Does rarity change our aesthetic sensibility?

ArmbandUhr69 · Jan 16, 2022

M'Bob
Nicely put, but I will add that there could be an economic factor. Here’s what I mean: if you have mega deep pockets, you can buy what you like with total disregard for what others think, It really won’t matter what the watch does value-wise.

My pockets were never that deep, so while I bought what I liked, I always had an eye on what historically remained desirable. Because of that, thankfully, I haven’t gotten slaughtered on the value of many of my pieces.

On the other hand, I love my Speedmaster 125, and yet few people do. So while it haven’t lost money on it, it’s stalled now in the mid $3K range, and honestly, I don’t see it going much up. No regrets, though…

Yes, I can see that completely. I mentioned the economic position in the next post and I'd raise a point that may be relevant to me but you and others could see it very differently, as it should be.

Many of these collectable watches were originally owned by people who purchased them for their utility as well as their quality. I don't know anyone of that time who thought about their future value and in many cases they survived for the current generation of collectors by being put in a sock drawer and inherited by descendants. Today, many of the buyers are primarily foccussed on maintained value if the forum posts are a good reflection. It shows the "progress" from buying a product to use, on to buying a bauble to display then sell.
If "investing" is part of the business plan, it comes with risks and rewards and a decision you want to participate.
Personally, I am most attracted to your Speedmaster 125 as something you value for itself. Maybe it will be the thing you keep for your descendants and keep the treasures for future generations.

ArmbandUhr69 · Jan 16, 2022

M'Bob
Like learning about art, craft or design, sometimes it’s not just a matter of what you like, but others who are well-versed in their respective fields can educate and train your eye to nuances that may exist, and the neophyte may have missed, or doesn’t appreciate.

True, particularly if you are in the business or a trading collector and need to consider accuracy and truth in advertising.
Personally, if we take painting as a topic, I would prefer something of great artistic technique and appeal on my wall by an unknown at $1K to some of the kiddie splashes by fashionable names I've seen at $1Mil. It's all down to whether it is for business or pleasure.

stonestone · Jan 16, 2022

Sometimes rarity does make an item more alluring than it would be otherwise. Though when it comes to watches very often the rarity lies in something lay people would never even notice. I have a tropical 2998-2 and a tropical Ed White: my wife doesn’t really notice the difference.
Personally, I love racing dial Speedies but I wonder if my appreciation would be affected if they were valued *less* than their monochrome counterparts.

TheGreekPhysique · Jan 16, 2022

M'Bob
I throw this out because I’m undecided on the answer..

Take the first watch, for instance: if it wasn’t rare, and valuable, from a purely aesthetic point of view, would you find it appealing? If you showed it to a friend, who you felt had a good sense of design and taste, and they had no idea about desirability or price, and you compared it to the one below, which would they think is the more aesthetic choice? Personally, I can’t decide if I find the racing dials cool because they’re uncommon, or if I take a step back, find them gaudy and cheap looking. What’s your take?

I think the answer to your question comes down to personal preference. For me, rarity makes an object more desirable but certainly not more aesthetically appealing. From an aesthetic standpoint I find the second speedmaster in your post much more appealing. I don't have speedy racing dial money and if I did I would probably spend it on a different watch. Most of my watch hunts are initiated by the watches design which then drives a compulsion to learn all the details for the particular reference or model.

queriver · Jan 16, 2022

For me actual rarity measured by numbers produced, and the market's POV about desirability, are not considerations in comparison with aesthetics. Using OPs examples, I like both the racing and black dials and have both - the JR was my first Speedmaster. It's probably heresy to say so but the Silver Snoopy doesn't appeal to me because of the look of the dial even though the market clearly has a different POV at the moment. Likewise, other rare LE Speedys with imagery or logos in the 9 o'clock subdial just don't cut it for me and I won't buy them. In a way the Speedymoon is aesthetically more appealing than the standard black dial Speedy because the 4th subdial adds to the overall balance and I love the blue and gold colour pops of the moonphase, so that's an example with both rarity and good aesthetics.

oddboy · Jan 16, 2022

IMHO, where rarity comes into play is in contrast to the norm. If Omega were considering designing the racing dial *or* the black dial (one or the other), I would expect that they'd probably go with the black dial as it's more likely to be pervasively usable - comfortable in any situation. the racing dial is more exotic, and from a purely design point of view would probably be appealing to a smaller group - those who want the "pop" - so maybe not as pervasively popular as a more subdued black dial.

but when both exist, it's the less common one that stands out simply (or mainly) because it's different from the common black dial version.

it's kind of like albino animals. they're not interesting because they're white (or colourless?), it's because they are rare *and* different from all the others.

In other words, I don't think its just "rarity" that appeals, it's the different-ness from the norm coupled with rarity that make things somewhat more interesting than the norm itself.

cvalue13 · Jan 16, 2022

I’d think the entire luxury goods industry proves the point?

M'Bob · Jan 17, 2022

cvalue13
I’d think the entire luxury goods industry proves the point?

