Exploring watch collecting through the lens of psychology. Discover why we cherish certain watches, how provenance affects value, and why the stories behind our watches matter. Uncover the hidden forces driving horological passion in this exploration of Paul Bloom's "How Pleasure Works".
To extend the thinking a bit further, think about how hard it is to divorce the cultural baggage of a particular item from its form, or even its myth. I’m not talking about a *particular* watch (or car or …) that is accorded talismanic properties by a previous owner, but rather the status and esteem accorded to certain coveted consumer goods by decades (or longer) of historical momentum.
Can anyone truly evaluate the merits of a Porsche 911 without falling back on cultural baggage? How would the 911 be viewed today if the 928 had usurped it (as was planned)? What if the line had ended with the 993 (the final air-cooled model)? Would Singer exist today? Would Porsche exist today??
I am confident that Mies van der Rohe had multiple chair designs in mind when he furnished the Barcelona pavilion. Let’s say he went with another option … would that alternative chair have become as “iconic” as the actual Barcelona Chair itself?
To bring things back to watches … what if Patek really lays an egg with the forthcoming Cubitus? What if it looks like this beauty - https://hypebeast.com/2021/4/genius-genta-watches-royal-oak-nautilus-hybrid? How many commentators will be seduced by the august name on the dial in the stead of cohesive, enduring design as a manifestation of horological excellence?
And a final comment on dials! De gustibus non est disputandum, there’s an ass for every seat, etc … but the prevailing belief that the addition of a common ecdysiast’s name (Tiffany) to the dial of a Patek Philippe enhances the timepiece’s value baffles me! When I think of “Tiffany” I think of baby rattles and fanny packs clanging inelegantly against the prodigious FUPAs of charmless tourists buying little blue boxes containing attainable charm bracelets on their annual pilgrimage to “the City.” This controversial opinion was strengthened immeasurably by Kelly Yoch’s recent appearance on The Collectability podcast - she came across as crass, inelegant, and overtly commercial. So perhaps a good fit for her antepenultimate employer, but not for association with Patek Philippe.
Funny you say this… readers have previously made “don’t know how you find the time” type of comments… However- This might be the first time I’ve had any reader explicitly saying a number which made me think about it numerically. I’d say you’re probably not far off … it obviously varies by week, but not unusual to spend 3 hrs a day on average - especially when I count reading as “prep” … so thanks for putting this stark reality into perspective 😅
I will say: Nobody just “has” time. You know this too, I’m sure of it. It’s just a matter of prioritising one thing over another. You’re gifted. And if there’s ever any topic you feel strongly enough to write about, don’t hesitate to do it. It’d be a gift to those who read it. 👊
I was thinking about that abomination you shared as an example of what might bypass critics’ feedback simply by carrying the Patek name - I think the counterpoint is how these critics value their reputation. “Important” collectors will probably not be able to bring themselves to accept it for fear of losing their credibility as independent commentators with no skin in the game. MSM will always be sucking at the teats which feed them, so really, nothing new at all.
You can find breathless reportage from Hodinkee, et alia that amounts to proverbial lips up and down the dick of any given watchmaker’s products. The same holds true for cars.
People who have a substantial amount of money to spend on luxury / performance cars and luxury watches don’t like to be taken advantage of or lose money.
That said, there are watches that I adore - e.g., the Code 11:59 perpetual calendar in white gold - which the secondary market has re-priced swiftly. That’s fine, just buy those items used. It gets harder if you all in love with a depreciation monster vehicle. Say you really, REALLY want a new (L460) Range Rover but you are looking for a needle in a haystack - a sober exterior color with small, silver wheels and a tan interior and, crucially, no window tint. The vast majority of vehicles on the secondary market will have been specced rather differently. Meanwhile, every one of the Code 11:59 perpetual calendars in white gold on offer will vary only in how closely they hew to BNIB condition.
Nice weekend read!! This has become a Saturday morning ritual for me, cup of coffee, SDC..
While Paul Newman adds value to a Daytona, are there similar examples in the art world? I couldn’t think of it.. like would a Picasso be 20 times more expensive if Elizabeth Taylor owned it, or ‘defiled’ it by signing on the back or leaving a message… what about in the world of cars or just houses/estates. I know the latter does make a difference but is it really to the 50x levels that can be seen with the Daytona or the Tiffany tape measure?
There is typically a multiplier for cars with significant provenance.
Cars that won a race (e.g., Le Mans); cars owned by a prominent collector (e.g., Steve McQueen, Jerry Seinfeld … Jo(h)n Voigt!); cars that appeared in a seminal film role (e.g., a certain Aston Martin DB5 in Silver Birch carrying the numberplate BMT 216A).
As for a piece of art - I am tempted to proclaim that, when it comes to artwork, res ipsa loquitur. Except this is clearly not the case, as you can obviously see the, ahem, curational prowess of Gagosian, et alia can elevate a piece of art from obscurity to celebrity with immediacy. Recommended - https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/07/31/larry-gagosian-profile
I just finished the Gagosian article. Christ, he sounds like Aurel Bacs on steroids.
