well, this has concentrated my mind; I've set myself the goal of having one watch by January First, 2020. Which gives me just over twelve months to decide on which one I keep. I think I can do this.....
And I think I can still retain as much interest in watches as a hobby. That's the theory. Anyone out there already done this?
Last edited by paskinner; 12th December 2018 at 10:30.
What do you currently still own? Did you sell your Daytona a couple of months back?
Oh and what do you see being the only one remaining?
For complicated reasons, I still own the 116509 Daytona...although a dealer has offered £1500 more than I asked on SC.
I also own a DD40, also in white gold. And a Glashutte Original, which I'm already trying to sell.
So ......
I find your rationale bizarre from my own perspective. As a WIS I enjoy choice and having a variety of different watches (even if my tastes seems to veer towards simple 2-3 handers with no dates). This week for example, I dug out my Dreadnought Voyager, having not worn it for months and it hasn't left my wrist all week.
I firmly believe it's worthwhile having a cap on the amount spent, but why one actively wants to set a goal to reduce to one I have no idea. Good luck in your quest - from your posts, you've tried even getting down to 2 and failed to maintain it, so 1 is just pure folly
If you really wanted to do this, why not 1 January 2019. You have already had the Go and Daytona on SC, leaving the one as the DD....
Would the one really mean “one”, or do you still intend to have a quartz or two as well, on the basis that you have, IIRC, mentioned not counting quartz as part of overall numbers in a collection?
To me having one watch is as strange a concept as only having one pair of shoes!
That's the best way to explain it, for me. I have a friend who's head of a department at the County Council. He's in charge of at least 15 direct reports, in a department of over 100. He has nice suits, good shoes, shirts, ties etc. but wears a massive Garmin GPS watch with a bright green rubber strap with everything. I cannot convince him that it looks ridiculous. It's like wearing one of his bespoke suits with white trainers. But he won't listen.
I'm sure I could reduce the size of the collection a tad (and I should), but I like having a watch for every outfit and every occasion.
Storing watches in boxes locked up somewhere holds absolutely zero attraction for me. My definition of appreciating a watch involves wearing it on the wrist, so the question is how many can I own where they would each get sufficient wrist time. For me, that puts a limit of 3* since I'd want to wear them all at least a couple of times each week.
I'm sure you can retain as much interest in watches only owning one, but I think you would have more fun owning a couple more!
* excluding my G Shock :)
That sounds very sensible - I’m just stuck on which watches I would have to give up to achieve something close. The devil on one shoulder always ask why limit yourself to X number though.
It's just a matter of time...
My view it that it’s about maximising the number of watches in a collection given the following constraints:
- what you really love and want to own (experience counts for a lot here)
- budget
- wear time (I like wearing my watches, no safe queens for me)
Nah, too boring.
So long as you've approached the problem scientifically.
The problem is when you get sentimentality attached to a watch but rarely wear it for whatever reason. The collection then grows 😂
I have.
https://forum.tz-uk.com/showthread.p...39#post4961439
I think three is probably a sweet spot in all honesty. A diver, a chrono and a beater would cover most bases most people will ever need from their watches. Within the range you can decide on precious metals, two tone etc. Throw in modern and / or vintage and there's plenty to think about. I've just realised I have nine watches and want a couple (ha) more so am in no way qualified to comment on this.
I got down to three from twelve....and have maintained that. The only reason for three watches is that it takes time to sell.
Enjoying a hobby can't be based on how many things you own. I'm interested in modern art, but all I own are some prints.....
Tim Mosso, of Watchbox, is a true expert. But he sold all his watches except one Sinn. He still loves the hobby.
So will I.
Last edited by paskinner; 12th December 2018 at 13:50.
The fact we're here discussing the hobby probably means we're going to be forever collecting, adjusting collection, broadening or focussing... 'all hope is probably lost'
Very few, very lucky people can simply keep adding to a collection, or have a very clear concept for their personal end game... and then when they reach it just stop!
