Turns out your gut might be smarter than a spreadsheet. A new study suggests good collectors don't out-think their instincts, they just build better ones.
This was such a good read; thank you! I find particularly helpful your way of differentiating one's immediate response to a watch: "I love this but I don't know why", versus "I don't know why I want this, I just do." I think bearing this in mind can seriously help one avoid regret purchases.
I'm curious, in your experience are there any particular watches where your immediate "gut" reaction eventually became very different after prolonged thought? Eg is there a watch that you at first dismissed but then eventually came to love? And vice versa, one you at first loved but then eventually dismissed?
And as you mature as a collector, do you find this happens less as your mental network is now set up in such a way that a snap judgement on a watch--either positive or negative--will usually be proven right by sustained reflection?
Thanks for reading! I think there are many examples… the best example is Hublot being dismissed as a general bucket of crap - they actually do have some good calibres in the web of nonsense including some cool repeaters - not that I’m hunting them down or anything, but memes aside, they are a good example on a brand level. Vintage Blancpain is one where I didn’t think much of them, but after learning more, I realise there are some solid watches which are super thin and elegant, despite the complications they hold.
On the other side of this coin, the ones where I initially thought they were cool but later found they were not… it’s often indies in this category. No point naming names, as every name will likely require an explanation I either don’t have time to share or I am not allowed to share because it would betray someone’s intel which was shared in confidence… but generally, it’s about how they lie and say they X Y and Z when in fact they do not (but claim they do so that their value prop appears high).
I recall that on a past SDC post we discussed Malcolm Gladwell’s Blink and the importance of experience in the value of snap judgments. I shared my understanding of Gladwell’s position: only with proper experience can a person validly accept their gut instinct. Without proper experience, a person trusting their gut is more likely making a wild ass guess.
I like how you carry this so much further here today :”No amount of information substitutes for integration.” Gold stuff here mate.
More gold: “When the semantic distance between a problem and a solution grows too large (i.e. when you are outside your usual area of expertise), your gut will stop producing reliable answer.” Nothing to add. Pure gold here.
—
Authentication / Superfakes
In “Blink”, there was an anecdote related to your passage of watch authentication. The intro to Blink tells the story of a statue which the Getty museum acquired after scientific authentication. But several art historians who took one look at the piece immediately had a hunch that it was fake and they were ultimately proved correct.
—— Compare side by side, not in isolation.
Two watches in the same room is more transformational than seeing two separate watches six months apart. Can you give a Luddite such as myself more insight here? What do you @KF look for in comparing watches. Just a few minutes ago, I handled a friends Patek Annual Calendar while I am wearing my wife’s Moser VANTAblack tourbillon.
They seem so different as to occupy different spaces. What do you look for when comparing watches on the fly? These spontaneous encounters are much different than a curated setting such as a large watch enthusiast event or sitting down at a dealer's where one selects watches to compare.
— Spend time with watchmakers
Great advice.
I have an acquaintance who has forgotten more about watches than I’ll ever know. Of the many insights I get from him, one thing that sticks in my mind is a passing comment he made many months ago. He was at a dinner in the US with David Candaux who was showing the DC12 and in sharing his experience my acquaintance remarked “I spent about 60 minutes with David discussing the double balance wheel in the DC12 and other watches with two balance wheels.”
That comment reveals both a level of knowledge to which we should aspire as well as a goal for us in our watch collecting interactions. Spend time with the watchmakers.
I often find myself meeting or talking with collectors like yourself who have handled and forgotten more pieces than I’ll ever have the privilege of seeing let alone owning. Their knowledge base blows me away but I often find myself not necessarily being too concerned with my youth in this hobby. Some are snobbish with it and turn me off. Others want me to try to learn as much as they have as quickly as possible. I need more watch Sherpas!!!
It’s such a difficult hobby to be successful in and so few people are willing to help make intros to the most difficult independents bc they know allocations are so scarce so you need a Sherpa to help get
This hits home so much for me. I knew nothing about watch collecting in 2021-22. I got a Rolex as my first “real”
Watch after a few pre owned Panerai’s and a Breitling in 2017-2021 but never caught the bug. By 2022 I become obsessed with learning everything I could about watches. I read at least a dozen books and starting to develop “my taste”. By 2023 I was hosting events for watch brands and buying things I loved or thought I loved. Most of those pieces are no longer in my collection but they included Moser, Ressence, Ming, Kollokium, MBandF and at least 10 others that are no longer in my collection. I don’t think my taste changed as much as my knowledge grew. Now I find myself backing away from the hobby more than previously. It’s a lot of repetition of products with minor meaningless changes and the cost of being able to get the pieces I dream of as a collector no longer seems to be realistic. I hope to keep going and regain the excitement I once had.
