Open it! Open it!

Agree, the 1963 and the likes from Red Star are a bit of an anomaly in the watch world. You just get a great watch for little money. I had a 1963 myself before, but it was an acrylic crystal haha.

Yes, agreed on most points. The reason I don't own Baltic myself is precisely because I can't swallow the price point compared to similar brands. But that said, they're not charging for just the parts cost. And even so, a Neptune is less expensive than an Aquascaphe, so we are seeing the price difference in materials in a way?

I am also one of those lunatics that buys "overpriced" Seikos. And I know full well I'm paying for the unique design and the brand name more so than anything else. But I do it because in that case it's worth it to me, I love them. The specs are only about 20% of my decision factor there. And that all changes depending on the watch.

Dude, are you secretly working for an acrylic manufacturing company? Haha. You really have this research down!

I think they use mineral glass? But either way, they do have that beauty shape.

I don't know, I think cost is always an issue. A Sellita movement is only about $100 more than an SII movement, yet as soon as a watch has Sellita in it the price goes up by $200-400. Even if you found a box Sapphire for $50 is that the average cost? Every design has its own dims and specs varying by fractions of a mm. Acrylic and mineral parts all cost well below $50, even below $20, on average, not as an exception is all I'm saying.

That said, markups also vary widely. Yes, every company could lower their margins and spend more on materials. But they won't do it because they all follow industry norms and the norms have general guidelines markups depending on the specs, name and design. The difference I think is not significant in low production numbers, but definitely in higher ones.

But yes, the shiny objects do look good either way. Just in different ways.

I find acrylic fans are more on the defensive and sapphire fans are more on the offensive. Just my opinion. Granted, I agree both sides can overplay which one is "better". It's personal preference in the end.

I actually don't have a hard preference tbh. It really depends on the watch for me. I put screen protectors on some mineral crystal watches (like my recent Timex Expedition WRUW post) that might see harder wear and move on. I find them barely noticeable.

And honestly, I'll admit I do kinda baby all my watches, regardless of the material or crystal. The only ones that really take a beating are the GShocks.