Ahhh, engenders the unfortunate “but I was into it before everyone else!” phenomenon: you buy a piece that appeals to your sense of aesthetics and style, it becomes popular later on, and everyone suspects you’re just another sheep, going along with the swings of fashion…

Dgercp · Jan 17, 2022

Aesthetics and rarity are two entirely independent qualities imo. How can anyone want a watch that is aesthetically a dog, even if rare? But, I guess some collectors do. Rare itself has never translated into high value unless it incorporates aesthetic desirability. I know first hand. I have the misfortune of being a Vintage Breitling collector, and I have a few very rare models, but most are not really worth much because many do not care for the aesthetics. Fortunately I DO like the aesthetics of these and am very happy with them.

joe band · Jan 17, 2022

Sherbie
Not sure i can answer you, but it surely depends on each individual’s point of view

For example - FWIW, my wife doesnt like any of the watches i currently favour - eg she hates anything with a cyclops date magnifier, doesnt like any type of bezel ( coloured or otherwise), hates splashes of colour on a watch dial or hands, and basically only likes watches that are plain, and symmetrical.

so... safe to say, she's not in the market for a 176.007?

cvalue13 · Jan 17, 2022

M'Bob
Ahhh, engenders the unfortunate “but I was into it before everyone else!” phenomenon: you buy a piece that appeals to your sense of aesthetics and style, it becomes popular later on, and everyone suspects you’re just another sheep, going along with the swings of fashion…

more broadly: in product, “luxury” is synonymous with “exclusivity” which is why brand’s 1st, 2nd, and 3rd priorities are to ensure they don’t sell (or appear to sell) too many of any object.

Equal parts “to have something no one else has” and “for others to see you have something they can’t” are without a doubt a central part of the human consumer zeitgeist.

Afraid that applies to us watch collector types, significantly. A vintage legit “prototype” watch? A modern “limited edition” watch?

As for how exclusivity intersects with aesthetics: separate but additive metrics. A watch that is a max 10 for rarity but a 5 for aesthetics comes out at least a rather compelling 7.5 overall score. Rarity does forgive certain sins, though only to a degree.

I think

pdxleaf · Jan 17, 2022

M'Bob
...Personally, I can’t decide if I find the racing dials cool because they’re uncommon, or if I take a step back, find them gaudy and cheap looking...

So, did any of this help you decide? What're you thinking about the racing?
🍿

Nobel Prize · Jan 17, 2022

I think it does, yes, if not the appeal it definitely affects the appreciation of it ( economic and physical)

There is also the fact that tastes do change, specially as one gets more involved with any hobby or like be it art , music p, design etc things that appear ugly become an acquired taste and then, often, a trend.

sometimes also the more one understands the language of a trade tardes evolve. You. My have to have ears to like classic jazz or classic music, but you need to “know” and understand the art very well to follow atonal opera or experimental Jazz. Without the understanding of the music lines it’s just noise. Same for art. A renaissance or neoclassic piece is straight forward, a cubist, abstract or modernist piece….may need some more discernment.

design, architecture, fashion and watches are no different…..in all cases though only the items that have a universal resonance withstand the test of time.

Archer · Jan 17, 2022

For me personally, no. No matter how rare a specific model might be, so an Apollo-Soyuz LE for example, it's still not an appealing watch to me.

pdxleaf · Jan 17, 2022

Archer
For me personally, no. No matter how rare a specific model might be, so an Apollo-Soyuz LE for example, it's still not an appealing watch to me.

No accountIng taste (or lack of 😉)

Archer · Jan 17, 2022

pdxleaf
No accountIng taste (or lack of 😉)

I meant the other one...from 1975 or whatever with the dubious Italian dealer connection...

TheGreekPhysique · Jan 17, 2022

stonestone
Sometimes rarity does make an item more alluring than it would be otherwise. Though when it comes to watches very often the rarity lies in something lay people would never even notice. I have a tropical 2998-2 and a tropical Ed White: my wife doesn’t really notice the difference.
Personally, I love racing dial Speedies but I wonder if my appreciation would be affected if they were valued *less* than their monochrome counterparts.

My wife is the same way ! Literally every speedmaster she sees I get the "is that the one you have? No!? It looks the same!"

tyrantlizardrex · Jan 17, 2022

M'Bob
Ahhh, engenders the unfortunate “but I was into it before everyone else!” phenomenon: you buy a piece that appeals to your sense of aesthetics and style, it becomes popular later on, and everyone suspects you’re just another sheep, going along with the swings of fashion…

Or you buy something that no one wants (the Tintin speedmaster), some coked up magazine editor decides its "going to be the next Paul Newman", and as a result it is now valued to a point where your insurer won't cover it. That's a fun one. ::facepalm1::

tyrantlizardrex · Jan 17, 2022

M'Bob
Nicely put, but I will add that there could be an economic factor. Here’s what I mean: if you have mega deep pockets, you can buy what you like with total disregard for what others think, It really won’t matter what the watch does value-wise.

You can... but that doesn't mean you do.

And now that various dealers/houses/commentators have declared that watches are no longer watches, but instead assets - people who were never into watches, but have mega deep pockets are buying things because they are being told that they will appreciate. And they leave them sealed in boxes, to sell a year or two down the line.

The last Philipps NY sale was filled with watches being bought and sold by these people (I had a chat with some of them at the viewing in London)... and they are really, really not into this for the same reasons as us.

M'Bob · Jan 17, 2022

pdxleaf
So, did any of this help you decide? What're you thinking about the racing?
🍿

Not in the market per se, but some of the insights presented here have encouraged me to scrutinize the dial more carefully, and I’m finding the design and color elements more interesting than I had originally anticipated.

Does rarity change our aesthetic sensibility?

ArmbandUhr69

ArmbandUhr69

stonestone

TheGreekPhysique

queriver

oddboy

cvalue13

M'Bob

Dgercp

joe band

cvalue13

pdxleaf

Nobel Prize

Archer

pdxleaf

Archer

TheGreekPhysique

tyrantlizardrex

tyrantlizardrex

M'Bob

Similar threads

Aesthetically, what does this stitching add?

The complex interplay between aesthetics and collectibility...

Does the Breguet Tradition short-change on finishing?

The Channel crosser: a Speedmaster’s tale

3 Minute Marks on Pilot’s Chronographs: (Partially) Debunking Myths and (Some) Dead Reckoning

Watch aesthetics and cultural shifts...