Fratello On Air: How The Watch Industry Can Reignite The Passions Of Collectors

Is it time to rethink how brands should attract customers?

August 05, 2025

comments 52

In the nearly 15 years since I began collecting watches in earnest, the watch industry has experienced significant growth. The last couple of years, however, have been a challenge. Inflation, geopolitical events, and other headwinds have now emerged. This has resulted in a tough market and high retail prices. So, what should brands do to reignite the passions of collectors and buyers? We don’t have all the answers, but we discuss the topic in today’s episode.

Yes, it’s tough out there, and while there’s plenty of interest in timepieces, the watch industry is working through a slow period. High list prices have exacerbated this, and we haven’t even brought up the potential effect of further tariffs in some countries. How should brands navigate these challenging times and drive demand again? That’s our topic for today. Enjoy!

Handgelenkskontrolle

Before we tackle our main topic, we discuss the recent Hungarian Grand Prix. Then, we mention recent travels to South Beach, where amazing watches were on display. Regarding our wristwear, Mike is wearing an under-embargo Aquastar. There’s not much to say about this upcoming piece other than it’s a diver and that it’s a relatively thin watch. Balazs is sporting the SpaceOne Worldtimer, a wild blue titanium watch with an in-house module.

Does the watch industry need to reignite the passion of collectors?

Mike shared that several brands recently reported that the second quarter was incredibly challenging. This gave rise to our topic about whether the watch industry needs to retrench and figure out how to excite collectors. Sponsoring events and opening single-branded boutiques fit the traditional definition of a luxury brand, but is it what buyers want? Furthermore, have these luxurious touches contributed to prices that are now out of reach for some potential customers? We discuss these thoughts and more. In the end, we don’t have the magic answer on how to create more foot traffic. We would love to hear your thoughts, though!

Home
Watch Brands
Aquastar
SpaceOne
Fratello On Air: How The Watch Industry Can Reignite The Passions Of Collectors

Read next latest →

Hands-On With The New Ming 57.04 Iris Chronograph

Michael Stockton

watches with arabic numerals — Formex Field Automatic wrist shot

A Return To Elegant Simplicity: Five Watch Options With Arabic Numerals

Henry Black

burgundy-dial Montblanc 1858 Split Second Chronograph Limited Edition crown up

Hands-On With The Montblanc 1858 Split Second Chronograph Limited Edition In Burgundy

Watch of the Week

52 Comments

Leave a comment... Join the conversation

Post with fratello account
Login

Don't have an account yet?
Create one here, it'll only take 20 seconds

AK
AlexK says:

Aug 05, 2025 at 09:10

What percentage of the market are collectors and what regular buyers that just either want a nice status symbol, functional tool, fashion piece or simple time piece ?

Reply
Enuona says:

Aug 05, 2025 at 10:00

Seems like there is a significant shift from focusing upon the enthusiast/collector customers towards increased focus upon luxury product consumers (LVMH, Hermes, Richemont, Kering and their likes).

Sure, they want enthusiast attention as well, they still need those for credibility. For now. Bet they get their profits increasingly from that segment, and if assuming the watch market is flat or in decline (Go 39%!), that’s the place to be for the brands.

Whatever credibility they may have, they have been highly dependent upon collectors/watchlovers to build it and to get where the pricing of the perception of luxury rules out a not insignificant share of the collecting society.

Has passion for luxury replaced passion for watches as the most important criteria amongst watchlovers?

Reply
Ghost Dog says:

Aug 05, 2025 at 10:34

Im afraid the watch industry as a whole will never come back to where it was. I barely see people wearing analog watches, regardless of class or financial situation. It is not relevant anymore.

Reply
1. Robert-Jan says:
  
  Aug 05, 2025 at 11:22
  
  Perhaps it depends on where you live then… I see them a lot here.
  
  Reply
  1. Enuona says:
    
    Aug 05, 2025 at 12:04
    
    Mechanical watches are about as smart as it gets. They don’t need to track you to be useful. Pretty relevant.
    
    Reply
    1. TR
      tarartrat2112 says:
      
      Aug 06, 2025 at 01:56
      
      I agree. I’m one of those individuals who hates being tracked. I won’t ever buy a smartwatch, and as soon as I retire I’ll get rid of my cell phone. If someone wants me they’re going to have to put in some extra effort to find me.
      
