Interestingly enough, many of those who owns these expensive mechanical watches, have mentioned how they have set them aside to wear the Apple Watch more often than not. I think most did not expect this when they purchased Apple Watch over the mechanical watches. Either way, they both serve their functions for everybody differently.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Has your Apple Watch entirely replaced your expensive Swiss watch?
- Thread starter Ffosse
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Interestingly enough, many of those who owns these expensive mechanical watches, have mentioned how they have set them aside to wear the Apple Watch more often than not. I think most did not expect this when they purchased Apple Watch over the mechanical watches. Either way, they both serve their functions for everybody differently.
Relentless, Im actually wearing my Hublot today and thought of this thread when I went to put my watch on, I said to myself, "nope, Im wearing this today" lol
Last edited by a moderator:
Can you post a new picture of your Hublot, please? I'm wearing my G-Shock today and am quite liking it.
Last edited by a moderator:
Well, Apple watch is not just a watch to wear and see the time or data but it connects you to your entire daily cycle for example I you are in a hurry and you have forgotten your iPhone so you can sync your iPhone contact details to your Apple watch, it has more other features which make my life more simple and easier. In fact so many times I forget to take off my Apple watch from my hand while sleeping.
Rolex is a decent brand and their two most popular models, the Submariner and the Daytona consistently sell well.
If you look at chrono24 and watch recon, their used prices are fairly stable - which in the face of the RRP steadily rising actually shows them getting more affordable over time.
Unfortunately it is impossible to predict which model of ANY watch brand will dramatically spike in price and when & why.
Its a safe bet that over the long haul that you will lose some money - not all of it and maybe not a lot, but its foolish in the extreme to assume that it will rise in value for ANY watch of any brand.
The current fad for Daytona's makes this even worse. People paying over-list price due to high demand will never make their money back. History has shown this over & over.
The more popular the model, the more of them out their, the less the chance that it will be worth more down the track in years to come.
Enjoy your Daytona and your AW, just don't expect to make money on either of them.
And yet sales/exports are way down ...
I actually agree that the high end will not be bothered because that market is just about status, no matter how good / beautiful / ridiculous the product may be. But the middle and low end mechanicals are in deep trouble and will never recover. We are only on the 2nd smartwatch gen and they will only get better and more functional.
[doublepost=1482162709][/doublepost]
Apple is never going to make anything as beautiful as a Daytona. I'm a millennial and I still can't buy into the concept of OS design overtaking the physical craftsmanship that goes into the intricate watch building.
To each his own. To me this just looks old, and not in a good way. And it's even pretty hard to read the time.
Last edited:
Ever since I got my AW (bought series 0 last year and now a series 2), my gold Rolex 116618 sits in closet--unused. I love the functions of the AW so much that I never take it off. The Rolex isn't going anywhere as it will ALWAYS be timeless and retain its value--even in 50 years from now.
If you scroll back a couple pages, You'll see a couple of posts that I made talking about some recent articles with a couple of graphs
The luxury watch market isn't solely being affected by smart watches. This is only really applicable in the sub $1k range. The spread of problems are multi-faceted and have all arrived at once, but in a nutshell have to do more with economics in India & China, two huge growth markets that have slowed, over-investment in new tech on the assumption this growth would continue, over-supply from the factories built to manufacture this new tech, a flawed distribution model that has been supplanted by online streams, managment tardiness in addressing these and marketing issues all combine to hit home in Switzerland, Germany and Japan.
I'm not a Daytona fan myself, but I don't question that it is a well made mechanical watch withgood craftsmanship and a lot of history and some very interesting tech. What the problem is, is the approach that Rolex has taken to preserve their profits, which is market their brand as exclusive and luxurious and increase price. Its a good watch , but it should realistically only be around the $2k mark today.
Rolex make a decent watch, but it isn't the pinnacle of the watchmakers art. They do no decoration, no complications and have few historical interactions. The do have exceptional marketing.
Its interesting that this thread has not had anyone with a watch off the mainstream advertising radar has so far chimed in and said they no longer wear it, only the vanilla brands.
Last edited by a moderator:
Depend on replace mean , I wear every watch but depend on what am I doing .
But the watches I wear the most are Apple Watch
Briefly --
The Swiss watch brands are spinning this sales slump in a variety of ways. They're all experiencing dismal sales and high amounts of unsold inventory.
Swatch Group is calling its unsold inventory an "investment", putting them in a good position for easy sales when the market bounces back.
Richemont and LVMH have been buying back, and in some cases destroying, unsold inventory, hoping to prop up prices by keeping their watches out of the gray market.
Either way, they're due for a major shakeup. Market analysts use the euphemism, "adjustment".
The Swiss watch brands are spinning this sales slump in a variety of ways. They're all experiencing dismal sales and high amounts of unsold inventory.
Swatch Group is calling its unsold inventory an "investment", putting them in a good position for easy sales when the market bounces back.
