Fake Watches -- Does it really matter?

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by DocMick

Good point

Not to ruffle anyone's feathers but outside of a Monaco, Tags are overpriced Guess watches

I don't have the first idea of how you can come to that conclusion, but I respect your right to have done so. No, my "feathers aren't ruffled." I'm just overcome with incredulity, but I'm willing to read any syllogism you might have to make the case that Tags timepieces are indeed merely pricey Guess watches.

Does Guess even offer a mechanical watch of any sort? Do they even have a single style that is not the horological "love child" of some two pricier watches?

All the best.

[Ben2k9]

Originally Posted by DocMick

while the purpose is to tell time, the real MEANING of expensive watch isn't chronometry... it's functional jewelry, it's a status symbol, and rarely even an investment... but really it's a statement that you enjoy the finer things in life. that's why a fake watch represents an attempt to bypass the hard work and discipline involved in accessing that strata where one has the means to enjoy said fine things.... when in reality they are only fooling themselves

+1

I don't have a lot of experience with fake watches. one time my friend gave me a fake Rolex, and the first time I tried to adjust the time, the crown popped out of the case and the watch was busted, so from then on I was done with fakes.

Me personally, I would respect someone more who's proud to rock a $200-300 Seiko versus someone who spent that much on a fake Rolex, omega, or Breitling..etc

You know...people should just be proud of what they are stop comparing themselves to what's around them. There's always going to be someone richer.

This may be an unpopular opinion but I'm also not a big fan of breast implants. It feels like cheating. It's like if a guy had pec, shoulder, bicep, and calf implants. I'd have no other choice but to conclude he was a superficial cheater who didn't want to earn it.

[P1]

Originally Posted by Ben2k9

+1

I don't have a lot of experience with fake watches. one time my friend gave me a fake Rolex, and the first time I tried to adjust the time, the crown popped out of the case and the watch was busted, so from then on I was done with fakes.

Me personally, I would respect someone more who's proud to rock a $200-300 Seiko versus someone who spent that much on a fake Rolex, omega, or Breitling..etc

You know...people should just be proud of what they are stop comparing themselves to what's around them. There's always going to be someone richer.

This may be an unpopular opinion but I'm also not a big fan of breast implants. It feels like cheating. It's like if a guy had pec, shoulder, bicep, and calf implants. I'd have no other choice but to conclude he was a superficial cheater who didn't want to earn it.

Cannot exactly do a million push ups as a woman and magically work your way into double Ds now, right?

[boots]

Originally Posted by Ben2k9

+1

I don't have a lot of experience with fake watches. one time my friend gave me a fake Rolex, and the first time I tried to adjust the time, the crown popped out of the case and the watch was busted, so from then on I was done with fakes.

Me personally, I would respect someone more who's proud to rock a $200-300 Seiko versus someone who spent that much on a fake Rolex, omega, or Breitling..etc

You know...people should just be proud of what they are stop comparing themselves to what's around them. There's always going to be someone richer.

This may be an unpopular opinion but I'm also not a big fan of breast implants. It feels like cheating. It's like if a guy had pec, shoulder, bicep, and calf implants. I'd have no other choice but to conclude he was a superficial cheater who didn't want to earn it.

We think alike! Good one.

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by Ben2k9

+1

I don't have a lot of experience with fake watches. one time my friend gave me a fake Rolex, and the first time I tried to adjust the time, the crown popped out of the case and the watch was busted, so from then on I was done with fakes.

Me personally, I would respect someone more who's proud to rock a $200-300 Seiko versus someone who spent that much on a fake Rolex, omega, or Breitling..etc

You know...people should just be proud of what they are stop comparing themselves to what's around them. There's always going to be someone richer.

This may be an unpopular opinion but I'm also not a big fan of breast implants. It feels like cheating. It's like if a guy had pec, shoulder, bicep, and calf implants. I'd ... conclude he was a superficial cheater who didn't want to earn it.

