SDC Weekly 49; OnlyWatch 2024; The Narcissism of Small Differences
May Market Update, Rolex Trademark Battles, Journe and Friendship, Detent Escapement, Sriracha Shortage, Spinning Tops and Fingerprint Forests.
In this issue of SDC, we dive into the results and drama surrounding OnlyWatch 2024, examine how the psychological concept of the narcissism of small differences applies to watch collecting, and round up the latest news and articles from across the watch world.
You can catch up on the older editions of SDC Weekly here. Remember, free subscribers receive the full newsletter via email - 2 weeks after publication - so if you’re not subscribed already, here’s a good reason to do so!
🎈 Small stuff
Auction results
I am travelling at the moment, with limited time to prepare this section in full given Christie’s postponed their main auctions following a security issue. Apparently they’ve fallen victim to a ransomware hack orchestrated by an insider, but for now, watch this video which claims this has been going on for a few weeks and clients’ personal information has been compromised. Christie’s subsequent auctions were a sh*t show as well, perhaps unsurprisingly, given they haven’t worked out how to solve their hacker problem! 🎪
Anyway, I decided to split out OnlyWatch into its own separate section below the ‘small talk’, and cover the rest of Christie’s and Sotheby’s auctions in next week’s SDC if there’s anything worth talking about. Meanwhile, Rexhep Rexhepi made it to Bloomberg for selling 3 watches for a total of US$4.3 million across all auctions!
“It’s a surprise for me,” Rexhepi said in an interview on Sunday following the auctions. “I couldn’t have expected this and these are really big numbers.”
Andy Hoffman via Bloomberg
Antiquorum: Eric Ku called it: The Patek Philippe 605 World Time Cloisonné exceeded the high estimate of 2 million, selling for just over 3 million CHF, and the Patek Philippe 1463 in the same auction achieved double the high estimate at 293k CHF. The auction sold 500 out of 589 lots, for a total sale price of 14.2 million CHF.
Phillips: One of the headline lots, the Patek Philippe 2523, sold for 1.75m CHF, below the high estimate of 2.4m CHF, and the RRCC1 sold for 1.155m CHF, above the high estimate of 600k. Eric also called it on this Cartier which sold for double the high estimate. Journe’s Chronomètre à Resonance “Pre-Souscription” sold for 571k CHF, which is a huge drop given the same watch which sold for US$800k (~725k CHF) 6 months ago in December 2023. This Chronomètre à Resonance Black Label sold for 355k CHF, and the same piece sold for 445k CHF in November 2023. A 20% decline in high end Journe is probably a good thing, as they were overdue a drop relative to the market. It is likely Watchbox is still protecting the market from free falling, given all the Journe inventory they’re holding. This auction sold 212 out of 215 lots, for a total sale price of 35.9 million CHF.
Ineichen: This auction just ended yesterday… and I didn’t even mention it last week because it was an online timed auction. They did have a couple of cool pieces like this Harry Winston Excenter Tourbillon Limited Edition ‘Speake-Marin’ and this Lange 1 on a white gold Milanese bracelet.
Rolex Trademark Dispute
This article covers a recent trademark opposition filed by Rolex against Hallmark. If you’re interested, here’s the filing with the USPTO. Hallmark applied to register a crown logo for use on random products like candles and board games … but the list also included jewellery! Rolex argues that Hallmark’s crown logo is confusingly similar to its own, but take a look at Hallmark’s logo below, to the right. Rolex are taking the piss!
