Does the watch make the man?
 

I've been working at a motorcycle dealership for a bit now and basically, I'm "in charge" of apparel, which include sunglasses and watches.

I can't help but notice how many men go out of their way to buy sunglasses and watches that they can't afford, but more so with watches. We deal Nixon watches that can easily be more than $300 dollars. And they sell!

Men, do you buy watches like this? If so, why? Is it to show off your money or just to have something nice to wear? Or is it something else completely.

Women, how do you feel about men wearing expensive watches? Do you take that as a sign of wealth or do you not care?



To answer my own questions, it seems to me like it's a money/power thing for men. But I'm not a man so I guess I can't say really. I do know though that when I see a man with a nice watch in a business or a romantic setting it gives the hint that they are well off and like nice things.

Also, is there something that women wear which serves the same purpose as a man's watch?


Edit: I didn't realize there was a whole thread about men's style otherwise I may have posted there but oh well, too late now. I'd like to see some discussion anyways.

I'm probably guilty of buying a watch beyond my means. But for my job, I'm expected to look nice, and look successful (I'm a recruiter). So I have a nice Movado watch.

Personally I think a good watch accents someone quite well, and it is not something I regret buying. However, I don't enjoy paying for it that much. I think it ran around 1400$ or so.

you can't walk into a meeting or restaurant and put your keys on the table to show you're driving a BMW, but you can glance at your watch and show you've got a rare, collectable, or expensive timepiece on your wrist.

My watches always get damaged, lost, or broken well before their time, so I don't want to spend any more than necessary. As for the reason behind wearing an expensive watch, I think it's the same as wearing a nice new outfit--it feels good to know you have something new that makes you look good.

Hate to break it to you, but $300 isn't exactly expensive when it comes to watches.

My three most expensive watches each retail for around 10 times your "$300" (new), and that's considered mid-high end in the world of watch enthusiasts. Of course, street prices are usually considerably lower than retail, and I did buy two of them in mint used condition which helped a lot.

For me personally, I've always really liked watches. I loved my Casio watches when I was a kid, and geeked out over fancy calculator ones and solar-powered watches. When I started working, I spent a year looking around for a nice watch, eventually spending around $200 on one, and wore it every day for three years.

Handbags, shoes. I'd say jewellery, but jewellery isn't necessarily functional in the same way.

Yeah, you're right but as I'm not in the watch business I don't know these things. Also, I'm a starving college student so 300 dollars for anything is a lot.

And I hate to break it to you but most shoes women spend good on money are not functional either. I guess it'd have to be handbags, but I definitely can't justify spending a lot of money on those.


Do all of you wear watches you spend all this money on or are they just collectibles? Do you have a nice one that you wear for special occasions and other ones that you wear all the time or do you always wear the nicest you have?

I stopped wearing a daily watch when my best friend got married. It was a good time to get rid of the watch tan and that was almost 10 years ago.

I now just have a dress watch which I wear only for occassions. Otherwise, I have my cellphone, PDA, iPod to tell me the time.

I have a cool-ass stainless steel Hamilton watch. $300. It is not an expensive time piece, but I like how it looks and I like that my wife gave it to me. Everybody I know who has a job like mine wears a Rolex. Most of them bought it because they were led to believe that is what a "successful" person wears.

They don't know what a really good watch is. They wouldn't know a Patek Philippe if it bit them on the wrist.

My watch is different. I like that.

If I see someone wearing a WWII vintage Rolex, or a funky Omega from the 50's or 60's, THAT impresses me.

But the bottom line is that a man's watch doesn't tell you anything about the man, unless you know the story behind the watch. Was it his Grandfather's retirement watch, or did he pick it up in a yard sale? Does he use the actually keep track of the tides an phase of the moon, or does he just like the way the dial looks?

What's the story behind the watch?

http://thestockmasters.com/images/pu...tion_koons.jpg

It's man-jewelry. Most women will notice shoes and watches on a man immediately; you're making an impression. A Timex $100 watch makes an impression. A Dior $2300 watch makes a slightly different impression.

Here's a question, then. How do you distinguish between the women who like you for your $ and the women who like you for you? Or are they necessarily related in some way?

