[Closed] Watch experts - assemble!

Grand Seiko.

IWC Portofino fits the bill

Something vintage and thus more original.

Q: What would experts on pricey watches know?

A: What they've been sold by the branding.

Tudor ?

Ooh, interesting. Some of those look very similar to my Aqua Terra, actually.

IWC Portuguese 7 Day reserve.

I'd find it hard to look past a Grand Seiko as well to be fair.

I do quite fancy this "poor mans" Aqua Terra though...

[img] [/img]

Something vintage and thus more original.

This is also very good advice.

I have a lovely vintage number that I inherited.
Every scratch, every mark, every imperfection is a part of the story of a truly marvellous man. I intend to wear it, love it, and pass it on to my son. One of his middle names is the name of the original owner.
[img] [/img]

1936ish, from the research I've done so far.

Something from Dornbluth & Sohn?

[img] [/img]

[img] [/img]

I'd say the AT you already own fits that bill.

Something from Bremont or Glashutte may suit and wont be too common either.

I'm an Omega fan too and have a Deville co-ax, I'd also like to try on a Blancpain.
I argue with a mate who likes Panerai's as I sometimes look at them in the same light as Rolex, Breitling, that could just be me though.

Grand Seiko or Citizen Chronomaster - both say you value quality and technology over simple name bling/rep.
An older Tudor would be a great call too - classy and high quality but NOT a Rolex.
Fwiw I'm no Omega fan and shouldn't say this but the older model quartz AT is way more appealing as a pick and go watch then I would like it to be!

not an 'expert' but I get to handle a lot of watches (some costing more than my flat) and visit a few manufacturers in Geneva. I think it's all about the movement or at very least that has to be a big part of it (for me)
What about Nomos? You will either instantly dismiss them on looks but if you like their style the new in-house movement is a big part of their appeal.
Rolex too bling? Again a top quality in-house movement and the oyster (in stainless) is quite understated, I'm about to get an Air-king as it's slightly smaller than the perpetual/date for my skinny wrists, understated and unlikely to lose any money

Something vintage and thus more original.

How is an older watch more original? I can understand that when you compare a homage to a previous watch like the Heuer cal18 or watches that have fake 'tropical' dials but modern watches are still works of art just because they are new doesn't mean they are less worthy than an old chrono with an off the shelf valjoux movement 😉

If a panerai floats your boat then go for it but for me they are more showy than a Rolex.
I recently went to Patek to shoot their new split seconds chrono before it was launched at Baselworld, it's stunning but probably £240k above your budget
Breitling now have their own B01 movement in the navitimer, bit 'sporty' for my tastes but nice timepieces.
For a completely off the wall suggestion what about a Schofield?

An older Tudor would be a great call too

SINN!

quartz

[img] [/img]

Hmmm... some interesting points there, will check them all out. Tough to say what got me looking at Panerais, but I think the presence and relative simplicity of the face makes it a bit of a statement, without the instantly recognisable Rolex design (for example), or the OTT visual complexity or brashness of something like a Hublot (not that I'd consider a Hublot).

Tudor is an intriguing one, I know of them, but not much of the lineup - the Black Flag looks... interesting. And Grand Seikos - very nice in a very understated way.

I bought a Longines Legend Diver with my long service award at work (~£1,250). It's a beautiful retro diving watch with mechanical movement, an internal bezal and two screw-in crowns. Quality is excellent with nice detailing and a lovely domed crystal glass. It's really comfortable on the black fabric strap it comes with and looks equally good with a suit or casual dress - not too bling and understated but feels 'special'.

I've also got a Sinn 556I which cost about half as much. It's more of a basic tool watch and is a really nice but I tend to wear the Legend Diver most of the time.

very nice in a very understated way.

Rather the point, isn't it?

If you want to show off, use a Mont Blanc pen, make sure your car keys are on the table (prestige marque, of course), flash some naff, but massive, cufflinks, etc.

Subtle is better. When my old watch (Above) pokes out from under a cuff, it's subtle. It doesn't shout, but, underneath, I know the meaning of it. Surely what you know and feel is more important than flashing it around?

Aside from pride of ownership and servicing [s]rip off[/s] costs, what are the actual differences in all these movements over quartz?

just have a look at the hodinkee website, if you can't find something within a few mins of browsing that makes you want to sell a kidney then stick to a quartz fashion watch from Argos

In the spirit of recommend what you've got http://ralftech.com/montre.php?modele=wrv_v_auto_77-volcano-auto lovely watches.