Service Centers Confiscating Stolen Watches
![r/Watches - [Vacheron Constantin] Overseas Seized By Police While In For Service - Help & Advice Requested](https://substackcdn.com/image/fetch/$s_!sfIA!,f_auto,q_auto:good,fl_progressive:steep/https%3A%2F%2Fsubstack-post-media.s3.amazonaws.com%2Fpublic%2Fimages%2F7a76c0b0-156f-4622-bbf1-667c355c6331_640x401.png "r/Watches - [Vacheron Constantin] Overseas Seized By Police While In For Service - Help & Advice Requested")
This turned up on Reddit last week, and found its way into a collector chat group. Some interesting discussion ensued, including a great story about a stolen Journe watch which led to a unique Resonance (story included in links section below). I’m sharing this image and link to the Reddit post for those who don’t already take steps in their watch-buying routine, to prevent this sort of thing happening to them. This was an eBay purchase, and the disaster could have easily been avoided if the buyer had done a quick search on Enquirus, prior to closing the deal. Expensive lesson to learn, but we might as well all learn something from it too… or at least, take it as a gentle reminder.
Enough small talk… Let’s dig in.
ScrewDownCrown is a reader-supported guide to the world of watch collecting, behavioural psychology, & other first world problems.
🎪 OnlyWatch 2024
On Friday the 10th of May, 20 minutes before the auction was set to begin, Christie’s sent out an email:
“We are taking all necessary steps to manage this matter, with the engagement of a team of additional technology experts… We will provide further updates to our clients as appropriate.”
Despite their website being down, the show continued in person (Full Video). They managed to raise ~28.3 million Francs, around 2 million shy of the amount raised in 2021. It sounds like a decent performance, until you realise over half of this was from a single watch, and over 80% was from 5 watches, out of 47 (over 90% was from the top 14 lots)! Here’s a summary, (Note: Performance relates to the sale price in relation to the estimates, and there is no buyer’s premium in this auction):
A friend of mine was bidding on the Rexhep Rexhepi Chronomètre Antimagnétique and despite bidding 800k over his pre-set budget of a million, still didn’t win it! Zach Lu the Tiffany Nautilus guy (side note, here’s a Tiffany Nautilus on a no reserve auction at Loupe This, ending this Friday), ended up buying the Patek OnlyWatch. Those three pretty much cover the extent of the ‘highlights’ unless you care about the Richard Mille necklace, the Louis Vuitton Einstein watch, and Kari’s ghastly square watch. That’s not the full story though…
The above Instagram post, as well as a handful of comments on the post, tell a different story, which was true for many other lots. The Ludovic Ballouard x Brittany Nicole Cox Upside Down Blue Feather sold for 100k CHF, exceeding the estimate of 60-80k… but evidently too low for Ludovic. So much so, that he’s decided not to participate anymore:
I must admit, it is easy to wonder why Ludo is so upset given this sold above the high estimate… but I think he knows more than he’s letting on (ref the unsubstantiated rumours below). I also wonder who else will stop participating as a result of this perceived grievance. Here are the ones which didn’t even hit the low estimate, and perhaps have more cause for grievance:
The Chaykin, Lederer and Trilobe stand out - the Genta piece is pretty sh*t for that sort of money, so maybe isn’t as surprising. Many in the room have suggested very few bids came from the room, and most bids came in over the phone. This would suggest the website being down, was in fact a bigger issue than Christie’s care to admit.
Anyway, back to a subject which came up post-fact, regarding how some brands had organised celebration parties, scheduled long before the auction, to celebrate the OnlyWatch results; this led to unsubstantiated rumours about pre-event collusion with groups of bidders pooling money, solely to drive up the prices of certain watches. I mean, sure, this is possible - but I’d like to see more evidence before believing these stories. The math does make sense, though.1
The final point is on the Patek result. Before you read this, please note: I have no evidence. However, I am choosing to share it anyway, to provide a window into the breadth of possible stupidity in this hobby. Apparently Zach Lu has a weird obsession with Patek, where he sees himself as some sort of Patek guardian. I am told he was bidding on the watch himself, but also had another person bidding on his behalf - so it is therefore possible that after a certain point he was bidding against himself with the sole purpose of driving the result as high as possible.
