Emotional hijacking and how we (mis)manage our expectations...

I've been doing a lot of posts related in one way or another to analyzing watches in a more objective manner. This is something I've always thought about, but in practice I find it's hard to exercise because watches after all are mostly emotional purchases for me. However, I have also been doing some courses for my work and having conversations with my AD and other enthusiasts which have helped me in my quest to better understand what drives me and possibly others to these little trinkets. This is a long-form post, you've been warned...If you're more of a TLDR type feel free to skip to the final "My head hurts..." portion.

I have an office job and work in a pretty technical and corporate environment. However, my company is privately owned so the owners have a lot of leeway as to how they manage the business. One thing they've been focusing more on is training staff on how to be more emotionally intelligent. For folks that deal in tech and engineering, EQ is not typically the demographic's strong-suit. So I find it quite refreshing. And honestly, I think we can all really help ourselves by simply being more self-aware, empathetic and value focused. When I say value, I don't mean in an economic sense, I mean as in what we actually value personally.

I'll structure this post by basically trying to address comments/questions that typically swirl in my head. Also, subjects that when I see them in comments, I compulsively feel the need to chime in. This is not meant to be a psychology major essay, just observations from a generally nerdy dude.

Watch X is not worth the price!

A lot of times people look at the price of a watch and start talking about how much "value" it offers. Conversely people talk about how overpriced a watch is and how you can get something much better for the same or lower price. Well, here is the thing, when people talk about economic "value", it's usually relative to what comparably priced products offer in terms of a category. So, for example, people will compare two divers in the $1-2k price range, not necessarily two divers actually meant for diving, or actually meant for casual wear, or actually meant for tough every-day wear, etc.

Humans have a knack for compartmentalizing the world around them. We put everything in a box, then label it, then organize the boxes in order of importance. The issue with looking at watches that way is that they cannot be categorized in a way everyone unanimously agrees on. Why? Because we all value different things in different measures. Again, I don't think this is a surprise to anyone here on WC. But even so, I'm sure you'll find yourself telling someone how much good value a watch offers sometimes without asking: "What matters to you?" first.

I myself resisted buying a plain black Seiko Turtle because I did not think paying $400 for a watch with no bracelet and a mineral crystal made sense. So I bought the King Turtle Manta instead. Well, I just bought the plain black one and I like it more! The value was not in the watch, it was in the original design which made me feel like a diver in the 70’s. Many of us are just cosplayers at the end of the day.

Another good way I can describe this is with a story my AD told me about a guy who came into her store recently. He looked at some Seiko 5 divers, commented on how they weren't as good as a Rolex, then called her later and bluntly asked if she would sell him one at 50% off! This person doesn't understand value, economic or practical for that matter. You cannot compare the two things on any level, yet in his mind he should be able to get something as good as a Rolex at half the MSRP of the bottom tier of a much less expensive brand! I've never seen anyone on WC go to these extremes. But definitely I've seen people compare watches that simply cannot be. Not because their price is not comparable, but because the value they offer outside just their price is not measurable. More on that below.

"Budget" watches are disposable...

It drives me a little nuts when people talk about how some affordable watches are "disposable". The usual argument is that it has a movement that cannot be serviced, or it's cheaper to replace the whole watch than service, or the brand doesn't retain its original MSRP market value. So here's my hot take on that: Almost ALL watches are disposable! You know why? Because they can all be recycled, most movements are cheaper to replace than service properly (paying for top-notch labor costs a lot of money!) and at the end of the day, even if a watch retains its original value, it will never be as robust as a brand new watch. But Swiss brands have convinced us a “good” watch should last for generations.

People simply view less expensive watches as disposable because they can afford to have that point of view. When something is less expensive, we are also less likely to grow emotionally attached to it. However, think of this, if your father or mother gave you their F-91 they wore most of their life, would you consider it disposable? Likely not. Yet in practical terms, it makes far more sense to replace it if it breaks. For that matter, most watches have diminishing value in terms of function, or at least their movements do. Eventually, all things break.

Here's the thing with movements these days, many of them are made very efficiently thanks to the magic of vertical integration and automation in manufacturing. I hear many people say how an NH35 is not worth servicing because a brand new one costs $40. Well, a brand new Sellita movement costs about $150 which is cheaper or the same price as servicing one. But no one mentions that. Swatch group could very well afford to simply swap out the ETA movements in many of their watches rather than pay a watch maker to service it. Maybe they do? In any case, many people that choose to service their watch do it to not be wasteful, but the economics of doing so aren't as good as maybe they used to be. Of course, there are exceptions, I’m only saying we tend to single out the lower price brackets.

