$19,000 For A Watch W/ A Rubber Strap?!?

[USMCsilver]

Okay, I'm all about "finer" things and respect products for their workmanship/materials/exclusivity.

I just don't understand how any person in their right mind would pay $19k for a watch that mimics a CHEAP Timex. Some Timex's look halfway decent and don't look like a gumball machine watch -- but this Patek sure takes the cake...

So, if you had $19k to toss away and wanted a watch, would you EVER consider dropping that sort of time on this Patek?

You gotta click the link; sorry, but it wouldn't let me C&P:

http://www.feelgoodwatches.com/produ...oducts_id/3046

[cody p]

after a certain price-point (a few hundred), no watch purchase makes sense to people in their 'right minds'.

[cameron]

In one word - no.

[Omega_Precision]

Isn't that cheap compared to what the stainless bracelet version would cost? Just look at it as buying the head of the watch and they threw in the rubber strap. I've seen Rolex heads with a NATO go for 3 grand. It's Patek.

[Jedi]

Ignorance is no excuse really, Sterling, but...

I have a pair of Patek Aquanauts in my collection, a 5165 and a 5066, both smaller than the one in the link.

I guess you just have to see one and handle one to appreciate it. The rubber strap is an integral part of the watch, in relation to the overall design. Observe the dial closely, and the relief on the strap and perhaps it'll make sense. There's also a relationship with the clasp, which is in my opinion, the finest deployant clasp every crafted.

There are intangible things in a Patek that may not be obvious, nor should it be, to the average Rolex owner, but like all things, education is the first step to enlightenment.

[mailman]

Originally Posted by Jedi

Ignorance is no excuse really, Sterling, but...

I have a pair of Patek Aquanauts in my collection, a 5165 and a 5066, both smaller than the one in the link.

I guess you just have to see one and handle one to appreciate it. The rubber strap is an integral part of the watch, in relation to the overall design. Observe the dial closely, and the relief on the strap and perhaps it'll make sense. There's also a relationship with the clasp, which is in my opinion, the finest deployant clasp every crafted.

There are intangible things in a Patek that may not be obvious, nor should it be, to the average Rolex owner, but like all things, education is the first step to enlightenment.

If I'm not mistaken Lee the AP ROO Offshore Rubberclad is at or near the same price point as this watch.

I had one on my wrist once and you just have to try it on to appreciate it. It was the most comfortable watch I've ever tried on. It's an amazing piece, IMO

[SLS]

I am glad the neither one of those watches "does it for me" Though there are several PP that I would love to have.
~Scott

[Psmith]

Rubber straps seem to be everywhere - I saw a recent ad for a new Breitling for Bentley chrono (about $10k) with a standard rubber strap.

I don't have anything against rubber as a strap material per se, but I find it sticks to my wrist after a while so I then end up constantly fiddling with it...

(I'm sure that some compounds are better than others in this regard though)


Cheers

[leopardprey]

I would say that, yes, Patek Phil. Watches are very expensive, as are many other luxury watch brands. But, PP watches due tend to hold their value better than any watches out there.

PP make a good watch, and even though a rubber strap, it is of high quality. And lets be honest, to most spending that much on a PP, it is probably not that much money to them in the first place. That $20K watch to them, may be like many others buying a $200 watch. I have friends here in Thailand who drop $40k on a watch and do not even think about it. And I have a girlfriend who actually sells PP watches, along with other high end brands, and it is amazing- she will get customers that fly in from Japan or China, walk into the store and buy 2 or 3 PP without a blink.

I can tell you, I have seen the Aquanaut up close, and it is a fantastic watch! If I was very rich, as most PP owners are, I would buy one.

Actually in the luxury watch market, most watches start at $10K and go on up in price.

[Jedi]

Originally Posted by mailman

If I'm not mistaken Lee the AP ROO Offshore Rubberclad is at or near the same price point as this watch.

I had one on my wrist once and you just have to try it on to appreciate it. It was the most comfortable watch I've ever tried on. It's an amazing piece, IMO

Yup, the AP ROO has variants that come with rubber straps, and yes, they are unique. I've tried on a few and each one has been supremely comfortable, despite the heft of the case, and the deceptive apparent slenderness of the straps.

I'd own one if they still carried the JLC movements inside. The new AP movements have been plagued by problems, and would be best to let them 'blood' before jumping on board. That said, the design doesn't do much for me, but oh, to have a JLC powered AP

[USMCsilver]

Originally Posted by Jedi

Ignorance is no excuse really, Sterling, but...

If you enjoy the watch, then that's all that counts!