Yes, this does rank highly amongst the dumbest things I have ever heard. Still, if you look at how Zach is allocated literally any Patek Philippe he wants, maybe this ‘limelight spend’ which reflects positively on the brand as well as himself (in the eyes of the brand) is actually worth it? We need not get into the details of Zach’s wealth, but needless to say, he can clearly afford to buy his status as Thierry Stern’s favourite client in the world. Maybe that’s how billionaires buy status, and peasants like us will never understand it? Who knows.
Anyway, despite all the drama, Christie’s seemed to give zero fvcks, as the CEO emailed everyone and offered no apologies for any inconvenience, while reminding them to pony up their cash in the upcoming auctions:
💡 The Narcissism of Small Differences
English original:
Now, the Star-Belly Sneetches
Had bellies with stars.
The Plain-Belly Sneetches
Had none upon thars.
Those stars weren’t so big. They were really so small
You might think such a thing wouldn’t matter at all.
You will never believe how this post came to be… A recent subscriber, MattW, reached out last week in response to the SDC Weekly, and aside from sharing some reflections on the newsletter itself, also explained how he found SDC. Matt happens to be a writer too, and one of his mates also reads SDC… That mate recommended SDC to Matt, and once I heard he writes too, I went down a little rabbit hole on Matt’s website. This post by Matt in particular, referenced a topic I haven’t explicitly covered before, and I thought it would be fun read. Thanks for the inspiration, Matt!
In his 1930 book “Civilization and Its Discontents,” Sigmund Freud introduced the “narcissism of small differences” to explain the hostility that arises between groups of people who are quite similar. This idea has since become a lens through which we can understand human behaviour across various domains, from ethnic and religious conflicts to rivalries in art, music, and politics. It may seem irrelevant on a blog about watches and watch collecting, but I assure you, it is most certainly not out of place!
Roots of the Narcissism of Small Differences
Freud observed it is “communities with adjoining territories, and related to each other in other ways as well, who are engaged in constant feuds and in ridiculing each other.” He noted this phenomenon tends to extend beyond ethnic or religious groups to families, neighbouring towns, and today we see this extend even further to watch brands and their origins (Swiss vs German vs British is a popular one nowadays).
Of two neighbouring towns each is the other’s most jealous rival; every little canton looks down upon the others with contempt.
What accounts for this hostility between groups that are so alike? Freud suggested this comes in two parts. First is our innate predisposition for aggression and the second is our desire for a distinct identity. Seeing people around us, and in our own circles, reflect or mirror us too much, tends to threatens our perception of how unique we are. Political scientist Stephen Brooks calls this the uncomfortable truth of resemblance; that is we resemble our neighbour and we are uncomfortable with the feeling. To alleviate this ego-injury, people downplay their similarities with others and emphasise their differences. This bias towards exaggeration can be amplified into seemingly unbridgeable rifts. (As an aside, isn’t it therefore unsurprising that limited edition watches, or unique customisations on watches are so desirable? Yes, the theory goes far beyond my watch examples, but thought it was worth pointing out)
The Robbers Cave experiment was a classic social psychology study conducted by Muzafer Sherif and his colleagues in 1954. The study aimed to investigate the formation of group identity, intergroup conflict, and conflict resolution2.
The Robbers Cave experiment demonstrated group identity and intergroup conflict could arise even in the absence of pre-existing differences or animosity. It also showed that competition and perceived scarcity of resources could exacerbate intergroup hostility, while shared goals and cooperation could help to reduce conflict.
The Narcissism of Small Differences in the Modern World
In the ‘modern west’, where tribal living has given way to the pursuit of individualism, people are forced to assemble their identities from various pieces, including personality, career, location, hobbies, and tastes. Even the whole notion which is best captured by the term ‘wokism’ speaks to this desire to stand out as an individual, but ironically does so by identifying with a smaller, niche crowd. Modern culture and consumerism provide endless avenues for tweaking one’s lifestyle and possessions to stand out. The thing is, globalism has made unique traditions, dialects, and pastimes more scarce than ever - and this makes it super challenging to truly distinguish oneself from the tribe.