Red:
Personally, I won't give or withhold respect for another because of what watch they wear or their wealth or lack thereof. I think and live in a way that doesn't accord respect that way. Wealth and its trappings just are what they are: things. One's original thoughts, kind heart and positive deeds that serve someone other than oneself will earn respect from me. I just don't see how I can rightly conclude much of anything substantive about a person's character because of the clothes and trinkets they wear/own.

Blue:
+100! Absolutely!

All the best.

[SenorFunkyPants]

Originally Posted by tony20009

Personally, I won't give or withhold respect for another because of what watch they wear or their wealth or lack thereof. I think and live in a way that doesn't accord respect that way. Wealth and its trappings just are what they are: things. One's original thoughts, kind heart and positive deeds that serve someone other than oneself will earn respect from me. I just don't see how I can rightly conclude much of anything substantive about a person's character because of the clothes and trinkets they wear/own.

Easily the best sentiment from the whole thread.

[NemesisX]

Originally Posted by Ben2k9

+1

I don't have a lot of experience with fake watches. one time my friend gave me a fake Rolex, and the first time I tried to adjust the time, the crown popped out of the case and the watch was busted, so from then on I was done with fakes.

Me personally, I would respect someone more who's proud to rock a $200-300 Seiko versus someone who spent that much on a fake Rolex, omega, or Breitling..etc

You know...people should just be proud of what they are stop comparing themselves to what's around them. There's always going to be someone richer.

This may be an unpopular opinion but I'm also not a big fan of breast implants. It feels like cheating. It's like if a guy had pec, shoulder, bicep, and calf implants. I'd have no other choice but to conclude he was a superficial cheater who didn't want to earn it.

Yes, but most watches do not provide a good means to properly assess wealth. I don't buy this notion that people who wear more expensive watches are wealthier than those who don't. If I see someone wearing a $20,000 watch, I can be ~95% certain that this person makes somewhere between $75,000 a year and $13,000,000,000 a year (the top earner for 2013, Warren Buffet) and has a net worth somewhere between $100,000 and $60,000,000,000 (Bill Gates).

The point is, there are ways to conceivably pay for a $20,000 watch over a sufficiently large financing term that are accessible to someone who makes as little as $75,000 a year or as much as $13 billion a year.

An individual making $75,000 could put aside $5,000 (and change for interest) towards this watch and live off of the remaining $70,000 for a short period of time. That's not all that surprising, nor is it impressive.

All I've learned about someone who wears a $20,000 watch is that this individual isn't homeless and totally devoid of wealth.

Cars, too, are not a good way to properly assess wealth for the exact same reason, although it's much more difficult to drive an increasingly expensive luxury car on lower income than it is to wear an increasingly expensive luxury watch. Watches can always be sold with relatively minimal depreciation (or, rarely with minimal appreciation).

In my experience the best indicator of wealth is one's house. This is not to say wealthy people always live in expensive houses, but rather expensive houses almost always house wealthy people. You can't just easily finance your way to living in a $10,000,000 house on a $75,000 income. The monthly payment on such a house is more than this individual's annual gross income. Someone who lives in a $10,000,000 house is going to be wealthy by most peoples' standards. Someone who wears a $20,000 watch? Who knows.

I also (as usual) completely agree with tony20009's last post.

Edit: I see this post and wonder which strata are you talking about, DocMick?

Originally Posted by DocMick View Post
while the purpose is to tell time, the real MEANING of expensive watch isn't chronometry... it's functional jewelry, it's a status symbol, and rarely even an investment... but really it's a statement that you enjoy the finer things in life. that's why a fake watch represents an attempt to bypass the hard work and discipline involved in accessing that strata where one has the means to enjoy said fine things.... when in reality they are only fooling themselves

What income or net worth 'strata' do the luxury watches mentioned in this thread (Rolex, Omega, Breitling, AP, IWC, etc.) represent?

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by NemesisX

...
All I've learned about someone who wears a $20,000 watch is that this individual isn't homeless and totally devoid of wealth....