That yellow pops hard… first time I saw it I immediately thought ‘sickkk’ - that’s all I remember. Nothing to do with the nice size or the absence of rivets on the bracelet… all good things, but the look was just fire.
I never read thinking fast and slow but when I took a college course with Kahneman 25 years ago I believe he did emphasize that the intuitive unconscious processing does provide a so-called "gut feeling" that integrates a lot of information that isn't captured by the slow thinking process. I'm not sure if this was widespread but we used to call easy courses where you could get a decent grade without studying much "gut" courses as in go with your gut for the answers on the test and I remember thinking that we he was saying kind of validated the "gut" courses
I've been thinking about the inversion of this lately - when you can make a very reasonable argument for a watch, but you don't feel compelled to actually act on it. You touch on it briefly, with "if you don’t have the ‘hell yes’ moment, you probably can’t have it, no matter how much research you do."
I've been trying to explore this - and ultimately just come back to "desire is often arbitrary".
Here's an example: I think most collectors would say that first generation, "meter" dial datographs are undervalued by the market. I would agree. I would even encourage somebody else to buy one. The movement is beautiful, the watch is historically significant and relatively scarce, and it even wears decently... and yet I haven't really ever felt compelled to own one.
Maybe I'm just describing a "requisite but not sufficient" phenomenon. Like you need to actually *want* the watch. But this isn't an adequate explanation - I can't put my finger on *why* I don't desire this particular watch. I can't even point to aesthetics.
(And I don't mean to pick on Lange here - plenty of other watches fit. The modern Ed White Speedmaster. Various Patek world times. Vintage IWC Ingenieur's. Etc.)
Have you seen any research on this? Candidly, I'm not even sure how you would research this. It would be like trying to interrogate somebody's preference for green eyes vs blue eyes.
It's so interesting - and frustrating - when I find inconsistencies in my own preferences and cannot easily explain them.
If I had the wrist for it, I would 100% own a Double Split. Maybe I don't feel compelled to own a datograph because it would feel like settling?
And, to add even more inconsistency - I would sooner buy a 5170 or 5270 than a datograph / datograph perpetual. And I genuinely believe the Lange's are *better* in most ways. There is no status / signal benefit; I think most collectors would go with the Dato. It's also cheaper. Likely more rare and (in the case of the first generation dato) almost certainly more historically important. And yet...
I guess we like what we like. I just wish I could explain it a bit better.
The number of “at bats” will always be relevant. In collecting as you stated it’s how many different physical watches have you seen, touched, wore and compared in person. It’s how many different dial layouts, color schemes, font types etc.. have you looked at. It all builds a library. It applies to music, how do you when to skip a song instantly? Professionally we get good at intuitively knowing key aspect of our jobs if we have had enough at bats and put in the reps.
I have the watches that my gut told me to walk away from but my ego got the better of me. So yes I now have a watch or two to sell. On the flip side, I still have a hell yes that haunts me. It’s always there. I’ve declined it twice due to timing and it will not go away.
Great as usual. It’s a wonderful essay that reminds us that we need to cultivate our learning and mental libraries so that we can better trust our guts. I’ve been burned by not trusting it in both collecting, professional and personal situations. System 1 and system 2 work in tandem, they reinforce one another. Solid deep system 2 thinking is what creates the expertise and the foundation for good system 1 thinking. Good system 1 helps quicker analysis of things that allow you to know where to best engage your system 2 without wasting excessive time and energy. Analysis paralysis is too much system 2 without good system 1 and leads to burnouts. System 1 makes System 2 sustainable and even more enjoyable. The emotional signals from System 1 , the feeling you mentioned and caring about an outcome, finding something interesting, are what motivate effort required by System 2 . Kahneman himself acknowledged this: affect and intuition are what make deliberate thought worth doing.
Wonderful again, and my gut on the word association was, poker, river card, note (money or taking note of the hand), account (more money) 😂🤷♂️. I thought I saw a connection
This was such a good read; thank you! I find particularly helpful your way of differentiating one's immediate response to a watch: "I love this but I don't know why", versus "I don't know why I want this, I just do." I think bearing this in mind can seriously help one avoid regret purchases.
I'm curious, in your experience are there any particular watches where your immediate "gut" reaction eventually became very different after prolonged thought? Eg is there a watch that you at first dismissed but then eventually came to love? And vice versa, one you at first loved but then eventually dismissed?