I don't mean gold diggers, either. I just mean your average, well educated attractive woman.

This is related to this thread b/c if you are single, would you want to wear a nice watch if you just get a bunch of interest in you due to your $?

$300 isn't considered an expensive watch by a large portion of the population. I have a pretty good job, though I am not rich by any means, but just talked myself out of a watch that was a couple grand and bought one that was several hundred instead. Lots of people that I know or work with have at least a watch or two that cost $1500+.

I can understand a woman being interested in someone who's responsible enough to earn a decent wage. I can usually weed out women who are with me just for a physical relationship or for handouts pretty quick. The idea is that a decent watch doesn't just communicate *money money money*, it also can communicate *he cares enough about himself to dress well; he can make enough money to support a family; oh my god he has huge hands*. Ultimately, it's about standing out in the herd.

Waste of money. I'd never spend more than $30. For the most part, same goes for clothing as well. I care enough about myself not to waste money on things I don't need or want.

I hate watches. I stopped wearing them when I was 12, and I will never wear one again. Antiquated and useless, in my book.

Gotcha. On a side note, it woudl be pretty cool to have more women interested in me for a solely physical relationship. i suppose that would be what many men would call the holy grail. lol

Nope. The man makes the man. Society puts too much emphasis on image..IMO.

Mine is chosen for function only. Swiss Millitary - basic model. I love it, mostly because I never have to take it off, and it truly handles the abuse. I've scraped it's face across the walls of the raquetball court more than once, broken the pins many times, wear it for all kinds of abusive work like welding, car reairs etc. Swimming, climbing, sailing - good in water. I've actually saved a lot of money (yes this is a pretty cheap watch @ approx $100), but it's lasted 10X any other watch I've had. Of course my most expensive previous watch was a seiko.

I just like not having to worry about abusing it, I'm impressed, and I think it look OK too. (bought my wife the matching ladies model - she likes it too.)

Mine is a sieko divers watch I found by the side of the road almost 20 years ago. It is a nice watch and retails about the value of the OP. It tells time and seems pretty hard wearing. Do I need anything else?

I have several watches - most chosen because they're unusual. Right now I'm wearing a Fossil Aut-O-matic which retails new at £100 ($200) but I bought from a business contact for £20.

I like Fossil watches, but my main dress watch is a Raymond Weil that was an 18th Birthday present from my father.

My father has an Omega that he was given by his mum for his 21st Birthday - in due course (assuming my Brother doesn't get there first) it may come down to me - it is heirloom quality after all...

Well, if you're like Healer, you'll probably feel that your fiancé should buy you an engagement watch that is both beyond the means of both of you :D

hahahahahaha...he wants a Tag Heuer but not just any Tag, a Kimmy Raikkonen Tag!!! which costs something between 30k and 40k, but he strongly believes that cos he bought me a ring, i should get him that watch...

he's quite nuts...maybe one day when i win the lotto :D

but yeah, he is currently wearing his dads watch which is plain and simple...it tells time, and has the date...and it is pretty hard wearing...what more can you ask for in a watch? i offered to have that one nicely restrapped for him for his birthday thats coming up, but he wont hear anything of it...he wants his Tag (or this other one thats name starts with a B, i forget)

but wait, here's a pic of the watch :D

the watch maketh the man indeed

but accessories dont maketh the woman. dont ask me why.. it just does.

when u see a man with a nice watch and a cool suit, u think he likes looking after himself..

if you see a woman who is carrying a gucci bag and minolkas you think 'vanity'.

anyone agree?

mandy, that's a Tag Heuer Carrera and I have that same model, in fact I purchased it about two weeks ago. Not sure what currency you are referring to but it doesn't cost anywhere near $30k... closer to US$2k. I got mine used for even less than that.

They're functional in that they protect your feet from the road when you're out and about (in the same way that watches tell time). All shoes do the same basic thing, in the same was that all watches do the same basic thing... some have more additional features than others though.

Of course I wear my nice watches. :) However the watch I wear for a wedding might not be the same one I wear when I'm fixing the sink. I have a couple of "dressy" watches which I save for special occasions, and several everyday watches which are still nice but are suited to a different situation. Again, a bit like shoes.

