Dive into the world of watch collecting as we explore the elusive concept of the perfect collection size. From mathematical formulas to emotional connections, discover how collectors navigate the paradox of passion and practicality in their horological journey.
“Perhaps, then, we might view the ideal collection not as a static entity with a fixed optimal size, but as an evolving organism. It grows, sheds, and transforms in concert with the collector’s journey through life. The collection of our youth, with its emphasis on quantity and variety, may give way to a more curated selection in our later years”
Great topic, excellent insights….. gave me some good perspective into my own collecting journey and where it’s at……. Slowing down mostly as I’m feeling less and less need and becoming more, I don’t know 🤷🏼♂️ satisfied/picky/jaded/discerning …. I guess mostly just enjoying what I have and just barely able to keep them all in rotation (I do have a couple mostly retired but with some emotional attachment so there’s that) I do think something will have to leave before something else enters as I’m probably at that stage of diminishing returns
Great write up Nathan and thanks for contributions by all!
It’s tough to come to terms with a watch that really doesn’t fit. Sometimes I see a dissonance in myself not wanting to admit that I was wrong when I purchased the watch or admit that my taste changed that much. It is part of how we grow in this journey.
For the not moneyed, this is also a serious consideration. And one that wasn’t touched upon in this otherwise very satisfying discourse. Accepting sunk cost fallacy and swallowing the red pill to further explore how deep the hole is, is a tipping point of the cusp. Trust me. I recently have undergone several major culls, and have stared into that abyss.
Sunk cost fallacy and loss aversion are something that definitely play a role in the watches that currently sit in limbo at the moment. Great observation
Oh I trust you. Believe me, I do. Knowing what little I do of your story, I would likely be a suicide statistic in your shoes 😂 - On that note, I welcome your extended thoughts anytime, should you wish to share them - here or in DM, and if there's a story or ten you'd like to share, I'm all for it!
Propose a longevity collector. One who is collecting 15 - 20 -30 years or more. One who has seen the passing of several trends, witnessed the way modern science and manufacturing quickly upends the status quo, and enjoyed the opportunity to sample many brands, independents, and hopefully the gods of haute horology’s heavenly samples. The Longevity collector may have a crazy number of watches spanning everything from early to contemporary. Hence my addendum to your equation adding a factor of the number of years a collector has been pursuing this most crazy and satisfying hobby to your equation.
Larry, absolutely right, the longer a collector is collecting the greater the number of watches that get added over time. There is not limit on the time of collecting. The only self imposed limits in the equation to prevent diminishing returns would be the number of watches in the primary rotation which I feel has an upper bound and keeping limbo close to zero as much as possible. The retired number of watches I don’t believe has an upper bound other than how many can realistically be retired. So the longer the collector is actively collecting the greater the number the retired watches. So total collection is larger over time. Thanks for thinking about the length of time of a collection and it’s impact on collection size.
Larry! Long time. Did you ever get my email response? I’d agree, duration matters - in Nate’s formula I suppose there are the ones which he accounts for in the retired category?
Appreciate the thoughts and compliment Bruce.
“Perhaps, then, we might view the ideal collection not as a static entity with a fixed optimal size, but as an evolving organism. It grows, sheds, and transforms in concert with the collector’s journey through life. The collection of our youth, with its emphasis on quantity and variety, may give way to a more curated selection in our later years”
Great topic, excellent insights….. gave me some good perspective into my own collecting journey and where it’s at……. Slowing down mostly as I’m feeling less and less need and becoming more, I don’t know 🤷🏼♂️ satisfied/picky/jaded/discerning …. I guess mostly just enjoying what I have and just barely able to keep them all in rotation (I do have a couple mostly retired but with some emotional attachment so there’s that) I do think something will have to leave before something else enters as I’m probably at that stage of diminishing returns
Great write up Nathan and thanks for contributions by all!
We're in a similar space Bruce...I think I might be teetering on the edge of moving on or taking an extended break.
Pens as a side hobby helps you I think. It feeds the collector beast in you, which will always be ravenous.
🤬
Thanks for reading hermano 🙏
The last sentence captures my ongoing struggle- being honest about my feelings for each piece then bold enough to send the bystanders on their way.
It’s tough to come to terms with a watch that really doesn’t fit. Sometimes I see a dissonance in myself not wanting to admit that I was wrong when I purchased the watch or admit that my taste changed that much. It is part of how we grow in this journey.
Sometimes, it’s just not wanting to crystallise the loss too 😂
For the not moneyed, this is also a serious consideration. And one that wasn’t touched upon in this otherwise very satisfying discourse. Accepting sunk cost fallacy and swallowing the red pill to further explore how deep the hole is, is a tipping point of the cusp. Trust me. I recently have undergone several major culls, and have stared into that abyss.
Sunk cost fallacy and loss aversion are something that definitely play a role in the watches that currently sit in limbo at the moment. Great observation
Oh I trust you. Believe me, I do. Knowing what little I do of your story, I would likely be a suicide statistic in your shoes 😂 - On that note, I welcome your extended thoughts anytime, should you wish to share them - here or in DM, and if there's a story or ten you'd like to share, I'm all for it!
Scott! So lovely to hear from you, thought you stopped reading 😂
You said it better than I did 🥂
I can sum up in two words exactly how many watches anyone should collect. “It depends.”😂 Good stuff Amigo! 🥃
How many watches does a collector need? One more. The answer never changes
Should have saved us all the hassle and led with that… next time 😂
😂
Thank you and your co-author :)
I love the idea of retired, it just explains so much!
This requires some self reflecting :D crazy
Interesting that 20/80 you see in so many other aspects of life
Best part about coauthors is they reply to comments 😂
Glad you enjoyed it Zhenya. The 20/80 definitely shows up a lot.
Love me some good optimization, fun stuff 👏
Nerd.
Propose a longevity collector. One who is collecting 15 - 20 -30 years or more. One who has seen the passing of several trends, witnessed the way modern science and manufacturing quickly upends the status quo, and enjoyed the opportunity to sample many brands, independents, and hopefully the gods of haute horology’s heavenly samples. The Longevity collector may have a crazy number of watches spanning everything from early to contemporary. Hence my addendum to your equation adding a factor of the number of years a collector has been pursuing this most crazy and satisfying hobby to your equation.
Larry, absolutely right, the longer a collector is collecting the greater the number of watches that get added over time. There is not limit on the time of collecting. The only self imposed limits in the equation to prevent diminishing returns would be the number of watches in the primary rotation which I feel has an upper bound and keeping limbo close to zero as much as possible. The retired number of watches I don’t believe has an upper bound other than how many can realistically be retired. So the longer the collector is actively collecting the greater the number the retired watches. So total collection is larger over time. Thanks for thinking about the length of time of a collection and it’s impact on collection size.
Larry! Long time. Did you ever get my email response? I’d agree, duration matters - in Nate’s formula I suppose there are the ones which he accounts for in the retired category?
Correct. The upper bounds greatest limiting factor is time.