Hot take: today, “luxury tool watch” is an oxymoron
Been a little while since I’ve posted one of these lol… and before I begin I should say that this post is in NO WAY suggesting that people should not buy luxury watches or that luxury watches are not excellent pieces of engineering and art—I still have luxury grails of my own (one of which is the Explorer).
BUT
Take a look at this Rolex ad, I believe from 1969. The advertised price of the watch is $195 on bracelet. Adjusted for inflation, that watch would cost $1,630 today. Of course it’s unrealistic to expect that the costs of such goods adjust only at inflation levels, but what is clear is that the $7,000+ price tag on a Rolex Explorer can’t be explained by exponential increases in build quality or improvements in ruggedness over the last 50 years. The luxury hype around Rolex and other brands as status symbols (and essentially jewelry) is the main driver here.
Obviously this is no surprise to us, but it is one of the many reasons I’ve come to realize that the concept of the “luxury tool watch” is a bit oxymoronic in this day and age. If tool watches are meant to be function first, aesthetic second (or at least not aesthetic first), then it is hard to reconcile that with such increases in demand and price.
Another reason, though, is that build quality has actually changed over time such that watches are a bit less rugged than they used to be. Rolex’s 904L steel, while more corrosion resistant, scratches more easily when polished than 316L steel (just ask anyone with a smooth bezel Datejust or OP), and the protruding sapphire crystals—while basically scratch-proof—are more susceptible to chips and shattering than acrylic. Similarly, Omega’s double-sided AR coating can scratch, and those scratches can’t be buffed out the way hesalite can (with hesalite being more naturally anti-reflective anyway). And this is to say nothing about the virtually non-existent shock resistance of “sports watches” like the Royal Oak and Nautilus, though I understand those exist on a different plane.
I’m thinking about this now because when I think about buying watches, I think about all the things I will do while wearing them. I like to think about taking them on adventures and making memories with them. When I think about hiking up a mountain or going snorkeling or white-water rafting with a $5,000 - $10,000 “tool watch,” something just doesn’t feel quite right (maybe I’m alone in that), especially because I know that although the watch is likely very well-built, it’s still somewhat delicate compared to other modern tool watches like G-Shocks. I also certainly feel more comfortable with a sub-$1,000 mechanical watch being used for sport just because it doesn’t have the luxury baggage associated.
Anyway, just my ramblings. Maybe a luxury watch isn’t for me after all, who knows!
Interested in all things watches!
I guess it’s all relative. “Luxury” is about how something makes you feel. Not how much was paid for it.
I have some inexpensive watches that provide that feeling while some of my Rolexes sit in a case, unworn.
I think the tool part refers to the buyer. Don't hate on me, im a buyer too🙄
I guess it’s all relative. “Luxury” is about how something makes you feel. Not how much was paid for it.
I have some inexpensive watches that provide that feeling while some of my Rolexes sit in a case, unworn.
Excellent point
Not an issue. If you bang up enough Explorers the AD will happily sell you another one. What I'm trying to say is: All watches can and will break. If you can't afford to replace a Rolex, I would think twice about buying one in the first place. The same is true if you can afford a Rolex, but would like to spend the money to replace or repair a Rolex on something else. It may not break on a climb up the Matterhorn, but you might drop in on the bathroom floor.
Unless you are flipping watches, just own what you are comfortable losing. At least that's my philosophy.
Not an issue. If you bang up enough Explorers the AD will happily sell you another one. What I'm trying to say is: All watches can and will break. If you can't afford to replace a Rolex, I would think twice about buying one in the first place. The same is true if you can afford a Rolex, but would like to spend the money to replace or repair a Rolex on something else. It may not break on a climb up the Matterhorn, but you might drop in on the bathroom floor.
Unless you are flipping watches, just own what you are comfortable losing. At least that's my philosophy.
This is one of the criteria when trying to select the One To Rule Them All.
If it’s too expensive to expose to risk, it doesn’t make the cut.
This is one of the criteria when trying to select the One To Rule Them All.
If it’s too expensive to expose to risk, it doesn’t make the cut.
That sounds reasonable. On the flip side, some people may be comfortable using up a Rolex.
I get what you’re saying, but to some folks, wearing a $10K beater is not an issue and scratches are a point of pride. However, Rolex has moved beyond that moniker, to the top luxury brand in the world. Hard to be both, but they are selling the dream; be it climb mountains, dive the deepest seas, placing the fastest lap times at Le Mans, or dominating a board room. They still make tool watches, but tool watches for the wealthy.
In every way watches today are more rugged and durable than their predecessors. Yes, the high polish scratches easily, but the advancement in technology and materials make most watches these days better than the strongest watches of even 20 years ago, nevermind 50 years ago. Yes, there are much better tool watches now, but the same could be said for watches of the quartz crisis, or the Iron Man watches of the 80s and 90s. There have always been cheaper more effective ways to do the job than a mechanical watch. Heck, an Apple Watch or Garmin Fenix is infinitely better than a G-shock at all things except for battery life, but for the average user? A Fenix is the ultimate tool watch, BUT it does not have to mean people cannot use luxury watches for sport/adventures.