Don't get a Ti Panerai. I used to have a Pam 089 and the Ti was sooo soft, it picked up so many dings!!

I'd just go for a new 42mm Rolex Explorer or Submariner LV. A safe place to put your money.

Or a Grand Seiko Snowflake. Yum!!!!!

Lol MrSmith, no answer eh?

No answer to what? ❓

Love my SINN UX, it's COSC certified Quartz is far more accurate than my previous Omega Planet Ocean.
Plus I find the whole approach SINN use with materials, technology etc.. feeds my need to have something a bit different.

[URL= http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f229/PSi3/265B8484-DD5D-4C0E-B204-35152CFFA63C_zpshrjwypd1.jp g" target="_blank">http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f229/PSi3/265B8484-DD5D-4C0E-B204-35152CFFA63C_zpshrjwypd1.jp g"/> [/IMG][/URL]
[URL= http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f229/PSi3/2B0ED146-3F37-4959-B8A3-2FBD216F372A_zpseni4wfep.jp g" target="_blank">http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f229/PSi3/2B0ED146-3F37-4959-B8A3-2FBD216F372A_zpseni4wfep.jp g"/> [/IMG][/URL]

I quite like the look of the Zenith Captains. (however I have no idea if the movement/presitige/timekeeping etc are any good)

Quartz shock horror !

Buying of expensive automatic movement watch is a different thing from buying something nice to sit on your wrist to tell the time. I am not sure I understand it but have had the bug in the past. I have stepped away as I much prefer to spend any available cash on experiences, thing that lead to experiences...Bikes for example, but if I had money for both I would do both.

I bought my wife a Quartz Cartier, she simply would not have been bothered with a automatic, it is taken off and on all day and sometimes left for a week before it is worn again and just works when picked up again, she loves it.

I wear a Casio Mudman quartz day to day, I would have wrecked anything else, and I use the features a lot especially the light.

I don't agree with the OP about Rolex's being too bling sure they have some ugly flashy monstrosities for people with too much money, but their standard classic designs are.... well, classic.

I would have whole heartily agreed about Breitlings, but I can't as they make these which I like a lot.

[img] [/img]

Superocean Heritage.

I like Panerais, but they are enormous and scream "LOOK AT MY WATCH"
As mentioned, IWC are very grown up and they make some very nice stuff. I like the pilots.
[img] [/img]

I have one of these:
[img] [/img]

I also have an Omega De Ville, an early-ish Co-Axial model:
[img] [/img]
Extended movement performance between services, compared with a more conventional escapement. Quite understated, imo, although I typically prefer Arabic numerals.

I like some of the IWC and Jaeger range also, which may be worth a look.

Subtle is better. When my old watch (Above) pokes out from under a cuff, it's subtle. It doesn't shout, but, underneath, I know the meaning of it. Surely what you know and feel is more important than flashing it around?

Something from IWC or Bremont would fit the bill.

My Rolly Sub No-Date doesn't fit your description of Rollys; it's very subtle which is why I chose that model. The Rolex Milligaus(sp?) is also very easy on the eye.

I like (and will soon get):

[img] [/img]

😆 @mogrim!

I actually had an American colleague looking at my business card with envious eyes the other day. Life imitating art!

personally i wouldn’t buy anything over 1k that isn’t going to at least hold its value or have some value down the line. i just had a look at the hammer prices at a watch auction and theres an awful lot of gaudy watch bling that is worth peanuts and it’s usually the likes of omega/rolex/patek that hold their values. longines and other brands that suffered after the quartz crisis are worth bobbins.

irrelevent if you are unlikely to ever sell but those mid level watches like eterna, oris, tissot etc are never going to increase in value.

what is bling and showy about a stainless oyster/explorer/airking?

[img] [/img]

MrSmith - Member
No answer to what?

The question I asked.

My point is none of you would know if your £5K watch had a cheap quartz movement.

I'm not saying its wrong, just stop pretending its not about one up man ship of some form

My point is none of you would know if your £5K watch had a cheap quartz movement.

