I know that any answers to this thread will be purely based on opinion and not fact.
I'm attempting to write a research paper on the factors that make a watch collectible and would like some opinions from vintage watch collectors.

For example when I look for a vintage watch I look at:
Condition
Originality
Rarity
and most importantly, story

If it isn't an inconvenience, could members post a list of what they look for in a vintage watch?
It can be one thing or it can be 100 things it really doesn't matter at this point, I am just trying to gather data.
People can have the same answer and in fact the more the better so that I have a large sample size.

Thank you so much

-SWK

 

For me, it's the aesthetics of the watch, do I like wearing it on my wrist and looking at it every day. For collecting purposes, I would say the history of the watch and the brand are very important too.

 

Condition is ALWAYS a primary factor, so much so that a common watch that's in outstanding shape is sometimes called a 'condition rarity'.

Originality is even more important in most cases.

I'm more of a vintage watch wearer than collector. It just so happened that for 7 or 8 years I had so many vintage watches that it became a collection, and I developed habits that led to a themed collection. For instance, I like skinny dress watches so I became an ultra-thin caliber collector.

 

Curious what kind of class this research paper is for?

 

When Hodinkee says it is?

 

Makes two of us.

 

This is for my senior project. I've been gathering evidence and taking notes for the past couple months but I realised that to really explore the factors that play into collectability, I needed input from watch collectors other than myself, and watch magazines/journals.

 

My collection partly consists of American and Swiss railroad grade pocket watches. I am intrigued with the evolution of North American railroads since the earliest days of railroading, through all the landmark events that were bookmarks in the evolution of railroads. And the watches that evolved with these events. I have a long way to go to hope of EVER having a collection that covers all the years, the events, and the evolution, but I'm working on it. In building my collection of railroad watches, here are some of my criterial. A watch doesn't need to be super rare, it doesn't need to be made of exotic materials. It should represent a pinnacle of technical refinement for the era, but NOT fancy. These were working watches! As much a part of the railroader's kit as his gloves, boots, bib overalls, and the printed train orders that governed his activities, and the rolling stock he controlled. Condition is key with me. Not necessarily new old stock, but a watch, the condition of which illustrates the importance to its railroader owner, and the respect he showed his watch. If a museum had a collection of keynote watches representing 185 years of railroading, I like to think my collection of railroad watches would run approximately parallel.

The line is blurred a bit as to the wrist watches I collect. My collection is a bit like Topsy! It has just growed! What do I collect? If I like it, I buy it. Ahem! Affordability being key, of course!

 

For me next to the design (dial AND case!) I´m looking for the very early models.
But it´s getting more difficult to find (& pay) very early models of interesting brands or movements like first El Primero, Buren Cal. 11.
Most of the times this is unfortunately combinded with extra premium price...
First Speedies, early Autavias, first gen. Rolex PN, early Zenith el Primero...

 

For me a collection must have a theme. You hear it a lot or see it a lot in the forum, people tend to navigate in a certain direction beeing, divers, tools or dress watches. I can even be sentimental and focus on a single company or even a model. I think it becomes a collection as soon as you start hunting for something, or when you know that you want to add more.

 

Same reason you think the pretty chics at university are pretty and the not so are not so.

Thats how i pick......

 

My collection is quite small and quite new, the watches I am most drawn to are from the 70s with more unusual dial or cases always being the ones I like the most. I only collect omega watches and have, in my small collection, a Chronostop driver, a dynamic, a Seamaster 176.007 (gold plated)a geneve automatic tv dial and a seamaster f300 cone aswell as a few others. I am currently on the look out for an Omega albatross. These watches are far from evryones cup of tea but each one of them is intresting to look at to me personally.
As I learn more about watches the condition of each peice is becoming more important. The watches that I like are not particularly rare and I am finding that with a bit of patience I can find really clean examples if I just look long enough. If I was collecting speedies I would probably jump on anything that was correct because they are getting more expensive by the minute.
To answer the OP title, I suppose the thing that makes a watch collectable is that someone likes it enough to want to own a particular style of watch or brand. I focus on Omega because they are well made and there are many models to choose from that are interesting to me. Another reason is that I am able to pay the prices being asked. I don't have the money for a Patek Phillip, or other high end watches, but most of the watches I like can be had from a few hundred pounds and a few thousand poundand thus within my budget.

 

Be careful on the topic of "rarity", as it means nothing without context. A rare example of a sought-after model can add tremendous value, while a rare example of brand/model that no one cares about is meaningless, no matter what some ebay seller may suggest.

 

A very good point. It might be a rare watch because it's ugly and nobody bought it when it was a current model.

 

The basics of my interest.

Mechanical. I like the interplay of the small well machined parts.

My particular passions.

My earliest TV watching memories? The space program. The watches (especially Speedmaster) were tools that served as a back-up to the computers and modern technology. I'm not in a position to own a Speedmaster at this point but my long-term acquisition plan is for late 60's Speedmaster, ideally made in 1966 when I was born. The pinnacle of the "tool" watch to me.

My second passion is the working man's watch, especially the sort that the guy back from WWII or the Korean War would buy that was a step or couple steps up from the cheaper widely available models. The type of watch you had to save for and with proper care would last a lifetime in the factory, office, or would be the watch that might not go out in the field on the farm but would be the one worn to town on Saturday or church on Sunday.

 

Primarily it has to be aesthetically pleasing. If true, then its based on the condition of the watch, which would include the watch having all (or most) of the original parts.

Another factor that I consider is the manufacture date, and really I think this is just a way to self impose a limit of watches I would like to buy (or a way to justify buying). Basically birth year watch, birth year of children, graduation date, marriage date, etc.

 

I agree, that's why I'm making sure to add brand name/recognition as a factor

 

I would say when it comes to the highest level of collecting, provenance is #1. Meaning one of a kind watches, like the Bulova that went to the moon, or a watch owned by a celebrity or world leader. Next, I would say rarity--the harder it is for supply to meet demand. Third, pedigree (history/reputation of the manufacturer). Fourth, aesthetic. If it looks good, it would likely be more desirable than an equally rare but less attractive/popular model. Fifth: trends. Different collectibles all see shifts in what is popular from time to time, and I bet this affects watches too. So to recap:

1. Provenance
2. Rarity
3. Pedigree
4. Aesthetic/popularity
5. Trends

Note I did not include condition or originality. These things in my mind only affect the price of a specific example, not necessarily how "collectible" it is. Maybe a small distinction, but one worth making I think.

 

Can't say I agree with your analysis. Provenance can be important but the vast majority of collectible pieces have no known provenance. It
is relevant to only very few watches. Rarity, as mentioned by Tony C only has meaning for desirable or iconic watches. Popularity is not a factor for me at all, and if anything, is a negative. Also, I think trends affect price rather than collectability, while condition hugely affects collectability.

Finally, for me at least, aesthetic considerations trump everything. If the watch is not beautiful, nothing else matters.

 

Wouldn't you say price is a reflection of collectability?