From Mandy's profile: Location: Port Elizabeth, South Africa

From Google: 30 000 South African rands = 3 960.93 U.S. dollars

I would like to get a nice watch, such as a Rolex when I absolutely don't have to think twice about spending the money. There is something about many nicer watches that feels good. I know it's the weight to some extent, but something else? I think to answer the OP, guys look at watches because they are an acceptable way to accessorize or be a bit different. Many men do not wear much, if any, jewelery, so this fills the gap.

South African Rand, or ZAR, is around R7.69 to the US$.

That said, I'm quite jealous. :)

I figured that might be it, USD$4k is still very expensive for that watch... even here in England it's typically around $2.5k new. Maybe it's a lot more in SA. :)

I know, this was a watch I dreamed about for many years and I am absolutely stoked to finally have one.

http://i29.tinypic.com/1z6y64h.jpg

I think I'm going to have to go put it on now... have been wearing my Link today. :)

With watches, unless you're going to an interview, I tend not to bother, and either use my phone, or a £5 casio job(gets odd looks, which make me laugh :D)

Cheap but effective.


They are purely fashion devices. A £3000 watch with a movement will be less accurate than a cheap quartz job.

Having said that, I'd quite like a quartz analogue watch with white face, stainless steel bezel, Roman numbers and a brown leather strap.

Doesn't have to cost much.

Wrist watches on a man dont do a thing for me at all, I dont even notice them, now give me a guy wearing a pocket watch and for some reason I swoon!!!

Dave rarely wears a watch, he doesnt like the "watch tan" and he carries his cell all the time so he uses that if he needs to know the time.

A pocket watch would be hot.

I never notice whether a man is wearing a watch or not. My SO doesn't wear a watch. He spends most of his day at a computer for work, or in a classroom with a clock, so there isn't really a need. He does have a cell phone, but he forgets it as often as not.

I agree with this, though I'm sure there are many people that would argue vanity for men's watches as well.


I think that's true. I know that if I see a man with a nice watch it tells me something about him, granted it's not always true but it's a start. I like to see that a man knows how to take care of himself and is motivated to have money like I am, otherwise things just won't work. Kind of like how I broke up with my ex because he was never motivated to work hard and have nice things. A nice watch tells me this guy has some sense.


Though, when I see someone with a 2k watch who clearly owns nothing else of that value it screams vanity or spoiled. Again, not always the case but I've noticed it a lot around Phoenix.

Would you spent $400 on an ideal black pearl?
How about $1,000 or more on a wedding band?

I view timepieces as any adornment.

Personally? I prefer something that looks dainty yet takes a beating. But I'm a woman, you're asking about men's watches. When I see good taste, I appreciate it.

It rubs me wrong that the OP assumed men can't afford something they choose to purchase.

This is a college town, and I happen to know that most of the college students here don't make money. I didn't say none of my customers can afford expensive watches.

You continue to senselessly pass judgment. That's not a clerk's right.
I certainly hope that you do not treat a customer any differently because you assume they cannot afford what they intend to purchase.

I think vanity either way. A nice watch and a cool suit is "too much" just as is a Gucci bag and minolkas (what ever they are). But many of us have our moments of vanity.

(Wears a pocket watch.)

What about a guy smart enough to save his money, rather than pissing it away on an ancient timepiece? :)

I have clocks all over the place, I have a PDA, I have an iPod, and I have enough computers to educate a small country, so I'm never really wondering what time it is. Consequently, I have no use for a wristwatch.

The idea of spending $4000 or even $400 on a watch just makes me go :confused: :confused: . That's like 15 nights of "entertainment".. movies, plays, dinner.. things which bring me much more joy than bling on my wrist. I'd never look at it anyway, pulling out my cell/PDA for time is habitual.

I think I view guys with $4000 watches like I view women who HAVE to have only Gucci/Prada; they're either spoiled, stupid, or in massive debt living a "fab" life.

It gets old really fast. Please trust me.

It screams stupid more than anything else. If you're having trouble affording food (or if your mom is buying it for you) you have no business buying expensive toys. It's about denial.