I'm not saying its wrong, just stop pretending its not about one up man ship of some form

thats crap. i would know exactly what movement i was buying. nothing wrong with a modified ETA or Valjoux even the fact they are owned by the swatch group doesn't bother me. yes there is something about an in-house movement and i like the fact that omega took the george daniels (british watchmaker) escapement and use it in their movements.

it’s only one-upmanship if you sit there showing your watch to other geeks, it’s about owning something well made and enjoying using it. i feel the same way about my Italian steel road bikes, my english made goodyear welted shoes, an opinel knife or my 60’s ercol coffee table. all things for my own enjoyment that are nicer than ikea furniture/plastic sweatshop trainers/giant/specialized/trek dull bikes.
what you or others think about those things doesn't enrich the experience of owning them.

[i] cynic-al - Member
My point is none of you would know if your £5K watch had a cheap quartz movement.

I'm not saying its wrong, just stop pretending its not about one up man ship of some form [/i]

I own both quartz, solar quartz and automatic. Yeah, I can tell the difference and no, I don't give a toss what anyone thinks about my watches, especially as I expect most folk don't even notice them.
And as such, it is in no way about "one up-manship" as I fully understand there are plenty of people about who are likely to be waaaaaay more wealthier than me, but who simply choose not to own Swiss watches or drive certain cars, etc, etc.

I've chosen to own the watches I have, for me, nobody else. All this "status" and "making a statement" rubbish is just that, rubbish. Its the same with my cars, I don't give a fig what anyone else thinks when they see any of my cars and more fool anyone who judges what type of person I might be on that basis. They'll most certainly be wrong.
In fact, in my experience, the folk who harp about the expensive watches (expensive being relative), cars, whatever other people choose to own, appear to me to be ever so slightly jealous.

Edit:
Yeah, and a bit of what Mr Smith posted, too ^^^

How would you know what movement is in a watch by looking at it? MrSmith seems to know his movements but what about the average punter who's just read about them on fora or been sold one by a dealer? Worse than the worst hifi tuning IMO!

Fair enough it's not always oneupmanship for everyone (snide "jealousy" comment noted) and I get that you have pleasure from owning the "better" movement, but what ACTUAL difference does it make in use? None.

Italian steel road bikes

Similar to the watch - it will ride the same as other steel bikes of same spec! (and IME Italian frames are the worst made I've seen)

my english made goodyear welted shoes

Different - that's about quality and durability (and perhaps style)

my 60’s ercol coffee table

A design statement - nothing in Ikea can match.

Yay, another thread derailed 🙄

[i] MrSmith seems to know his movements but what about the average punter who's just read about them on fora or been sold one by a dealer? Worse than the worst hifi tuning IMO![/i]

Fair enough, your point appears to be that by the numbers, there'll always be those among us with enough money to buy expensive items, but who may not understand or even value, the intangible, intrinsic, value of an item such as a hand built, steel road bike frame, the true value of which is literally brazed into the frame, produced by a true artisan and experienced frame builder.
Or a Swiss watch, some components of which are so small and delicate one would be forgiven for wondering how on earth such components were produced in the first place! Yet alone that as part of a movement, the thing keeps time.

So what I guess you're diverting this thread towards is the subject of "[i]taste[/i]". And the age old debate about those who seem to have it and those who might not, but whom have lots of cash.
Imo, the former, should they be in a position to do so, will appreciate owning items such as has been mentioned, for reasons of good taste, appreciating the true value of an item for it's intrinsic value, it's traits and, in some cases, for the shear wonderment at the craftsmanship required to produce that thing.
All points that are usually lost upon to those who know the price of anything and the value of nothing.

And that isn't a rebuke. Fair play to anyone who can stand up and declare that they've no idea what owning an automatic watch is really all about (and leave it at that, without criticizing) while they're happy enough owning a £25 quartz jobby.

How would you know what movement is in a watch by looking at it? MrSmith seems to know his movements but what about the average punter who's just read about them on fora or been sold one by a dealer? Worse than the worst hifi tuning IMO!

you can apply that to just about everything. some people are quite happy with the everyday and dont care what went into it or what it looks like or if there is something better out there.

Similar to the watch - it will ride the same as other steel bikes of same spec! (and IME Italian frames are the worst made I've seen)

some people like to have something different or own things that have an intrinsic value other than their pure functionality or monetary value, i think that should be celebrated not ridiculed.
anyway i’m off to look at a Kai Kristensen chest of drawers.