I have no issue wearing luxury watches during adventures, other times I want a tracing device. Both are viable for different reasons and that is okay to me.
That sounds reasonable. On the flip side, some people may be comfortable using up a Rolex.
Indeed. My “too expensive to risk” is most certainly not the same for others.
I think a case can be made that many technological advances have been made in Rolex watches & build quality is vastly superior now over the 1960's.
$5K of improvements? I don't know.
But, I think a luxury tool watch is a real thing. It's just that maybe I'm not luxury enough to use one as a tool watch. Me spending even $1K on a watch is luxury and I will baby it because it would be my nicest watch.
Others that can buy a $7-10K watch or afford the restoration to repair the scratches & dings a tool watch will pick up, might just call it a tool watch instead of a luxury tool watch. Their luxury watch might be a Vacheron or an A. Lange & Söhne.
Its all relative, but for most of us, I believe you are correct. A Rolex is a luxury piece, not a luxury tool watch.
I wouldn't swim with the Seamaster Professional 300M for this exact reason. I know this doesn't sit well with some people since a dive watch is supposed to be used in water, no matter how expensive it is, and the SMP is designed precisely for this purpose. BUT some people don't have my financial situation so, unless they're giving me an SMP for the explicit purpose of using it to swim, I just won't. I just can't risk anything happening to it because the financial consequences will be dire. For me.
If this is the case, why buy luxury at all? I have a friend who constantly asks me this. And the only real answer I have is because I can and because I want to. People buy luxury for different reasons. I feel like here on WatchCrunch, it's taboo to admit buying luxury for peacock flexing. I'm not afraid to admit it. I bought the Speedmaster to flex. I mean, I ain't a racecar driver so what do I need the chronograph for to begin with? I buy other watches--less expensive ones--for their intended purpose. And if that's enough reason to take away my "enthusiast" card, so be it.
Too funny. I actually had a sentence typed for cars, but some could state that electric cars may or may not hold up to time, but absolutely, in every way, modern ICE cars are way better than cars of the past in almost every way. And speed? Speed is dead. Old muscle cars could not turn or stop, but everyone wants to skip past that. A Kia EV6 is faster than a drag prepped Hellcat Redeye, nevermind muscle cars of the past. And that is an average EV, nevermind something nuts like a Lucid, or if one goes really up market like a Rimac.
You make a good point, but I think that just as these luxury watches have become less robust, our conception of a watch’s potential for robustness has gone WAY up.
It used to be that 50m of water resistance was enough. Now it has to be 200m, with a screw down crown, and survive being dropped out of a helicopter. Thank you G-Shock. That’s great, but also unnecessary for most things (a Speedmaster…with all 50m of its water resistance…was the first watch to the North Pole) and it’s distorted out ability to apppreciate the old standards of resilience.
So in a way, both ends of the spectrum have moved, making it doubly hard on these old brands.
i agree with all your point, stop thinking basic 3 handed mechanical piece as luxury
Totally true in part, but this is a hobby and a pleasure so it doesn’t make any sense to external people. In fact it seems insane to them and unrealistic.
However I do love my pieces as few as they are and try to use them and scratch them with my memories, cause my intention is to conserve my collection
Idk this is really more of a lukewarm take 😂 I don't think many people would disagree with you overall
I call it ownership Anxiety. Wearing $400 on your wrist is fine compared to $4000 let alone $40,000 is nuts ! I couldn’t wear a beautiful FP Journe or ALS etc without worrying about scratches, I’ve already put a nice scratch on the Ranger and it’s ok because it is a tool watch but I still subconsciously baby it wereas the Seiko’s I just wear and they never bloody seem to get scratches!!!
While I’m about to talk about two watches half the price of the examples you raised I have two watch’s that are around the £3k price points one is a grand seiko gmt and I treat it like a baby it’s too nice to damage it and I take care to look after it
The other is a fully tegamented sinn u50 that I wear to work. I’m an electrician in a chemical factory and I have no worries about causing damage to it
One because it truly is a tool watch ( not that we need them anymore )and it’s tough enough to withstand it and two it wouldn’t be ruined with a few scratches it might enhance it even
I wouldn’t wear an explorer or any of my omegas to work in either but while Rolex and the like have moved out of the tool market others have come to replace them
Tegimented yesssss
Rolex…the best $1,000 watch you can buy for $10,000. 🤣
Dont own any "luxury". If I ever do, it'll be worn through whatever the day throws at me.
The Tudor Pelagos comes to mind for a "luxury" tool watch.
Disagree with the moniker "luxury" tool watch, hence the "".
If buying or getting it issued for work, regardless of price, it's a tool.
Some like to run Q Honey Badgers on the range, others like to build out there own and keep it under $1K. Both are fun to use and still tools.