So if we say the narcissism of small differences is what occupied people back in the day, today we might best describe what we see as the narcissism of microscopic differences. This phenomenon is particularly heightened in communities that share more in common than the general population. Pierre Bourdieu observed a lot more on the same subject:
"Objective differences in capital, like differences in power, almost always tend to be underestimated and differences in lifestyle overestimated"
A bit of a tangent, but this quote highlights Bourdieu’s central thesis i.e., cultural preferences and practices are not simply matters of individual choice, but things which are deeply influenced by one’s position in the social hierarchy and which serve to reinforce and legitimise social inequality - more in the post shared above.
Back to the point - to use a provocative example, consider the members of the LGBTQ+ community; As the individual groups (L, B, T etc) grew in number, each was forced to work harder to feel unique in what appeared to be a sea of similarity to any casual observer; “Lump it all into the acronym, job done!” Here’s a phenomenal quote using the concepts of achievement and failure to make the point:
“The more our societies have become meritocratic, and the more they have opened themselves up to individual achievement, the more our identities have tended to be framed around our professional achievements — with the inevitable corollary that failure has come to seem catastrophic.”
The Pitfalls of Basing Identity on Minor Differences
You might say, there’s nothing wrong with adopting a lifestyle which aligns with your beliefs, but when people rely on small differences to frame their identity, two potential problems arise.
The first issue, is this may result in defining yourself by what you are not, rather than what you actually stand for.
“An identity or a career cannot be built around what you don’t want. We have to shift from a negative identity, or sense of what I’m not, to a positive one, or a sense of what I am. This takes courage.”
The second issue, is this could lead to a focus on trivial details over fundamental issues. If you’re too scared of of conforming, this (somewhat ironically) could prevent you from creating a truly unique self. That’s because, whether we like it or not, we are all conformists to a certain extent. There are many aspects of life which are common to most (work, relationships, etc) - and instead of pursuing excellence in the fundamentals, we may end up tending to superficial stuff:
“The art of being wise is the art of knowing what to overlook.”
William James
Rather than worrying about whether to do basic things in a slightly different way, we should simply focus on excellence in everything we do.
General thoughts
The narcissism of small differences is a rather powerful force which we are likely to find at least partially explains much of human conflict and behaviour. Rather than getting caught up in superficial differences, we would do well to focus on cultivating excellence in everything we do. Becoming a person of integrity and unshakable principles, an excellent parent, a loving neighbour, whatever - these are ‘significant differences’ which actually matter. We live in a world which tends to value style over substance, so if you think about it, committing to become a person of impeccable character is pretty radical thing to do.
I can’t help but quote David Foster Wallace from “This Is Water” for what might be the umpteenth time on SDC:
“The real value of a real education has almost nothing to do with knowledge, and everything to do with simple awareness; awareness of what is so real and essential, so hidden in plain sight all around us, all the time, that we have to keep reminding ourselves over and over: “This is water. This is water.”
When we look beyond the narcissism of small differences, we open ourselves up to this kind of transformative awareness - and to a richer, more meaningful engagement with our common humanity.
Conclusion
You might be wondering what you are supposed to do with this information… How can this be put into practice? Here are a few ideas, to get you started:
Recognise the tendency to exaggerate minor differences: Watch collectors are often prone to over emphasising small differences between brands, models, or features in order to assert their unique identity or connoisseurship. Being aware of this tendency can help collectors maintain perspective and avoid getting caught up in trivial details or worse, foolish debates with other collectors.
Embrace shared passion and knowledge: While it is seemingly quite natural to seek distinctiveness, watch collectors should also recognise the value of shared goals and cooperation within the community. Engaging with fellow collectors and learning from one another will probably lead to a richer and more rewarding collecting experience.