      Reply
  2. TW
    Berlin_Tony says:
    
    Aug 05, 2025 at 15:22
    
    I haven’t made a proper study of this but the majority of people I see don’t seem to have watches at all – either traditional or smart
    
    Reply
    1. Robert-Jan says:
      
      Aug 05, 2025 at 17:55
      
      As said, this might be different depending where you live, what you do, and so on. I hardly see any people without a watch here (not talking about our office 😅).
      
      Reply
      1. MH
        Desmodromic says:
        
        Aug 05, 2025 at 18:57
        
        I think that is true, and I think it’s ever comes down to the neighborhood and location.
        
        I see watches all the time at airports. Makes sense, because travel is so time sensitive.
        
        In downtown Los Angeles, I used to see watches all the time. That also made sense because it was the financial and business center of LA, full of lawyers and bankers and consultants, people who take a lot of meetings and need to be on time, people who make their living by charging for their time. Working in downtown Los Angeles jump started my interest in watches because I saw so many people wearing them.
        
        Since the pandemic, downtown has hollowed out as the banks and law firms have instituted remote work polices. Now downtown is more populated by the fashion industry, where you don’t charge for your time and you are encouraged and free to decorate the wrist with anything and everything — bracelets and jewelry, etc. There are a lot of artists, to whom time is more of a vibe than anything that needs to be measured, and the homeless, who only need to know sunrise and sunset, and they do can that without a watch.
        
        Reply
      2. TW
        Berlin_Tony says:
        
        Aug 05, 2025 at 19:30
        
        I live in a fairly central part of Berlin in a currently being gentrified area, ie, not exactly a high street crime area – this afternoon was fairly warm so about half the people I saw had bare arms as I strolled to the nearest local supermarket via a bank & back
        
        Overall, the younger a person seemed to be the less likely they were to be wearing a watch of any sort & the proportions of non wearers to wearers was about 20% wearers, including smart watches to 80% non wearers
        
        Smartwatches vs traditional watches, also 2 in 10
        
        It would be wrong to extrapolate too much from this very casual sort of survey obviously
        
        I have also just finished a regular video conference with a client by asking him how often he wears his Sub – answer, not often but definitely every time he speaks to me because he knows I like seeing it…
        
        Reply
        
        Robert-Jan says:
        
        Aug 05, 2025 at 22:06
        
        I notice especially that people (kids!) under 20 are mostly watch-less, so brands have a lot of work to do still. But otherwise I see many watches, including a large share of smartwatches. Where I live, there doesnt go a day by without seeing a few nice watches around me. For example, an afternoon & evening Summer party at my daughter’s primary school a few weeks ago even exposed some rarities on wrists. A vintage Seiko Captain Willard with proper wasabi on the dial, a Chopard dress watch, a Jaeger-Le Coultre Reverso, and the usual Rolex and Cartiers. Oh, and a Speedmaster Mark II Racing re-edition! In our shared office space at Fratello HQ, we also tend to bump into people during lunch in the cafetaria wearing nice watches. Unfortunately, go to the city or beach on a warm afternoon and chances are people left their watches at home for safety reasons. It’s the sad state of the world today…
        
        Reply
2. jo
  jeff-o says:
  
  Aug 05, 2025 at 14:31
  
  I rarely see anyone in my town even wearing a watch. I don’t even see many
  Apple watches or G-shocks and this is an affluent suburb of NYC that has the spending power. Rather sad. However, I would like to think that people have a nice analog watch for the office or that special occasion.
  
  Reply
  1. AM
    Veliero says:
    
    Aug 06, 2025 at 16:53
    
    Where I live, almost everyone wears a watch, young and old alike and some even double wrist with a smart watch (cardinal sin!!).
    
    Reply
TR
tarartrat2112 says:

Aug 05, 2025 at 13:41

I think collectors fall into 2 main categories–wealthy collectors, and regular schmucks like me. To those who are wealthy the price increases probably don’t matter so much. In fact, I’d go so far as to say that wealthy collectors like paying top dollar for a watch, as it gives them bragging rights, and provides to them a sense of prestige with which they differentiate themselves from the regular folks.

Meanwhile, the rest of us do, in fact, gripe about prices when they increase. Splurging on an overpriced watch often means not having the means to afford other watches which we’d like to own. It’s difficult to remain passionate about watch collecting when the wallet is empty.

