Well said, Salim. I think your learnings are shared by many of us as we progress through our collecting journeys. Number 2 was particularly relevant to me this year. I, too used to be a movement and escapement junkie. I obsessed about timekeeping precision, movement design, and technical specifications. As I learned more, finissage became more and more important (which helps creates the problem in item number 1). Both are still relevant and have value for me, but these days, design and aesthetics take pride of place. A watch must make me smile when I look at in order to be part of my collection; hardly logical or scientific, but very satisfying. It is also more personal; movements and finissage can be compared reasonably objectively, but aesthetic sensibilities should be one’s own.
It’s a hard thing to admit to yourself- almost like a wasted opportunity of collecting. But better late than never and with it another opportunity to explore different perspectives. Happy holidays!
Your collective thoughts are why quite a few people exposed to this illness secretly admire the “one watch guy”. Curating a “collection” often resembles “Fuck! I simply just bought a bunch of watches!”
with nothing but love, please allow me to reject some of your ideas as musings of a man who still hasn’t quite figured it out.
i too once toyed with these ideas of “rejecting the mainstream” and “what does my watch say about me?”. but then i realized this was just my need for validation and approval. who cares what someone else thinks of my watch? i don’t need their approval, in fact, i welcome their rejection. other peoples’ perceptions of my watch says more about their own circumstances than about the merits of the watch in question.
we must build the knowledge, taste and confidence to stop wondering “what does my watch say about me”, and instead ask the relevant question “what does it say about the watch that i bought it?” all i need to determine is if the watch is consistent with my desires, my discernment, my taste, my personal aesthetic and needs as a consumer, and my values (this is usually overlooked, i refuse to wear any watch made and sold by institutions whose values disgust me).
which finally brings me to community. unlike most enthusiasts who live in big cities, i have consciously avoided any in-person interaction with the “community”. people make you forget the product, and the product must always come first. i didn’t get into this hobby to make friends, i’m only in it for the product.
and no matter how much we rationalize, there is only one thing a watch will say about you: your spending power. a new gold daytona and a pre-owned 1815 chrono both cost the same, and can only be purchased by someone who has $50k to spend on a watch. everything else is meaningless. if it’s a desirable dial on the daytona, it also says that you must have spend more in the past to have been offered it. and buying the 1815 shows you have enough affluence to buy an object that cannot be sold without a loss. either way, it’s still all about your spending power, your station in life, your success. there is no escaping that.
While I don’t agree with most of your comments here, I do find the idea of rejecting the mainstream to be in direct contradiction with the idea of buying what you like.
If you reject a watch because it’s too mainstream, you’re making a decision based on the opinions/actions of others, which is the same motivating factor for someone who buys a mainstream watch as a status symbol.
The first person cares about what “watch people” or “people with good taste” think, the second cares about what people more generally think. Neither is simply buying what they like.
we don’t have to agree on everything but good we found some common ground.
i will just say “watch people” are the last people whose opinions i put stock in. because “watch people” have vested interests, which should be obvious and not a controversial statement.
influencers who’ve just been wined and dined by a brand will obviously not be critical of the product. pre-owned dealers will obviously talk you out of buying new product at an authorized dealer out of self-interest.
the “general public” are much more honest and reliable. when i show my wife (who’s quite the consumer herself but totally disconnected from the online enthusiast bubble) pictures of a watch, i know i’m getting her honest and unbiased opinion. when she takes one look at the simon brette watch and declares “ugly”, i give her a hug and say “baby, i knew i married you for a reason”.
On your first point, I think that it all comes down to wearability of some of our grail watches, for us that have smaller wrists.
We often fantasize about watches that unfortunately have larger dimensions. We love the watches for what they represent, and want them for those reasons, without first thinking about how the watch wear on our wrists.
We, small-wristed people, are both cursed and blessed at the same time. We're cursed as many complicated watches and current references are too big. But blessed as most vintage watches are smaller sized, and also because we have Tim Mosso to help us get a sense of how watches would wear on our wrists.
My most used filter on Chrono24 is case size, as I have realized that fit is what matters most to me.
I really recognise this feeling, particularly the distinction you draw between a collection that is curated versus one that is simply accumulated.
That said, I do think there is a legitimate counterpoint in the watch world that perhaps does not apply as strongly to other interests. Watches are inherently expensive, mechanically complex and, to a degree, risky. Playing it safe can therefore have genuine merit. Proven designs, strong brand heritage, reliable movements and long-term serviceability all matter, especially when budgets are finite and pieces are worn regularly.
