How’s the prices on the PP dress watches?

[Josh1000]

O get so irritated when I buy a new car and the value doesnt go up when I drive it out the showroom door

[Josh1000]

I get so irritated when I buy a new car and the value doesnt go up when I drive it out the showroom door

[MadSpaniard]

This incessant debate on Patek dress watch value amazes me.

None of these watches were intended to be financial instruments...they were conceived and created as timepieces, made with exceptional levels of craftsmanship and attention to detail, meant to be worn, enjoyed, and perhaps even passed on or gifted with some history or sentimental value attached.

If you buy a Patek dress watch (at list price, no less) and then turn around and sell within weeks to any Internet dealer, you will almost certainly take a major bath. There are very few watches where that is not the case. Those are singular exceptions, and we all know exactly which models those are.

But you can't measure all watches by the handful of models that happen to be "on fire". Just like you can't evaluate all high-line sports cars by the handful that command "over sticker" pricing. Those are exceptions. By and large, those are lucky, unforeseen and unplanned exceptions.

But if you buy wisely, take care of it and enjoy it for a considerable period of time and then sell, you will likely see decent value retention. That is, decent value retention for what it is - a watch - not a financial instrument.

And yes, that assumes you purchased "wisely", which means you bought aggressively on price (even at an AD), you bought a model that is not entirely an idiosyncratic or black sheep reference that nobody likes but you. And it also assumes you sold later in a reasonable manner, i.e. not a fire sale to a low-ball "cash now" internet dealer.

On the 3 Patek dress watches I have bought and sold over the years, I have never taken a loss, in nominal terms. I actually made a nominal profit of 5% (3919J), 45% (5035R) and 65% (5015R). All 3 were purchased at AD, where I secured attractive pricing, and I benefited from Patek continually raising prices over the years, which helped to buoy resale prices.

Of course, had I taken the same money and bought MSFT or any similar stock I would have done much better over the same time period. But that's comparing apples and oranges. We're talking nominal terms here, not real terms or opportunity costs. If real returns are the primary concern, you should probably be buying a Timex to keep time and real financial instruments to make some real money.

Obviously, value retention factors into every Patek purchase decision I make (as it does for most people without unlimited financial resources). But, it doesn't determine what I buy. It only helps me balance "what I like" vs. "what it will cost me".

If that equation seems too far skewed in the latter direction, I pass. If it's not, I then agonize over whether or not I'll really like the watch, both now and into the future.

Which is why I haven't yet purchased (for example) a Lange: as much as I like them, and as undeniably great as they are, it will almost certainly cost me too much to own one because the resale value is just too low for me to swallow. For me, the apparent cost of ownership on the Lange models I like crosses a line. For other people, it doesn't. Each person has their own line. And that's totally OK.

So, my advice is simply this: buy a watch that you really like. Do so with a lot of thought, deliberation and consideration. And enjoy it for what it is, a great watch, and hopefully even a great watch that also reflects your sensibilities, your values, and who you are as a person.

[Fat_ninja]

Originally Posted by Josh1000

O get so irritated when I buy a new car and the value doesnt go up when I drive it out the showroom door

That’s the problem for the fake rich.

Edit: let me use ur example of a car.... my car that I buy does not drop almost 50% when I leave the show room. Especially when it was pitched that it would hold value relatively well. I’m not in the mindset to light my money on fire. Irrespective how much money I have or don’t have.

[Fat_ninja]

When a watch falls 50% when u walk out the door that’s not buying a watch because u are interested in collecting watches. People. If you guys think buying a 100k watch and it falls 50% in 1 day is normal. I don’t know man...


This is not a debate about collecting watches and choosing watches carefully and loving it in ur collection.

We are not talking about 10k or 20k watches. We are talking stuff 50k, 100k 200k


I got a business proposition for u if u guys think a PP should free fall once u walk out of the store.