I for one accept... I'm an incurable addict... I like to try lots of different brands, new and vintage, and I'm sure I will explore lots of new watches in 2019. However, if I fall on tough times I know that a Casio F-91W would also make a great one watch.
I like variety and splashes of colour so many is my model. The idea is every so often have a cull as I do have a number that I don’t wear or rarely, trouble is I have a number of micro brands and with the very low production numbers can be a real headache to find again after I miss them too much.
Three would just never work fo me as I like them on display when not wearing.
I get why most people might only own one car and one house but never one watch. I should expand on that really - one watch is enough for 99% of people, but not for the good people on here.
We are here because one watch is never enough, neither is 2 or 3, we are to share our obsession, talk about our grail watch and about our perfect duo, or trio or multiple collection.
We all eventually find that grail, that duo, that trio or that 100 piece collection and then we share it with each other.
We become happy and content that we have achieved nirvana.
The odd member or two then ‘retire’ from this game of watches and it’s obsessive behaviour. . . . .
The rest of us realise that grail watch turned out to not be a grail, that perfect duo or trio, wasn’t quite as prefect as it seemed, so we start the search all over again.
I’ve had some amazing watches and I’m still not there - think if I was I’d be a bit gutted to be honest.
I am still interested in watches and enjoy reading about them as well as gawping at YouTube but I have totally lost the urge to buy any others. I have 8 and that is it, game over.
I'm at 25 or so right now. I could pick my favourite three to keep, but next week it could be a different three.
Having a decent small collection of interesting vintage watches I have come to the conclusion that it maybe time to move them on a get one or two 'proper' watches to replace them. One keeper and one replaceable. Understand the OPs sentiment. For me it gets to the point where maintenance of vintage watches and my own apprehension of damaging them, and subsequently reducing value, is not enjoyable.
I consolidated with no regrets (see pics)
Will prob add another next year (if only I could get a Pepsi) - then a case of rinse and repeat later on
Last edited by kultschar; 8th December 2018 at 17:39.
What does 'better' mean?
Good luck everybody. Have a good one.
Exactly!
I can’t see better being a main driver over a certain point. For most a certain brand is more than good enough. For me the Rolex 16600 Sea-Dweller is the best watch ever made, but it’s not going to be my only watch.
Why limit to 1, 2, 3, or 10?
I can see the point if you have say £20k for arguments sake (both in ready cash, and in actually mental ability have that amount put aside to spend on a watch or watches). You could buy either one watch, like a steel Patek, a precious metal Rolex (or over RRP harder to get steel), or a number of watches that make you feel good when you wear them.
For some people the one more expensive watch is the right answer, for others it’s having a few watches that match different perceived uses. Others enjoy trying many different brands and flipping quickly to try the next release or goal. I can only speak for myself, and I buy what I like - I probably have a mental limit of the most I’d like to spend on one watch, but if my 5711 was suddenly worth £60k on the used market that’s different to what it has cost me, and I’d most likely still keep it and wear it, as it was my first Patek. I sold my first ever Rolex as a lesson that there is no point being sentimental about inanimate objects.
None of the above options is wrong.
Last edited by Omegamanic; 8th December 2018 at 17:47.
It's just a matter of time...
I think after a certain point in the game, there's no 'better', only 'different'
Good luck everybody. Have a good one.
By that I mean that there is not a linear progression, but a circular movement.
Good luck everybody. Have a good one.
Why does consolidation need to mean fewer more expensive watches?
If I were to consolidate, in all honesty I'd rather have my PRS29 than my 16660. Or at least until I can get my hands on the white 36mm Everest :) but I'll just keep hold of the lot and enjoy them all seeing as I can :) I like collecting things, so until I am forced to for reasons such as space or money, I'll continue to collect. Be it shoes, guns, knives, watches, bottles of hot sauce, and so on. Variety is the spice of life :)
5711, give it 4-5 years and it will be.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Question is WHY do you want to go down to just one watch. What is your real motivation?
