Question about Patek

[Patton250]

I own a 5035 so I’m part of this club but I really don’t understand the pricing behind the brand. When you see a Calatrava with only a date selling at a discount at $26,000 I have to ask why is this brand so expensive? I know the movement and case are hand made but so are many brands. The movements are special but so are many brands. So in the end it’s all about the name right? Just the name. It has absolutely nothing to do with material cost or labor. 0%. Just like vintage Rolex it all comes down to what people are willing to pay and nothing to do with the actual cost of the product. It blows my mind away. I love the brand as I do lots of brands but good grief. It really makes me feel kind of bad for company’s like JLC or VC that are every bit as meticulous and quality (some would argue more) as Patek but are in the backseat. Anyway this is not a slam on the brand as it is my favorite for sure but I have to wonder.

[woodbine]

Exclusivity

[tyler1980]

an AP 15202 and a 5711 are pretty close so Patek and AP prices are pretty similar in competing offerings. A VC overseas and a 5711 are almost the same price as well.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

an AP 15202 and a 5711 are pretty close so Patek and AP prices are pretty similar in competing offerings. A VC overseas and a 5711 are almost the same price as well.

Yes but VC doesn’t come close in resale value.

[Tony64]

Originally Posted by Patton250

Yes but VC doesn’t come close in resale value.

That's a large part of the answer. Value retention. If you keep the watch for a lifetime (or generations as the slogan would have you believe) then the added cost is averaged over so many years as to be inconsequential.

If you resell the watch in a few years then your higher cost of purchase is offset by higher resale, thus lowering your actual cost of ownership.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by Patton250

Yes but VC doesn’t come close in resale value.

so you are saying VC should be priced less then I thought you were saying PP was priced too high in comparison.

Retail pricing the big 3 are pretty close. Used, PP beats them all. So basically PP could be priced higher and still be a better value.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

so you are saying VC should be priced less then I thought you were saying PP was priced too high in comparison.

Retail pricing the big 3 are pretty close. Used, PP beats them all. So basically PP could be priced higher and still be a better value.

That’s not at all what I am saying. I believe VC should be priced the same. But it’s not. After retail I mean.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by Patton250

That’s not at all what I am saying. I believe VC should be priced the same. But it’s not. After retail I mean.

ohh i see. I actually agree with that. They are fine watches as are JLC and especially ALS (which i think is better than PP in some measures). Why they tank on resale is beyond me. They should hold value better, objectively. I would say the brand name is really the only possible explanation.

[Alford78]

It's somewhat dependent on the amount of collectors going after PP used pieces raising the demand since there are more of them in general compared to VC. VC produced fewer watches of each model so the collectors couldn't really drive the prices up since there weren't as many to fight over so to speak. A small number of VCs that get sold here and there pretty much just change hands so pricing stays relatively close to what each sold/traded the piece for where as with PP many people can drive the prices up with multiple people all wanting the same watch which has more produced.

This may not be as apparent with today's market (I don't track VC production) but it is true from the past which has carried over through the years.

[GB-man]

Because Patek is Patek.


I realize that's not much of an answer but it's the truth.

[KarlS]

People determine value themselves

[subtona]

Part of the equation is that patek is independent vs a brand like VC.

For many the big parent company brands are a deal breaker.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by KarlS

People determine value themselves

I completely agree with this statement. And as a result it works out really great for Patek. Not so much for JLC and VC.

[Andrés G]

It comes down to demand. Patek has it and the others not as much. It’s the consequence of a well managed brand over a long period of time and the result for consistently delivering a quality product.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by Andrés G

It comes down to demand. Patek has it and the others not as much. It’s the consequence of a well managed brand over a long period of time and the result for consistently delivering a quality product.

You may be correct but all the mentioned brands have excellent quality as well. I think Patek accomplishmed the same thing Rolex did.

[AK797]

The truth is there just isn't that much money out there at these high levels of SS luxury so the cream rises to the top and becomes a bit of a self fulfilling prophesy with some confirmation bias thrown in; and so PP and AP dominate their markets while competitors like VC and Breguet find it harder and harder to compete and their resale markets tumble, which reduces their attractiveness even more.

Same at the Rolex level, Omega and Breitling just can't compete with the Rolex juggernaut that grows ever stronger. 19 of the top 20 selling UK watches over £5K are Rolexes. I suspect the Nautilus/Aquanaut have very strong dominance in the £15-20K category. It's the rich get richer paradigm, and the forums and Social Media tend to confirm that bias and narrow the focus of watch buying.

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by AK797

The truth is there just isn't that much money out there at these high levels of SS luxury so the cream rises to the top and becomes a bit of a self fulfilling prophesy with some confirmation bias thrown in; and so PP and AP dominate their markets while competitors like VC and Breguet find it harder and harder to compete and their resale markets tumble, which reduces their attractiveness even more.