And as you mature as a collector, do you find this happens less as your mental network is now set up in such a way that a snap judgement on a watch--either positive or negative--will usually be proven right by sustained reflection?
Cheers!
Thanks for reading! I think there are many examples… the best example is Hublot being dismissed as a general bucket of crap - they actually do have some good calibres in the web of nonsense including some cool repeaters - not that I’m hunting them down or anything, but memes aside, they are a good example on a brand level. Vintage Blancpain is one where I didn’t think much of them, but after learning more, I realise there are some solid watches which are super thin and elegant, despite the complications they hold.
On the other side of this coin, the ones where I initially thought they were cool but later found they were not… it’s often indies in this category. No point naming names, as every name will likely require an explanation I either don’t have time to share or I am not allowed to share because it would betray someone’s intel which was shared in confidence… but generally, it’s about how they lie and say they X Y and Z when in fact they do not (but claim they do so that their value prop appears high).
I had many of
These I love this and don’t know why moments that I no longer has as much. It actually makes it less fun to not have these moments
I recall that on a past SDC post we discussed Malcolm Gladwell’s Blink and the importance of experience in the value of snap judgments. I shared my understanding of Gladwell’s position: only with proper experience can a person validly accept their gut instinct. Without proper experience, a person trusting their gut is more likely making a wild ass guess.
I like how you carry this so much further here today :”No amount of information substitutes for integration.” Gold stuff here mate.
More gold: “When the semantic distance between a problem and a solution grows too large (i.e. when you are outside your usual area of expertise), your gut will stop producing reliable answer.” Nothing to add. Pure gold here.
—
Authentication / Superfakes
In “Blink”, there was an anecdote related to your passage of watch authentication. The intro to Blink tells the story of a statue which the Getty museum acquired after scientific authentication. But several art historians who took one look at the piece immediately had a hunch that it was fake and they were ultimately proved correct.
—— Compare side by side, not in isolation.
Two watches in the same room is more transformational than seeing two separate watches six months apart. Can you give a Luddite such as myself more insight here? What do you @KF look for in comparing watches. Just a few minutes ago, I handled a friends Patek Annual Calendar while I am wearing my wife’s Moser VANTAblack tourbillon.
They seem so different as to occupy different spaces. What do you look for when comparing watches on the fly? These spontaneous encounters are much different than a curated setting such as a large watch enthusiast event or sitting down at a dealer's where one selects watches to compare.
— Spend time with watchmakers
Great advice.
I have an acquaintance who has forgotten more about watches than I’ll ever know. Of the many insights I get from him, one thing that sticks in my mind is a passing comment he made many months ago. He was at a dinner in the US with David Candaux who was showing the DC12 and in sharing his experience my acquaintance remarked “I spent about 60 minutes with David discussing the double balance wheel in the DC12 and other watches with two balance wheels.”
That comment reveals both a level of knowledge to which we should aspire as well as a goal for us in our watch collecting interactions. Spend time with the watchmakers.
— All the best KF, another banger.
I often find myself meeting or talking with collectors like yourself who have handled and forgotten more pieces than I’ll ever have the privilege of seeing let alone owning. Their knowledge base blows me away but I often find myself not necessarily being too concerned with my youth in this hobby. Some are snobbish with it and turn me off. Others want me to try to learn as much as they have as quickly as possible. I need more watch Sherpas!!!
"Watch sherpas."
Sounds like the title of an upcoming SDC. You listening @KF?
It’s such a difficult hobby to be successful in and so few people are willing to help make intros to the most difficult independents bc they know allocations are so scarce so you need a Sherpa to help get
You up the mountain
This hits home so much for me. I knew nothing about watch collecting in 2021-22. I got a Rolex as my first “real”
Watch after a few pre owned Panerai’s and a Breitling in 2017-2021 but never caught the bug. By 2022 I become obsessed with learning everything I could about watches. I read at least a dozen books and starting to develop “my taste”. By 2023 I was hosting events for watch brands and buying things I loved or thought I loved. Most of those pieces are no longer in my collection but they included Moser, Ressence, Ming, Kollokium, MBandF and at least 10 others that are no longer in my collection. I don’t think my taste changed as much as my knowledge grew. Now I find myself backing away from the hobby more than previously. It’s a lot of repetition of products with minor meaningless changes and the cost of being able to get the pieces I dream of as a collector no longer seems to be realistic. I hope to keep going and regain the excitement I once had.
my rules about “i must have it” gut feelings:
if it’s under $10k, spend a few weeks in contemplation.
if it’s over $10k, spend a few months in contemplation.
if it’s over $30k, spend at least a year in contemplation.
but if it’s a sexy new steel tudor/rolex, then text the ad immediately (come to papa, my pretty bumblebee 🐝)
That yellow pops hard… first time I saw it I immediately thought ‘sickkk’ - that’s all I remember. Nothing to do with the nice size or the absence of rivets on the bracelet… all good things, but the look was just fire.