It’s fun to see new releases. It’s fun, to read about new releases. It’s a pleasant diversion to dream of buying a grail watch. But when all one can do is dream and drool, that’s when frustration can set in.

The regular schmucks and the wealthy collectors each have differing realities. Sure, there are plenty of watches for each group, but I think normal folks actually do mind it when the watch they like is way overpriced. We can’t afford to waste money. We want a good watch at a fair price.

Lastly, I know a lot of people who simply aren’t interested in mechanical watches. To them it’s a waste of money buying a mechanical watch when they can simply check their phone or their much cheaper smartwatch. I don’t think those types will ever develop a passion for mechanical watches. The watch industry will never sway them.

Reply
1. Lonnie says:
  
  Aug 05, 2025 at 19:04
  
  Well said. I’m not poor but I’m cheap and I prefer to collect many unique and distinctive watches under $500.00 each than have 1 or 2 expensive watches like my Rolex GMT II.
  
  Reply
  1. TR
    tarartrat2112 says:
    
    Aug 06, 2025 at 01:37
    
    I’ve got several watches below 500 bucks and I have several well above. Overall, I’ve spent roughly 25k on watches. No Rolex or Omega though. My most pricey watch is Tudor. I have 3 of those. As of now, I’m set with Tudors. LOL.
    But you’re right – it’s great to have a bunch of “cheap” watches that you can cycle through. I love some of my cheaper watches almost as much as my more expensive ones. Cheers!
    
    Reply
2. JM
  McQuesten1893 says:
  
  Aug 06, 2025 at 21:30
  
  You are on to something here, but perhaps I can add one observation. Many wealthy people are also conscious of the price of a good, even if they have more than enough money to buy it. After all, they do not get wealthy or stay rich by spending their money needlessly. There is a section of the affluent class that spends money as if it were going out of style, but they aren’t representative of the whole. There are many who are disciplined, conscious of price vs. value, and understand the need to be aware of their purchases and safeguard their earnings. Many wealthy people are also turned off by the price increases. They are also turned off by the attitudes of the Swiss watch brands and the perception of bragging “luxury” that has been built around the watch industry. They understand that there has to be a reason for significant price increases, like material improvements, excessive inflation, or other factors that aren’t lies or half-truths. Otherwise, they see the brands as nothing more than greedy, and this won’t get them to part with their money any more than it will someone who isn’t wealthy.
  
  Reply
  1. TR
    tarartrat2112 says:
    
    Aug 07, 2025 at 13:47
    
    Your point is well received. Warren Buffet comes to mind when you talk of super wealthy people who don’t waste money on overpriced, frivolous stuff. He’s notorious for being cheap. I understand he buys used cars….
    
    Glad you stepped in here to correct my stereotypes regarding wealthy folks. Cheers 🍻
    
    Reply
    1. AM
      Veliero says:
      
      Aug 07, 2025 at 17:03
      
      He wears an 18k Rolex day date !
      
      Reply
      1. Enuona says:
        
        Aug 08, 2025 at 10:25
        
        If it ever comes up for sale (it probably won’t) you’ll learn it would have an admirable ROI. Any hedgefund managing owner or shark tycoon or whoever would kill to own and wear it.
        
        Any bets on how much that crowd would be willing to pay for it?
        
        For what I know it might have been a gift or whatever.
        
        Apparently, Prince William wears a Seamaster, so does King Frederik of Denmark (the Fromand edition), King Harald of Norway wears a ’62 GMT Master ref 1675, and I believe King Carl Gustav of Sweden wears a Patek, so does King Charles I believe.
        
        As far as I’m aware they are not known as collectors, but they do wear high quality watches which they like and probably means something to them.
        
        I don’t think you can judge any of the above gents by their watches in any negative sense. Affection for a mother passed away, a precious gift from a father, or a symbol of the pride that comes with an achievement.
        
        Reply
        
        AM
        Veliero says:
        
        Aug 08, 2025 at 11:45
        
        Was more a reference to not spending on overpriced or frivolous things. Whilst initially expensive, the 18k day date has given decades of wear and amortised over, probably works out good value, same for many people spending large sums on a watch. As for King Charles, he is know to wear a Parmigiani, Patek, Breguet and Jaeger among others and in my book that would make him a collector of sorts.
        