Avoid defining yourself solely by your collection: While watches can be an important part of one’s identity, collectors should be cautious about defining themselves primarily by what they own or don’t own. Cultivating a well-rounded sense of self that goes beyond the hobby is likely to result in greater personal fulfilment.
Appreciate the diversity within the watch community: The world of watches is vast and varied, with room for many different tastes, styles, and approaches to collecting. Embracing this diversity and respecting others’ preferences can help foster a more inclusive and harmonious community.
Prioritise substance over style: This one may not resonate with everyone, but in a world which tends to value superficial differences, committing to being a collector of integrity and principle can be harder than it seems. This is about not being a hype-chaser, and I say it may not resonate with everyone because some folks actually enjoy this aspect of collecting! Still, I would say focusing on the substance of watches – their objective quality, history, or personal meaning – over fleeting trends and status symbols, will likely lead to a more authentic and satisfying collecting journey. Most of all, it will be more sustainable, since your love for the watches you own is internally driven, and not a function of external factors such as hype trains.
Anything I’ve missed? Hit me up in the comments.
📌 Links of interest
⚙ Explained: The Detent Escapement by David Ichim.
📉 May 2024 Watch Market Update: WatchCharts. While we’re at it, Cartier Watch Prices Gain as Rolex, Patek Fall: Subdial Index via Bloomberg’s Andy Hoffman.
🤓 How Counterfeit Rolexes Actually Work, According To An Investigator. (22 min video)
🕰 Churchill's pocket watch to go under the hammer.
🌠 DavidSW listed the first 2024 Rolex release on Sunday, a mere one month after its unveiling at Watches and Wonders. It sold within hours for $75,675 - that’s a $23,570 premium over retail.
⭐ The ‘Mystery Cross Daytona at Sotheby’s via Perezcope.
😇 Theft, Friendship, and a Custom F.P. Journe Resonance. An old story shared by Mark Cho which I only heard about last week.
🍭 Stepan Sarpaneva: From Cable Guy to Candyman.
🎪 GPHG 2024: entries now open! Entry fees amount to CHF 800 per candidate watch, and if nominated, a single flat-rate fee of CHF 7,000 is payable for each nominated watch. Given the marketing value, particularly for unknown brands, this is a good deal. Easy to see why watchmakers bother!
♠ Howard Marks on the Impact of Debt.
🎼 Research suggests that our musical preferences tend to stagnate around age 30.
🍎 How Apple’s ‘tone deaf’ iPad ad signals a turning point. More here and here. The ad is pretty intense, and while I understand the premise of the ad, the backlash is understandable!
🤖 Apple nears deal with OpenAI to put ChatGPT in iOS 18.
💊 The Paradox of Plenty - a 4 minute film by Chris Ramsay.
💥 Sriracha shortage fears: Why a pepper supply issue halted production.
😮 Why Do So Many Maple Syrup Bottles Have a Tiny Little Handle?
😇 16 Heartwarming Words and Phrases That Don’t Have an English Equivalent.
🤔 I forgot to add this link last week - but here’s a full recap of Warren Buffett’s comments at the Berkshire Hathaway annual meeting: “I hope I come next year”
🌌 This video (25 mins) was shared by A Watch Critic critic during a discussion about ‘hand made’ watches - various sub topics included the (mis)use of the term ‘hand made’ in watchmaking, the use of CNC, the true definition of ‘hand made’ and so on. The video is a fun example of true craftsmanship and experience in action. Enjoy!
End note
In case you missed it… here’s a fun post from last week:
A brilliant conversation in a collector chat took place last week, and I wasn’t sure where to share it - and this was the only remaining section!
Someone asked:
“You meet someone, could be at a party or dinner or whatever. They figure out you’re into watches. Then they say oh what do you think of mine? And it’s an absolute shitter. What you saying?”