Controversial dealings with oligarchs and other questionables, representing both sides without disclosure, quick flipping, artificial scarcity, cornering markets (a la Watchbox and Journe) - He's also operating on a different planet, given art is worth many multiples more than watches.
Thanks Sherman and I think that’s exactly what I was driving at.. I know we like to compare watches to Art but a massive force of influence that’s missing or maybe nascent in watches is curatorship. A reason a car driven by James Dean or a watch worn by Steve McQueen can command 10-30-50x value is because the watches and car market are not studied.. there aren’t a million historians so to speak with their PhDs and what not .. and therefore can more easily be manipulated by the media, big auction houses and what not. The PN PN was, let’s be honest the biggest talking point in the watch circles thanks to H and Phillips.. but the influence Gagosian can have on art is maybe still not going to at the same level because for every Gagosian, there is also a Jerry Salz or someone similar to dismiss it? Provenance in art is a major topic but is more used from an authentication and history standpoint point. The other angle is, watches are wearable/used which brings you so much closer to the object and the collector rather than a painting and statue that was merely owned and displayed? Not sure… anyways…
Wonderful read as always! Reminded me of this quote: We live inside our mind. That's all there is. Everything that you experience is not external, it's internal. All your experiences are predicated upon your awareness field.
Fantastic read and lots of great tidbits and ideas for the brain to snack on for some time…. Although I’m finishing the post late I see that the comments section is as intriguing and stimulating as the ideas put forth in the original post ….. hail King Flum 😉and the royal court of commentators … thank you all for the contributions 🙇🏼🎯🫡
It is possible to endow an object with 'ghost' meaning to justify a purchase or a liking. Sometimes, I have done this without understanding why; I have endowed an object with a profound meaning to me and felt I cannot be without it.
Fully agree. I would say it’s worth questioning whether that object is serving as a surrogate for something else. Consider a kid with a favourite teddy or blanket - they have this attachment to it which serves as a comfort to them - but nobody else understands it. That tendency exists in us regardless of age. Just different triggers
Interesting topic(s), per usual; a few thoughts:
The essay brought to mind this book, of which I have a copy - https://www.goodreads.com/en/book/show/836365.Quintessence
To extend the thinking a bit further, think about how hard it is to divorce the cultural baggage of a particular item from its form, or even its myth. I’m not talking about a *particular* watch (or car or …) that is accorded talismanic properties by a previous owner, but rather the status and esteem accorded to certain coveted consumer goods by decades (or longer) of historical momentum.
Can anyone truly evaluate the merits of a Porsche 911 without falling back on cultural baggage? How would the 911 be viewed today if the 928 had usurped it (as was planned)? What if the line had ended with the 993 (the final air-cooled model)? Would Singer exist today? Would Porsche exist today??
I am confident that Mies van der Rohe had multiple chair designs in mind when he furnished the Barcelona pavilion. Let’s say he went with another option … would that alternative chair have become as “iconic” as the actual Barcelona Chair itself?
To bring things back to watches … what if Patek really lays an egg with the forthcoming Cubitus? What if it looks like this beauty - https://hypebeast.com/2021/4/genius-genta-watches-royal-oak-nautilus-hybrid? How many commentators will be seduced by the august name on the dial in the stead of cohesive, enduring design as a manifestation of horological excellence?
And a final comment on dials! De gustibus non est disputandum, there’s an ass for every seat, etc … but the prevailing belief that the addition of a common ecdysiast’s name (Tiffany) to the dial of a Patek Philippe enhances the timepiece’s value baffles me! When I think of “Tiffany” I think of baby rattles and fanny packs clanging inelegantly against the prodigious FUPAs of charmless tourists buying little blue boxes containing attainable charm bracelets on their annual pilgrimage to “the City.” This controversial opinion was strengthened immeasurably by Kelly Yoch’s recent appearance on The Collectability podcast - she came across as crass, inelegant, and overtly commercial. So perhaps a good fit for her antepenultimate employer, but not for association with Patek Philippe.
Honestly I think you should take over SDC - your prose is so very epic. 😂
I am well aware of how much time it takes to put together a newsletter.
I simply don’t have it, and I commend you for putting in what likely amounts to 20+ hours a week on a passion project.
Funny you say this… readers have previously made “don’t know how you find the time” type of comments… However- This might be the first time I’ve had any reader explicitly saying a number which made me think about it numerically. I’d say you’re probably not far off … it obviously varies by week, but not unusual to spend 3 hrs a day on average - especially when I count reading as “prep” … so thanks for putting this stark reality into perspective 😅
I will say: Nobody just “has” time. You know this too, I’m sure of it. It’s just a matter of prioritising one thing over another. You’re gifted. And if there’s ever any topic you feel strongly enough to write about, don’t hesitate to do it. It’d be a gift to those who read it. 👊
I was thinking about that abomination you shared as an example of what might bypass critics’ feedback simply by carrying the Patek name - I think the counterpoint is how these critics value their reputation. “Important” collectors will probably not be able to bring themselves to accept it for fear of losing their credibility as independent commentators with no skin in the game. MSM will always be sucking at the teats which feed them, so really, nothing new at all.