It's a case of different values - I personally would rather spend the money on a watch that will give me years of enjoyment rather than on 15 evenings of one-time entertainment. I'm not saying that's wrong, just my preference. I cook at home (and am good at it), and can therefore indulge my particular watch fetish responsibly.

You don't think it's possible that they work hard, have saved up and just like having a nice watch?

I would never spend more than $30 on a watch but I definitely don't look down upon others who do. I look at my computers over the past 5 years and see that some of the components in it cost $500 alone so it's basically down to what you value. I have a $500 watch and never wear it because I can't stand having anything on my wrists/hands. I played with it to the point where the band broke and cost $100 to be replaced. Fidget fidget fidget.

I also can't tell the difference between a $100 watch and a $1000 watch so that doesn't help. I suppose people buy expensive watches for the same reason they buy $40k+ cars.

And yes, the general impression you get from a man could be heavily influenced on whether you believe he can leisurely afford a $3k watch. :)

Have you ever driven a Corvette? :eek:

God, I hope not; I wear a women's watch.

I destroy watches. A $400 watch would be a waste, a $30 watch would have a 2 week life-span. I currently wear a black swiss army watch that is waterproof to 100m, with a hardened crystal, and a leather band. It is 3/4 (women's) size, since I hate large watches.

I crunched it's predecessor when a wrench slipped. I lost the one before that in a violent fall on skis. The one before that turned opaque from scratches on the crystal. The $100-150 price range seems to give me a tougher watch, while minimizing the pain when I inevitably trash it.

My car is as fast as many Corvettes/Porsches/generic fast car so I know the thrill of having a fast car. It's not as luxurious or awe-inducing as a nice Z06 though. People buy them for the wow factor is my point!!

The watch doesn't make the man, but it sure as hell puts him in a specific category. Some opt for an out of their price range watch to appear to be higher than they actually are. I put high importance on it, but have no means to get what I want, so I'm currently stuck with a $110 Fossil.

Or Fake, as often as not...I know twice as many college age guys who have fakes as who have real expensive watches. This is partly because I know a lot of international travelers, but still... I'm guilty of this, I've got (really really good) fake Rolex's and Mont Blancs from various China trips. I'll never try to pass them as real, though...in fact, i'd probably claim any real watches I had were fake.

However, my daily wear is a brand noone has heard of, specifically to avoid pigeon holing...people can't pass judgement on it because it looks classy, (well, as classy as a 2-lbs block of stainless steel can look) but they most likely haven't heard of the brand (vestal), so I don't get pigeon holed.

I haven't worn a watch since I was 17.

Cell phone = modern day pocket watch.

I don't need to impress people with how I look so its worked out well.

Well you're married and aren't interested in an affair. Some people in this thread are not married.

I wasn't married when I was 17 either ;)

Didn't have a cell phone then either, but a good sense of time and plenty of places to find it.

Did they have cell phones when you were 17? Still, no watch often can communicate *I'm poor*.

hmmmm I have never in my life tried to figure out if a person has money by whether or not they have a watch.

My daddy has lots of money....he doesnt wear one lol he hates them

I'm aware of the potential status symbolism in watches/jewelery for men but I choose not to worry about them.

Maybe someday I'll go for the 5000 suit, 12000 watch and pinky ring but right now, not so much.

I stopped wearing a watch because I found them annoying, I don't think that has changed.

You have no idea how disappointed I am that you don't wear a pinky ring. Next thing you know, you'll tell us you don't have a pimp chalice.

You honestly think this?

I don't think it, I know it as absolute fact. Many people think this way. I know some of them and believe it or not there are statistics available on this from Men's Health Magazine.

Quite honestly, seeing a man with nothing on him but a cheap wallet and keys does communicate quite a bit. Either they're obstinate, poor, or don't care about their appearance.

This isn't entirely true. What a watch (or lack of one) communicates is entirely dependent on how it fits in with the rest of the man's outfit. If, for example, I'm wearing torn jeans and an oil-stained shirt, the message is 'I'm working at something that gets me dirty.' This message does not necessarily reflect on an individual's economic status (although some might interpret it as such). Similarly, an expensive silk shirt and some nice chinos or slacks might communicate 'I am wealthy/successful' without a need for accessories.

