I originally wrote this to answer in this thread:

https://omegaforums.net/threads/thoughts-on-this-big-blue.37784/

@Rasputin

But decided not to hijack it.

I am not a fan-boy of any brand and/but I have a lot of different ones. I do have ten Rolexes and I really like them as sturdy users. I try to keep apart my interest for the watches and my disregard/disinterest of that particular culture (patina, ghost, Patrizzi, spider, tropical, etc., etc., etc. in all eternity...) within the "Rolex world".

I have a theory about it and of what sets the "Rolex world" apart from, for instance, most of the "Omega world" (will get back to "most of" - because it has bearing on my theory). When watches are made for a very long time and basically unchanged over that period - people (collectors) start to build legend in minute details. As the case and movements are made in the tenth - maybe hundreds - of thousands of the same, and are quite difficult to tell the differences between for a non-watchmaker - it all becomes a story about the dial and bezel. Dials and bezels are often made by different entrepreneurs and there are some small variations between them.

When thousands of collectors have sorted out the small differences in the dial and bezel there is a move to other things that make the mass-produced watch unique. Enter Patrizzi, enter any production flaw, enter degraded tritium, tropical, etc., etc.............And forever ongoing. Some do it to build their own legend and name, some do it for money, some do it because they actually like what it looks like and some - like it because anyone with money can buy a new Rolex but an old battered one makes it look like you have had money for some time and do not care "oh - this old thing".

Bottom line - there is money and points to be made in watches that are unique - and when a watch is mass-produced in the extreme and virtually unchanged for decades - and has a very strong brand awareness - things like this start to happen. @MSNWatch once wrote this here on OF - “Huge Supply + Huge Demand + High Public Awareness + High Prices = Potential Bubble”. It could also be = desperately seeking for anything that makes the watch, filling those criteria, unique. To further feed the legend, the pockets and the needs of the crowd – and the nerds.

Why does Omega not suffer from this? Well they have had a much broader production range and a much bolder design philosophy. Watches have been changed design-wise often and diversity has been the thing. Trying to get customers from all walks of life and closely following design trends over the years has made for an almost endless variety.

I wrote “most of the Omega world” above and promised to get back to it. Take a moment to think about why the dial variations on a Flightmaster – with or without patina do not command a premium. Then ask yourself why there is such hype around Speedmasters. Apply my theory and throw in MSNWatches on top. Draw your own conclusion.

That is why I am not into Speedmasters - even if I like them a lot.

Pictured stolen from www.doubleredseadweller.com

 

Very interesting topic... thanks for sharing!

 

very well laid out. Never thought about it on those terms but it does make sense.

I should add IMO there is another reason why some drift towards old pieces, Rolex or any other Brand. I think your point is not invalid, but more often than not it is a matter of appreciation (not on the economic sense). As you dig deeper into anything and you acquire knowledge and appreciation for the brand, or model, or style, you start perceiving age as a different thing. Not so much "this old thing" but this "classic" how you wear it is up to you, but most vintage watch wearers that I meet are more focused on how the watch makes them feel than on how it is perceived. You appreciate the painted markers, or the proportions, or the lack of a Crown guard or a straight lug. The "first in class "First 4 line, first automatic, first chronometer, first red line or daytona etc"...you appreciate that the watch is as old as you are, or older. You appreciate the history. I have not met one person yet that wears vintage as a way to appear wealthy for a longer time. But maybe.

 

I fully agree with you.

But the question was - "I find it strange that in the Rolex world a "ghost" bezel like this would be desirable but not in the Omega world?"

 

I'm not an expert by any means, but do scan the VRF. Within that collector community, there seems to be a reluctance to question the opinion of the "big dawgs" regarding the desirability of a "patinated" watch that has gained their approval. Those who to question orthodoxy generally get slapped down. As I've mentioned before, never ever mention the Emperor's New Clothes when discussing the condition of a patinated Rolex with a Rolex collector

Thus the desirability of ghost bezels, damaged/tropical/spider dials and degraded/puffy/missing lume is now established and becomes self-perpetuating. I see this to a much lesser extent here sometimes in connection with Speedmasters.