Edit:

Also patek sales people as part of the sales pitch highlight the value retention of patek... so, as much as I don’t disagree with buying watches to enjoy. I can do that up to a certain price point. But if patek wants me to buy dress watches at 100k clips... it better hold value better than most brands.


Y’all are confusing I need to make money from my watches vs I expect it to hold up better.

[MadSpaniard]

Originally Posted by MadSpaniard

This incessant debate on Patek dress watch value amazes me.

None of these watches were intended to be financial instruments...they were conceived and created as timepieces, made with exceptional levels of craftsmanship and attention to detail, meant to be worn, enjoyed, and perhaps even passed on or gifted with some history or sentimental value attached.

If you buy a Patek dress watch (at list price, no less) and then turn around and sell within weeks to any Internet dealer, you will almost certainly take a major bath. There are very few watches where that is not the case. Those are singular exceptions, and we all know exactly which models those are.

But you can't measure all watches by the handful of models that happen to be "on fire". Just like you can't evaluate all high-line sports cars by the handful that command "over sticker" pricing. Those are exceptions. By and large, those are lucky, unforeseen and unplanned exceptions.

But if you buy wisely, take care of it and enjoy it for a considerable period of time and then sell, you will likely see decent value retention. That is, decent value retention for what it is - a watch - not a financial instrument.

And yes, that assumes you purchased "wisely", which means you bought aggressively on price (even at an AD), you bought a model that is not entirely an idiosyncratic or black sheep reference that nobody likes but you. And it also assumes you sold later in a reasonable manner, i.e. not a fire sale to a low-ball "cash now" internet dealer.

On the 3 Patek dress watches I have bought and sold over the years, I have never taken a loss, in nominal terms. I actually made a nominal profit of 5% (3919J), 45% (5035R) and 65% (5015R). All 3 were purchased at AD, where I secured attractive pricing, and I benefited from Patek continually raising prices over the years, which helped to buoy resale prices.

Of course, had I taken the same money and bought MSFT or any similar stock I would have done much better over the same time period. But that's comparing apples and oranges. We're talking nominal terms here, not real terms or opportunity costs. If real returns are the primary concern, you should probably be buying a Timex to keep time and real financial instruments to make some real money.

Obviously, value retention factors into every Patek purchase decision I make (as it does for most people without unlimited financial resources). But, it doesn't determine what I buy. It only helps me balance "what I like" vs. "what it will cost me".

If that equation seems too far skewed in the latter direction, I pass. If it's not, I then agonize over whether or not I'll really like the watch, both now and into the future.

Which is why I haven't yet purchased (for example) a Lange: as much as I like them, and as undeniably great as they are, it will almost certainly cost me too much to own one because the resale value is just too low for me to swallow. For me, the apparent cost of ownership on the Lange models I like crosses a line. For other people, it doesn't. Each person has their own line. And that's totally OK.

So, my advice is simply this: buy a watch that you really like. Do so with a lot of thought, deliberation and consideration. And enjoy it for what it is, a great watch, and hopefully even a great watch that also reflects your sensibilities, your values, and who you are as a person.

Ninja: I'll simply restate what I wrote above: "Obviously, value retention factors into every Patek purchase decision I make (as it does for most people without unlimited financial resources). But, it doesn't determine what I buy. It only helps me balance "what I like" vs. "what it will cost me".

So I agree with you, resale value matters a lot ("what it will cost me"). But the primary thought, first and foremost, is "what I like", based on my own sensibilities, sense of aesthetics, etc.

I don't buy a watch just because it retains value or because others might be impressed by what I have on my wrist. I buy first because I really like it - and then because (hopefully) I won't lose my entire ass owning it.

Pretty straightforward.

[JorgeCCW]

Dress watch is the essence of the hobby. If you are in horology you have to be into dress watches. Patek always had said that Nautilus is never been what patek is all about and always tried to control their production. Now that said , the market is all about sport watches and destroyed the prices of the dress watch. It had affected the way I collect because I am not rich , so instead to have 60% dress and 40% sports, now I have 80% sports and 20% dress watches. Everything is a factor when buying watches for me : likes, Price you buy/market, lifestyle, budget , and life itself.