The absolute best response came from none other than A Watch Critic himself:
I have given this some thought and devised a simple 5 step approach that is both respectful but also honest and helps educate:
1. *Question:* Ask why they chose that/what they like about the watch. It may have sentimental value or some other valid reason you haven't considered. It will also give you some understanding of their knowledge of watches in general and how they see their own watch.
2. *Relate:* we probably all started with shitters at some point, you can say you started your collecting journey with similar watches, you may have even owned the same brand at some point. Try to remember why you enjoyed those watches, it was usually just the design and perhaps even preceived brand value, and often aspirational purchases. If the watch looks like any particular "proper" watch, Google that reference and point out the similarity so they realise they are simply wearing a copy.
3. *Educate:* Let's assume it's just some fashion watch shitter and they know not much about watches yet, depending if it has a Quartz or Automatic movement, you can explain that watch collectors often care about movements, you then proceed to show of your minute repeater/QP/Chronograph etc. explaining it's all mechanical and watch their mind being blown.
4. *Explain:* why their watch is technically what we in the collectors world call "a shitter", the movement is likely not designed to last or be serviced, a disposable product that won't last and doesn't maintain any value. Point out the many flaws in finishing like misalignments on the dial etc. Objective reasons you don't particularly appreciate their watch.
5. *Conclusion:* now they will already have hopefully concluded themselves that they are wearing an absolute shitter, and retreat shamefully, or ask you more about horology and they are genuinly interested or passionate and want to learn more, a new degenerate is born! If they are still defending their shitter, repeat step 3 & 4 for as long as necessary or they give up! 😁
*Shorter alternative (much less fun), say:* "I had something like that too once, when I was 14! Now I am more into Patek Philippe"
Or: "looks a bit like a ###!" (enter reference it copies).
Factual, doesn't directly judge them, and puts into perspective that they haven't yet matured in their appreciation of watches yet, but you see why they might appreciate the piece.
I, and many others in the chat, were pleasantly surprised and understandably blown away by this excellent guide which seems to cover all bases. Is there anything you’d add or change?
I have previously shared this post by Ted Gioia on Dopamine Culture. Fundamentally, we’re moving from everything being in real life or offline, to moving virtual and online. We are measuring moments in seconds, instead of in days or months. Everything is becoming instant and fleeting… every bit of enjoyment is now ephemeral. What is also true is many things are more accessible than ever before - not just generally (even poor people have smartphones etc.) but also in watchmaking - you can buy a cheap tourbillion for under a grand now!
In such an era then, where instant gratification, easy access and rapid success have become the norm, the world of watchmaking finds itself at a crossroads. Much like the shift from traditional, slow culture to the fast-paced, dopamine-driven culture described by Ted Gioia, the watchmaking industry has seen a surge in accessibility and so-called democratisation (Just ask Wei Koh and William Massena!). With manufacturers more readily accessible and ready to make whatever people want like a horological ‘pick n mix,’ virtually anyone can now create a watch, regardless of their background or expertise in the field.
This newfound accessibility has given rise to a ‘new generation of watchmakers’, eager to tap into the booming watch market and enjoy overnight success (relative to serious watchmakers of the past). The thing that strikes me is just as the transition to dopamine culture has led to poor retention rates and the dominance of novelty effects in the tech world, the watchmaking industry seems to be facing similar challenges.
Many of these starry-eyed profit seekers (self-dubbed watchmakers) seem to expect instant gratification and rapid recognition, without putting in the years of work and dedication that true watchmaking demands. They haven’t toiled at the workbench for decades without widespread success and fame like François-Paul Journe or Daniel Roth, who have devoted their lives to the craft and understand the value of slow, deliberate progress.
In this age of ‘dopamine-driven’ watchmaking, it behooves makers to go back to the roots of their craft and embrace the love of watchmaking for its own sake, rather than chasing quick profits. Just as counter positioning can work in the tech world, with long-form content and deeper experiences still thriving amidst the sea of short-form media, actual watchmakers who remain committed to the art and tradition of their craft will likely find much more sustainable success and fulfilment.
