The Watch Appreciation Thread - Part two (Rolex, Patek Philippe, Audemars Piguet, Jaeger LeCoultre,

[Texasmade]

Rotations are overrated. What if you could only have one watch (or maybe one dressier and one sportier, if we have to stretch)? What would it (they) be?

Nautilus 5990 for sporty. Dress would probably be an ALS Langematik or FP Journe.

 

[TheFoo]

Nautilus 5990 for sporty. Dress would probably be an ALS Langematik or FP Journe.

Not bad. Which Journe?

 

[TheFoo]

My 3k estimate was based on, admittedly, not a ton of research. There ARE plenty of instances of sticker shock with AP servicing, into the thousands. The AP subforum at RolexForums has several such threads. I understand you do not have to necessarily do all the servicing they recommend.

Seeing the official price list is a bit of a relief, just goes to show you should take internet truths with a grain of salt.

When it comes to watches, the internet is as often wrong as it is right. It's a giant echo chamber. One guy heard $3k back in 2009 from some dude who "works for AP" or some such nonsense and it stuck. Even if a hundred people posted photos of their service invoices showing $1k or $1.5k, the internet will still say $3k.

 

[Texasmade]

Not bad. Which Journe?

Octa Lune in 40 mm most likely. Strap not bracelet. I don't like the design of the FPJ bracelet.

 

[Dino944]

The Nautilus is surely a natural RO competitor--but more broadly, I think the "other" option for most would-be RO buyers is Hublot.

There is a very small niche of buyer who is well-versed in watches and likes the 15202 because it is THE Royal Oak. Everyone else who buys APs and ROs . . . well, look at all the other APs and ROs.

I don't think there is much of a genuine alternative to the 15202 other than the 5711. Each is a rarified combination of quality, originality, historical importance, and luxury/sport ethos. The Overseas just doesn't position the same.

ROs are trendy now. 10-15 years ago they were not hard to buy and sort of derided by the online WIS community. Trendy people like trendy watches.

Well, I believe the original poster was referring to the original RO line (be it a 15400, 15300 or 15202) and it having become a SF must have. I've never considered an Hublot or their offerings as a competitor or alternative to the RO. Perhaps for some their Big Bang is an alternative to the RO's bulkier siblings in the RO Offshore line.

Yes, years ago the RO was not as sought after as they are today, but the same is true of the Nautilus. Collectors in the Patek forums basically sh*t all over the watch and people who bought them saying they weren't real Pateks, or saying they were just entry level Pateks. I was in an AD back in 1999, and I could have purchased a brand new Patek Nautilus 3710, which had a list price of around $9,700 for around $6,000. Looking back it was a financial mistake on my part as they are worth about 4 to 5 times that amount. However, I really didn't like the 3710. I thought it was a terrible dial, the Commet indicator seemed stupid to me, the Roman numerals made little sense to me on a sports watch, I didn't like the black dial -which lacked the beauty and depth of the classic striped blue dial, and I didn't like the placement of the Patek name at the bottom. So I passed on it even at a healthy discount. The Nautilus largely gained popularity, when there were rumors Patek wasn't going to make steel watches anymore, not long after the 3712 which was only made for about a year and then went out of production. However, everyone eventually found that wasn't true with the release of the slightly larger 5712 and 5711 and the rest of the line which grew out of them. Still from that time forward interest in the Nautilus has been far stronger than it ever was in the first roughly 25- 30 years of production. So the RO and Nautilus mirror each other in terms of what people thought of them 20-40 years ago vs their growth in popularity during the last 10 years.

I do agree the Overseas isn't truly a direct competitor it always lagged behind the others. Still, I do think its the closest offering from another maker that could compete with the RO or Nautilus.

 

[TheFoo]

Octa Lune in 40 mm most likely. Strap not bracelet. I don't like the design of the FPJ bracelet.

Agreed on the Journe bracelet. Very Russian gangster/oligarch.

I am torn on Journe today. Love his older watches. The original Resonance and 38mm Souverain come to mind. The newer ones are not proportioned as nicely, getting too big, and seem to be increasingly conventional in dial design/layout. The Bleu remains a knockout, however.

Well, I believe the original poster was referring to the original RO line (be it a 15400, 15300 or 15202) and it having become a SF must have. I've never considered an Hublot or their offerings as a competitor or alternative to the RO. Perhaps for some their Big Bang is an alternative to the RO's bulkier siblings in the RO Offshore line.

Yes, years ago the RO was not as sought after as they are today, but the same is true of the Nautilus. Collectors in the Patek forums basically sh*t all over the watch and people who bought them saying they weren't real Pateks, or saying they were just entry level Pateks. I was in an AD back in 1999, and I could have purchased a brand new Patek Nautilus 3710, which had a list price of around $9,700 for around $6,000. Looking back it was a financial mistake on my part as they are worth about 4 to 5 times that amount. However, I really didn't like the 3710. I thought it was a terrible dial, the Commet indicator seemed stupid to me, the Roman numerals made little sense to me on a sports watch, I didn't like the black dial -which lacked the beauty and depth of the classic striped blue dial, and I didn't like the placement of the Patek name at the bottom. So I passed on it even at a healthy discount. The Nautilus largely gained popularity, when there were rumors Patek wasn't going to make steel watches anymore, not long after the 3712 which was only made for about a year and then went out of production. However, everyone eventually found that wasn't true with the release of the slightly larger 5712 and 5711 and the rest of the line which grew out of them. Still from that time forward interest in the Nautilus has been far stronger than it ever was in the first roughly 25- 30 years of production.