The kicker here is also with in-house movements. Some people see "in-house " as a dirty word. But again, all Seiko's are in-house, Swatch group is in-house, and both those brands have proven to be reliable. Tudor became in-house relatively recently and some people just aren't sure about it. But you know how they became in-house? EDIT: They organized an industry effort to create their own manufacturing company Kenissi. They now share ownership with Chanel and make movements for not just Tudor, but multiple brands. Now, not all in-house movements can claim the same reliability. All I’m saying is who makes the movement matters more than whether it is in-house or not.

My point here is that most people look at low price and "disposable" in the same vein. But truly, even at higher ranges, a lot of what we pay for in watches has little to do with how much they cost to make or how reliable they are. It has mostly to do with how they make us feel. And brands want us to think this way, with our hearts, because there is no way to put a price on a feeling.

Graphic description warning: one of my military colleagues described the most impressive watch he’s ever seen. Can you guess? It was a digital Casio that was still going after a bomb blast, it was attached to the severed arm of the suicide bomber who committed the act. My colleague wore a Timex Ironman himself, on his vest, not his wrist.

Why is my multi-$k watch not perfectly perfect?!

Here is a common post: "My watch is 4 seconds out of spec? What should I do?!". Usually, it's with luxury brands like Rolex, Omega, Breitling, etc. You will also see these: "Wearing my Tudor to chop some wood today!". So clearly people expect these watches to be nearly indestructible, because this is the image those brands have fed us. After all, military, explorers and athletes all wear these watches. Not to mention the brands have spent hundreds of millions in technology and R&D to give us the best of the best.

I was not alive in the 60s or 70s, I was a toddler in the 80's, so I don't know if what I'm about to say is a fact. However, talking to some older military colleagues and older watch enthusiasts in general, what I surmised was than "back then" people routinely broke their watches and thus routinely had them serviced or replaced. Crazy huh?! These little mechanical devices with tiny delicate parts actually break.

"Back then" however, people also bought their watches for more practical purposes. Subs were a couple thousand dollars and were reliable and premium, but practical watches nonetheless. I have a hard time thinking someone in the 70's ran back to the shop when their watch was running 10sec/day fast. But maybe I'm wrong...Here is the thing however, many of those name brands no longer sell us watches for practical use, they sell them as luxury accessories.

Luxury accessories are not meant to be practical, or logical for that matter. They are usually frivolous objects we buy to make ourselves feel special or simply because we want to admire them. Your Pelagos is tough sure, but it was not designed to accompany you while you load cement. If that's what you want to do, by all means it's your watch, just temper your expectations is all I'm saying. Don't be aggravated if it breaks or starts acting funny. My dad was not a big watch guy, but you know what he did when he played sports, or did anything physical? He took off his watch.

Another AD story here...she bought her husband a fine silk shirt, he typically wears Costco brand T's. One day he decides to throw it in the washer, then the dryer. He ruined his "luxury" shirt then complained to his wife "how come this much more expensive shirt is not as good as my cheap Costco shirts?". She replied "guess you're not meant to have luxury products..."

Brand/watch X is all hype, don't be fooled!

This is the biggest form of emotional hijacking that takes us all by surprise: the thought that we're paying for hype or status not just a watch. But again, if you tell yourself you’re buying a watch for anything other than emotional purposes you might already be blind to your intentions. If you truly understand you’re buying watches for mostly emotional reasons you likely won’t be one of the people throwing shots at “hype watches”.

Let me clarify something, this is not a holier-than-thou post. I myself deal with this and all the issues above ALL the time. I’m only trying my best to be more self-aware is all. What we term as hype is nothing more than clever marketing tactics to incite another common acronym: FOMO (fear of missing out). Once more, I’m sure this is not news to anyone, but once more if you’re a human you’re likely still vulnerable to this.

No one likes being manipulated, no one likes thinking they and they alone are not responsible for every decision they make. However, we don’t fully understand our lizard brains, so inevitably we play a game of cat and mouse with our subconscious constantly. Thus, the typical response to “hype” is going to be FOMO or the opposite, animosity at the thought of being influenced. “Why do you keep spouting all this obvious s#*t Hector?” Well, because knowing how our emotions work and actually being self-aware in the moment are two totally different things!

Story time again...I went to my AD a couple months ago and tried on some Seiko watches. One was a Seiko 5 reissue LE, this one to be precise:

She also had the Seiko 5 with Snoopy on it which I just totally ignored to be honest. Well now both those watches are going for a premium on the used market. I actually told myself when I saw that “should’ve bought them when you had the chance…” and then I went looking for one! I don’t actually like them all that much, but I also don’t like the thought I won’t be able to buy them if I change my mind. Or worse, that I will have to pay more than MSRP if I want one. It took me a whole day to come back to my senses. And yet, if I saw that Seiko 5 diver again at my AD, I might buy it…

It's better to get what you actually want than get something similar…

This is the most well-intentioned comment I see all the time. It really boils down to it’s better to have a single premium watch you actually want than many less expensive watches that only hold your attention temporarily. For the most part, this makes sense and seems like sound advice. However, this is the flaw I see in it: a lot of people don’t actually know what they want.