I understand reducing the collection to a manageable number that you can reasonably rotate through, and already said I have too many, but I couldn’t go down to one, as sometimes get a bit bored and want a change.
Why stop at one? You could sell all your watches and still have an appreciation of them without ownership. There is no need to own a watch to tell the time these days. We are anachronistic.
M
.
Something more expensive that you don't like as much
Guess “better” in the collectors eyes
Well, yes, 'better' is always a matter of choice. Here's my view of a 'better' watch.
Now, that's generally seen as a highly sought-after watch. But this is better....better looking, better to wear, more fun.
And I'd prefer to sell the ceramic, and a couple of other watches, to get it. Purely personal of course.
Now, here's arguably the opposite. A 40mm DayDate. Quite yummy if you like conservative watches.
But, is it a lot more desirable than this Datejust?
Personally, I think the notion of 'better' is more problematic here, given that the DD40 costs more than four times as much, but looks similar and is of similar quality.
But that's just me.....
And just to confuse matters, here's a watch highly worthwhile to own, because of inflated values.
But is it a 'better' watch? Not to me, but clearly the market takes another view.
And finally (phew) I see this as a 'better' watch, but generally, the market is indifferent. It's quartz, so a none-runner' .So, no real answers.
Last edited by paskinner; 8th December 2018 at 18:19.
I would try switching the 5711 to one with a blue dial, that would be something to consider as a "number of watches neutral move", unless you really prefer the white?
Just have both, surely?
It's just a matter of time...
Ha, well of course, but he's trying to restrict numbers. Both would be the ideal - if you can find them. The market's gone nuts for these as everyone knows. A great watch I'd certainly love to own. The Seiko looks nice as well. I'm not a Daytona fan personally, but another fantastic watch with a big following. Fluted bezels are too much for me as well, I'm not nearly enough of an extrovert. But they look great on other people.
Last edited by Holsterman; 8th December 2018 at 20:22.
I do prefer white...but I don't want either. Not that I could afford one these days with prices as they are.
A basic Grand Seiko quartz and a white gold Daytona would work for me. And these days, gold Daytonas are not hughly more costly than steel.
I honestly prefer just two or three watches. Concentrates the mind.In fact i'l be selling one this week to keep within my 'rules.'
Last edited by paskinner; 9th December 2018 at 03:38.
I used to have one watch for years (well 2 strictly speaking, but one I wore every day except for family events).
I had no serious interest in watches then.
Then I got hooked. I have 35 or so watches.
Sure I have 10 I probably never wear, but all the others get wrist time.
I sometimes think I should scale it back, not to get a 'better' watch, just to make it more manageable, but when I start going through them I realise most were bought because I liked something about them and when I look at them again, it comes back to me.
One, two, three watches? For some it's a goal, but I see no appeal personally.
M
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
Breitling Cosmonaute 809 - What's not to like?
I've always thought I'd get rid of everything I own if I had the hugely versatile IWC Aquatimer Titanium - the one with the matt black bezel.
But in reality, there's about 10-12 watches I've been given for presents or scrimped and saved for that I just couldn't part with. Maybe I'd put them in storage?
Edit: This one:3536?
Last edited by HenPecked; 9th December 2018 at 00:12.
I could probably shrink my collection to these two - but enjoy the others as variety:
Last edited by MartynJC (UK); 9th December 2018 at 00:09.
Think that’s the steel version, but all 3 variants of 3536 are exceptional 😍I've always thought I'd get rid of everything I own if I had the hugely versatile IWC Aquatimer Titanium - the one with the matt black bezel.
But in reality, there's about 10-12 watches I've been given for presents or scrimped and saved for that I just couldn't part with. Maybe I'd put them in storage?
Edit: This one:
You clearly love your new Deepsea; that's perhaps the ideal 'core' piece of a smaller collection. Who knows, you might enjoy it. As an architect once famously remarked :'less is more.'
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