I do agree the Overseas isn't truly a direct competitor it always lagged behind the others. Still, I do think its the closest offering from another maker that could compete with the RO or Nautilus.

The 15202 is arguably the only "real" Royal Oak. All others are variations that diverge from the original concept and/or are intended to follow trends.

Non-15202 ROs are typically bought as flashy status symbols. The Offshore line is particularly guilty of this, of course. But like or not, that's what defines AP and the RO model line today and aligns closely with Hublot. Big, flashy, luxo-sporty watches with nonsense complications made of "high-tech" materials styled after a ship porthole and with an integrated bracelet/strap.

 

[TheFoo]

Bring back solid casebacks. Yay/nay? I vote yay.

 

[Texasmade]

Depends on the company. ALS, AP, VC, PP and the like I vote nay.

 

[Dino944]

The 15202 is arguably the only "real" Royal Oak. All others are variations that diverge from the original concept and/or are intended to follow trends.

Non-15202 ROs are typically bought as flashy status symbols. The Offshore line is particularly guilty of this, of course. But like or not, that's what defines AP and the RO model line today and aligns closely with Hublot. Big, flashy, luxo-sporty watches with nonsense complications made of "high-tech" materials styled after a ship porthole and with an integrated bracelet/strap.

I do appreciate AP continuing to offer a watch that is true to the original concept.

While other ROs diverge from the original concept of being an ultra thin time only watch, I'm not sure I'd go as far as to say that all other non-15202s are purchased as flashy status symbols. I don't think one could really say that about a 15300. As for following trends...all most all watch companies are guilty of it. Patek, VC, Rolex etc have all offered larger watches in recent years as that is what much of public demands.

 

[Dino944]

Bring back solid casebacks. Yay/nay? I vote yay.

I agree with @Texasmade depends on the company. With ALS, PP, AP, VC, and a few others I'd vote nay.

 

[roomiller]

Non-15202 ROs are typically bought as flashy status symbols.

99.999% of 15202s, 15400s, ROOs, and all other luxury watches are bought as flashy status symbols.

Speaking of flashy status symbols: Lemme see the flashy movement of my flashy status symbol

 

[ericgereghty]

99.999% of 15202s, 15400s, ROOs, and all other luxury watches are bought as flashy status symbols.

Speaking of flashy status symbols: Lemme see the flashy movement of my flashy status symbol

Do you DARE suggest there might be a more convenient way of telling time than glancing at a $20,000 doohickey on your wrist?!?!

 

[kimmo]

Do you DARE suggest there might be a more convenient way of telling time than glancing at a $20,000 doohickey on your wrist?!?!

A $30k doohickey.

 

[Mr Tewkesbury]

Something about all this doesn't add up.

As far as I know, there are no "official service agents" of Patek other than those who actually work at a Patek service center. Unless your friend is one of those, he doesn't do authorized repair/service work for Patek.

But more odd is his critique itself. Annual calendar complications typically use pen or stylus activated push-piece correctors to adjust the individual calendar elements and to adjust for leap years at the end of February. IWC allows perpetual calendar correction through the crown, but that is their proprietary innovation. Lange, for example, also uses similar push-piece correctors with its annual calendar.

Moreover, Patek invented the annual calendar complication--and only ~20 years ago. Strange to conclude that the inventor's version of their own modern innovation is somehow behind "modern benchmarks."

Finally, not sure anyone else even makes a combination annual calendar and chronograph. If not a singular Patek combination, it is at least very rare.

To the extent your friend knows watches and Pateks, if he means something else about the movement architecture, specifics are needed.

As far as finishing, it seems excellent to me. That said, I haven't taken a loupe to it--and neither have most who venture a strong opinion one way or another. I'd love to see a careful, systematic comparison of finishing from top makers.

He is the go to man for patek in Australia, to my knowledge - offical service agent may of been an overstatement.
As to the other points, for a modern benchmark and within this price point, I believe his critique stands. Too many of the larger houses push out watches based upon the house reputation and tend offer a level of finish and architecture they feel the market will accept (30 minute sub-dial for example), haute-horology is supossed to be the finest and most accomplished level of design and finish. It seldom is now - no, I'm not at all saying what the market is presented with is rubbish, that's not so, but it can be quite lazy. Raraely do we see column wheel chronographs or fully integrated complications. Base plates... I could rant but I'd rather not.

If you have any questions with regard to this please pm me. Rather not take up space here.

Regards

 

[Mr Tewkesbury]

Rotations are overrated. What if you could only have one watch (or maybe one dressier and one sportier, if we have to stretch)? What would it (they) be?

Royal oak and a Dufour or Haldimann