#nosafequeens
Yeppers. daily wear.
If you can wear it without a care in the world, good for you man. Truly admire that. I can wear mine all day everyday(they’re already scratched so it doesn’t matter anymore) but I wouldn’t wear them for any hard activities or someplace where it would put my safety in jeopardy.
I feel that the more I read and get interest in watches over the year the most I appreciate lower end watches and appreciate them for the low cost and the same pleasure to wear them. I totally get the passion for very expensive products but I feel it's not healthy (for me) to put so much money into a watch no matter how good or prestigious it may be. I honestly take pride in enjoying some relatively good watches (that let's admit it) will do 98% of what other watches will do for a tiny fraction of the price.
Perhaps someday my mindset will drastically change but the more I'm into watches the more I find low costs can be fun. That's my rational mind speaking.
(I want a omega aqua terra so bad!)
my Most expensive watch is the baby alpinist and she will never climb a mountain my gsquare will...
I feel that the more I read and get interest in watches over the year the most I appreciate lower end watches and appreciate them for the low cost and the same pleasure to wear them. I totally get the passion for very expensive products but I feel it's not healthy (for me) to put so much money into a watch no matter how good or prestigious it may be. I honestly take pride in enjoying some relatively good watches (that let's admit it) will do 98% of what other watches will do for a tiny fraction of the price.
Perhaps someday my mindset will drastically change but the more I'm into watches the more I find low costs can be fun. That's my rational mind speaking.
(I want a omega aqua terra so bad!)
my Most expensive watch is the baby alpinist and she will never climb a mountain my gsquare will...
Completely agree
I think conversations like this are important if for nothing else, to be able to enjoy the hobby even if you can't afford to buy "the best," (if there is such a thing)
One of the "problems" that, IMO, is not much mentioned, is how the industry is transforming the "prosumer" market into a luxury one. That is a two steps problem:
1st step - We moved from regular consumer to "prosumer":
"A customer who wants to buy very high-quality technical products or equipment. The word is formed from the words "professional" and "consumer" (https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/prosumer)
"If the customer buys a manly and capable product, that is enough to make them feel manly and capable". Nobody "needs" to effectively be anything, as long they buy the stuff that makes them "feel" they are that thing they are, that is enough for the industry:
Massive trucks, to go to the supermarket;
High-performance running shoes, to stroll on the treadmill like walking on a promenade;
All possible house tools, to fix a picture frame once a year;
The list goes on and on...
2nd step - Let the consumer realize that the "professional" goods are ugly, rough, unrefined and, there is no pleasure in using that stuff.
Then give the consumer a new version of the same product but with some additional pleasure:
Change the material to something nicer
Polish the edges
Make it more comfortable
Restrict the access could be a nicer thing too ;-)
In other words, make the "prosumer" back to "consumer" but still sell the image of the "prosumer", that kinda loops the cycle... That is genius! Evil, but genius!
That vicious cycle happens in so many places, another day I saw this abomination:
https://www.pentfitness.com/
Another example is the Land Rover Defender. That car was originally designed for farmers and other individuals with similar activities, then ordinary people started to buy this model and eventually, it became a completely different creature:
I can't imagine a person filling the trunk of the second one with boxes of dirty zucchini.
In addition, there is this term in the military, "GEARDO":
As far as I can tell, these individuals are not well-seen among the military people because usually that institution values a more "precise" approach to their gear. Having gear that is less than absolutely necessary means putting the task at risk but also, more than necessary means a waste of resources, even a lack of professionalism. I kinda admire that philosophy.
In conclusion, there is nothing wrong with buying these watches, I even have a BB58 to support my hypocrisy, I just avoid the term...
You bring up a good point about prosumerism (is that a word?). Even in electronics this is a thing. I’m perfectly content with my Macbook Air M1 coz it does everything I want it to do, even edit videos on occasion. I don’t see the need to get the Macbook Professional. But only because I got into watches and what money I don’t throw away at stuff I could use to throw away at watches. Believe me, if this was even two years ago I would’ve gotten the Macbook Professional.
I’ve met many “luxury tools” - let them have their toys
Great read I love Rolex but I’ll never buy one for myself, maybe my wife can buy one for me, they great tool watches even though I’ve never seen one in person, I’ll take your word that they are tough as they come, I love the submariner 41 mm, I do have Tissot 1000 in 43 mm and loving it
For $175 dollars? What year is this advertising from?
Good old days when Rolex had the same price numbers of today's Pagani design watches :-D
Of course it is. It’s a way for guys to pretend it’s a “tool” and not a fashion accessory.
Isn’t the term “tool” when referring to a delicate mechanical watch inherently a bit facetious though? You can just kind of yell “what time is it” at your general person now and some device will respond.
To me these designations are just stylistic genres. The difference between a Seiko diver and a Deep Sea is the difference between a guy who buys a Ford Ranger he has no use for, and a guy who buys an f350 he has no use for. One is being a bit more ostentatious than the other, but neither is actually being used as a tool