[randomhodler84]

What is the allure of these things? They keep worse time that an ntp synced phone, have no internet connectivity and few features.

It’s all conspicuous consumption, right? If you know, you know — a way to signal wealth without being too brazen.

[maigret]

Did you never want something because it’s nice and inspiring? A sports car, a big Lego, a cap of your sport hero, a computer full of LED? Did you want this only to impress others? Have you had such a watch on your wrist and felt how it wore? Once you start learning about how those are built etc this becomes a small hobby that’s very nice to enjoy in all the trouble nowadays. Of course some wealthy people will buy those just because they can afford them, but those are not the collector enthusiasts who built the watch culture that allowed those brands to grow to where they are now.

Watch enthusiasts will say all tech is conspicuous consumption because it lasts so little and loses value very quick. There is little more sustainable than a Rolex that still wears nice after 50 years, and can probably hold 100 if taken care of.

[randomhodler84]

No, none of those things. And I have absolutely no interest in impressing others. I own basically nothing except 256-bit numbers. Never owned a watch.

If you saw me IRL you would think I am a bum. It’s much better that way to hide in plane sight.

I agree that a lot of tech is conspicuous consumption — phones are classic example. I hadn’t considered the longevity of the devices. This does increase their value.

[Guest19023892]

Why do you assume all of these things only exist to impress others? There's a lot to appreciate in the design and craftsmanship of a well made product, its impact on culture, or its significance in history. Or maybe the object simply puts a smile on your face when you see it or touch it. That new phone could make someones work day more efficient. That diamond necklace could be a gift from their loved one and a reminder of the times they shared together when they look in the mirror. It seems a bit shortsighted to suggest that expensive things only exist to impress others.

[hoseja]

The satisfaction you get just seems very price-inefficient and lot of that price seems to be traceable to one-upsmanship. What is the special value of the diamonds in the necklace?

[Guest19023892]

For expensive objects, a lot of the price goes into the limited production runs. A number of these very expensive watches ($100,000k+) might be a single unique piece or limited runs of 100. They take a lot of time to develop, the production expenses are high because of the small numbers being produced, and it's reflected in the final price. For higher end mass produced watches, the expense is in the tighter tolerances, materials, and craftsmanship. You can search for macro videos online to see the difference between a typical $500, $5,000, and $50,000 watch. The extra details and care given to the construction of the watches is impressive. Yes, some brands charge a premium for their name. I'm aware of that, however, it doesn't necessarily indicate the buyer is trying to impress others. Someone could buy a Rolex because it's one of the most iconic watches in history and in their mind it's the peak of their watch hobby.

And you see this with nearly every hobby. If you look at the audiophile community, you'll see people with $20,000 speakers in their living room, yet they live a rather modest lifestyle. You can find people spending thousands of dollars on samurai swords to hang on their bedroom wall. These people are not trying to impress the world. They have a hobby and they are able to appreciate these items.

The special value of the diamonds? People have worn diamonds for ages. It's been ingrained in our culture that diamonds are significant as they've been worn by royalty and noble figures over the years and marketed as a symbol of love. They're also the hardest naturally occurring substance on the planet and look quite nice to the eye. Did you ever see a child dress up like a princess? They didn't do it because they wanted to impress others, they did it because it made them feel special. Wearing diamonds can have that same impact. It can make someone feel special, or represent to themselves their own successes and accomplishments in life. I looked at wedding bands the other year. Many of them had diamonds hidden on the inside of the band. If the purpose of diamond jewelry was only to impress others, why would they be hidden on these rings and only known to the wearer?

I'm not going to say expensive objects or diamonds are never used to impress others. I'm only saying that's one of many reasons why someone might make such a purchase. I don't think it's appropriate to see something of value and automatically assume the owner only bought it to impress you. If you talk to them about the purchase, they might be able to talk your ear off about their passion and what that object means to them.

[anm89]

Except I think very few people are impressed. I definitely have a vague negative association with people who wear watches. It's just some expensive show off fashion accessory that you have to lie about getting utility out of.

[maigret]

That's very true that few are impressed. 99% of people don't notice expensive watch, and for the 1% who do that sometimes lead to weird discussions. But I wouldn't say this is fashion. Actually many watch enthusiasts I know of are not people you'd call fashionable at all.

[kop316]

>What is the allure of these things?

I like having something well made, looks nice, and will last on the order of decades. I also like not having something attached to my wrist that tries to grab my attention for every email, text, call, etc. that I get.

> They keep worse time that an ntp synced phone

There is nothing in my life that requires me to be in sync to a precision beyond +/- 30 seconds.

> have no internet connectivity and few features

Some folks (like myself) view that as a feature, not a bug. I actually like walking around without something constantly on my person that is always internet connected.

[Helitio]

It's about appreciation of the craft itself.

Those watches have a fundamental cultural value to us.

Keeping time is now very easy and cheap but those watches reflect the history of keeping time.

And there is a tremendous amount of craftsmanship in them. Older ones are only handmade and even modern watches from high class manufacturer are still made by watchmakers.

No one buys them if they don't care or don't have the money.

Those watches have a lot of personal skill embedded in them.

It reflects the opposite of mass production.

Feel free to look for good watchmaker docus on yt.

[smackeyacky]

Mechanical watches are fun. You can buy something like an Invicta with a display back for $100 and see the moving parts as it runs. Sure you have to adjust the time, wind it etc. But that is part of the charm. Like a chunky, pre digital reminder of the past.

[randomhodler84]

$100 is fine, I’ve spent more on beer in a night. I can see the charm in a $100 toy you wear on your wrist for fun. Thank you for your perspective.

[PyWoody]

For me it's that there is no tech involved in a mechanical watch. No screen. No buttons. No perfectly kept time. If I don't wind it, it dies.

The watch I'm wearing on my wrist is virtually indistinguishable from one created over a hundred years ago. I think that's just neat.

[thraway3837]

Fact is that jewelry wouldn’t be a “hobby” if no one ever saw you wear it. You can espouse all the needless complexity and pass it down value, but it’s all make believe weird “you can tell a lot about a man by the watch he wears” BS.

[throw8383833jj]

and i'm surprised people still want to signal wealth, this day and age. I would imagine you'd be treated worse by the average person, if you're signaling wealth.

[adamdusty]

Only if you live entirely on the internet.

I've never met anyone in real life that actually hates people with money.

[goodpoint]

Hating people with money is one thing.

Disliking ostentation of wealth is another one.

If you never met anyone that dislikes the latter... well perhaps you live in US.

[TigeriusKirk]

>I would imagine you'd be treated worse by the average person, if you're signaling wealth.

This runs completely counter to my personal experiences and observations.

[goodpoint]

Conspicuous consumption and showing off status symbols.

[mperham]

The best are engineering marvels and last generations. Art with a practical purpose.