I know I been saying that dress watch is dead but more than an attack to the dress watch is my dislike against the stupid market hoping that people appreciate horology again.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mr Naultilus]

Originally Posted by MadSpaniard

This incessant debate on Patek dress watch value amazes me.

None of these watches were intended to be financial instruments...they were conceived and created as timepieces, made with exceptional levels of craftsmanship and attention to detail, meant to be worn, enjoyed, and perhaps even passed on or gifted with some history or sentimental value attached.

If you buy a Patek dress watch (at list price, no less) and then turn around and sell within weeks to any Internet dealer, you will almost certainly take a major bath. There are very few watches where that is not the case. Those are singular exceptions, and we all know exactly which models those are.

But you can't measure all watches by the handful of models that happen to be "on fire". Just like you can't evaluate all high-line sports cars by the handful that command "over sticker" pricing. Those are exceptions. By and large, those are lucky, unforeseen and unplanned exceptions.

But if you buy wisely, take care of it and enjoy it for a considerable period of time and then sell, you will likely see decent value retention. That is, decent value retention for what it is - a watch - not a financial instrument.

And yes, that assumes you purchased "wisely", which means you bought aggressively on price (even at an AD), you bought a model that is not entirely an idiosyncratic or black sheep reference that nobody likes but you. And it also assumes you sold later in a reasonable manner, i.e. not a fire sale to a low-ball "cash now" internet dealer.

On the 3 Patek dress watches I have bought and sold over the years, I have never taken a loss, in nominal terms. I actually made a nominal profit of 5% (3919J), 45% (5035R) and 65% (5015R). All 3 were purchased at AD, where I secured attractive pricing, and I benefited from Patek continually raising prices over the years, which helped to buoy resale prices.

Of course, had I taken the same money and bought MSFT or any similar stock I would have done much better over the same time period. But that's comparing apples and oranges. We're talking nominal terms here, not real terms or opportunity costs. If real returns are the primary concern, you should probably be buying a Timex to keep time and real financial instruments to make some real money.

Obviously, value retention factors into every Patek purchase decision I make (as it does for most people without unlimited financial resources). But, it doesn't determine what I buy. It only helps me balance "what I like" vs. "what it will cost me".

If that equation seems too far skewed in the latter direction, I pass. If it's not, I then agonize over whether or not I'll really like the watch, both now and into the future.

Which is why I haven't yet purchased (for example) a Lange: as much as I like them, and as undeniably great as they are, it will almost certainly cost me too much to own one because the resale value is just too low for me to swallow. For me, the apparent cost of ownership on the Lange models I like crosses a line. For other people, it doesn't. Each person has their own line. And that's totally OK.

So, my advice is simply this: buy a watch that you really like. Do so with a lot of thought, deliberation and consideration. And enjoy it for what it is, a great watch, and hopefully even a great watch that also reflects your sensibilities, your values, and who you are as a person.

Well said

[Fat_ninja]

Originally Posted by MadSpaniard

Ninja: I'll simply restate what I wrote above: "Obviously, value retention factors into every Patek purchase decision I make (as it does for most people without unlimited financial resources). But, it doesn't determine what I buy. It only helps me balance "what I like" vs. "what it will cost me".

So I agree with you, resale value matters a lot ("what it will cost me"). But the primary thought, first and foremost, is "what I like", based on my own sensibilities, sense of aesthetics, etc.

I don't buy a watch just because it retains value or because others might be impressed by what I have on my wrist. I buy first because I really like it - and then because (hopefully) I won't lose my entire ass owning it.

Pretty straightforward.

Yes I agree with u.. I’m just venting more or less. I also buy what I like...just upsetting these things fall so hard. If it didn’t fall as hard I have to tell u I’d have a few more dress watches in the box

[Mr Naultilus]

Originally Posted by Fat_ninja

Yes I agree with u.. I’m just venting more or less. I also buy what I like...just upsetting these things fall so hard. If it didn’t fall as hard I have to tell u I’d have a few more dress watches in the box

Buy them pre owned then surely ?

