[anigbrowl]

I didn't see the original but I did not get the impression that the poster's aim was to insult you.

You mentioned being software development, and as a skilled craftsperson in that field naturally you prize function over display. But two professional investors might eye each others' Rolexes to to signal both a sufficiently high level of disposable income that they can afford not to care about purely utilitarian factors, and as a sign of willingness to comply with an unwritten social norm rather than insisting on the superiority of their own taste/judgment in every circumstance.

What's ostentatious to the outsider may be an expression of humility to the insider: 'I'm willing to pay the price for this entry ticket on my wrist, but did not come here this evening to try to one-up everyone else.' At the opposite end of the social scale, you might wear a black leather jacket to fit in at the local punk club, but if your leather jacket was of too obviously high quality the other punks would doubtless consider you a wanker.

Please consider the possibility that you are undervaluing the social engineering function of the expensive watch by focusing on the technical engineering criteria.

[mtempm]

Sure, I think Rolex is a product of very capable social engineering, which is why it can command such a high price while knock offs that cannot be easily identified as such sell for a fraction.

Also, the above poster's assertion this is proce discrimination is plainly wrong and uninformed. This has nothing to do with price discrimination.