Is this a good thing? Personally, I really don't care, as I'm nowhere near obsessed enough with any watch brand to make such details matter to me. If I like it, can afford it and I think it looks good on my wrist, then that's what matters to me.

 

A seamaster 300 as well as a speedy with a ghost bezel is as desirable as a sub or 5512/13

 

I disagree. Ghost and blue bezels are desired, and tropical speedies are getting premiums. Even Omega released a brown speedy for awhile that had to be inspired by the tropical dials.

To me it's a wabi sabi thing. That Japanese term reflects the beauty in a well used item, the beauty in a patina if you will. Yes it's bigger in the Rolex world as it is harder to differentiate Rolexes due to long periods between even minor changes. Hell look at the huge premiums just for minor rare dial variations i.e. Double reds.

I think it is alive and well here and I think the higher numbers and longer production watches are more affected, with tool watches also affected by this. So big in most Rolexes, speedies and Sieko divers. Not as big with Connies with high variation and less common watches that are not tools or had short production runs i.e. A bullhead.

 

Although I love ghost bezels for how it looks (i like urban street fashion) and not really how it is perceived by others (in fact, most people I know don't like it), my conjecture is that it has something to do with exclusivity. This is in line with the OP's argument. If everyone has A -> A becomes ubiquitous -> want some exclusivity --> ghost A. Now replace ghost with gilt, tropical, etc. Next is who's chocolate is more chocolate Either way, as @Mouse_at_Large says, whats important is it looks good on your wrist (and for your pocket).

 

And that was my point - there are Omegas that play that role. The vintage - "Huge Supply + Huge Demand + High Public Awareness + High Prices, etc". Speedy is one. Seamaster 300 another.

 

You disagree. Related to what? Sorry but I am not following. My point was that tropical, among other things, speedys are commanding premiums for the reasons I put forward - "Huge Supply + Huge Demand + High Public Awareness + High Prices" etc...

 

"I have a theory about it and of what sets the "Rolex world" apart from, for instance, most of the "Omega world"" & "Why does Omega not suffer from this?"

Those lines made me think you where making a slightly different point. I understand you better now.

 

OK -

"...wrote most of the Omega world” above and promised to get back to it. Take a moment to think about why the dial variations on a Flightmaster – with or without patina do not command a premium. Then ask yourself why there is such hype around Speedmasters. Apply my theory and throw in MSNWatches on top. Draw your own conclusion."

 

As there might be some confusion about what was my main points, and maybe it is me not having English as my native language, I will try to clarify it.
The question was:
Rasputin wrote - "I find it strange that in the Rolex world a "ghost" bezel like this (on a "Big Blue" - addition to clarify, by styggpyggeno1) would be desirable but not in the Omega world?"

The points I (tried to) make:
1. When a watch is made in large numbers and for a long time without major changes, people start searching for uniqueness within the production. When that is done and everything is in the open - next step is creating uniqueness thru other means.
2. Rolex is a typical example of this. Not all - but many.
3. Omega, in general, is not a typical example of this for different reasons (stated in OP above) but there are exceptions - the ones that has been in production for a long time and in large numbers. For instance the speedy.

 

Urban legend it the watch collecting game can influence prices quiet quickly.

One guy sets a spider dial extremely high for several months that does not sell but just being there it becomes a bench mark for slightly less spider dials. The community talks about said watch, becomes a no 1 hit on google search. Heap of spider dials are now marketed as rare so worth more. High priced watch eventually sells for high price so it must be true. New craze in collectors is to have a spider dial......