[Fat_ninja]

Originally Posted by Mr Naultilus

Buy them pre owned then surely ?

That’s why Jin is salivating... I still have to get the wife over the hump there

[Mr Naultilus]

Originally Posted by Fat_ninja

That’s why Jin is salivating... I still have to get the wife over the hump there

Jin? And problem with wife is? Surely cheaper is better value?

[Fat_ninja]

Originally Posted by Mr Naultilus

Jin? And problem with wife is? Surely cheaper is better value?

Jin= bearxj86
Wife doesn’t like preowned
Yes it would be cheaper and priced properly

[Josh1000]

.I agree 100% with Madspaniard...I have long moved on from having a watch to.impress my friends but to something I wear as a piece of jewelry. I treat cars as utilities. I mentally depreciate it at 20% p.a. if it has some value along the line that's a bonus. If worrying whether the realisable value will be beneath the book vie, probably buying for wrong reason. Little pieces of compressed carbon that some seem to have obsessions over dont appreciate when u walk out the showroom. In fact when buying a tiffany diamond you actually paying g for the marketing budget not the intrinsic value of the stone. I also believe most people who want a 5131 or 5231 do so for the value and couldnt give a toss about worldtimer nor actually have one in their collections. I have lost on some watches I have made on some watches but have never kept a watch just because it holds value and is part of the herd hysteria. That includes having sold blue dial 5711, FPJ CB and Daytona C ages ago. All hype

[Fat_ninja]

Originally Posted by Josh1000

.I agree 100% with Madspaniard...I have long moved on from having a watch to.impress my friends but to something I wear as a piece of jewelry. I treat cars as utilities. I mentally depreciate it at 20% p.a. if it has some value along the line that's a bonus. If worrying whether the realisable value will be beneath the book vie, probably buying for wrong reason. Little pieces of compressed carbon that some seem to have obsessions over dont appreciate when u walk out the showroom. In fact when buying a tiffany diamond you actually paying g for the marketing budget not the intrinsic value of the stone. I also believe most people who want a 5131 or 5231 do so for the value and couldnt give a toss about worldtimer nor actually have one in their collections. I have lost on some watches I have made on some watches but have never kept a watch just because it holds value and is part of the herd hysteria. That includes having sold blue dial 5711, FPJ CB and Daytona C ages ago. All hype

But the big declines these days Dont make sense no? I don’t mind 20% decline. I mind a 50% decline. Don’t forget Patek actually raises prices even more this year so the declines are even higher. In the Us we have the wayfairer act that kicked in and we don’t get VAT relief like some in Europe. It’s like a kick in the nuts. And I’ve been told more than once about the value retention by Patek sales people. So it’s an active sales strategy and part of the brand.

I like collecting watches I also like trying out new watches and new brands. I don’t mind losing money on watches. But in no way will I be buying more watches that fall 50% the day I walk off the lot. This is the same reason I’ve never bought a VC or a lange.


I accept Tiffany is not worth that much... my Sales person doesn’t pretend to argue there’s value retention, she says ‘it’s because ur wife likes it’. I know that much and have accepted it.. it also influences how much money I flow to said diamonds vs watches in any given year.

I don’t have a 5231 as I don’t like it and have declined it.



I don’t collect art but I probably would think the approach to art and high end watches is similar.

[Bearxj86]

My answer is simple. Yes I like watches. Buying watches that retain value is called zero cost of ownership. Why not get your cake and eat it too?

[GB-man]

Originally Posted by Fat_ninja

I do think in net terms. But I also adjust for a real transaction.

All transactions need to be net positive otherwise I wil not buy anything. U know how I roll. Even the crooked stuff

Lol what about all those diamonds. They surely are not net positive!

[Fat_ninja]

Originally Posted by GB-man

Lol what about all those diamonds. They surely are not net positive!