I would argue that a cheap Casio communicates 'I'm poor/obstinate' far more effectively than no watch at all does.

I'll buy that.

Will, I expect better from you. This is a staggering generalization. I choose not to wear a watch. It is not because I cannot afford a decent one, and it is not because I do not have a sense of style. There are plenty of times when you cannot even see a person's watch, if they have one. What about if they wear French cuffs? Would you say that that person is poor? So if I buy a decent looking Fossil watch for $75 bucks I am suddenly classy and "unpoor?"

Why don't you wear a watch?

He didn't say you didn't have a sense of style or were poor, he said you appear that way. Big difference.

He didn't even say that - he said you CAN appear that way. Depends on the person making the observation I guess.

Green for the money and gold for the honeys.

Will, this is not 1950. Cell phones are ubiquitous and (I think) changed the expectation about men of 'our generation' wearing watches. It almost makes less sense to wear a watch and carry a cell-phone.

I don't like watches because they're ugly, heavy, and leave me feeling off balance like I'm going to tip to one side.. even with a cheapo plastic one.

Are you talking "40 something" or "20 something"? Generational stereotypes about wealth change, and I think that the time we're 40 somethings, watches will not be a sign of wealth.

HOLY SHIT! Are you serious! That means I have to go back and get my parents into some sort of social.. date! 1.21 gigawatts! Oh god the Lybians found me!
The watch, as I said above, is man-jewelry. It's the same thing as wearing a shirt with a collar. No one NEEDS a collar.
So the first thing you think of when you see this is "ugly"? And you think ALL watches are ugly? That's kinda hard to buy.
We're both 20 somethings and live in 2008. For both men in their 20s and 40s, a watch is a status symbol.

well I know Im not a guy but the yeah...that watch you linked to is ugly

so its not a status symbol for men in their 30's?

I have asked around today....real people in my life of all age groups and not one person seems to hold the same belief you do Will.

what do I know though, I think women that spend hundreds or more on shoes, clothes and jewelry are idiots with their money. Even if I was rich you wouldnt see me spending my money on stuff like that

It's a status symbol no matter the age, so long as one isn't 13 or under. Then it's more of a symbol for the parents.

What beliefs do the people you speak to hold?

I have to agree with will from a first impression stand point.

Looking successful will give people that mindset when dealing with you. I'm sure it matters at the local meatmarket as well with a lot of women. Its something almost subconscious as even the most expensive mass produced watch can be had by most people willing to live in debt, which is not uncommon.

Same as mine...they've never considered a man's watch or lack of one a symbol of their wealth...some elaborated to say if a person were going to judge them for their watch, or again lack there of....that really wasnt the kind of person who's opinion they valued.

*shrug* maybe I just dont associate with materialistic people cause they bug the ever living crap out of me

It is materialism, of course, but materialism is quite normal. Wearing a nice watch doesn't give my life meaning, but rather gives me superficial comfort. Like getting a hair cut. I could grow my hair out and not comb it or put stuff in it, but I'd not like the way I look.

Materialism enjoys a rather bad reputation, but I can't for the life of me figure out why. As long as it's tertiary to other, more fulfilling life goals and aspirations it's perfectly normal and perfectly healthy.

Materialism may be normal for YOU....its not for me. I cant for the life of me understand why in the world a person should be judged for they watch they do or dont wear (as the OP was about watches, I wont mention other "status" symbols)

I can promise you my child will not be taught to check a man's watch when establishing the worth of the person

Unless the watch is incredibly expensive/requires regular maintenance (e.g. Rolex), I don't think there is much that I would consider "beyond my means", and I am not a wealthy person. A good watch will last possibly decades, so when you look at the cost over time, spending $300, even more, on a watch is not a great expense.

The reason I might be willing to spend a goodly amount on a watch is that watches are almost the sole "accessory" that men might often wear, or at least with my type of style. I don't wear necklaces, piercings, bracelets, or rings that are solely decorative, so all of the focus/money that might otherwise have gone into those areas can be placed on the watch.

You misunderstand, it's not at all about the "worth of a person" at all. It's simply about discerning facts. $2300 watch? This man probably has money. Nice looking watch? He probably has good taste.