Same at the Rolex level, Omega and Breitling just can't compete with the Rolex juggernaut that grows ever stronger. 19 of the top 20 selling UK watches over £5K are Rolexes. I suspect the Nautilus/Aquanaut have very strong dominance in the £15-20K category. It's the rich get richer paradigm, and the forums and Social Media tend to confirm that bias and narrow the focus of watch buying.

Right on the money. Because Breguet and VC as well as JLC are every bit as quality as Patek and so are Breitling and Omega just as good as Rolex but they will never compete. That’s good for us who want diversity in our collections and are willing to buy second hand.

[lapince]

Originally Posted by Patton250

Right on the money. Because Breguet and VC as well as JLC are every bit as quality as Patek and so are Breitling and Omega just as good as Rolex but they will never compete. That’s good for us who want diversity in our collections and are willing to buy second hand.

I have seen quite a few JLC, they are great watches but apart the Duometre line, I really don’t think they are the same quality as Patek, and have yet to see a duometre in real, that Breguet is on the same level probably, but as for VC they don’t compete IMHO design wise, Patek is much more interesting in that matter and has a lot of different styles you can choose from, not the case for the other two. Again this is just my opinion...
About resale yes Patek beats them all, wether it is about restricted production, marketing or something else, not sure, but I don’t think there is another brand out there which have models that once you leave the store cost more, sure there is the Daytona C, but that’s it, had a few SS Rolexes, bought at a slight discount, and sold for a little less, they hold their value not bad, but are not worth more...

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by lapince

I have seen quite a few JLC, they are great watches but apart the Duometre line, I really don’t think they are the same quality as Patek, and have yet to see a duometre in real, that Breguet is on the same level probably, but as for VC they don’t compete IMHO design wise, Patek is much more interesting in that matter and has a lot of different styles you can choose from, not the case for the other two. Again this is just my opinion...
About resale yes Patek beats them all, wether it is about restricted production, marketing or something else, not sure, but I don’t think there is another brand out there which have models that once you leave the store cost more, sure there is the Daytona C, but that’s it, had a few SS Rolexes, bought at a slight discount, and sold for a little less, they hold their value not bad, but are not worth more...

You might want to check out the history of Breguet, JLC and VC.

[RussW]

Originally Posted by Patton250

I own a 5035 so I’m part of this club but I really don’t understand the pricing behind the brand. When you see a Calatrava with only a date selling at a discount at $26,000 I have to ask why is this brand so expensive? I know the movement and case are hand made but so are many brands. The movements are special but so are many brands. So in the end it’s all about the name right? Just the name. It has absolutely nothing to do with material cost or labor. 0%. Just like vintage Rolex it all comes down to what people are willing to pay and nothing to do with the actual cost of the product. It blows my mind away. I love the brand as I do lots of brands but good grief. It really makes me feel kind of bad for company’s like JLC or VC that are every bit as meticulous and quality (some would argue more) as Patek but are in the backseat. Anyway this is not a slam on the brand as it is my favorite for sure but I have to wonder.

You can’t always rationalise it logically. Buying watches at this level appeals to the emotions, and for me Patek has a certain intangible quality that other watches don’t. For example, if I try on a 5711 I love it. If I try on a 15202 I think “nice watch”.

[AK797]

Originally Posted by Patton250

Right on the money. Because Breguet and VC as well as JLC are every bit as quality as Patek and so are Breitling and Omega just as good as Rolex but they will never compete. That’s good for us who want diversity in our collections and are willing to buy second hand.

For sure, I've owned and tried on these brands many times and it is not a matter of quality at this level, but more perception; but there is another area that is important here and that is emotion as mentioned above, and I feel more emotion with my Rolex than with my Omega and my Patek than a VC, but if you feel the other way then God bless your lucky wallet!

[Patton250]

Originally Posted by AK797

For sure, I've owned and tried on these brands many times and it is not a matter of quality at this level, but more perception; but there is another area that is important here and that is emotion as mentioned above, and I feel more emotion with my Rolex than with my Omega and my Patek than a VC, but if you feel the other way then God bless your lucky wallet!

Unfortunately for my wallet I feel emotion with all those brands.

[donut]

"Same at the Rolex level, Omega and Breitling just can't compete with the Rolex juggernaut that grows ever stronger. 19 of the top 20 selling UK watches over £5K are Rolexes. I suspect the Nautilus/Aquanaut have very strong dominance in the £15-20K category. It's the rich get richer paradigm, and the forums and Social Media tend to confirm that bias and narrow the focus of watch buying."

Well said, Neil couldn't agree more.

[vipereaper30]

You are spot on, and the same can be said for Rolex or any other brand for that matter. Most of my colleagues can't understand paying more than one or two-hundred for any watch.

[subtona]

Originally Posted by vipereaper30

You are spot on, and the same can be said for Rolex or any other brand for that matter. Most of my colleagues can't understand paying more than one or two-hundred for any watch.

These 2 watches are $10, why would anyone pay more than $10 for a watch when these tell time just as well?