I never read thinking fast and slow but when I took a college course with Kahneman 25 years ago I believe he did emphasize that the intuitive unconscious processing does provide a so-called "gut feeling" that integrates a lot of information that isn't captured by the slow thinking process. I'm not sure if this was widespread but we used to call easy courses where you could get a decent grade without studying much "gut" courses as in go with your gut for the answers on the test and I remember thinking that we he was saying kind of validated the "gut" courses
Then again he also taught us that memory is a construct so maybe I'm not recalling things perfectly from 25 years ago
I've been thinking about the inversion of this lately - when you can make a very reasonable argument for a watch, but you don't feel compelled to actually act on it. You touch on it briefly, with "if you don’t have the ‘hell yes’ moment, you probably can’t have it, no matter how much research you do."
I've been trying to explore this - and ultimately just come back to "desire is often arbitrary".
Here's an example: I think most collectors would say that first generation, "meter" dial datographs are undervalued by the market. I would agree. I would even encourage somebody else to buy one. The movement is beautiful, the watch is historically significant and relatively scarce, and it even wears decently... and yet I haven't really ever felt compelled to own one.
Maybe I'm just describing a "requisite but not sufficient" phenomenon. Like you need to actually *want* the watch. But this isn't an adequate explanation - I can't put my finger on *why* I don't desire this particular watch. I can't even point to aesthetics.
(And I don't mean to pick on Lange here - plenty of other watches fit. The modern Ed White Speedmaster. Various Patek world times. Vintage IWC Ingenieur's. Etc.)
Have you seen any research on this? Candidly, I'm not even sure how you would research this. It would be like trying to interrogate somebody's preference for green eyes vs blue eyes.
This is a question of taste (subjective, obv) … we’ve covered it at length :)
It's so interesting - and frustrating - when I find inconsistencies in my own preferences and cannot easily explain them.
If I had the wrist for it, I would 100% own a Double Split. Maybe I don't feel compelled to own a datograph because it would feel like settling?
And, to add even more inconsistency - I would sooner buy a 5170 or 5270 than a datograph / datograph perpetual. And I genuinely believe the Lange's are *better* in most ways. There is no status / signal benefit; I think most collectors would go with the Dato. It's also cheaper. Likely more rare and (in the case of the first generation dato) almost certainly more historically important. And yet...
I guess we like what we like. I just wish I could explain it a bit better.
it’s an easy explanation, lange are not the “team” you want to join.
what other watches of that price-point did you desire and finally make your own?
we can contrast those teams to lange and determine what drove your desire.
The number of “at bats” will always be relevant. In collecting as you stated it’s how many different physical watches have you seen, touched, wore and compared in person. It’s how many different dial layouts, color schemes, font types etc.. have you looked at. It all builds a library. It applies to music, how do you when to skip a song instantly? Professionally we get good at intuitively knowing key aspect of our jobs if we have had enough at bats and put in the reps.
I have the watches that my gut told me to walk away from but my ego got the better of me. So yes I now have a watch or two to sell. On the flip side, I still have a hell yes that haunts me. It’s always there. I’ve declined it twice due to timing and it will not go away.
Great as usual. It’s a wonderful essay that reminds us that we need to cultivate our learning and mental libraries so that we can better trust our guts. I’ve been burned by not trusting it in both collecting, professional and personal situations. System 1 and system 2 work in tandem, they reinforce one another. Solid deep system 2 thinking is what creates the expertise and the foundation for good system 1 thinking. Good system 1 helps quicker analysis of things that allow you to know where to best engage your system 2 without wasting excessive time and energy. Analysis paralysis is too much system 2 without good system 1 and leads to burnouts. System 1 makes System 2 sustainable and even more enjoyable. The emotional signals from System 1 , the feeling you mentioned and caring about an outcome, finding something interesting, are what motivate effort required by System 2 . Kahneman himself acknowledged this: affect and intuition are what make deliberate thought worth doing.
Wonderful again, and my gut on the word association was, poker, river card, note (money or taking note of the hand), account (more money) 😂🤷♂️. I thought I saw a connection
Wonderful essay! Or, as Ron Hekier put it, ANOTHER BANGER! 💥