Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben2k9
+1
I don't have a lot of experience with fake watches. one time my friend gave me a fake Rolex, and the first time I tried to adjust the time, the crown popped out of the case and the watch was busted, so from then on I was done with fakes.
Me personally, I would respect someone more who's proud to rock a $200-300 Seiko versus someone who spent that much on a fake Rolex, omega, or Breitling..etc
You know...people should just be proud of what they are stop comparing themselves to what's around them. There's always going to be someone richer.
This may be an unpopular opinion but I'm also not a big fan of breast implants. It feels like cheating. It's like if a guy had pec, shoulder, bicep, and calf implants. I'd have no other choice but to conclude he was a superficial cheater who didn't want to earn it.
|
Yes, but
most watches do not provide a good means to properly assess wealth. I don't buy this notion that people who wear more expensive watches are wealthier than those who don't. If I see someone wearing a $20,000 watch, I can be ~95% certain that this person makes somewhere between $75,000 a year and $13,000,000,000 a year (the top earner for 2013, Warren Buffet) and has a net worth somewhere between $100,000 and $60,000,000,000 (Bill Gates).
The point is, there are ways to conceivably pay for a $20,000 watch over a sufficiently large financing term that are accessible to someone who makes as little as $75,000 a year or as much as $13 billion a year.
An individual making $75,000 could put aside $5,000 (and change for interest) towards this watch and live off of the remaining $70,000 for a short period of time. That's not all that surprising, nor is it impressive.
All I've learned about someone who wears a $20,000 watch is that this individual isn't homeless and totally devoid of wealth.
Cars, too, are not a good way to properly assess wealth for the exact same reason, although it's much more difficult to drive an increasingly expensive luxury car on lower income than it is to wear an increasingly expensive luxury watch. Watches can always be sold with relatively minimal depreciation (or,
rarely with minimal appreciation).
In my experience the best indicator of wealth is one's house. This is not to say wealthy people always live in expensive houses, but rather expensive houses almost always house wealthy people. You can't just easily finance your way to living in a $10,000,000 house on a $75,000 income. The monthly payment on such a house is more than this individual's annual gross income. Someone who lives in a $10,000,000 house is going to be wealthy by most peoples' standards. Someone who wears a $20,000 watch? Who knows.
I also (as usual) completely agree with tony20009's last post.
Edit: I see this post and wonder which strata are you talking about, DocMick?
Quote:
Originally Posted by DocMick View Post
while the purpose is to tell time, the real MEANING of expensive watch isn't chronometry... it's functional jewelry, it's a status symbol, and rarely even an investment... but really it's a statement that you enjoy the finer things in life. that's why a fake watch represents an attempt to bypass the hard work and discipline involved in accessing that strata where one has the means to enjoy said fine things.... when in reality they are only fooling themselves
|
What income or net worth 'strata' do the luxury watches mentioned in this thread (Rolex, Omega, Breitling, AP, IWC, etc.) represent?