I know because mine's got a display back...... Nothing fancy at all, just a Stowa Flieger with an ETA movement. It has a few "extra" touches like an engraved rotor and blued screws. It was an emotional purchase though, bought as a kind of dual reward for a promotion at work and managing to make it to 30! I mess with irritating electronics all day and wanted something purely mechanical, I love wearing it and it always feels like the start of a weekend when I put it on. But geeky/sad but there you go. Would absolutely love a Submariner (no date) but will have to wait 'till 40 (more likely 50!) for one!

Agree, love the PAM 562 but struggling to pull the trigger. I have an Anonimo Polluce Drass which I'd highly recommend but you can only get them second hand and don't think there's much exciting in the current range.

The Ralftech WRX 1005 looks interesting and I may eventually go for one, hybrid movement which is pretty awesome, proper military too.

How about a Linde Werdelin spidolite if you like titanium or DVD but a little different ?

Last suggestion (I have one too) have is a Jorg Schauer - I've got a 12, very classic but niche too.

I regret selling my Submariner a few years ago, they soared in value soon afterwards ..... That said, I sold it because I got fed up with people staring at it, either thinking it was a fake or I was rich/flash, I guess.
I then bought an Omega Speedmaster, second hand, which doesn't attract any attention. My OH recently bought me a Certina DS Podium auto for a 'big' birthday, though, and I haven't worn the Omega since. The Certina is more comfortable, lighter and seems tougher. It's certainly more water resistant so it stays on all the time.

What about a Baume and Mercier Capeland, I have one and think it is rather nice.
[img] [/img]

I woke up this morning with an itch for a Tudor Heritage blue Chrono, on the NATO strap. Although I was also looking at some Baume & Merciers last night. Tbh, most of the fun is in the looking...

And for Rolex, it's tough to explain - I think some people (me included) just get stuck on the associations people make when they see a Rolex. It's not bling as such, it's the way some people wear them as a status symbol, along with the yellow Ferrari and fake-blonde arm candy, that put me off. Logically it shouldn't bother me but...

Good call on Ti PAMs - definitely makes me feel better knowing that it would've been a bad choice anyway 🙂

Oooooh, a (derailed) taste and style thread, based on watches! Hoorah!

A great believer in form and function in equal measures, but I hate ostentatious displays of wealth. The diamond encrusted Rolex phenomenon is absolute anathema, so much so that for me, personally, the mark is somehow "tainted". Something that works well, does what it says on the tin, but has a wealth of heritage (and, dare I say, class?) will always win over the flashy. I love understated, simple style. Joy of ownership is a very personal thing; my favourite watch is an heirloom. I wear it every day, and fondly remember its original owner. My son will wear it when I'm gone. That aside, it's a beautiful watch, but in a classic, simple way. It needs to be serviced and occasionally repaired, but as I have absolutely no interest in its resale value I have it serviced by an independent, trusted watchmaker for a fraction of what it costs to send it to the official servicing centre. That way it can stay on my wrist where any watch belongs. That it is an automatic Swiss watch with the company's heritage and reputation for excellence helps a good deal, but I don't care who notices

@cynic-al... yes I hear what you are saying, and I hope I am right when I say you are actually lambasting those who simply want others to notice their watch/car/labelled clothes, the price tag being more important than the actual item?

i amazed people think a blue/black/silver dialled air-king/explorer/oyster is OTT and a bit showy? they are 35-36mm for a start
how do you actually wear them as a status symbol? roll one sleeve up a bit? wave it in peoples faces? leave the little tag dangling off the bracelet?

they are under the radar compared to ****erwear like this:

[img] [/img]

Watches don't get any 'cooler' than this... 😉

[URL= http://i1280.photobucket.com/albums/a491/loddrik1/Mobile%20Uploads/32CDB67A-7F86-4EEB-A946-6F6AE031C0D9_zpstqbcwye8.jp g" target="_blank">http://i1280.photobucket.com/albums/a491/loddrik1/Mobile%20Uploads/32CDB67A-7F86-4EEB-A946-6F6AE031C0D9_zpstqbcwye8.jp g"/> [/IMG][/URL]

the 1953 greenland expedition tudor that i photographed after it was found in the drawer by it’s 93 year old original owner is cooler than that tuna-can. 🙂

[img] [/img]

Class.

