Al, it's pretty obvious that no one is advocating here that there is a master list of watches that a larger deity compiled that causes anyone that doesn't have one of the listed watches to be deemed a lesser watch collector than the one that has said watch. Everyone thus far has included what they personally believe every collector should have or what they consider to be integral to a collection. This is important because it allows others to pick and choose watches; agree and disagree with others' choices. Maybe explore watches they never heard of. It's all personal tastes. And you even allude to that when you say, "...not relevant except for the person making the statement." I don't think anyone in here read any of these posts and thought that anyone's statements were demeaning others collections because they personally didn't have the timepieces that someone else listed as a "must have" for a collector. So what was the reason for your post? To belittle those that happened to weigh in with their own opinions about watch collections because you have a "higher" opinion than us plebeians? I guarantee you have a list of watches you consider to be important that you either love in your collection or desire to purchase for your collection. That's the information I was looking for. Everyone's personal opinion. If you supplied that instead of taking offense over the semantics of "every collector should have", I wouldn't have felt it necessary to type up this diatribe in defense of those that did answer the question.
Click to expand...