I, personally, could not find myself owning a watch such as that one. FOR ME...well, it just does nothing for me. But, that's me, and it is a picture on the internet. If I had it in my hands, or on my wrist, then I may see something special about it, but, again, I, myself, don't think I could see $19,000 special.

That's what's great about watches -- we can agree to disagree. Everyone has their own personal likes/dislikes.

By no means to I see Rolex as an exclusive watch brand. There are many Pateks out there that are BEAUTIFUL watches! Would I ever own one? Nope. I don't make that kind of money, so I'll just have to be happy with my Rolex, Tags, and Tissot. One day...one day I'll get myself a Panerai; I kinda lust after one of those.

Thanks for all the insight, everyone!

[Timber Loftis]

The Aquanaut is an incredible and beautiful watch. The only reason I would not pay that much for that rubber strap watch is simple: I cannot.

Originally Posted by Jedi

There are intangible things in a Patek that may not be obvious, nor should it be, to the average Rolex owner, but like all things, education is the first step to enlightenment.

That's a little bit arrogant, though, in my opinion. But then again I'm just one of those average owners who can't observe the finer things in watches with certain names etched on them, right?

[eric23]

Originally Posted by USMCsilver

Okay, I'm all about "finer" things and respect products for their workmanship/materials/exclusivity.

I just don't understand how any person in their right mind would pay $19k for a watch that mimics a CHEAP Timex. Some Timex's look halfway decent and don't look like a gumball machine watch -- but this Patek sure takes the cake...

So, if you had $19k to toss away and wanted a watch, would you EVER consider dropping that sort of time on this Patek?

You gotta click the link; sorry, but it wouldn't let me C&P:

http://www.feelgoodwatches.com/produ...oducts_id/3046

This is a nice watch! Have you ever tryied it on? I have and I think it is a great watch. IMO Patek makes the best watches out there. I don't know if I would ever be able to afford one, but they are sure nice to look at! One of my friends is looking at spending 50K on one patek but he has a lots of spare cash.

[boa2]

I only appreciated Patek from a distance until I tried them on. And the pricing used to seem exhorbitant. No, I do not like every model on my wrist, but I can honestly say the ones that smile back make me feel like I'm walking on air. They are stunning. I expect a picture of a Patek on the Internet conveys the depth and beauty of the watch about as effectively as a picture of any one of us does the same. In other words, it doesn't.

[BigHat]

Originally Posted by mailman

If I'm not mistaken Lee the AP ROO Offshore Rubberclad is at or near the same price point as this watch.

I had one on my wrist once and you just have to try it on to appreciate it. It was the most comfortable watch I've ever tried on. It's an amazing piece, IMO

I too was going to cite the AP ROOs as an example. Rubber may not impress the OP, but these ROOs are among the hottest sellers on the planet. To each is own, but there are many appealing facets to the watch business. I'd love to have a PP Nautilus one day.

[Defiancekofb]

Originally Posted by Timber Loftis

That's a little bit arrogant, though, in my opinion. But then again I'm just one of those average owners who can't observe the finer things in watches with certain names etched on them, right?

I wouldn't say that is arrogant, I would gather the OP is being arrogant with the fact that he is bashing a watch just because it has a rubber strap, without any research on the particular item. Patek's are amongst the finest watch brands in the world. You don't have to be a owner to appreciate the fine manufacturing qualities of the company. It's basically something you either get or you don't. Like the other poster said, for some of the elite individuals, they just don't care what material the product is made from, as long as they have that name brand item on their wrist. The previous said it best, to some the $20K Patek is like a $200 Timex.

[USMCsilver]

Originally Posted by Defiancekofb

I wouldn't say that is arrogant, I would gather the OP is being arrogant with the fact that he is bashing a watch just because it has a rubber strap, without any research on the particular item.

The OP is well aware of Patek and "who" they are.

Many of their watches look like exquisite pieces of art. My point of the post was that this watch didn't look like your run-of-the-mill Patek and I just didn't see how anyone would actually justify that much money on a watch with so few "features" (as so I see it).

No valuable metals, no elaborate bracelet, etc. I understand that it is still a Patek.

I'm not ignorant; I'm just inquisitive.

[Defiancekofb]

Originally Posted by USMCsilver

The OP is well aware of Patek and "who" they are.

Many of their watches look like exquisite pieces of art. My point of the post was that this watch didn't look like your run-of-the-mill Patek and I just didn't see how anyone would actually justify that much money on a watch with so few "features" (as so I see it).

No valuable metals, no elaborate bracelet, etc. I understand that it is still a Patek.