I don't even think one can safely commit to that belief even. I can assure you that if something were to happen to me, one of my relatives would likely end up with one of my $20K watches and I can tell you there's a few of them who haven't even been in the same state as the word "wealth" let alone have any of their own.

Originally Posted by NemesisX

What income or net worth 'strata' do the luxury watches mentioned in this thread (Rolex, Omega, Breitling, AP, IWC, etc.) represent?

In light of my comment above, it's pretty clear they don't represent any strata.

All the best.

[NemesisX]

Originally Posted by tony20009

I don't even think one can safely commit to that belief even. I can assure you that if something were to happen to me, one of my relatives would likely end up with one of my $20K watches and I can tell you there's a few of them who haven't even been in the same state as the word "wealth" let alone have any of their own.



In light of my comment above, it's pretty clear they don't represent any strata.

All the best.

Great point. Gifting further muddles issue of assessing wealth based on jewelry. I chose $75,000 as a somewhat arbitrary middle class income that's still comfortably above the median U.S. income, but you're right in asserting that the low end of that monstrous range could be even lower still.

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by NemesisX

Great point. Gifting further muddles issue of assessing wealth based on jewelry. I chose $75,000 as a somewhat arbitrary middle class income that's still comfortably above the median U.S. income, but you're right in asserting that the low end of that monstrous range could be even lower still.

Three's nothing muddled about it at all, IMO. It's just something that one can't do and rely upon the conclusions drawn from doing so.

All the best.

[DocMick]

Originally Posted by tony20009

I don't have the first idea of how you can come to that conclusion, but I respect your right to have done so. No, my "feathers aren't ruffled." I'm just overcome with incredulity, but I'm willing to read any syllogism you might have to make the case that Tags timepieces are indeed merely pricey Guess watches.

Does Guess even offer a mechanical watch of any sort? Do they even have a single style that is not the horological "love child" of some two pricier watches?

All the best.

I'm not impressed with any Tag Heure timepiece personally. The fit and finish of tag is on par with Guess. Tag aficionados (wether real or fake) are usually people who a year before were geeking out over Kenneth Coles, Movados, or Guess watches.

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by DocMick

I'm not impressed with any Tag Heure timepiece personally. The fit and finish of tag is on par with Guess. Tag aficionados (wether real or fake) are usually people who a year before were geeking out over Kenneth Coles, Movados, or Guess watches.

I didn't realize Guess had such high standards. One learns something daily.

All the best.

[DocMick]

Compare a Gc and Tag side by side. Very similar imo. I personally have no compelling reason to by a single Tag Heuer any more.

[DocMick]

Originally Posted by NemesisX

Yes, but most watches do not provide a good means to properly assess wealth. I don't buy this notion that people who wear more expensive watches are wealthier than those who don't. If I see someone wearing a $20,000 watch, I can be ~95% certain that this person makes somewhere between $75,000 a year and $13,000,000,000 a year (the top earner for 2013, Warren Buffet) and has a net worth somewhere between $100,000 and $60,000,000,000 (Bill Gates).

The point is, there are ways to conceivably pay for a $20,000 watch over a sufficiently large financing term that are accessible to someone who makes as little as $75,000 a year or as much as $13 billion a year.

An individual making $75,000 could put aside $5,000 (and change for interest) towards this watch and live off of the remaining $70,000 for a short period of time. That's not all that surprising, nor is it impressive.

All I've learned about someone who wears a $20,000 watch is that this individual isn't homeless and totally devoid of wealth.

Cars, too, are not a good way to properly assess wealth for the exact same reason, although it's much more difficult to drive an increasingly expensive luxury car on lower income than it is to wear an increasingly expensive luxury watch. Watches can always be sold with relatively minimal depreciation (or, rarely with minimal appreciation).

In my experience the best indicator of wealth is one's house. This is not to say wealthy people always live in expensive houses, but rather expensive houses almost always house wealthy people. You can't just easily finance your way to living in a $10,000,000 house on a $75,000 income. The monthly payment on such a house is more than this individual's annual gross income. Someone who lives in a $10,000,000 house is going to be wealthy by most peoples' standards. Someone who wears a $20,000 watch? Who knows.