Richemont and LVMH have been buying back, and in some cases destroying, unsold inventory, hoping to prop up prices by keeping their watches out of the gray market.
Either way, they're due for a major shakeup. Market analysts use the euphemism, "adjustment".
Last edited:
Since I got my Apple Watch on launch day in 2015, my Rolex DateJust has been relegated to my watch for sleeping whilst the AW charges!
People (particularly my other half who bought me the Rolex for my 40th), think I'm mad, but I love my AW and all the things it can do. My daughter (who lives in the US - I live in the UK), has just bought me a 42mm SS S2 as well.
Occasionally, I will still wear the Rolex, but in the main, I polish it and know that I won't lose money on it by not using it
Just my 2p worth.
(For the posters kicking off about spending £3000+ on a watch: We all are at different stages of our life, with different priorities and with different things that make us tick. I don't judge those who buy a £5 Casio, so please don't judge those who may like their analogue watches.)
People (particularly my other half who bought me the Rolex for my 40th), think I'm mad, but I love my AW and all the things it can do. My daughter (who lives in the US - I live in the UK), has just bought me a 42mm SS S2 as well.
Occasionally, I will still wear the Rolex, but in the main, I polish it and know that I won't lose money on it by not using it
Just my 2p worth.
(For the posters kicking off about spending £3000+ on a watch: We all are at different stages of our life, with different priorities and with different things that make us tick. I don't judge those who buy a £5 Casio, so please don't judge those who may like their analogue watches.)
Just found this - a picture i took when I first got my AW lol. It only told the right time twice a day and the date was only right once a month ![:)]( "Smile :)")
Depend on replace mean , I wear every watch but depend on what am I doing .
But the watches I wear the most are Apple Watch
Nice collection of your Apple Watches. I have five total. You need to add a space black stainless to your collection. Then it would be complete. I do not own the ceramic Edition.
Agreed, I've caught myself eyeing the ceramic a few times. But I feel like it's too late in the lifecycle to buy another one. I tried one on and it must be part of the machining process, but there is a prominent edge where the ceramic meets the display. It's much larger than the edge of the metals, and for some reason I didn't like the feel.
I'm interested to see what the edition models are going to be in the next gen. I have a feeling they'll get exclusive functionality.
Okay, all previous posts aside, would ceramic not be a bad material for a watch? It seems like it would be brittle.
The newer Rolex' now have ceramic bezels replacing aluminum. The ceramic is pretty freaking strong.
Another day without the AW and a watch I not worn for AGES as I not been able to find this one too
I think I will use it more now as Im off for Christmas so around the house I suspect it will benefit me more not having to check the phone every 5 mins whereas in the office Im at my rMBP at my desk so everything is all there.
[doublepost=1482356282][/doublepost]The Daytona Im getting in the new year is ceramic.
I think I will use it more now as Im off for Christmas so around the house I suspect it will benefit me more not having to check the phone every 5 mins whereas in the office Im at my rMBP at my desk so everything is all there.
[doublepost=1482356282][/doublepost]The Daytona Im getting in the new year is ceramic.
The newer Rolex' now have ceramic bezels replacing aluminum. The ceramic is pretty freaking strong.
Attachments
I think it depends on how the ceramic is shaped.
Rolex (and an increasing number of other manufacturers) showcase it on their bezels because it won't fade (look at older Rolex GMT watches with aluminum bezels) and it's damn hard to scratch. Omega uses Liquidmetal in some of their ceramic bezels for the number markings. But in all of these instances, the ceramic is not doing anything structural.
You can find pictures online of cracked ceramic cases for regular watches -- Panerai, Omega, etc. But they were also shaped identically to their normal steel and titanium counterparts.
Jony Ive and Marc Newson know their watches -- they've got extensive collections of their own. I think they knew that they would need to adjust a couple things for a ceramic-cased Watch. A fine ceramic edge would chip more easily, which is why the "bezel" edge next to the display is slightly rounded off compared to the steel and aluminum models.
http://gizmodo.com/no-one-is-buying-smartwatches-anymore-1788153001
See?, everybody is in a slump.
And Yes, the Luxury watch industry is in a perfect storm, partly of its own making ( I've said this in at least 3 posts now)
Over-investment in new factories of the major brands over the last 5-10 years lead to increased production. This on the assumption of steady, continued growth of sales in China and India. A flawed and increasingly outdated distribution model that only counted sales when they were out the factory door, not on the user's wrists has created a market for grey-market outlets who buy authorised dealer sunsold stock ( that the factories used to refuse to take back previously) and then off-load online at huge discounts. With the slump in the chinese and indian economies and introduction of luxury tax laws, sales slumped for the first time in 17 years.
There have been an enormous namuber of CEO reshuffles amongst the big 4 swiss groups - its interesting times for all concerned.
As to Ceramics, Rado have been making ceramic watches for 30+ years, IWC for more than 10 Omega forat least 5. Its very hip currently.