        Reply
LawrenceH says:

Aug 05, 2025 at 13:52

For me the biggest problem here is the arrogance from the larger brands that they will just always be able to sell to us ‘idiots’ irrespective of whether the prices just keep going up and up. C19 and the massive increase in demand definitely fed their egos, leading to them believe that they could continually treat their customers with contempt, release lazy reiterations of the same old model and hike the price each time while they were at it. Ultimately a luxury purchase is just that, a luxury, therefore not something people will just keep buying when times become tougher. Microbrands felt like the solution, but even they are cashing in and filling the 2-4k void left by the larger brands. I think the future is offering a much reduced version in Quartz again, that’s where people of the younger generation don’t seem to mind, as long as it has the look of its bigger brother. I predict Quartz sales will see a huge uplift in the next few years again, but from larger brands as opposed to the mall watch offerings.

Another I thing I find interesting is where these tarrifs will leave us. Either US clients will just just fly and buy for larger purchases, get a nice vacation out of it and still save money, or the brands will increase the prices globally. The contempt with which they currently view their customers, I fear it will be the latter.

Reply
1. TR
  tarartrat2112 says:
  
  Aug 06, 2025 at 01:47
  
  Interesting perspective on quartz watches. Perhaps you’re right. Can’t squeeze blood from a stone, right? And if, like you say, people tighten their belts in regards buying luxury items, then maybe quartz will fill the void.
  
  Reply
Remontoir says:

Aug 05, 2025 at 14:33

There is only one option left for the struggling brands, cut retail prices. If you charge Rolex prices for less than Tudor quality, you’re not going to sell many watches.
Cutting prices will be seen as a public admission that your watches are not as good as you claimed, and that will cause irreversible damage to your brand. And it will also upset your online supporters, but if these supporters were still buying your product, you wouldn’t be in this predicament.
Cut prices or face extinction.

Reply
1. TR
  tarartrat2112 says:
  
  Aug 06, 2025 at 01:49
  
  Sounds dire, your last sentence. But maybe not so far from the truth.
  
  Reply
TW
Berlin_Tony says:

Aug 05, 2025 at 15:28

Perhaps the watch industry needs to start offering some killer finance deals on their products

I wouldn’t buy that way but huge numbers of people would

Reply
1. TR
  tarartrat2112 says:
  
  Aug 06, 2025 at 01:42
  
  It’s a good idea, although (like you) I wouldn’t take that route. If I cannot pay cash, then I cannot truly afford it. Plus, interest rates would make an already overpriced watch even more expensive.
  But you’re right- some creative financing deals could result in greater sales numbers for certain manufacturers, and perhaps even create more watch enthusiasts.
  
  Reply
  1. TW
    Berlin_Tony says:
    
    Aug 06, 2025 at 17:02
    
    There are some obvious pitfalls with this idea though, for one thing it’s been tried before & now it’s no longer available, presumably because it’s hard to reposess watches that aren’t being paid for & to argue about damaged / non functioning watches
    
    Reply
    1. TR
      tarartrat2112 says:
      
      Aug 06, 2025 at 22:09
      
      Good points made. I hadn’t considered those problems, actually. Renting watches wouldn’t work either, I suppose. For the same reasons you cited.
      
      Reply
2. JW
  OldJohnBulova says:
  
  Aug 06, 2025 at 20:40
  
  I could see a “NetJets” type of system working quite well for many, even. $3,000 upfront for your very own quarter-part-ownership of a $10,000 watch for example and so on, on up the vine. Problem solved.
  
  Reply
Sam says:

Aug 06, 2025 at 10:41

I think most people who want to buy a nice watch, CAN buy it, as long as they save up for it.

Back in the day, when watches were a necessity and not a luxury, it was common to spend 2 or even 3 months salary for a good watch.

That watch would not necessarily be that person’s only watch, for life, but it could be that person’s only watch for a decade or two.

Collecting, if it happened at all, happened over a lifetime, and it would consist of two, or three, or maybe 5 watches.

I think watch media focuses too much on collectors and collecting.

This creates an (unnatural/unhealthy) need to collect and to compete amongst even the youngest and least experienced enthusiasts.

In turn, that makes (some/most) watch brands focus too much on collectors and collecting.

In conclusion, as someone who does not identify as a collector, it is hard for me to buy into this article’s premise and this author’s perspective.