I also (as usual) completely agree with tony20009's last post.

Edit: I see this post and wonder which strata are you talking about, DocMick?



What income or net worth 'strata' do the luxury watches mentioned in this thread (Rolex, Omega, Breitling, AP, IWC, etc.) represent?

I see what you did there... and there.

My post is self explanatory. The ability to enjoy the finer things. A large subjective "eye of the beholder" component goes into what each different individual defines as wealth.

I never offered up a particular income bracket previously, so I won't care to now. But since you so vaguely and yet so distinctly assigned income/wealth definitions to watch owners, primarily to mock owners of 20k watches as pretentious non-wealthy types, I'm sure you can answer your own question with great eloquence.

But if the wearer of said $20k watch admitted it was a replica, does this catapult him now into a higher income/wealth strata? I look forward to reading between the lines.

These kind of in-depth dick measuring discussions are quite the staple of car luxury lifestyle aka "I'm more Alpha than you, Bro" forums.

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by Harley Mc Slow

Mines a Tag Carreras ,So is it or isn't it real..?

I don't know, but what I can see of it in the pic you posted looks nice. That's as much as matters IMO, that and the fact that you are happy wearing it.

The reason I might want to know if it's real or not if if you decide to gift it to me. If you decide to do just that, upon taking delivery of it, I will bother to find out whether it's an authentic or fake Tag.

I will appreciate the gift either way. If it's fake, I'll learn something about the difference between a fake Carrera and if it's real I'll discover things about a Tag model with which I have no direct ownership experience. Moreover, you didn't have to give me anything, so along with being thanking for learning opportunity, for the simple generosity you will have shown by your gift, I'll also be grateful.

All the best.

[tony20009]

Originally Posted by DocMick

...

But if the wearer of said $20k watch admitted it was a replica, does this catapult him now into a higher income/wealth strata? I look forward to reading between the lines.

These kind of in-depth dick measuring discussions are quite the staple of car luxury lifestyle aka "I'm more Alpha than you, Bro" forums.

If folks want to play "whose is bigger," well they need to whip it out, but a watch isn't going to answer the question, whether it's real or fake. In the same way, a real or fake watch doesn't tell one what another's economic position is.

I suspect I'm not all that different from most other folks who buy pricey watches and other nice stuff in that nearly everywhere one goes socially -- for me it's most often social events I or friends host in our homes -- everyone there is well off and everyone knows it. Merely being there pretty much "screams" that much more effectively than any possessions ever could.

It's not any different professionally. People don't need exact figures to know damn well whether their peers, bosses, subordinates, clients and colleagues are in good shape. When you see your doctor, it doesn't matter what he wears, were he lives, what car he drives, etc.; you know he makes a very good living.

In the same say, when you see a "regular" sort of fellow with some uncommonly extravagant belonging, you know there are likely circumstances beyond his job alone that allowed him to come by it. You can assume the item is a fake, and you may or may not be correct in your assumption.

The point is that wealth assessments and assertions -- by virtue of a real of fake watch or any other possession -- isn't ever effective among folks one knows, and it's irrelevant as it applies to people whom one doesn't know. Although, among that latter group, it could become relevant if they are ponying up to direct some of that wealth one's way. LOL.

All the best.

[NemesisX]

Originally Posted by DocMick

I see what you did there... and there.

My post is self explanatory. The ability to enjoy the finer things. A large subjective "eye of the beholder" component goes into what each different individual defines as wealth.

I never offered up a particular income bracket previously, so I won't care to now. But since you so vaguely and yet so distinctly assigned income/wealth definitions to watch owners, primarily to mock owners of 20k watches as pretentious non-wealthy types, I'm sure you can answer your own question with great eloquence.

But if the wearer of said $20k watch admitted it was a replica, does this catapult him now into a higher income/wealth strata? I look forward to reading between the lines.

These kind of in-depth dick measuring discussions are quite the staple of car luxury lifestyle aka "I'm more Alpha than you, Bro" forums.