Product management culture in the tech world, with its focus on incremental progress and short-term gains, finds its parallel in the watchmaking industry too. Many watchmakers may be tempted to prioritise superficial novelty and other quick wins over actual development and honest pursuit of purposeful watchmaking in the way Breguet or Harrison did. Look at how a new dial colour is heralded as a ‘release,’ often with a higher price tag simply because time has passed since the last release. What happened to offering genuine value, and prioritising innovation and originality in design? This bit isn’t even limited to new brands either - think about how long it took Patek Philippe to bring a quick-adjust mechanism to the Nautilus, similar to that on the Gen.3 VC Overseas… about 6-7 years!
As the watchmaking industry navigates this landscape, it is crucial for brands and watchmakers to remember that true success lies not in riding the wave of a booming market or chasing fleeting moments of glory, but in dedicating themselves to the craft and creating watches that will stand the test of time. By tapping into the history and traditions of watchmaking, while also embracing innovation and adapting to the changing demands of the market, these watchmakers can ensure that their creations not only captivate in the short term but also leave a lasting legacy. Granted, many of the new brands aren’t bothered with a watchmaking legacy and are only concerned with seasonal success with the release of each new product - and this is where serious collectors should take pause.
In the age of dopamine-driven watchmaking, the path to success may seem temptingly short and straightforward... But it is up to collectors to speak with their wallets and reward brands and watchmakers who remain committed to the art, who invest in their skills and knowledge, and who understand the value of slow, deliberate progress… Because it is those who will ultimately thrive and shape the future of the industry and the hobby.
We get what we deserve.
Until next time,
F
🔮Bonus link: Why does this forest look like a fingerprint?
Deep in the geographic center of Uruguay, there’s a peculiar group of trees just a few kilometers down the road from the small town of San Gregorio de Polanco. From the ground, it’s not particularly notable. But from above, the view is mind-boggling: Hundreds of trees are arranged in perfect concentric arcs, all spiraling toward the center. Together, they look remarkably like a human fingerprint.
Why are the trees been arranged in this shape? Who planted them there? And why — when you zoom out on satellite view — was the entire country of Uruguay covered in similar-looking forests?
This brilliant video (25 mins) by VOX goes straight to the source: interviewing locals, experts, and people whose lives have been shaped by a transformed landscape and economy.
Believe it or not, that “❤️ Like” button is a big deal – it serves as a proxy to new visitors of this publication’s value. If you enjoyed this post, please let others know. Thanks for reading!
The idea, in principle, works like this. If you get 4-5 collectors to split the cost of an RRCA for 500k each, that’s 2-2.5 million. The watch then settles at a ‘public value’ which far exceeds the retail price of 100-150k. This is assuming these collectors already own a watch from the brand. Even if they didn’t you could imagine a situation where the brand would promise each of them a watch allocation as part of the scheme, and once they get their allocations, they have now effectively paid 600k each for a watch ‘publicly valued’ at over 2 million. Sure, it won’t be a unique watch, so maybe these will be valued at 1.5 million or even a million. It is still a great deal, right? Again - this is just an example of how the math could work!
The brand benefits by being able to increase retail prices since they are perceived to be worth a lot more… and just generally, the watches have an inherently boosted brand value which far exceeds the retail price. An ideal situation, especially for a young brand.
Now, I am not at all suggesting this is what happened - I am merely substantiating how ‘the math checks out’ … Funny old game, isn’t it.
The experiment involved two groups of 12-year-old boys who were taken to a summer camp at Robbers Cave State Park in Oklahoma. The boys were carefully selected to ensure they were well-adjusted, of similar backgrounds, and strangers to one another.
Still the best weekly roundup of watch sector news plus exploration of some deep philosophical concepts thrown in for good measure! Bravo!
Small differences discussion has me thinking about some of my professional relationships that are, umm, a struggle. I'm going to have a rethink through this lens, I think it might help.