You yourself just changed your hair cut not too long ago. That is a superficial change that was not made for any deeply meaningful reason. It doesn't reflect on your character or worth.

I recognize that wearing a watch can be a small part of an overall first impression, but I think that it should be clarified considerably, to say something like "wearing a nice/expensive watch." Having a Tag, Rolex or Bulova may convey a certain impression, however as others have said I do not believe that it conveys "poor" to not wear one. There is something vaguely gentlemanly about wearing a watch with a nice suit, and I do not deny that it can be a nice accessory, I just take exception to the concept that not having one is an impression of "poorness." I believe that shoes probably convey as much as a watch, if not more.
I used to wear watches, but found it annoying to have to constantly put them on and remove them. Put them on for work, take them off for workout, put them on for dinner, take them off for bed, for something that was sort of unnecessary since the mid 90's when I first had a beeper/phone. I used to have a nice G-shock that i never worried about, but it got caught in the rigging of the boat I race on and pulled the pin from the band and "bloop" into the water it went, never to be seen again. Imagine how annoyed I'd be if that was a couple grand down the drain!
As an aside, my arms are fairly hairy and most nice watches with metal bands pulled the everloving jesus out of my arm hair, but I found leather bands too constricting. I will probably get another one at some point just for work, as it is nice to keep track of the 50-minute hour with clients.

you said yourself that a man with no watch would/could be perceived as poor...Im telling you that I would not be of that opinion, its as easy as that

Yeah, I have friends who own one or two Rolex watches (each) and some are worth much much more than my car. But then, these guys can really afford them....so the whole idea of trying to buy a so-called expensive watch & "pretend you have money" is pretty humorous.

It's so 1980s. Move on posers/Flush.

Hold on everyone, I don't want to look poor, so I'll be sporting this. I can barely read the flippin' thing, but I have a watch, so I'm not poor!!http://www.fossil.com/webapp/wcs/sto...agePath=PH1089

I don't wear a watch because I hate having one on my wrist, I find them to be uncomfortable any annoying. Also I hate my skin, it needs to breathe at all times, and if I put anything on it that does not breathe it starts to sweat and I get irritated.

Now having said that, I own a Rado that looks kick ass, all black, 4 diamond markers for the time. Nice and simple, but amazing looking at the same time. I have only worn it about 3 times, all with my suit, and that is the only time I will ever wear it.

Having said that, I did not pay a fraction for it what it is worth, and buying it new would have been absolutely insane.

I will stick to my cellphone for daily time-keeping. And I also don't have a retarded trendy phone like the RAZR either, now if that isn't a useless cell phone than I don't know what is.

I'd be embarrassed to be seen in that lol does it glow in the dark?

You're taking it a bit out of the context.

As long as the watch is stylish, you will make a favorable impression on those who care. Those who care are more than you think. My boss is one of them. He is a watch fanatic and has a couple of watches that cost in excess of $200,000. To him, a good watch means having a sense of style.

So while the Fossil you linked to might look good on a kid or on the beach, something like this Tissot Le Locle will automatically upscale you in the eyes of many people.

http://www.worldlux.com/products/tis.../fullsize2.jpg

Whereas I appreciate a nice looking watch, I'm not sure I would ever stretch to buy one. I do have a very nice 18K gold watch I inherited, but aside from that I have a $150 Skagen as a "dressy" watch and Timex Ironman (about $50) as my day to day watch and the one I wear while training (running, swimming, cycling).

I absolutely love the SRT-4, don't get me wrong, but it's not as fast as a vette.

And what's this obsession with making cellphones so tiny? They keep making them smaller, yet they keep putting more and more crap in there that a phone really doesn't need.

That's entirely subjective.

Explain.

Quite simply, what you may deem unnecessary, others will find useful or essential. Most people who have cell phones do not need MP3 players, e-mail clients, ability to read e-books, GPS, MS Office editors, etc in their phones. Basic phone functions such as making and receiving calls and text messaging as well as light internet browsing is all that's used. However, despite that, these new phone features are a godsend to some. For example, the people in my office are issued Blackberries with integrated corporate e-mail accounts to keep in touch with each other and clients. My supervisor has a GPS on his phone and uses it instead of his store bought one. My friend uses an integrated MP3 and video players in his phone, so that he doesn't have to carry an iPod around.