Not when u get a t-stamp along with it...

Edit: so that’s a not , not. Double negative. :)

[SL BRABUS]

We all know Fat Ninja don't like to lose money & he can't buy preowned......

Knowing you have the connection.....

Just buy Patek application pieces & limit editions........

[pam66]

Originally Posted by Fat_ninja

Not when u get a t-stamp along with it...

Edit: so that’s a not , not. Double negative. :)

t stamp nautilus are also dropping line stone at the moment. just as non t stamp ones do. they just start from a higher level.

[Fat_ninja]

Originally Posted by pam66

t stamp nautilus are also dropping line stone at the moment. just as non t stamp ones do. they just start from a higher level.

No idea. I can’t find a price point anywhere...but if u know of one I can follow I’d like to see it. :). But I assume u are right tho

[Mr Naultilus]

Originally Posted by SL BRABUS

We all know Fat Ninja don't like to lose money & he can't buy preowned......

Knowing you have the connection.....

Just buy Patek application pieces & limit editions........

But i see from Fat Ninja previous post he wont buy 5231 , that's application

[pam66]

Originally Posted by Fat_ninja

No idea. I can’t find a price point anywhere...but if u know of one I can follow I’d like to see it. :). But I assume u are right tho

someone i know has a 5980A T stamp. he says his current offer is 40K less than what he was offered a month ago.

[MadSpaniard]

Originally Posted by Fat_ninja

But the big declines these days Dont make sense no? I don’t mind 20% decline. I mind a 50% decline...

With the exception of a few "on fire" models, there will be a decline the minute you walk out of the AD with a new Patek on your wrist. That's expected, and that's what buying a regular production watch entails (I'm not talking about application or limited edition pieces here.)

But a 50% decline, or 40%?

Well, if you buy a new Patek for list at AD, and then sell it to an internet dealer just a few weeks later, then yes, you're probably going to take it up the a$$. How deeply and how severely depends on the reference, but yeah, you're gonna get boned.

But if you buy wisely, deliberately, and then hold and enjoy your new Patek for a decent period of time, you will likely do reasonably OK for what it is - a watch, not a stock.

Yes, there is definitely a cost of ownership, that is expected and reasonable on most normal production watches (some more, some less). But if you're routinely taking massive losses on "dress" Pateks on the order of 40-50%, the problem probably lies elsewhere: you're probably quickly flipping something that isn't intended to be flipped.

Buy something you'll savor for a good period of time, hold onto it and enjoy it. Even the best wine tastes like shit straight off the vine. You've got to buy and let it sit for a while, and then its value will stabilize.

But if dabbling, variety and trading velocity is what you prefer (and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that), then you should do that in the secondary market for normal production models (or focus on vintage pieces instead).

For the record, I've never taken a loss on a "dress" Patek. But then again, I've never flipped a brand new one after only a few weeks/months of ownership either.

[Fat_ninja]

Originally Posted by MadSpaniard

With the exception of a few "on fire" models, there will be a decline the minute you walk out of the AD with a new Patek on your wrist. That's expected, and that's what buying a regular production watch entails (I'm not talking about application or limited edition pieces here.)

But a 50% decline, or 40%?

Well, if you buy a new Patek for list at AD, and then sell it to an internet dealer just a few weeks later, then yes, you're probably going to take it up the a$$. How deeply and how severely depends on the reference, but yeah, you're gonna get boned.

But if you buy wisely, deliberately, and then hold and enjoy your new Patek for a decent period of time, you will likely do reasonably OK for what it is - a watch, not a stock.

Yes, there is definitely a cost of ownership, that is expected and reasonable on most normal production watches (some more, some less). But if you're routinely taking massive losses on "dress" Pateks on the order of 40-50%, the problem probably lies elsewhere: you're probably quickly flipping something that isn't intended to be flipped.

Buy something you'll savor for a good period of time, hold onto it and enjoy it. Even the best wine tastes like shit straight off the vine. You've got to buy and let it sit for a while, and then its value will stabilize.