To a non collector like myself, it seems that all that the industry does is cater to collectors.

The best watches form the best brands are aimed at collectors, designed in collaboration with collectors, only available to collectors etc.

Most of the watch media content is aimed at collectors, and written from a collector’s perspective.

In fact, the entire watch game seems rigged by collectors for collectors.

So if I were to write this article, the title would be: “How the watch industry can overcome its unhealthy obsession with collectors and collecting, and reignite the passion for watches in regular people?”

And inside, I would explore ideas on how watch brands can graduate from trying to sell as many watches as possible to the fewest people possible, to selling a few good watches to as many people as possible.

Reply
1. Lobo says:
  
  Aug 06, 2025 at 12:33
  
  Hope the brands read what you’ve written since it’s absolutely on point.
  This is also why Rolex are the only brand that are untouched by the ongoing decline. They make watches that everyone wants. Their entire business plan (since the days of Hans Wilsdorf) is to get every person on the planet to buy one of their watches over the course of their lifetime. The fact they all end up wanting to buy a second (and then a third) is just a bonus.
  
  Reply
  1. Sam says:
    
    Aug 07, 2025 at 12:05
    
    Thank you 👍🏻
    
    I appreciate it 😊
    
    And I agree that Rolex doesn’t intentionally play the collector game, like Patek, AP, Omega or Seiko.
    
    They don’t do Limited Editions, and they make and sell as many watches as they possibly can, and invest billions in increasing their production capacity to bridge the gap between demand and supply.
    
    However, even they are not immune to the collector game, because their dealers do allocate their most in demand models to their best customers, based on purchase history.
    
    This is the equivalent of collectors and grey dealers 🤗
    
    Reply
2. TW
  Berlin_Tony says:
  
  Aug 06, 2025 at 16:59
  
  Truth is that in most industries most customers are repeat customers therefore it makes sense to cater to their requirements
  
  Getting people to make the first step should be where the bulk of the marketing budget is spent though
  
  Reply
  1. Sam says:
    
    Aug 07, 2025 at 12:30
    
    Very interesting comment 👍🏻
    
    I guess that statement is true because most industries are service industries.
    
    In service industries, repeat customers are key and the subscription model is king.
    
    In the production industry however, new customers are key.
    
    Some traditionally production-based industries have adopted a service industry approach (e.g. telecom companies offering smartphones as part of the mobile internet subscription, operational lease plans for cars etc.)
    
    In the watch industry, Breitling piloted a service subscription based approach a few years back in the US, as reported on Hodinkee, but I guess the pilot failed since it wasn’t rolled out at scale and we’ve heard nothing about it since.
    
    Still, when it comes to consumer goods like Apple, BMW etc. they need millions of new customers every year to buy their new iPhone 17 Pro Maxs, and iX3s etc. in addition to the millions that will upgrade from their older iPhones and older BMWs.
    
    With watches, the need for new customers is even bigger, because while a phone needs an upgrade every 2 to 3 years and a car needs an upgrade avery 5 to 10 years, a Rolex, an Omega or a Patek doesn’t need an upgrade ever.
    
    In fact, a modern Omega or Rolex may not even need servicing in 10 to 20 years.
    
    They have no built in obsolence or expiration date.
    
    Reply
    1. TW
      Berlin_Tony says:
      
      Aug 07, 2025 at 13:41
      
      “They have no built in obsolence or expiration date.”
      
      That we are currently aware of – assuming that you are talking about the tech
      
      If we are talking about fashion then their obsolescence is very definitely planned
      
      Reply
      1. Sam says:
        
        Aug 07, 2025 at 18:55
        
        I agree that aesthetic obsolence is a thing 😊
        
        But aesthetic obsolence is not real obsolence.
        
        I mean, you can still wear the watch, even if the public at large no longer thinks it’s cool or trendy 🤗
        
        Just look at how many people rock ’70s designs and how many brands release ’70s homages 🕺🏻
        
        Whereas with a smartphone or car, when real obsolence kicks in, it simply becomes unusable, unsafe even.
        
        As for the tech, seeing that many Rolex, Omega and Cartier watches from 50, 60 or even 100 years ago still work today, sometimes even in spite of not being serviced regularly or even at all, I doubt that any good quality modern watch from any top manufacture will stop working and become irreparable and need to be thrown in the garbage anytime soon.
        