While all these features aren't necessarily needed, they make everyday tasks a whole lot easier for some.

As for me, I love tech. I think the Nokia N95 is orgasmic and would buy one in a heartbeat if I had $500 to blow on it. It does virtually anything you can think of.

Acknowledged. Just one question. Who'd wanna read an e-book or e-mail, surf the web, or edit on a screen that small, even play a game? Granted, some cellphones have a larger screen than others.

As for playing music and video; it's a nice convenience, but still unnecessary.

Well, it's not so much out of context as hyperbole, exaggeration for effect. My point was that I felt Will was being irresponsible by not qualifying his statement that anyone who does not wear a watch appears poor. I like Will, and I know he can take a bit of critique.

You know, I asked my friend the same question. "Why would you want to read e-books on your 2.2" screen?" "Because it shortened the commute to school."

Some features I wouldn't ever use, such as reading books on a tiny screen, while some I would use quite consistently, such as music, video, camera, game playing, email, web.

I can't wear watches -- the last one I tried worked alright ... for the first week, then the battery died. I replaced the battery and it died in another week. Left it on my desk for a few weeks and it worked fine, put it on again and in three days the battery was dead. Same happened with the one before that, plus it slowly ticked backwards for a few hours before dying. There has to be something oddly corrosive or conductive about my skin or sweat that kills them, or maybe I should go for a self-winding one.

When I need something extra for a formal occasion, I bust out my great-grandfather's pocket watch which is accurate to within a few seconds per week if I wind it regularly. As far as I can tell, it's a 1913 Lord Elgin series watch, worth around $200 these days but priceless to me with the monogram on the back and the history of it.

I'm guessing MSD generates an EM field. Use the wind up type.

I qualified it, and he agreed. Or did you miss that part?

He's not wrong. Appearance dictates reaction. The type and nature of accessories is included in that. In the right context, lack of a watch can communicate either poor finances or a lack of attention to details.

Everything you wear says something about you. Sometimes the things you don't wear say something about you too. This is a very simple truth of social interaction.

Well, I guess that counts as a qualification. I was sort of wishing that he had qualified his original statement, but it's no biggie.
Appearances do matter, but not wearing a watch is not like wearing white socks with dress shoes. I believe that there are some rather small circles where people evaluate each other closely and appreciate small things like watches, cufflinks or whatever, but I would contend that that is the minority of social arenas. For the three piece suit crowd, I would agree that a nice watch would be expected, but there are plenty of avenues where people are not "poor" but choose not to wear a watch. I will have to tell my friends who own construction companies and other businesses that they must be poor because they do not wear a watch.
I do apologize if I have stated anything too strongly or inappropriately, I just do not have much use for people who would judge me on whether or not I choose to wear a watch.

So, it would appear that this subject depends entirely on what type of person you are and who you're around. For people who are like willravel and myself, it seems to matter. Then for many people it doesn't matter at all. That's cool, I can understand that.

Ding ding ding. Status symbol, that is correct. Kind of like a Corvette.

And I'd just like to point out genuinegirly, I know many of my customers quite well. It's my job to. I don't treat anyone badly, ever and just because I have a good idea of someone's income level doesn't mean that I am judging them. It's called an observation. And if you haven't noticed, I'm not the only one pointing out that people buy watches they can't afford sometimes.

I definitely understand the watch thing, as a business person/student I get both sides of the spectrum. When I'm a student I wear jeans, a t shirt, and whatever I feel like for jewelry. But when I'm meeting with a potential client I always look not only professional but like I have money, it tells people something about you and it makes them more likely to be willing to pay for your services. After all, if you seem to have money you must be good at what you do right?

I'm also in the twenty something age group and maybe that matters, but I don't know that it does.