So, the solution is to go try on a bunch of watches right? Find the one you like then just buy the one good one instead of wasting time with one-night stands. Well, this is not practical for everyone. In fact, I don’t think it’s practical for most. And it’s usually well-seasoned enthusiast that give this advice. But maybe we should consider they already went through their own discovery phase.

Everyone starts enjoying watches at different times. Some since childhood, some in young adulthood, some in mature adulthood. Whatever the case, your likes and dislikes are typically linked to hands-on experiences you’ve had. If you have not had them, only one way to do it: actually owning watches. Not just reading about them or trying them on. No matter how much you spend on your first watch, that’s still your first experience. You don’t know if it’s going to be your true love right away. It’s not the price that matters in other words, it’s the whole experience, and you cannot predict that easily.

I think more sound advice might be “try one style at a time, not many”. This will allow you to focus more intently. If you think you like dress watches, just try that one style. Whether it’s a JLC Reverso or an Orient Bambino depends on what you’re able/willing to spend, but just focus on the experience. Maybe you try both and discover you don’t like square watches, so next you try a Longines moon phase. By then you might figure you want sports as well or instead, so you go on to the next style.

Finally, we can also consider there are seasoned enthusiasts that still opt to buy lots of lower priced watches vs few expensive ones. Well then that is just their style! Maybe it’s A.D.D., maybe it’s just pure child-like excitement, but the point is, some people like having a big box full of toys. That is what they want.

My head hurts Hector. Who cares about any of this…?

Maybe this is what you’re thinking if you made it this far. And if it is, then congratulations! You are now experiencing what it’s like for me to try and be self-aware. It hurts, it’s hard and it’s probably why so many people don’t practice it routinely. It should also be approached with caution because overthinking is a real thing and can also lead to anxiety which is just not worth it when it comes to something as inconsequential as watches.

I’ll end with my own story once more, one that involves all the aspects I discussed here. It’s about how I fell in love, then out of love, then back in love with the Rolex Submariner. But I still don’t know if that’s how it will end…

When I got back into watches in my 30’s, I started with simple Casio’s. I still love them to this day. But my next itch was for a Rolex, because we’ve all been there. Being the hyper practical and no-nonsense guy I am, I thought Submariner, duh. Well I obsessed about it for a long time, tried to convince myself I should just get one, etc. etc. Well I saw one in the flesh finally, on my coworker’s wrist. He let me handle it and try it on. I felt nothing….it was cold and blocky. I should note it was a 2017 model. So it had the beefed-up case, maxi dial, ceramic bezel, etc. So I gave up on it. I also though to myself “this watch is not worth $10k, not by far”. After all I could get an Omega SMP for much less, and so that became my new target.

When I finally had the chance to buy an expensive watch, you know what I did? I bought a Grand Seiko! Haha, nothing like what I had originally set on. I love my GS, really. It’s everything I thought it would be. And best of all I really felt I got value for money out of the GS, more so than the SMP or Sub. But that Sub still kept creeping into my thoughts.

I said to myself: "ok, maybe it’s just new Subs that I don’t like. I’ll just build a vintage style Sub and see how that feels." And so I did that. As soon as I built it, I really liked it! I started telling myself: “maybe I don’t need a Rolex after all!” I mean my self-built homage is made of stainless steel, it has a perfectly serviceable or easily replaceable NH38 movement, and it looks great. So why am I still thinking about that stupid Rolex?!

Then I start researching vintage Subs. I do like their look more, and I also saw some of them in the wild. Thoughts confirmed, they are “better”. But do I really want a $10k watch with a 40 year old movement? F#*k no! Best next thing? A newer vintage model. In comes the 14060M, my perfect Rolex. Old looks, but a 3130 movement with modern materials, magnetic resistance, etc.

Now back to the value proposition…over $10k for a used watch?! WTF, am I serious here?! I can get soooo many “better” watches for that money. I can get a new AND a used Omega diver couple for that money! C’mon Hector, make some sense!

Well, emotions don’t make sense. Rolex knows this, they have climbed to the top by achieving the highest commercial value via emotional value thanks to their unrivaled marketing. They know how to create an experience, not just make a good watch. And the cost of that experience is over $10k. Case closed. I will buy a used Sub at some point. Will I get the experience? I don’t know, but I sure have to try or I’ll never know.

Honestly, if you made it this far, good on you. You are a glutton for punishment or just hoped this would have a more rewarding ending. Sorry if I disappointed you, but at least you can say you tried. And if you got triggered at any point, but then came back down, maybe you even looked inside yourself a bit more than usual.

Keep it real WC.