        The exception is Seiko, of course.
        
        Seiko is the only big manufacture where they no longer service even watches from the ’90s, let alone their best watches from the ’60s, so there is understandable anxiety regarding the future of the watches they create and sell today.
        
        Reply
jujuvodu says:

Aug 06, 2025 at 13:23

A collector is someone that buys more watches than they need. Maybe collecting fewer watches is the trend.

Reply
1. Roy-65 says:
  
  Aug 06, 2025 at 14:42
  
  Deep Yoda insight, that was. Much to consider, I now have.
  
  Reply
2. TR
  tarartrat2112 says:
  
  Aug 06, 2025 at 22:11
  
  So few words, and yet so much conveyed…. Well said.
  
  Reply
Roy-65 says:

Aug 06, 2025 at 14:32

🌞 Currently, I’m enjoying the sunny and warm weather in Spain, and it’s the perfect setting to listen to a fresh episode of Fratello on Air. Welcome back gentlemen.

Normally, I start my comment by briefly poking the Balazs and teasing the Mike. But this time, I’m diving straight into the topic.

You discuss how Swiss watch prices have increased too much in recent years, with Omega specifically mentioned. I agree, I believe not only is the Speedmaster overpriced by €2,000 to €3,000, but also their latest Aqua Terra women’s watch.
One possible solution could be a “Mea Culta” moment—lowering prices or offering discounts in boutiques. However, if they go down that road, the damage to their reputation might be greater than the loss from unsold watches. That leaves two options: reduce production and avoid price hikes for years to come.

I’ve heard that some brands (like JLC) base their pricing on other brands. JLC believes that if their products are positioned above a certain brand, their prices should be too. That’s a recipe for disaster.

Balazs mentions the gold Vacheron 222. When the first photos were released, my educated guess was that the watch would be priced around €50K. At a VC boutique, they estimated €60K, but it was ultimately introduced at €80K. That price seems based on the estimated value in the pre-owned market. In the EU, pre-owned prices range from €70K to a maximum of €90K, so that checks out. If their goal was to kill off flippers and investors, they succeeded. Good move, right?

The steel 222 is more than half the price—56% cheaper. So maybe VC got cold feet and positioned the price below comparable steel models from AP (Royal Oak) and Patek (Nautilus/Aquanaut).
The idea that the 222 is impossible to get doesn’t seem to hold in my hometown. I personally know two people who ordered and received one this year. Okay, one of them had previously bought watches from Vacheron, so it makes sense he’d be placed at the top of the list.

P.S. Hide the Pain Harold was brought in to give us Dutch folks a bit of comfort. 😅

Reply
GCP says:

Aug 06, 2025 at 15:08

I think the answer can be found in brands who are doing things correctly. While I don’t care for their F1 or bike racing campaigns, Tudor’s recent video made in collaboration with Hodinkee is a masterclass in telling an interesting story rooted in something authentic.

So the answer is two-fold. First, brands have to stop lying, which runs the gamut from lying that a watch is worth a certain bananas price, to taking a watch up market and pretending it is still faithful to the original thing, to misleading consumers about a movement or that in-house means anything. And the second thing is once you stop lying, you have to tell a true story that’s interesting.

Unfortunately, I don’t think bands will do this. Instead, they will just keep lying, both to consumers and to themselves, until they reach the grave, or some other sad, decrepit state.

Last, part of the reason vintage is cool is that it is largely authentic. It is what it is and for the most part there is no brand trying to tell you what it is since they are not selling it anymore. And then the question is just whether you find the authentic story about the history of a particular watch interesting.

Reply
1. TR
  tarartrat2112 says:
  
  Aug 06, 2025 at 22:14
  
  Good insights. I agree completely.
  
  Reply
RJD says:

Aug 06, 2025 at 18:41

The “watch community” could go a long way in recognizing 50% of the world’s population – who are not only potential collectors, but often have a lot confidence over current collectors. Acknowledge the rampant misogyny present in watch making, watch design, and in collector communities such as Reddit subs, and commit to eradicating it

Reply
1. Gary says:
  
  Aug 06, 2025 at 20:41
  
  This is a great point and Fratello should pay more attention to the Omega fans who regularly regress to ugly bigotry because of jealousy. Everytime there’s an article about a Daytona, there are comments like “it’s a woman’s watch”, “it’s a rapper’s watch”. It’s almost like a scene from a South Park episode.
  How can more people get passionate about watches when they see this type of ugly jealous behavior from the usual suspects who own cheap watches?
  