One more question for you watch people. I'm not willing to spend a lot of money on a good handbag that I won't use or some fancy shoes but I'd be willing to spend money on a dress watch to wear with my suit/business outfits. Does the expensive watch thing apply to women? If I were to have a really nice watch would people notice or would it not be any different than a diamond bracelet or something of that sort?
I've been contemplating this for a while since I have nice looking watches to stare at all day. I have a Fossil but it's something you wear with a t shirt and jeans, not a suit. Granted, this is my second Fossil watch and it holds up to a lot! My last one made it through three years of abuse before a violent jet ski crash claimed it. I'm happy to wear my current watch when I'm on the lake or diving but it's not always appropriate, just like a diamond bracelet is not always appropriate IMHO.

Edit:
To avoid confusion, I work in a motorcycle dealership to pay the bills and get me through school but I am also a pro photographer and I do work, when I can, for businesses both large and small. After school, photo will be my full time gig.

wow, this thread has really generated some responses.

based on ballpark figures, responses are about 10% of views from what ive seen. so this thread must really have hit it off with many people.

probably cos everyone can talk about their own experiences with watches. there are many things to be taken into consideration, and a wearing a watch isnt just about telling the time. theres a lot more involved than just that, like class stature, money, job etc.

interesting thread cadre.. and very interesting responses..im following with eagerness.

I know what you mean, this thread really took off. I'm pleased with it :thumbsup:

I play Tetris on my phone quite often. Best $3.00 I ever spent. I also check the weather, sports scores and other miscellaneous online stuff. I would never try to actually browse on it, but for the added interconnectivity stuff it's great.

I would be thrilled to be able to read an ebook on my phone. In fact, when I upgrade that and a better camera are my two 'must-have' features. It'd be much more convenient than carrying an actual book around (which I also do often) and my eyesight is fine, thank you.

I hate the tone implied by phrases like "I hate to break it to you..." so please ignore any implied condescention it might convey.

But seriously in the world of watch "enthusiasts"a $3000.00 watch is by no stretch of the imagination considered in the mid to high end.

Personally for me the watch could make the man. If you spend more then you can afford on your watch, that says far more about ~you~ to me then you could possibly imagine. Likewise if you spend less then you can afford on a practical watch, that also speaks volumes about the man. I suspect the reader will be able to discern what I see of the man from these two scenarios.

Just my $.02....

-bear

nothing to say

I read on here some people hate wearing a watch, and some feel "off balance" etc. Just FYI, I find it the opposite. I feel it's to an extent a habitual thing. If you get in the habit of reaching for your cell phone to check the time, you'll be comfortable with that.

If your like me, in the habit of looking at your wrist for the time, it's comfortable there. I wear mine 24-7. I sit at a computer, have a cell phone, PDA and a few clocks around too. Where do I turn for the time, ? My wrist every time.

I feel naked without a watch on.

PS would it be a threadjack to ask if there is a watch enthusiast on this board who knows about watches ? My grandfather left me a watch called "White Star" - other words on the face are "Incabloc" "Automatic", and "Swiss Made". I don't wear it because I'm afraid of trashing my grandfathers watch. It works though, and seems very accurate. It's well worn for sure. Maybe PM me if you want to discuss this watch. Thanks

I have two watches - one for everyday; one for going out. Neither cost $300, and why should they? Judge me for me, not my posessions.

Seems silly, and an anachronism. A wrist watch was reduced to a vanity item with the advent of small, personal communication devices.

You only have that one opportunity to make a first impression that you have personal confidence issues you are attempting to compensate for with a watch or a car or whatever prop you include in your personal presentation.

In your personal life, how interesting will it be to interact with the people who first approved of you because of what you were wearing, or driving?

Business, on the other hand, is business. You have to meet your perception of the expectations of those who have the option of selecting you, and your talent, product, or service, vs, those competing with you.

If you carry, into your personal life, your perceived need to ornament yourself in the way you think you need to, "for business", how interesting will it be to interact with the people who first approved of you because of what you were wearing, or driving?

I think this is where the watch thing is important for most men. I know for me it is definitely the case that I need to dress the part. Many men seem to carry it over into their personal lives as well thinking that the impression will still help them. I can't say that it doesn't, but not in every situation.

I think for men that are looking for dates the watch thing can be a real need as well as a perceived one, but I also think that many women will not notice or care if a man is not wearing a watch at all.