My own collection would probably be criticised as predictable by many. A modern Speedmaster, a neo-vintage Explorer I, a Reverso, a Cartier and one or two others. None of them are particularly obscure or difficult to source. However, I genuinely love each piece for its design language, historical significance and robustness. There is subtle variety between them, and together they suit my current lifestyle, financial constraints and appetite for risk. In that sense, they feel intentional to me, even if they sit closer to the mainstream than the more adventurous end of collecting.
I completely agree with your broader point though. Intentionality matters far more than price or hype. However, rejecting the mainstream for its own sake could also be as hollow as buying it uncritically. The real value lies in understanding why a watch belongs in the collection at all I guess.
I do agree with you that sometimes playing it safe can be the best thing to do- especially with brands that don’t have the servicing infrastructure, known reliability and are less liquid in the market. This is one of the reasons I have not yet jumped into the independent rabbit hole!
Your collection sounds great- I think as long as you feel it resonates with you and your personality and says something about you then it’s awesome!
As it turns out - the pleasure of talking watches with friends met thru the hobby (and reading about them here on Stack) , is at least as fun as acquiring / hunting / owning various fascinating watches.
Looking forward to hopefully meeting some of you esteemed Substack folks at watch events in the coming year or years 🤝
Well said, Salim. I think your learnings are shared by many of us as we progress through our collecting journeys. Number 2 was particularly relevant to me this year. I, too used to be a movement and escapement junkie. I obsessed about timekeeping precision, movement design, and technical specifications. As I learned more, finissage became more and more important (which helps creates the problem in item number 1). Both are still relevant and have value for me, but these days, design and aesthetics take pride of place. A watch must make me smile when I look at in order to be part of my collection; hardly logical or scientific, but very satisfying. It is also more personal; movements and finissage can be compared reasonably objectively, but aesthetic sensibilities should be one’s own.
Best wishes for a happy and healthy New Year!
Thanks Brad- that’s exactly my feelings. Thanks for reading this year and have a happy holidays and new year!
The Tiffany blue OP is cool. I do agree with you about vintage, I find that I like it more over time
Good read! The VC CDV was an excellent choice and stunning piece! Congratulations 🎊🎉🎈 I hope it brings you many years of joy 💙
Thanks so much, Bruce
Well written and thoughtful piece. The realization that your collection felt accumulated but not curated resonated with me.
Thanks for reading and the support!
It’s a hard thing to admit to yourself- almost like a wasted opportunity of collecting. But better late than never and with it another opportunity to explore different perspectives. Happy holidays!
Anytime my email lights up with a new Deadbeat article, I know it's gonna be a good day. Thanks for sharing.
Too kind! Thanks for all the support this year!
Your collective thoughts are why quite a few people exposed to this illness secretly admire the “one watch guy”. Curating a “collection” often resembles “Fuck! I simply just bought a bunch of watches!”
Haha- I have a deep admiration for the one watch guy!
My dad for example put on a 5940 and that’s it- that was his watch!
with nothing but love, please allow me to reject some of your ideas as musings of a man who still hasn’t quite figured it out.
i too once toyed with these ideas of “rejecting the mainstream” and “what does my watch say about me?”. but then i realized this was just my need for validation and approval. who cares what someone else thinks of my watch? i don’t need their approval, in fact, i welcome their rejection. other peoples’ perceptions of my watch says more about their own circumstances than about the merits of the watch in question.
we must build the knowledge, taste and confidence to stop wondering “what does my watch say about me”, and instead ask the relevant question “what does it say about the watch that i bought it?” all i need to determine is if the watch is consistent with my desires, my discernment, my taste, my personal aesthetic and needs as a consumer, and my values (this is usually overlooked, i refuse to wear any watch made and sold by institutions whose values disgust me).
which finally brings me to community. unlike most enthusiasts who live in big cities, i have consciously avoided any in-person interaction with the “community”. people make you forget the product, and the product must always come first. i didn’t get into this hobby to make friends, i’m only in it for the product.
and no matter how much we rationalize, there is only one thing a watch will say about you: your spending power. a new gold daytona and a pre-owned 1815 chrono both cost the same, and can only be purchased by someone who has $50k to spend on a watch. everything else is meaningless. if it’s a desirable dial on the daytona, it also says that you must have spend more in the past to have been offered it. and buying the 1815 shows you have enough affluence to buy an object that cannot be sold without a loss. either way, it’s still all about your spending power, your station in life, your success. there is no escaping that.
