The Eternal debate -- 1 expensive watch or many cheap watches...

I wouldn't necessarily want a pile of cheaply made garbage watches. But, reality shows me that every time I start a specific fund for an expensive watch, I end up with 4 or 5 less expensive ones instead. I like variety.

And what about "A few not-too-expensive-but-also-not-cheap Watches"?

Balance is everything 😎

I care about case construction and details the most, you don't get that on the lower end, but you appreciate other things cheaper watches offer. I'm trying to buy what I love now, regardless of the price, my last one was 2k, and my next one will maybe be around 500.

There is a balance between "many cheap" and several affordable options that I would choose. 

So, remember back in 1995, this guy...

...  was dating this gal... 

...  and it was understood that when big name famous people are dating, they're exclusive!  They're in love!  All the tabloids breathlessly reported on their deep abiding love for one another.  

And then he got arrested for engaging in some sexy time in the car with another gal, and this happened...

Now, preferences are preferences.  Nonetheless, Elizabeth Hurley stuck with him!  And when interviewed about the whole thing, if I remember correctly, she quipped, "Well, obviously, I wasn't doing good enough of a job keeping him occupied," or some such witticism.

He wasn't leaving Elizabeth Hurley for another woman.  He wasn't madly in love with the second gal.  He was simply responding to the basic human need for variety.  Because variety is the spice of life!

So, we should all take Hugh Grant's example to heart.  His experience has taught us some very valuable lessons, which we would be foolish not to apply to all aspects of our own lives - including to watch collecting.  More is better.  Always and forever.

More the better!! Expensive and inexpensive!! 

also how do you define both? 
it may be inexpensive to like @HotWatchChick69 with all his Omegas and Grand Psychos and expensive to all of us!! I heard @HotWatchChick69 will be opening an onlyfans account so she/he/it/they will be more rich 

😂😂🍻

The definition is dependent on the individual.  For some people, $20 is a lot to spend on a watch.  For others, $500 is a fortune to spend on a watch -- for other people it's $5,000.00 or $50,000.00.  Jeff Bezos likely wouldn't consider any watch "expensive."

I like having one really nice watch (nice, but not over the top) and a small collection of micros. So can I say half and half?

You’re right…I wish I can be happy with one watch but seems I’m not happy either with multiple watches maybe having no watches is the answer!! 😂😔

yup like Hugh we have to pay for spices!! 😉

2-3 pretty nice watches > 1 really nice watch > lots of cheap watches

But seriously, I could never just do one watch. So I save for the grail and buy interesting inexpensive ones as well. 

both "many" and "one" are too broad. I am definitely not a One Watch guy but I definitely don't want only many cheap watches. and here "many" to me means more than a couple/few, so I would say "many" means at least 5. and "cheap" here means affordable / sub $300 but still generally favored in the watch community (like vostoks, orients, etc.; and not random Ali watch)
I'm going to make my own option and say:
"I'd rather have a ratio of 1 quality watch to many cheaper watches."

so I'd have rather have 3 quality watches over 15 cheap watches, but doesn't mean I wouldn't have a few cheap watches in the collection (and I do)

This is the formula

That's the million dollar (or I guess <$10,000) question, I guess. I also suppose that if I saw this question a year or two ago I'd have chosen many cheaper watches for the variety.

In any case, from my experiences so far, personally I found that I do like that extra water resistance (100m or higher), do not like paying chronograph servicing costs, and as much as I love dress watch designs, I've been wearing sports watches more. Specifically, dive watches because I like fiddling with the bezel. 

On one hand I think the no-date Rolex Submariner fits every bill, but I honestly would feel a little uneasy wearing it around everywhere (for many different reasons). So I've narrowed it down to the Omega Seamaster 300 Master Co-Axial. I wish they came up with a less confusing name for this series but whatever. It's still an Omega, but I think the design's just a bit less recognizable by the masses for me to wear it without being self-conscious.

Picture from Hodinkee.

That being said, I am currently hoping to acquire a Tudor Pelagos because I own a dress watch and thus don't feel like I need a dressy sports watch. Once I do, I'm quite sure I'll be fine with a two watch rotation of Tudor Pelagos and Cle de Cartier. 