  Reply
  1. Roy-65 says:
    
    Aug 07, 2025 at 14:27
    
    Hey Gary, I just put a like on your comment. But sometimes people like the Speedmaster over a Daytona. I like all the comments around these kind of topics.
    
    Reply
Ishmael says:

Aug 07, 2025 at 01:57

It doesn’t matter how excited I am about a watch. If I can’t afford it, I can’t buy it.

I also can’t buy it if you won’t sell me one because I don’t have a “purchase history,” because how could I have a purchase history if you won’t sell me one?

If the attitude is “we’re not interested in doing business with plebes who can only afford to buy ONE watch” then I reckon companies shouldn’t be surprised that people aren’t lining up around the block to get in.

I’m just a blue collar guy. I own a few watches each costing $500 or less, and I regard all but one of those as mistakes — I wasn’t aiming to build a collection, it just took me a couple of tries to figure out what I really like. I just want to own one nice watch. To me it’s utterly incomprehensible that someone could “collect” e.g. Speedmasters or Rolexes. We might as well be living on different planets.

Maybe that’s part of the watch industry’s problem? Maybe you just can’t expect that much growth in the market segment of Insanely Expensive Stuff No One Actually Needs?

Reply
1. TR
  tarartrat2112 says:
  
  Aug 07, 2025 at 13:55
  
  Well stated. I’ve been waiting forever for my AD to contact me to let me know they have a Rolex Oyster for me. And just like you said, my name is nearby the bottom of the list because I’ve never bought a Rolex from them before.
  
  Well, I’ve got news for them. Even if they call me today, I won’t buy it from them. It’s the principle of the thing. If I’m merely an afterthought to them, then I won’t spend my money there.
  
  Reply
LED says:

Aug 08, 2025 at 03:19

I think the watch industry has underestimated the impact of the Apple Watch. With each new feature the “stickiness” of the watch increases. While there will always be people who want and appreciate a mechanical timepiece, new, vintage or otherwise, Apple has created a product that completely negates many people’s desire to look beyond something that is so utilitarian and tells the time more accurately than any watch. This product is greatly reducing the potential customer base for mechanical watches. (Despite not having a soul)

Reply
Richard says:

Aug 08, 2025 at 17:00

Great episode, guys. And excellent analysis of the issues at play.

There is no doubt that watches are becoming much more expensive, and that brands want them to be more expensive. I foresee a future where most watches fall into the $1500 and under tier, and $10,000 and over tier. Watch brands want to leave behind the customers who crow about a lack of microadjust and buy used watches to save money. Instead, they want customers who can easily buy more than one $10k watch per year, and who aren’t price sensitive. The problem for these brands is that there just aren’t enough of these customers to go around.

I predict a future where some brands win at this game, but others lose and get sold or go out of business. The most vulnerable brands are the ones selling watches in the $2500 – $5500 range.

Cheers,

Richard

Reply
SM
RedwoodAggie says:

Aug 08, 2025 at 21:52

This was a great topic/conversation. Also, that Mai-Kai place looks like a lot of fun.

Reply
DM
TacoPants says:

Aug 18, 2025 at 21:26

Getting caught up on these and I think the discussion of how the industry might, or might not be able to lower prices (as the handbags you mentioned had) was very interesting. Personally I think it’s completely possible to lower prices, by introducing minimally updated products. To put the cat back “in the bag” so to speak.

Take away the expensive metal bracelet, and give a cheaper mesh one, lower the MSRP. Same for a rubber strap or NATO. Introduce a no-date model, position that as just below the date model. Offer non METAS or lower certification models if things get truly desperate. Standard playbook stuff.

What’s weird is how Omega does the opposite. Imagine being a normal consumer at an AD and comparing the full-fat date SMP on bracelet (slick on the fly adjustment and all) with a no-date SMP on a NATO… only to see the no-date on NATO costs $300 more. Take a $6200 watch, subtract some expensive things… and you now have a $6500 watch? What is an AD sales rep going to tell that client to justify the price difference while still sounding credible? Seems like a very practical retail problem here. I would love to hear Omega explain their strategy on this.

Reply