ThomasM
[PuristS]
14331
Does one like what one has, or have what one likes?
Hi, Jed,
I'll try very hard not to slippery slope down the path of token trivial platitudes, but I remember something my father once said to me a long long time ago - try to do what you like. But if life doesn't give you that luxury, like what you do.
Life is all about compromises - make a little more money; a little bigger house; a faster car; more peace and less war; more love and less hate; etc etc etc (I was going to write a hotter girlfriend/wife; a sexier me; smarter more considerate and responsible kids; etc etc etc but I used up all my politically incorrect credits yesterday...
One of the "epiphany" moments for me in my life was when I somehow, magically, stopped being envious, covetous, and jealous. (all related but not synonyms) Of course, that's fine for me, but then I've lost one of the big powerful motivators for most people - competitive one upsmanship. It is really hard to explain to teenagers that one should strive for some abstract standard and not petty grade competition or money earning pissing contests or beauty contests or popularity contests...
What does this have to do with watches, and specifically the practical reality that for most (moi aussi!) watch play money is limited and more often than not one needs to sell to fund and make room for the next buy. So of course resale value comes into play.
But I think an important consideration is being missed, and I'll address it by example - would I buy something I really wasn't in love with, just because I can sell it for a high percentage of purchase price later, when I inevitably get bored with it (not true for me, but for most, yes, most have ADDS and short attention spans; whew, I feel sorry for their significant others! ) or would I rather get something that really rocks my world, even if, at some nebulous point in the future, I have to sell it for a large monetary loss?
What's wrong with this picture?
And why am I getting either piece at all, in the first place?
dollar for dollar, pound for pound, sure, Rolex and Patek will resell faster and for a higher percentage of acquisition price, in most cases. But, if Rolex and Patek don't float my boat, what is my non-monetary loss for not getting what I really want?
One can either consider it in the positive - factor in the enjoyment of owning what I really want; or one can consider it in the negative - factoring in the loss in pleasure of not getting what I really want - and the final "equation" is far different than the purely pecuniary.
I know of people who have had absolutely horrible experiences with their Lamborghini, and on top of which they are horrendously expensive to maintain, even if everything works right and one is lucky enough to have a trustworthy, inspired mechanic (not an easy goal!!!)
For those in love with their Lambos, would they trade in their Lambo experiences, multi-10s of thousands of dollars of loss vis a vis Porsche, Nissan GT-R, or even Ferrari aside, for something else?
Not on your life!
Just food for thought...no answers here...
TM
This message has been edited by ThomasM on 2010-02-24 08:21:24
pre-Humpday Head Scratcher (this one's for you, Andrew...)
"Context is everything. Everything is context." I saw a man eating shark. I saw a man eating shark in a Chinese Restaurant. I saw a man-eating shark. I saw a man-eating shark at the aquarium. Arthur, aka wmclarenf1, if I'm not reading his comments incorre...
You would post this just before I have to go to work . . .
. . . damn! Lookin' forward to getting home tonight . . .
I just realized...
I started at 7:30a; it took me over 2 hours! Flow of consciousness; man, I need to learn to speed type (and proof read!)
Work can wait. Your question reminds me of . . .
. . . the arguments American legal scholars have over the Constitution. Some veer towards interpretation of the Founding Fathers intent, while others contend that it's a 'living document' and that history is more a guide than a prescription. My sense is t...
Mr. Peabody! One of my favorite characters in all of literature and
film/screendom! Quite a conundrum, Art, and I'd love to read your considered take on the issue (as well as Harvey's, as a "professional jurist" of quite some experience) "The Big Three" - They were, they are. Those three made more clear, well delineated s...
There was a time when I fancied myself as Mr Peabody. These days . . .
. . . I feel more like his boy Sherman. Btw, have you ever noticed the similarity between Sherman and Andrew? As for the Big Three and historical context, my take is that the term is more an appellation and less a value judgement. PP, AP, and VC have been...
Office
Actually Daos, my desk at work is set up the same way. Draws some interesting comments. ;-) Andrew
History
Thanks for dredging that up, Art, I think. So we are Peabody and Sherman, making sure that historical events play out as they should? Is this where your interest in history was kindled? I do recall that JLC Masterclass very clearly; a most pleasurable mor...
Begs the question, Art:
Is the Constitution a great document, a fine document, both, or neither? ;-) Best, Jed
Odds are 5 - 4 that it's a great document . . .
. . . naturally, that's subject to change when the next Justice takes his or her seat ;-) . . .
I think I understand what your saying...