But if dabbling, variety and trading velocity is what you prefer (and there's absolutely nothing wrong with that), then you should do that in the secondary market for normal production models (or focus on vintage pieces instead).

For the record, I've never taken a loss on a "dress" Patek. But then again, I've never flipped a brand new one after only a few weeks/months of ownership either.

I don’t mind taking a 50% loss on a lange because that is expected... but I’m not cool taking a 50% loss on a patek because that is not expected. irrespective of how long I hold it. That’s not an important whether I hold it for a day a week or 10 years.

How long I hold it doesn’t change the fact it depreciated 50% quickly.



I’m not equating this to a stock and have never said that at all. Not sure why that keeps being brought up.


Point is if patek dress watches fall as much as lange then it’s no better than a lange.

I don’t expect to make money on my watches dress or sports... but I do not expect PATEK dress watches to fall 50% in less than 1 month of ownership.

[Fat_ninja]

Originally Posted by pam66

someone i know has a 5980A T stamp. he says his current offer is 40K less than what he was offered a month ago.

I still don’t plan on selling...

[Mr Naultilus]

Originally Posted by Fat_ninja

I don’t mind taking a 50% loss on a lange because that is expected... but I’m not cool taking a 50% loss on a patek because that is not expected. irrespective of how long I hold it. That’s not an important whether I hold it for a day a week or 10 years.

How long I hold it doesn’t change the fact it depreciated 50% quickly.



I’m not equating this to a stock and have never said that at all. Not sure why that keeps being brought up.


Point is if patek dress watches fall as much as lange then it’s no better than a lange.

I don’t expect to make money on my watches dress or sports... but I do not expect PATEK sports watches to fall 50% in less than 1 month of ownership.

Whats a lange?




Im kidding 5000 pieces a year etc

[Bearxj86]

Originally Posted by Fat_ninja

I still don’t plan on selling...

Jonathan, how about you build in a full service into the pre-owned price for Mrs. Ninja? Say get a 5170P for pre-owned price and ship it straight for service. It comes back factory sealed and you can all gather around it with Katanas and slice the packaging open! You can even film it and keep the shredded plastic and Styrofoam (My AD does not allow me to).

[Fat_ninja]

Originally Posted by bearxj86

Jonathan, how about you build in a full service into the pre-owned price for Mrs. Ninja? Say get a 5170P for pre-owned price and ship it straight for service. It comes back factory sealed and you can all gather around it with Katanas and slice the packaging open! You can even film it and keep the shredded plastic and Styrofoam (My AD does not allow me to).

That’s like telling her I’m not a virgin. U silly man

[Josh1000]

Originally Posted by bearxj86

My answer is simple. Yes I like watches. Buying watches that retain value is called zero cost of ownership. Why not get your cake and eat it too?

Because not every watch a person.likes holds its value. Not everyone wants to own a 5070P versus a 5170P. I am still a bit confused on why we expect value retention.on a readily available watch. A simple example of say a 5327, 5159, 5230, 5930 etc all readily available at dealers. If the 5930 costs say $70 000 at a dealer why would anyone pay more when its readily available. The question is at what pain threshold will someone see value in.oreowned versus new. Personally I coildbt be bothered to save 20% buying preowned versus new. Why take a chance that it hasnt been carefully looked after etc. As it leaves the dealer its preowned....doesnt matter for 1 day or 1 month the value drop is immediate...the price shouldnt decline the longer it is preowned...it actually smooths over time....some inelasticity will come in when a person wont care whether a watch is say 3 or 5 years old for same model in good condition. The 5930 is going for around $50 - 55000 at auction. If u sell to a dealer or auction house u have to expect a further 20% dealer margin versus selling yourself. That's not Pateks fault. If you really want to lose cash consider independents like Gronefeld, Grossman, lang and heyn, voutilainen etc. You own them as they are beautiful but haemorrhage at leisure