You're the one who offered up the notion of luxury watches being functional jewelry and status symbols in the first place!

You presumably want people to ascribe a certain status to you when you're seen wearing a $20k luxury watch, but when pressed on what that status is precisely you get defensive.

Why is the onus on me to answer my question? I don't see watches as status symbols. I don't judge anyone's status based on the watch they wear. I wouldn't even recognize 99% of the $1k+ watches as is. They all look the same to me.

I also don't understand how I'm the one "dick measuring." I come from a humble, middle class family and I wear a relatively inexpensive Seiko (it's a real Seiko in all of its $100 glory).

I judge the wearer of a fake $20k watch the same way I judge the wearer of a real $20k watch - I don't judge either individual at all based solely on the watch they wear. That was the point of my post to begin with. I don't see how it's possible to judge status based on a watch, but you have more experience in this realm than I do. I don't have the faintest clue about the association between watches and status which is precisely why I asked you for clarification. I offered up my best guess - that there is little (if any) association between watch price and socioeconomic status - but you offered up a different view and I merely asked for clarification.

I'm also curious as to why you think offering up an enormous, plausible socioeconomic status range (so enormous that it's effectively useless) for $20k watch-wearers is the same as mocking some (or all) of them as pretentious and non-wealthy. I specifically included the very top income and top net worth for 2013 as the upper limit of that range!

[P1]

Originally Posted by Harley Mc Slow

Mines a Tag Carreras ,So is it or isn't it real..?

Easy to answer mate: it _has_ to be real in order for it to be a Tag Heuer. If it's not real, then it's not a Tag. Then it's merely a Chinese junk replica.

[marvin100]

Homages are fine. Fakes are not. They violate laws, they frequently involve child or slave labor, and they are notoriously used for money laundering. Buying fakes isn't cool.

That said, you can have as much fake crap as you want.

[DocMick]

Originally Posted by NemesisX

You're the one who offered up the notion of luxury watches being functional jewelry and status symbols in the first place!

You presumably want people to ascribe a certain status to you when you're seen wearing a $20k luxury watch, but when pressed on what that status is precisely you get defensive.

Why is the onus on me to answer my question? I don't see watches as status symbols. I don't judge anyone's status based on the watch they wear. I wouldn't even recognize 99% of the $1k+ watches as is. They all look the same to me.

I also don't understand how I'm the one "dick measuring." I come from a humble, middle class family and I wear a relatively inexpensive Seiko (it's a real Seiko in all of its $100 glory).

I judge the wearer of a fake $20k watch the same way I judge the wearer of a real $20k watch - I don't judge either individual at all based solely on the watch they wear. That was the point of my post to begin with. I don't see how it's possible to judge status based on a watch, but you have more experience in this realm than I do. I don't have the faintest clue about the association between watches and status which is precisely why I asked you for clarification. I offered up my best guess - that there is little (if any) association between watch price and socioeconomic status - but you offered up a different view and I merely asked for clarification.

I'm also curious as to why you think offering up an enormous, plausible socioeconomic status range (so enormous that it's effectively useless) for $20k watch-wearers is the same as mocking some (or all) of them as pretentious and non-wealthy. I specifically included the very top income and top net worth for 2013 as the upper limit of that range!

holy defensive reply batman, I mustve hit a sore spot

defensive reply by way of posturing like an authority figure with an expansive list of questions

i wont bother with copying and pasting my previous responses, you clearly have a chip on your shoulder

also, i never said i own any $20k watches, that must have been an assumption on your part

have a great weekend

[Ben2k9]

Originally Posted by marvin100

Homages are fine. Fakes are not. They violate laws, they frequently involve child or slave labor, and they are notoriously used for money laundering. Buying fakes isn't cool.

That's a great point no one has made yet. Buying a fake contributes to the parasites & cheaters out in the market, while diluting the value of whichever legitimate company has built the product / brand.

[Shaung]

I would not buy a fake m3. I would not buy a fake watch.