In addition to the well conceived points about the big 3 and their historical context, I took part of your post to mean that in order to really enjoy one's watches, one must know oneself, and understand his own watch values (not $ values). If this is what...
Absolutely.
Hi, Brandon, Strange, I had replied to you this morning, but now I don't see my reply! Sorry it might seem like I ignored your reply! "...I took part of your post to mean that in order to really enjoy one's watches, one must know oneself, and understand h...
Practical Purist
"Just realize that it is a journey, and wisdom, even with the best teachers, doesn't come overnight, wholesale. What might appeal to you, is worth something to you, today, may not be so next year, or a decade from now, or 50 years from now. And that's oka...
Does one like what one has, or have what one likes?
Hi, Jed, I'll try very hard not to slippery slope down the path of token trivial platitudes, but I remember something my father once said to me a long long time ago - try to do what you like. But if life doesn't give you that luxury, like what you do. Lif...
Floating the boat.
TM, yes, as a Purist (rather than a retailer) why acquire anything that doesn't float the boat? No need for Rolexes or Pateks (or Dufours of Voutilainens) unless they race one's heartbeat. But if ownership is restricted by budget, isn't the equation made ...
here's one of the basic problems...
Hi, Jed, Often, one doesn't know whether "the one" is "the one" until after the choice is made. I remember (warning - Bill Maher moment coming) having a discussion with a few Americans in Cambridge almost 30 years ago (early 1980s) - One young man was pro...
at the end of the day, history can tell...
TM, your post reminds me that one recent instance - i conducted a teaching for a 3rd year class of uni students, as usual, at the end of the teaching course, students will fill in the feedback/comments form. of course i read the students' feedback to see ...
indeed, Stefan, indeed...
history is the final arbitor (yeah, yeah, I know that's could be a meaningless platitude too, but hopefully more readers will know the implied meanings attached than those that don't) and that is why, to some, the sweet victory of historical perspective a...
It's easy...
....Surely the category of the "Big Three" is as arbitrary as any other. So I can ignore it. Done! Why is there a desire or need for this category? What's the purpose of it? It only matters to those that care for the criteria that mark that category. If w...
I was waiting...
Hi, Ben, Why not "twenty-somethings?" Do they not share some things in common, which they don't share with non-twenty-somethings? How about the fact that they just (likely) graduated college; are most likely early in their money earning careers; are still...
twenty-somethings: a rhetorical question
Is it only me, or does anyone else get creeped out by 5 year olds that speak like 60 year olds? Or twenty-somethings that can barely afford their own gas, but who talk and write like they've owned every car ever made? Like you wrote, BDLJ, it's about auth...
20-somethings...
aaargh. I pressed the wrong button and lost 10 minutes of furious typing! aaargh. I pressed the wrong button and lost 10 minutes of furious typing! I'll try to piece together my thoughts anew...Many points to address here.... ...as for stereotypes/politic...
Hah! Now it is your turn...
...to accept tender of an apology for plagiarism! Your eloquent response to TM above (which 'crossed' with the similar views expressed in 'second mouthful of the elephant') is further proof of the Antipodean 'great minds' effect! ;-) ;-) Cheers, pplater.
Great minds...
...No doubt! After all, don't we both have Rover P2s (ok, yours is a lovely burgundy and black vehicle....mine barely warrants the label...)
Now, now...
Though a recent birthday robbed me of that title, I still have the same collection I did when I was in my 20s, and I hope it does not meet your criteria A
Definitions and stereotypes ...
Hi Thomas, There are clearly well defined horological terms like tourbillon or pinion. True, we could discuss the minutia around the edges of these, but they are clearly understood to most with an interest in horology. However, on PuristS we are prone to ...
I could not agree with you more, Andrew...
" However, on PuristS we are prone to waxing lyrical about the emotional and other subjective aspects of horology. It is here that we have to be more careful in defining what we mean. The recent threads on “great” versus “fine” are...
Parameters, history, focus and appreciation …
There you go; the importance of defining parameters. Everyone can now see how important it is to define “hump”. Are we talking hills, camels, mood, railroads, or …..? J Thanks again for bringing several threads together in one scratch. There are multiple ...
LOL! Andrew, I knew I liked you from the very first time...
you so kindly emailed me to offer you specialist help. What a kind and thoughtful thing to do, and something I will never forget! You and Ben (and Kevin) I always look forward to in a thread, because you (and others like you) ARE sincere; ARE authentic; y...
I'll take the bait...
At the risk of further derailing the thread. Hitler, Ataturk and Mao? I'll see your Ataturk, and raise you a Lenin. (I have Keynes up my sleeve, Einstein in my cummerbund and Stalin stuffed down the back of my pants)
Agreed on Keynes . . .
