One $10k Watch -OR- Four $2.5k Watches?

I'd pick four watches, as I like variety. 

I also don't really "bond" with things, so I don't place a huge amount of value on the idea of having a watch that has been "everywhere" with me. 

I could see the benefit to either decision.  Personally, I’d have a hard time narrowing it down to one! 😂

I get the most enjoyment from buying watches that I like despite the cost. I'll never,EVER, spend 10 grand on a watch but I have spent nearly 3 grand.

After many years of collecting one thing has become crystal clear. Enjoyment has zero to do with cost. 

Unfortunately there are many watch lovers that disagree.

But I'm not one of them.   Buy  what you like and let the others pound sand.

I would buy 4 watches. I like variety. 

Depends on the watches. I’d probably go with two $5k watches than four at the $2,500 range as it opens you up to so many more options.

I think maybe 3 pieces for 10 k.  A dress, chrono and a diver. 

Assuming you are talking about starting from scratch, I would prefer to have a small collection rather than one piece.  Adding to my existing collection, I would prefer to add one exceptional piece. 

Three of $5k, $3.5k and $1.5k

Depends on the watches - but I’d probably get a number rather than one. That‘s much more fun.

I couldn't afford to buy a two thousand, five hundred, dollar watch, let alone a ten thousand dollar one. Nor would I spend that much if I had the money. 

The question raised is one that could only be formulated by one of a tiny minority of people in the world. Put the $10,000 to better use. 

People tend to put far too much emphasis on the cost of a watch as a factor in its purchase. If you remove cost then your question becomes "Should I buy 1 watch I like, or 4 watches I like?"

Clearer? 

I 100% agree with @gasworks on this.

Let's be honest, outside of precious materials, and hand-made/hand-finished, no watch should be $2,500. A Rolex for example cost about $500 to make. The rest of their operating expense is marketing. They possibly spend more on that than they do making the watch, and none of it makes the watch better.

When the quartz crisis hit, the only way any of the companies we love stayed in business, was to take a tool people paid far less for, and turn it into a product of desire, through marketing. You want the car, the girl, the yacht.. those that have what you want are wearing this, so you should too! that kind of stuff.

I say this because many $2,500 watches are pretty much the same as $10,000 watches. The only difference between them is how much money their marketing departments have been able to convince you to part with for it.

What you both say is fine but it wasn't the question. The question did ask about $2500 or £10000 watches. And in that case, the cost of the watch really  is 'a factor in it's purchase'.

If it is about 'should I buy 1 watch I like, or 4 watches I like?' that is a different question and implies different things.

Yea, but the problem is the question :). If you asked me "should I buy 4 $2,500 PCs, or one $10,000 PC" then the answer can be pretty cut and dry, once I know the use case.

the difference between a $10,000 PC and a $2,500 PC is huge, as the price reflects what you get. In watches, that's just not the case.

If you put 5 watches in front of me, one cost $10,000 and the other 4 cost $2,500 and said "you can have one of these, but you can't sell it", the odds of me picking the 10K one is no different then any of the others. They will be effectively the same.

So the answer I will give, is if you have a 10K budget, then buy 1, 4, 20, whatever you like within that budget, and enjoy whatever you end up with. If you see one watch that you "have to have!" and it's 10K, and you are willing to sell all your other watches for it, then that's you. Go for it. If your favorite watch is $2,500, then you have $7,500 to play with for whatever you might like.

If we want to really be difficult, the original post said that they liked both ideas - so in reality this is just pointless discussion if the original answer was a cop-out. There is no motion, it’s just a series of soundbites. Again, I do wonder whether I’m on the right forum.

Bit of a mantra of mine but there is a big difference between value and cost. What you spend has no bearing on what you enjoy. Just because something is more expensive doesn't mean it's more valuable or enjoyable.

Your question is utterly flawed in that it presumes that a 10k watch is inherently more enjoyable than a 2.5k watch as you suggest having 4 at 2.5k as the alternative to 1 at 10k.

I have watches at less than 100 that I enjoy at least as much as watches at many times that price.