 

one could argue that those are the omega models that most behave like the classic rolexes ... they still look cool to modern eyes and are sports watches made of SS and of good size (unlike a 34mm golden constellation)

so, there is brand, but there is also "modern beauty standard" and a SM300 and Speedy still scratch that itch

 

This is an interesting discussion however I think it is a challenge to try to dissect the motivations of the collector community.

In any industry where there exists a secondary market, the obvious and seemingly redundant fact is that an item is worth only what one is willing to pay for it. Similarly, the secondary market is what measures desirability in the vintage community.

I think it is possible that like many trends, the popularity of patina found on rolexes could be the result of a trickle down effect (the "he has it so I want it" mentality). In the last 5 years, the vintage watch market has exploded (metered by the amount of business in millions of dollars big auction houses have seen in the last decade). I think this is easily attributed at least in part to the Internet.

The Internet also allows collectors to display their collections and relay their opinions. This could feasibly give way to fads and trends in terms of what is deemed desirable or unique.

Lastly, the world of watches is highly subjective. I find many brands to be supremely more attractive than Rolex. I'll even come right out and say it--I think the submariner and all its bezel toting siblings are an eyesore, and I find the oyster family dull and inelegant.

I would certainly not espouse that my opinion should be shared by others, it is simply mine. And an unpopular one at that. But a preference in watches is a personal style and its possible that Rolex collectors have adopted the menagerie of references and patina as part of their culture. Time will tell whether these attributes remain desirable as the secondary market adjusts to the wax and wane of supply and demand.

A long piece, but I've said it.

Edit: I feel I should clarify my above opinion is undoubtedly colored by my dislike of modern Rolex. The vintage pieces are largely more tasteful, but still take a back seat to brands I feel exude more class, personality, or both. Omega falls into this category for me.

 

This is all very interesting, and I think we are seeing some of the "Rolexness" impact other markets as well.

Over the last 6 months I have changed the way I collect and focus on watches, not brands, and evaluate a piece based on its individual merits. For example, I look at case design, size, dial, layout, markers, hands, bezel,patina, case finish, originality , and of course movement.

I apply a lot of what I learned collecting vintage Rolex to my future watches. A watch is an equation to me, and based on what I subjectively see, I decide whether or not to buy. That is one of the main reasons that I love Omega, you can check all of the boxes and get a killer piece at a fraction of Rolex money. The Rolex equivalent of my 300s would be $9-12k and I think the 300s are so much cooler.

From speaking with other collectors, I think that many take a similar approach, and seek unique watches that are relatively affordable when compared to the Rolex market.

In the end, I have found two kinds of Rolex collectors, those who like the smell of their own shit, and those who like watches.

 

I think it's a result of Rolex being a very "conservative" design house. the only variations you can "collect" relate to dials and handsets. A 50's Sub is a 90's Sub is a Noughties Sub. it's the same for the other styles that Rolex offer up. Nothing that can be attributed to a particular "Style" movement like for example Hamilton in the 50's with the electrics. If you want to collect Rolex you HAVE to collect the dial and handset differences.

.02c

 

I think OP has a nice premise, well laid out, interesting read. Very well written I might add. I'm not a collector, per se, just a buyer of what I like and then use. Yes I have a few watches. More than most people, those lucky bas...people. Uh oh, perhaps I'll see myself out the door.

That said, "Ghosting" can be summed up as total failure of legibility. I've even seen horrific DIY instructions on how to achieve the effect. I will not repeat the process here. Buyer beware.

 

If you know what to look for its very easy to see the difference between a real ghost bezel and a "manufactured" one. IMO the appeal of a ghost bezel is that it enhances the look of a vintage piece in the sense that it has a pleasing vintage look as opposed to a perfect bezel that looks brand new or one thats scratched up. Its better looking than the way a Speedmaster bezel typically ages, or the way a vintage Seamaster bezel falls apart. But is not unique to Rolex, I think the reason its more prevalent in Rolex is that they tend to have more bezels with this effect...not sure exactly why, but I'm sure it has something to do with the finish used and how it reacts to environmental influences.