Monochrome watches

Fifth Wrist

My Dad recently picked up the Cle de Cartier and he's currently on a honeymoon with it.  It's by far my favorite of Cartier's offerings.

It's deceptively simple looking, but the case has some interesting things going on! I do wish they bumped up the water resistance to 100m before release like they were able to with Santos de Cartier and Pasha de Cartier, but alas. Hope he wears it in good health!

It probably has to do with the crown design.

I'd have guessed that was the issue too. Oh well, still one of my favourite aspects of the watch, though a lot of people seem to dislike winding with it 🤷🏻‍♂️

Quality over quantity... but one watch does not make a collection. 

This is not an option but I would choose at least one higher end watch (defined differently by the person) and then a satellite of more affordable watches. Having one expensive watch gives a collection range, which is another dimension beyond type or other themes. For example, (if one could afford a luxury piece) doesn't one want to be wearing a luxury dress piece versus an affordable seiko to a wedding or other special event?

I would also argue one needs at least one affordable piece at times as well. Many people are not comfortable casually wearing more than a month's income on a watch... and depending on income, that can attract the wrong type of attention outside the office.

@HotWatchChick69 BRO!!!  Once again you're WAY TOO SMART for WatchCrunch 😳😆😂🤣

I was in the same position as Hugh aka HG 😛 But I didn't get the opportunity to update my headshots like he did 🤣🤣🤣

I am fortunate to have both in my life and collection 🤫😉

I’ve never been a fan of categories like “cheap equals bad” and “expensive is good” in the watch sector. The reason for that is effortlessly charming. Whatever you expect from a watch is completely a matter of opinion. It doesn’t matter if you’re a seasoned watchmaker, an armchair watch collector or a desktop diver. Your verdict about what a particular watch is and what not is as good as any. Your point of view is neither better no worse than the others. Whether a watch is good or bad, only depends on how you look at it. Perception is everything. What people perceive to be their reality is, in fact, their own reality

yup.  I think the diminishing returns kicks in really hard once you get above a certain point, and for me that point is in the "Rolex retail" range.  

For example I'd rather have 2 GOs than a Piaget, or stepping up a level, 2 Mosers than an AP.

More that 2 or 3 watches is too many for me, though, so I wouldn't rather have 17 micros than the 2 GOs.

This is a fair point, but I think when it comes to selling pre-owned, your local market plays a huge role in how easy this will be (assuming you are selling to strangers and not to someone you know/friend of a friend situation). The market for watches in my country is not big, maybe I could make my money back on a Rolex, but an Omega or a Tag may be a different story (also have to consider how long I'd be willing to wait for someone to give me the price I want). I could try sell internationally but buyers may find that with shipping + import tax, it's not worth it. I could sell to a secondhand dealer locally but I definitely wouldn't make my money back since they dealer needs to make money when they eventually sell it. There's also a fair bit of admin involved when selling anything deemed "expensive" - I'd expect quite a bit of back and forth, so if you're a busy individual, the time you'll spend in correspondence (and the person you're talking to may end up deciding not to buy) may not be worth it to you.

I'm more on the affordable side. I don't like ugly cheap. Nor too expensive where I have to worry if I loose it or get robbed.

I swap watches (and straps) all the time so I'd say I dont need "many" but definitely a few so yeah... just owning a one killer watch doesn't sound right with me. :)

Ah! the eternal dilemma. I once just had an Omega seamaster planet ocean with a Co-axial movement which I loved (I later foolishly sold) and have sold that many watches over the last 15 years or so, I have lost a small fortune. I now try and not to think about how much status a watch will give me and just buy watches that are good at what they do. I now only own a Casio 5600 waveceptor, a Swatch Irony Chrono, a Seagull 1963 Pilots Chrono, my late fathers old 70's Sekonda and my absolute favourite - a Tissot Seastar 2000 Diver.

Is that a period accurate Elizabeth Hurley? Wow! 

I'm not Cheap! I'm Inexpensive!