The market speaks.
You can find breathless reportage from Hodinkee, et alia that amounts to proverbial lips up and down the dick of any given watchmaker’s products. The same holds true for cars.
People who have a substantial amount of money to spend on luxury / performance cars and luxury watches don’t like to be taken advantage of or lose money.
That said, there are watches that I adore - e.g., the Code 11:59 perpetual calendar in white gold - which the secondary market has re-priced swiftly. That’s fine, just buy those items used. It gets harder if you all in love with a depreciation monster vehicle. Say you really, REALLY want a new (L460) Range Rover but you are looking for a needle in a haystack - a sober exterior color with small, silver wheels and a tan interior and, crucially, no window tint. The vast majority of vehicles on the secondary market will have been specced rather differently. Meanwhile, every one of the Code 11:59 perpetual calendars in white gold on offer will vary only in how closely they hew to BNIB condition.
I’d have gone with tongue over lips in that fabulous analogy 😂
But yeah, fair enough
What a last paragraph, "prodigious FUPAs of charmless tourists"...😂
Nice weekend read!! This has become a Saturday morning ritual for me, cup of coffee, SDC..
While Paul Newman adds value to a Daytona, are there similar examples in the art world? I couldn’t think of it.. like would a Picasso be 20 times more expensive if Elizabeth Taylor owned it, or ‘defiled’ it by signing on the back or leaving a message… what about in the world of cars or just houses/estates. I know the latter does make a difference but is it really to the 50x levels that can be seen with the Daytona or the Tiffany tape measure?
There is typically a multiplier for cars with significant provenance.
Cars that won a race (e.g., Le Mans); cars owned by a prominent collector (e.g., Steve McQueen, Jerry Seinfeld … Jo(h)n Voigt!); cars that appeared in a seminal film role (e.g., a certain Aston Martin DB5 in Silver Birch carrying the numberplate BMT 216A).
As for a piece of art - I am tempted to proclaim that, when it comes to artwork, res ipsa loquitur. Except this is clearly not the case, as you can obviously see the, ahem, curational prowess of Gagosian, et alia can elevate a piece of art from obscurity to celebrity with immediacy. Recommended - https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2023/07/31/larry-gagosian-profile
I just finished the Gagosian article. Christ, he sounds like Aurel Bacs on steroids.
Controversial dealings with oligarchs and other questionables, representing both sides without disclosure, quick flipping, artificial scarcity, cornering markets (a la Watchbox and Journe) - He's also operating on a different planet, given art is worth many multiples more than watches.
Holy smokes this is a great share. Thanks - might need to, in the words of every modern consultant, “double click” on this mf’er 🤩
Thanks for sharing that Gagosian article. What an epic read!
Thanks Sherman and I think that’s exactly what I was driving at.. I know we like to compare watches to Art but a massive force of influence that’s missing or maybe nascent in watches is curatorship. A reason a car driven by James Dean or a watch worn by Steve McQueen can command 10-30-50x value is because the watches and car market are not studied.. there aren’t a million historians so to speak with their PhDs and what not .. and therefore can more easily be manipulated by the media, big auction houses and what not. The PN PN was, let’s be honest the biggest talking point in the watch circles thanks to H and Phillips.. but the influence Gagosian can have on art is maybe still not going to at the same level because for every Gagosian, there is also a Jerry Salz or someone similar to dismiss it? Provenance in art is a major topic but is more used from an authentication and history standpoint point. The other angle is, watches are wearable/used which brings you so much closer to the object and the collector rather than a painting and statue that was merely owned and displayed? Not sure… anyways…
Honestly, a good question, but not something I follow closely enough to answer 😅
Wonderful read as always! Reminded me of this quote: We live inside our mind. That's all there is. Everything that you experience is not external, it's internal. All your experiences are predicated upon your awareness field.
Wise words EG! 🙏👊
Great read. And thanks go directly to you for bringing both essence itself and clarity on essence to all of us in the watch community 🙏
Relax, nerd. You had it in you all along 😁👊
Fantastic read and lots of great tidbits and ideas for the brain to snack on for some time…. Although I’m finishing the post late I see that the comments section is as intriguing and stimulating as the ideas put forth in the original post ….. hail King Flum 😉and the royal court of commentators … thank you all for the contributions 🙇🏼🎯🫡
😂😂 missed you man. Thanks for taking the time 🙏
It’s always been about the essence.
Word 🥂
It is possible to endow an object with 'ghost' meaning to justify a purchase or a liking. Sometimes, I have done this without understanding why; I have endowed an object with a profound meaning to me and felt I cannot be without it.
Fully agree. I would say it’s worth questioning whether that object is serving as a surrogate for something else. Consider a kid with a favourite teddy or blanket - they have this attachment to it which serves as a comfort to them - but nobody else understands it. That tendency exists in us regardless of age. Just different triggers
Super read… fantastic!
Thanks for taking the time Roberto 🥂