While I don’t agree with most of your comments here, I do find the idea of rejecting the mainstream to be in direct contradiction with the idea of buying what you like.
If you reject a watch because it’s too mainstream, you’re making a decision based on the opinions/actions of others, which is the same motivating factor for someone who buys a mainstream watch as a status symbol.
The first person cares about what “watch people” or “people with good taste” think, the second cares about what people more generally think. Neither is simply buying what they like.
we don’t have to agree on everything but good we found some common ground.
i will just say “watch people” are the last people whose opinions i put stock in. because “watch people” have vested interests, which should be obvious and not a controversial statement.
influencers who’ve just been wined and dined by a brand will obviously not be critical of the product. pre-owned dealers will obviously talk you out of buying new product at an authorized dealer out of self-interest.
the “general public” are much more honest and reliable. when i show my wife (who’s quite the consumer herself but totally disconnected from the online enthusiast bubble) pictures of a watch, i know i’m getting her honest and unbiased opinion. when she takes one look at the simon brette watch and declares “ugly”, i give her a hug and say “baby, i knew i married you for a reason”.
Terrific piece ! At the end of the day, it is always how the watch makes you feel.
100% agree!
On your first point, I think that it all comes down to wearability of some of our grail watches, for us that have smaller wrists.
We often fantasize about watches that unfortunately have larger dimensions. We love the watches for what they represent, and want them for those reasons, without first thinking about how the watch wear on our wrists.
We, small-wristed people, are both cursed and blessed at the same time. We're cursed as many complicated watches and current references are too big. But blessed as most vintage watches are smaller sized, and also because we have Tim Mosso to help us get a sense of how watches would wear on our wrists.
My most used filter on Chrono24 is case size, as I have realized that fit is what matters most to me.
Completely agree with everything you’ve said here, Will. It’s definitely a blessing and a curse having a smaller wrist!
I really recognise this feeling, particularly the distinction you draw between a collection that is curated versus one that is simply accumulated.
That said, I do think there is a legitimate counterpoint in the watch world that perhaps does not apply as strongly to other interests. Watches are inherently expensive, mechanically complex and, to a degree, risky. Playing it safe can therefore have genuine merit. Proven designs, strong brand heritage, reliable movements and long-term serviceability all matter, especially when budgets are finite and pieces are worn regularly.
My own collection would probably be criticised as predictable by many. A modern Speedmaster, a neo-vintage Explorer I, a Reverso, a Cartier and one or two others. None of them are particularly obscure or difficult to source. However, I genuinely love each piece for its design language, historical significance and robustness. There is subtle variety between them, and together they suit my current lifestyle, financial constraints and appetite for risk. In that sense, they feel intentional to me, even if they sit closer to the mainstream than the more adventurous end of collecting.
I completely agree with your broader point though. Intentionality matters far more than price or hype. However, rejecting the mainstream for its own sake could also be as hollow as buying it uncritically. The real value lies in understanding why a watch belongs in the collection at all I guess.
Ps loving the articles and podcast Salim.
Thanks for the thoughtful reply!
I do agree with you that sometimes playing it safe can be the best thing to do- especially with brands that don’t have the servicing infrastructure, known reliability and are less liquid in the market. This is one of the reasons I have not yet jumped into the independent rabbit hole!
Your collection sounds great- I think as long as you feel it resonates with you and your personality and says something about you then it’s awesome!
Thanks for following and reading!
Love it mate!
Wonderful Christmas note - cheers Salim!
As it turns out - the pleasure of talking watches with friends met thru the hobby (and reading about them here on Stack) , is at least as fun as acquiring / hunting / owning various fascinating watches.
Looking forward to hopefully meeting some of you esteemed Substack folks at watch events in the coming year or years 🤝
Thanks Matt!
Absolutely agree, I think the talking, learning, listening to friends is so therapeutic too in a world where we are increasingly isolated!
Thanks. I’ve learned a lot from you. Your Substack was the best new learning tool enthusiasts launched in 2025.
So kind of you, John and very humbling.
Thanks so much for the support this year and happy holidays!
You’re a terrible influence and I am so glad we’re friends now! Maybe 2026 is the year we finally meet in person!
Same here bud- though you’re as bad an influence!!!
Well said.
At the end collecting is about personal choices and personal relations. Otherwise it’s called buying. :)
Thank you for your work here.
Thanks Knud!
Well said! Thanks for your introspection and transparency.
Thanks for reading and thank you so much for your support this year!