- Posts
- 3,979
- Likes
- 8,998
cvalue13
·Interested in your thoughts on choosing watches that are intended to be passed down to children.
My first son, we'll call him "SJ," is nearly 2 years old. When pregnant, my wife and I were on vacation in Las Vegas when I accidentally had the opportunity to purchase a SS Rolex Sky-Dweller. In addition to capitalizing on the opportunity to purchase at MSRP a watch that was otherwise unobtainable at the time, I also rationalized the purchase based on the idea that this would be SJ's watch one day - essentially, his "birth year" watch, to be one day passed along from his father. Every glorious scratch, would have been put there by dear ole' dad.
We've recently had a second son, we'll call him "CJ." So, I've been on the hunt for "his" watch.
This time around, a birth-year SS unobtainium Rolex has not jumped into my lap. So, I've had the opportunity to think about what qualities a watch should have to plan on it being passed down to my child. Below are some of my thoughts to date (still being scrutinized).
It's fare to say, in short, the thought process roughly mirrors a decision toward a "single watch collection" thought process.
Very interested in additional or contrary views!
-> First and foremost (but specific to my situation), is the notion that CJ's watch should be fairly characterized as being "equal" to SJ's SS Rolex Sky-Dweller. This at least includes being roughly the same price (at least in today's prices, as who knows where they'll be in 20 years). I'd like to make a good faith effort to avoid any appearance of playing favorites vis-a-vis "a watch from dad."
-> Second, I've been thinking a lot about attempting to ensure the longevity of the watch. This notion of 'longevity' would include both the robustness of the watch itself, but also of the underlying company. Is this a legitimate concern? For example, on one hand, I'm not at all married to the idea of CJ's watch being a Rolex, but on the other hand a Rolex seem to offer a relatively good proposition in terms of robustness of the watch itself as well as relative surety that the company will be around for service, parts, etc.
-> Dress, vs Sports, vs hybrid? While SJ's Sky-Dweller is technically within the brand's "dress" portfolio, it does wear considerably more 'sporty' than, say, a Cellini or even a day-date. When thinking of CJ's watch, I've leaned away from decidedly "dress" watches, and more toward the flexibility of a SS sports watch that permits of both dress and casual wear.
-> Finally, I've been debating whether to have the case back engraved. I've leaning toward engraving SJ's Sky-Dweller with at least his name and birth date, if not something a bit more personal included. If so, I would take the same approach with CJ's watch.
Other thoughts, or critical thinking?
It would be particularly great to hear from those who have already been through the 'life cycle' of this thought process (i.e., years ago purchased a watch for an heir, and learned from the experience; or themselves were the recipient of an intentional heirloom watch).
Happy Monday, and cheers!
cvalue
My first son, we'll call him "SJ," is nearly 2 years old. When pregnant, my wife and I were on vacation in Las Vegas when I accidentally had the opportunity to purchase a SS Rolex Sky-Dweller. In addition to capitalizing on the opportunity to purchase at MSRP a watch that was otherwise unobtainable at the time, I also rationalized the purchase based on the idea that this would be SJ's watch one day - essentially, his "birth year" watch, to be one day passed along from his father. Every glorious scratch, would have been put there by dear ole' dad.
We've recently had a second son, we'll call him "CJ." So, I've been on the hunt for "his" watch.
This time around, a birth-year SS unobtainium Rolex has not jumped into my lap. So, I've had the opportunity to think about what qualities a watch should have to plan on it being passed down to my child. Below are some of my thoughts to date (still being scrutinized).
It's fare to say, in short, the thought process roughly mirrors a decision toward a "single watch collection" thought process.
Very interested in additional or contrary views!
-> First and foremost (but specific to my situation), is the notion that CJ's watch should be fairly characterized as being "equal" to SJ's SS Rolex Sky-Dweller. This at least includes being roughly the same price (at least in today's prices, as who knows where they'll be in 20 years). I'd like to make a good faith effort to avoid any appearance of playing favorites vis-a-vis "a watch from dad."
-> Second, I've been thinking a lot about attempting to ensure the longevity of the watch. This notion of 'longevity' would include both the robustness of the watch itself, but also of the underlying company. Is this a legitimate concern? For example, on one hand, I'm not at all married to the idea of CJ's watch being a Rolex, but on the other hand a Rolex seem to offer a relatively good proposition in terms of robustness of the watch itself as well as relative surety that the company will be around for service, parts, etc.
-> Dress, vs Sports, vs hybrid? While SJ's Sky-Dweller is technically within the brand's "dress" portfolio, it does wear considerably more 'sporty' than, say, a Cellini or even a day-date. When thinking of CJ's watch, I've leaned away from decidedly "dress" watches, and more toward the flexibility of a SS sports watch that permits of both dress and casual wear.
-> Finally, I've been debating whether to have the case back engraved. I've leaning toward engraving SJ's Sky-Dweller with at least his name and birth date, if not something a bit more personal included. If so, I would take the same approach with CJ's watch.
Other thoughts, or critical thinking?
It would be particularly great to hear from those who have already been through the 'life cycle' of this thought process (i.e., years ago purchased a watch for an heir, and learned from the experience; or themselves were the recipient of an intentional heirloom watch).
Happy Monday, and cheers!
cvalue