The strength has not a lot to do with shapeand several models in the big guys' ranges are the same shape as they are in other materials.
Ceramic isn't brittle, in and of itself.
Ceramic is such a broad caetegory description to say that "ceramic is brittle" is like saying "metal rusts"
I spent 30 odd years in a career that included ceramics.
You can dial in almost any characteristics into ceramic materials - rocket engine linings, Glock pistols, Porsche brakes, teeth crowns, tea cups or watch cases. Just depends on the materials science behind it - base crystal, infusions and glazes, sintering and firing temperatures will all have an impact
The number of new photos of busted watch cases that have not been debunked has been pretty small.
These come up regularly in watch discussion forums and all large proportion of them turn out to be reposts of the "i knew a guy who knew a guy" types.
Then genuine ones that I've seen have all been manufacturing faults and fixed by the company concerned. Everybody makes mistakes - they are all made by human beings, after all.
So if you want a ceramic AW, I'd be pretty comfortable that it will be pretty safe from scratches.
If you fling your watch to the floor regularly, then the case is now at risk as well as the screen.
So bear that in mind when making your choice - if you hurl a cermaic case against a hard floor - tile or concrete - there is a risk that if you get it dead wrong in vectors of forces - that iw ill crack. The same force that would also crack a screen or a watch crystal.
I've had a ceramic Rado in my collection for 7 years or so. It is totally un marked. Omegas and JLC's and IWC in steel - doesn't matter the heritage of the maker -a unfocused moment and casual contact with a brick wall will leave a scratch.
As to the thrust of the OP's post about utility and obsolesence, following similar threads on watch forums, it would seem that the number of folk who have both devices is actually pretty small subset of the customers for each.
They are entirely different devices that seem to be being bought, for the most part, by entirely different people.
I can see the watch guys finally getting their act together and marketing their wares to some AW customers, but I can't see Apple ever bothering to try and market to anbody in the mid to high end watch market.
See?, everybody is in a slump.
And Yes, the Luxury watch industry is in a perfect storm, partly of its own making ( I've said this in at least 3 posts now)
Over-investment in new factories of the major brands over the last 5-10 years lead to increased production. This on the assumption of steady, continued growth of sales in China and India. A flawed and increasingly outdated distribution model that only counted sales when they were out the factory door, not on the user's wrists has created a market for grey-market outlets who buy authorised dealer sunsold stock ( that the factories used to refuse to take back previously) and then off-load online at huge discounts. With the slump in the chinese and indian economies and introduction of luxury tax laws, sales slumped for the first time in 17 years.
There have been an enormous namuber of CEO reshuffles amongst the big 4 swiss groups - its interesting times for all concerned.
As to Ceramics, Rado have been making ceramic watches for 30+ years, IWC for more than 10 Omega forat least 5. Its very hip currently.
The strength has not a lot to do with shapeand several models in the big guys' ranges are the same shape as they are in other materials.
Ceramic isn't brittle, in and of itself.
Ceramic is such a broad caetegory description to say that "ceramic is brittle" is like saying "metal rusts"
I spent 30 odd years in a career that included ceramics.
You can dial in almost any characteristics into ceramic materials - rocket engine linings, Glock pistols, Porsche brakes, teeth crowns, tea cups or watch cases. Just depends on the materials science behind it - base crystal, infusions and glazes, sintering and firing temperatures will all have an impact
The number of new photos of busted watch cases that have not been debunked has been pretty small.
These come up regularly in watch discussion forums and all large proportion of them turn out to be reposts of the "i knew a guy who knew a guy" types.
Then genuine ones that I've seen have all been manufacturing faults and fixed by the company concerned. Everybody makes mistakes - they are all made by human beings, after all.
So if you want a ceramic AW, I'd be pretty comfortable that it will be pretty safe from scratches.
If you fling your watch to the floor regularly, then the case is now at risk as well as the screen.
So bear that in mind when making your choice - if you hurl a cermaic case against a hard floor - tile or concrete - there is a risk that if you get it dead wrong in vectors of forces - that iw ill crack. The same force that would also crack a screen or a watch crystal.
I've had a ceramic Rado in my collection for 7 years or so. It is totally un marked. Omegas and JLC's and IWC in steel - doesn't matter the heritage of the maker -a unfocused moment and casual contact with a brick wall will leave a scratch.
As to the thrust of the OP's post about utility and obsolesence, following similar threads on watch forums, it would seem that the number of folk who have both devices is actually pretty small subset of the customers for each.
They are entirely different devices that seem to be being bought, for the most part, by entirely different people.
I can see the watch guys finally getting their act together and marketing their wares to some AW customers, but I can't see Apple ever bothering to try and market to anbody in the mid to high end watch market.
Last edited:
So why make a watch out of ceramic in the first place? Why not just use something strong and lightweight like titanium? Or heck, why not a carbon fibre watch?