You just need to remove yourself from the social construct that says more expensive is better. I'm fully aware that people have budgets and most of them dont have anywhere near 10k. That critical factor will also determine their opinion on what is "luxury" as the idea of luxury is also entirely subjective.

Is your choice of a 500k watch based on its cost? Do you think you could enjoy a watch more than that if it cost 50? Does provenance not play a part? What if the watch that cost 50 was given to you by your brother three weeks before he died of cancer? 500k Rolex still be more valuable? More enjoyable to wear? Trust me, it wouldn't be.

Like I said, people need to learn the difference between value and cost. 

The question is not "utterly flawed."  It's obvious that almost everyone who has commented on the post understands the question and has given thoughtful answers.

I have inexpensive watches and "expensive" watches and I wear both of them and get enjoyment out of both of them.  I never said anything remotely close to "the more expensive the watch is the more enjoyment you'll get from wearing it."

You cannot completely disassociate the price of an item and how it would affect your collection...they are related.

The post is a simple thought experiment to start a conversation.

"Do you think you’d get more enjoyment from having one $10k watch or having four $2500 watches?"

Your question clearly intimates that the greater the cost the greater the enjoyment.

If you'd asked - "Are big watch collections inherently more enjoyable than small watch collections?" then you remove the misnomer around enjoyment being proportional to cost and open the debate far wider

Or "Is one expensive watch better than many less expensive watches" removes the prescripted budget of 10k and allows others, whose idea of expensive may be 200, to contribute.

If you can't see that and understand the point I'm making on cost having no bearing on enjoyment then so be it. I can only explain it to you, I can't understand it for you.

Yea, I was a bit off. but well under $2,000, so selling it as a $2,500 watch would be reasonable, if it did not have the desirability it currently has.

I had a similar dilemma waiting for a $4.5k GMT from an AD.  I kept looking around and thought I could pick up a nice Mido (true) GMT or Christopher Ward GMT and have more than $3k to buy other watches (like a nicer Dive watch, Pilot's watch, etc. especially if I kept it in the 1000-1500 family (or less, I really love my cheap Seikos).

For me, the answer was that I really wanted the $4.5k GMT for a while now and even though I also wanted a dress watch, pilot's watch, nicer dive watch and so on (want is endless), I stuck to the one watch remembering what an old client who was a great salesperson told me: if you really want a 911, wait and save up for the 911 and don't buy something cheaper that is "like" a 911 (e.g. Audi TT at the time) because you'll still want the 911 and the alternative won't really make you happy. By the way, the salesman told me this after explaining that his main sales tactic was to find out what his client really wanted and to tailor whatever he was selling to be like his client's ultimate desire (sell the dream and close).

If I didn't really want the more expensive GMT, I would probably go the multiple watch route but pace myself and spread it out over time because getting 3-4 watches all at once or in a relatively short period of time would be too much and I don't think I would end up appreciating these watches as much. 

I hope you have a great day! 😂

I feel like this topic has been discussed to death on every single watch forum that has ever existed. and on some large forums such as WUS, hundreds of threads worth. 
 

Moving along...

You too. 

If it’s being discussed on every single watch form it must be a topic that people enjoy going back and forth about!

If it was an uninteresting conversation no one would be having it.

That is an interesting question and for me flip-flops on a daily basis. Considering that recently I've started to fall in love with Tudors catalogue im gonna go with option 2 but if you asked me tomorrow I would be sorely tempted by the Submariner

I think I'd probably end up with 2, since there's not anything right at 10k that I'm very interested in.  Assuming availability and retail pricing, I'd get a 36mm OP and a preowned Sinn T2.

But ask me tomorrow and there would be different watches in my 10k...

It's interesting that you said that, because those are exactly what I was thinking of when I posted.

A Rolex GMT or Sub is around $10k, and Tudor has some offerings around the $2500 price point.

I don't think there is a "right" answer, it's just fun to see how other people go about building their collections!

Completely understand that, ha!

I'd actually love a Sinn...they have a few different ones that I've been eyeing for a while.

Maybe one day...

Wait, what? Do you think a Rolex is made by a watchmaker?

https://www.businessinsider.com/10-things-every-rolex-owner-should-know-2015-1