[img] [/img]

MrSmith - Member
you can apply that to just about everything. some people are quite happy with the everyday and dont care what went into it or what it looks like or if there is something better out there.

With many, many things there is a discernible difference in use - definitely NOT the case with the "quartz fashion watch from Argos" movement (your words - no snobbery there?) vs your expensive automatics.

MrSmith - Member
i amazed people think a blue/black/silver dialled air-king/explorer/oyster is OTT and a bit showy? they are 35-36mm for a start

It's the "Omega" writing and the whatever £K price tag that's showy.

cynic-al: Seiko, Certina, Record de Luxe, Swatch and one time Rolex owner.

Seiko, Sekonda, fossil, Omega, Breitling, Rotary, Skagen, Boccia and until recently a Werner flying watch. Check out the Werner site, some truely "[i]Amazing[/i]" kit on there.

[url] http://www.wernersflyingwatches.com/ [/url]
😯

It's the "Omega" writing and the whatever £K price tag that's showy.

the tiny certified chronometer (cosc accuracy test not some made up turbo-max decal) that you need a magnifying glass to read? 😯 😆 😆 😆

that ‘showy’ perception says more about the voyeur and their issues than somebody who wants an understated beautifully made wris****ch to wear and maybe hand down. if you think a 2.5k timepiece is showy then you are in for a shock when you find out how much a grand complication from Patek or Jaeger costs, most i have had in my hands are around $200-$250k each.
it’s another world thats for sure but then so is yours if you think a small plain automatic wris****ch which costs the same as a mid-range MTB that’s going to be junk in a few years is somehow OTT ❓ 😯

flashy is that watch that looks like a small treadmill, very cool. searching photo now

get a Welder, nobody will notice it

[img] [/img]

or one of my favourites

[img] [/img]

MrSmith - Member
The tiny certified chronometer (cosc accuracy test not some made up turbo-max decal) that you need a magnifying glass to read? 😆

Who needs or can justify a chronometer this accurate? (presumably as accurate as any one a quartz?).

Branding is pretty clear on most watches IME.

that ‘showy’ perception says more about the voyeur and their issues than somebody who wants an understated beautifully made wris****ch to wear and maybe hand down. if you think a 2.5k timepiece is showy then you are in for a shock when you find out how much a grand complication from Patek or Jaeger costs, most i have had in my hands are around $200-$250k each.

Are you a politician? You are really good at not answering questions and putting any negatives back on the questioner.

I think it is showy, tho not all wear them for that reason.

if you think a small plain automatic wris****ch which costs the same as a mid-range MTB that’s going to be junk in a few years is somehow OTT

I just don't see the point really, but even that's not my point. Lots of these watches are beautiful things...

...but you can get a watch that's just as good functionally and as well finished for so much less, I wish people would admit it's about having something expensive that they think is better, or has a certain brand, but, functionally, isn't any better.

...but you can get a watch that's just as good functionally and as well finished for so much less, I wish people would admit it's about having something expensive that they think is better, or has a certain brand, but, functionally, isn't any better.

You haven't become a proper adult until you've spent several thousand pounds on a watch.

I'd be scared to wear it though. Imagine being at a social event (a dinner party perhaps) and someone clocks your fancy watch and asks you how much it cost. Imagine telling them it was several thousand pounds; you'd feel like a right berk, as well as becoming a bit of a folk legend; "that daft **** with the five grand watch" - you'd never live it down!

Imagine being at a social event (a dinner party perhaps) and someone clocks your fancy watch and asks you how much it cost. Imagine telling them it was several thousand pounds; you'd feel like a right berk, and would probably become a bit of a folk legend as "that daft **** with the five grand watch"

Apparently in some circles you'd be given a patronising "couldn't afford the real thing?" look.

I wish people would admit it's about having something expensive that they think is better

what if it is better but the reason the owner thinks it’s better isn’t really anything to do with cost or performance?

a casio will be more accurate and you can pick them up for bobbins but i like nice looking watches if i can afford them then why shouldn’t i have them? they make more sense to me than a 50k depreciating asset motor car that does 155mph.
as a pure timepiece they are no better than my iPhone and i can play games, look at the internet, check my train times and phone people with it, far more cost effective.

i could easily pick loads of watches that were more showy, expensive and overly complicated and with features you would never use than a 2.5k plain stainless watch.
i mean who needs a 300m dive watch apart form divers? who needs a tachymetre scale apart form those who need to work out how far away an artillery shell is by pressing a button when you hear it fired and again when you get blown to bits by it? who deeds a million gauss anti magnetic watch?
but if that’s what you like to own and enjoy wearing it then great. if it’s purely to show other people how rich you are then you obviously have issues just like the people who judge you for having a nice watch purely by it sitting on your wrist and fairly obtrusive to the casual observer.