I'm not ignorant; I'm just inquisitive.

I agree with your assessment about the no valuable metals perspective, in my opinion I think the Patek Aquanaut was created to compete with the AP ROO, since they are both SS Cases w/ Rubber Straps. Patek wanted to expand the territory by creating a sport model for those Patek owners that already own a good portion of the precious metal versions.

Without further adieu here is Bart Simpsons ass,

[Jedi]

The Aquanaut and the Royal Oak Offshore share a common DNA. Their individual predecessors, namely the Nautilus and Royal Oak respectively, were both designed by Gerald Genta, working for both Patek Philippe and Audemars Piguet.

While it is totally feasible that the Aquanaut may be an ROO competitor, this likelihood is somewhat reduced by the fact that the ROO is a chronograph, and the Aquanaut a time and date piece. The Nautilus 5980 would be more likely competitor, with the edge going to the Nautilus in my books for sheer design values.

I find the ROO simply to audacious and... in your face, as opposed to ass

[topcat30093]

Intereseting thread.
At the end of the day it come's down to one's personal tastes.
I'm not a big fan of either the Nautilus or ROO range of watches.
But I do appreciate the fine craftmanship that it takes to build these watches.
But then who's to say that my tastes will not change in the future. This time last year I had 2 Rolex watches and wouldn't consider any other brand. But now my eyes have been opened to a much larger range of watch brands. And I do now appreciate the finer things.

[unknown]

I had one and it was an amazing watch

and maybe those pics could change your mind

As you can see I put it on a black croc strap. I don't like rubber straps

[topcat30093]

Bruno
Those are fantastically detailed photos.
I to would much prefer a leather strap then a rubber one. But then the rubber strap would be much more practical, if the watch was going to get a wet alot

[WatchTimes]

That is a beautiful watch!
If I could justify buying one I would.
I highly doubt Id ever sell it either unless it was trading up
to another Patek.

My father passed an Audemars Piguet down to me and Id like to
add a Patek to that to pass down as well if I have a son.

[Jedi]

While a leather strap makes for a pleasant and attractive change-up on the Aquanaut, the original tropical strap with the chequered relief pattern complements the dial in a way that rounds off and completes the design. I would like to have a choice depending on the mood, like NATO vs Oyster bracelets

Looks great Bruno, when you gonna get another one ?

[USMCsilver]

Well, I must say, those pictures do a whole lot more justice than the one from the sight that I posted.

Still, if I, PERSONALLY, were to EVER spend that much on a watch, then I would want some precious metals involved just so I felt like I got something for my money. But, that's just me.

Indeed, the attention to detail really shows in those photos. Thanks for sharing, and giving me more of an idea what one gets when he buys a Patek.

[Letsgodiving]

I'm far from an authority on Patek and I'm not really a fan of their designs but I seem to hear left and right about their quality and attention to detail. To be honest the dial of the Aquanaut that Unknown posted is not that impressive. I realize it is a macro pic but the numbers don't appear to be of a particularly high quality considering the price point and the fact that this is a Patek. These aren't extreme macro photos and they obviously show that Patek has its flaws as do many others.

[Terry Newton]

Originally Posted by Letsgodiving

I'm far from an authority on Patek and I'm not really a fan of their designs but I seem to hear left and right about their quality and attention to detail. To be honest the dial of the Aquanaut that Unknown posted is not that impressive. I realize it is a macro pic but the numbers don't appear to be of a particularly high quality considering the price point and the fact that this is a Patek. These aren't extreme macro photos and they obviously show that Patek has its flaws as do many others.

You are right. At the end of the day, the Patek is a manufactured watch. It is definitely not a Philippe Dufour:

http://www.ninanet.net/watches/other...s/mdufour.html

There is very little like it in terms of quality and finishing.

My dream and "grail" watch.

Terry Newton

[unknown]

Originally Posted by Terry Newton

You are right. At the end of the day, the Patek is a manufactured watch. It is definitely not a Philippe Dufour:

http://www.ninanet.net/watches/other...s/mdufour.html

There is very little like it in terms of quality and finishing.

My dream and "grail" watch.

Terry Newton

but you're comparing en entry level Patek with a Dufour which costs 3.5 times the Patek Aquanaut.


When looking at those pics I think I can say the finishing is also PERFECT

[BigHat]

They are all beautiful but thanks for the PD link Terry. That's some workmanship.

[eric23]

Wow, Great photo's!!

Originally Posted by unknown

I had one and it was an amazing watch

and maybe those pics could change your mind

As you can see I put it on a black croc strap. I don't like rubber straps