. . . as the most influential person of the last century, evidenced by this thread . . . www.network54.com . . . . from Belles Lettres. Remarkably, we also agree on the value of vintage Omega. As Arte Johnson used to say, "Verrrry interrestingk!"
I can no longer...
...access Belles Lettres for some reason. Is it still active? Vintage Omega. I once was satisfied with my few, but I've seen your watches...Still dreaming of a good Constellation.
You might have to be registered for that particular forum . . .
. . . please send Thomas a pm regarding BL access.
Then there's the big sleeper: Kurt Gödel.
Limits to knowledge, and all that. Cheers Tony P
Also Émile Borel . . .
. . . of infinite monkeys theorem fame. A mathematician and a politician . . . not your usual twin-track career path.
OK, well, now we are WAY off-topic, but...
...for a good twin-track career, how about Ignacy Jan Paderewski, concert pianist and third Prime Minister of Poland? Vaclav Havel did something similar in the 90s, but Paderewski was the pioneer. Cheers Tony P
That sounds like the most uncomfortable tux EVER
I'd trade Lenin AND Mao for Otto Hahn, Mikhail Kalashnikov and a draft pick to be named later.... Neither the cold nor the hot wars of the second half of the century would have been if not for them... A
Good call...
The tux is uncomfortable, but at least Stalin is where I can keep an eye on him (boom boom). I was going to include Oppenheimer, but your Otto Hahn nomination is far superior.
"When eating an elephant...
...it is wise to approach the task one mouthful at a time". First mouthful: "Hitler, along with Ataturk, and Mao, were the Big Three of the 20th Century". Hmmmmm, perhaps. Remember Lenin? Stalin? Some might say that each of them (and maybe others) were bi...
:-)
(sly wink that was supposed to be...) Kevin, couldn't resist, couldya? I've glad you chimed in. That's the underlying point (literal words used notwithstanding) - To the West, the Rape of Nanking (and other "atrocities" like the "Armenian Genocide") was s...
Aaaarrrrgggghhhhh!!!...
...played like a bass - hook, line and sinker! Yes, we can agree 'on that'. On the second mouthful, however... ;-) (sly wink backatchya). Cheers, pplater.
Beat me to it. Oops
Sorry, pplater, I hadn't read your post. Feel like a plagiarist now
Hey, BDLJ...
... it's not like it was a startlingly original thought. Besides, we're kinsmen: we know that great minds think alike... Cheers, pplater.
A second mouthful of the elephant...
The second mouthful: "Have we to be so considerate of everyone, in every stripe and color, that even among "enthusiasts" (which we are, as a group, if ever there was one) we still have to tip toe around and avoid terms like "tourbillon" and "beat stabilit...
The answer to your question is yes. The extent to which . . .
. . . the obligation can be followed is dependent upon the audience. I think you'll agree - and correct me if I'm wrong - that the audience of The Purists is more likely to adhere to the discriminating protocol you suggested than the audience of PuristSPr...
Great post, well argued PPlater.
However, I'm not so sure that this statement doesn't draw too long a generalist bow - "... it is, generally speaking, impolite to converse with some guests at a dinner table in a language other than the language shared by all guests." The dinner parties I...
I agree, Tony...
especially this last - " Applying this analogy to PPro, I think it's fine for threads to start out firmly and fairly with the use of inclusive language, and then lurch off at more arcane tangents with which readers can sate their thirst for horological (o...
It's marketing values versus our values.
Great posts, Thomas and those who have followed. I think we should not forget that watch companies, being in business to sell watches, will inevitably emphasize their "selling points." A selling point could be membership in the Big Three, a Geneva Seal, a...
A complex equation ...
All good points, mkvc. Even if we don’t intend to on-sell a watch we buy, the ‘markets’ appreciation and ‘value’ of that watch does factor into the purchase equation. It may not be the most important factor (it isn’t to...
hmm, I see my handle mentioned prominently in here
Just to be clear about something: I don't have strong views about who's in the "big three" or whether there should even be a "big three." I just thought that raising the issue might trigger some really interesting (meandering!) discussion about why we lov...
One size fit all?
Yes Jon, we all know there is no right or wrong answer to the Big Three question, who should or shouldn’t be in it, how they are ‘chosen’, or how we even define it. That is what is fun about Purists, although I acknowledge that to some (...
Think I agree with the underlying concept
Hi Like your thoughts and think I agree with your underlying concept. That the are three big beasts in the watchmaking world - they have supporting evidence from history appreciation by a wide community and their current output supports both of these. Don...