Branding is pretty clear on most watches IME.

there are so many rolex submariner-likes out there including some very nice watches from Squale and similar that are less than £500 and are just as accurate you really would have to be a geek or get really close to know what was what and if it was £15k or £400 anyone not into watches would just think its a dive watch.
i know people with watches that cost half the national average wage but i don't feel the need to compete by buying a more expensive watch or somehow inferior because i don't have one as expensive, that kind of mindset is for bedwetters.

MrSmith

You mention Squale - where do the likes of Steinhart, Stowa and Christopher Ward stand ....
Good products or tat?

MrSmith - Member
what if it is better but the reason the owner thinks it’s better isn’t really anything to do with cost or performance?

Then is is not better (as a matter of fact) it is only in the owner's opinion.

if i can afford them then why shouldn’t i have them? they make more sense to me than a 50k depreciating asset motor car that does 155mph.

I'm not saying you shouldn't, please read my posts.

i could easily pick loads of watches that were more showy, expensive and overly complicated and with features you would never use than a 2.5k plain stainless watch.
i mean who needs a 300m dive watch apart form divers? who needs a tachymetre scale apart form those who need to work out how far away an artillery shell is by pressing a button when you hear it fired and again when you get blown to bits by it? who deeds a million gauss anti magnetic watch?

Who needs an "understated" Swiss etc watch with a ££££ automatic movement?

there are so many rolex submariner-likes out there including some very nice watches from Squale and similar that are less than £500 and are just as accurate you really would have to be a geek or get really close to know what was what and if it was £15k or £400 anyone not into watches would just think its a dive watch.

How isn't it a dive watch?

As an aside, what does it matter, as you said above, if it goes to 300m?

You seem to be proving my point here. Thanks

Yet you are missing my point. Which is not everyone buys an expensive watch to show other people how well off they are. Man has spent thousands of years embellishing and enriching their lives with pointless decoration and precious metals. The wris****ch is a current example of this. Yes some people like a huge yellow gold and blue bauble on their wrist to show everyone how rich they are, just don't put everyone who owns and cherishes an understated timepiece that has qualities they admire yet have no bearing on actually telling the time in the same basket.
Especially if you have ever purchased or adorned anything beyond the purely functional in your life.

MrSmith - Member
Yet you are missing my point. Which is not everyone buys an expensive watch to show other people how well off they are.

I am not, I have not said that.

don't put everyone who owns and cherishes an understated timepiece that has qualities they admire yet have no bearing on actually telling the time in the same basket.

As above, please read my posts rather than replace them with your own assumptions.

Especially if you have ever purchased or adorned anything beyond the purely functional in your life.

Of course I have, including a Rolex.

'kin 'ell.

I know!

Al is gradually morphing in to Nu-TJ.

Might start a thread about Scotchish rugby players wearing helmets just to see what happens!

😉

I think it is showy, tho not all wear them for that reason.

To be like T-J you would be dealing in absolutes and have no margin for allowing another opinion or subtleties of reasoning . CA isn't that much of a cretin.

CaptainFlashheart - Member
Al is gradually morphing in to Nu-TJ.

I always think of TJ and c_a as kanga & roo, just undecided who's in who's pouch

why does anyone ever need/want a watch nowadays your never more than a couple of inches away from knowing the right time .

How's that then?

Dont you have a mobile phone Ivan

Imagine taking your mobile out of your pocket during a meeting to glance at the time.

Imagine taking your mobile out of your pocket when you could just flick a glance at your wrist.

Etc.

Equally, what's wrong with wanting nice things?

Yep, normally in a pocket or the bottom of a rucksack. Basically, 99% of the time it's less accessible than a watch and usually needs a shake or button press to get it to light up.

Which is remarkably similar to a pocket watch.

Equally, what's wrong with wanting nice things?

Makes you a showy winker and upsets poor people. 😕

just because they are new doesn't mean they are less worthy than an old chrono with an off the shelf valjoux movement