Breitling: Breitling

Omega: Omega Seamaster

Tag: Tag


At prestent Im most keen on the Omega.

What do you peeps think?

Cheers,



Kaz.

Tag for me!
It looks the most expensive and is not as "fussy" as the other two.

Onnly thing im concerned with in regards to TAG, there is soooooo many fakes out there......kinda puts me off. These are only three ive briefly looked at, if you can think of any more, im open to offers.

TAG TAG TAG

Go for the Breitling or the Omega, they hold value better. Stainless steel is better than gold.

I have two Breitlings, a Blackbird and an Avenger and both are valued more than I bought them for,

Kazi,hows bout RADO,do you not fancy something like that?I am partial to a bit of Omega.My old man swears by them.

May I suggest this watch from this page. (Seventh watch down)

Its ceramic, radio controlled time and solar powered.

S.

yeah that ceramic watch is nice,rado have a similar range of ceramic watches.Kazi what is the budget?

It looks the most expensive?? Tag's are pretty cheap in comparison to a Breitling!! I bought a Tag Kirium... must of only paid about 550 pounds. Now using an Omega Speedmaster, and i def. prefer the Omega.

Out of the three though, id still choose a breitling. Not many people wear them.

omega, i have the same one pictured what a brill watch and it has held its value, always wanted a bretling but not the one pictured, so i say omega seamaster there is a reason why james bond wears one!!!!

I have a Breitling Navitimer. Best watch I have ever owned.

Breitling for me too, its way out of the league of the other two

I've got a Rado ceramica mulifunction and it's very understated, not at all bling.

Breitlings are wonderfully made but they're usually pretty chunky, skinny people look funny wearing a Breitling. My mate can barely lift his skinny arm up when he wears his and feels self-conscious as it's really expensive, so he wears his Omega instead.
I agree about the TAG looking fake, as that's what put me off.

Omega make nice watches too, although the James Bond connection puts me off.

Breitling

Nothing more than around £3k.

Thanks for all your input people. Just having a looook now at some of the suggestions.

Just rang our local and only stockist in my town of good watches, Omega are reducing the number of stockists by 150 and have over time increased their watch prices to make them more exclusive.

I have been very pleased with my Omega Seamaster, (plain one) and have lost very little money off mine in three years.

Im still drawn towards the Omega more than anything else at present but not in a hurry to rule anything else out.

get the seamaster,

it's a real nice watch

but what ever you buy make sure that it's a mechanical watch and not battery powered

out of the three.....Breitling any day

you should look into buying outside the UK!

I have a TAG, and love it. Never had to adjust it in 2 yrs.

£3k for a watch....... , how could you relax on a night out?

Looks wise, I like the Omega

Kazi the most ive ever spent on a watch is £1300,£3k is an awesome budget,but save a couple of hundred out of the 3k for a good safe.Out of the three I would certainly go for the Omega.

With a budget of £3K I would forget any of the three that you have been looking at. Whist they are fine watches they are not in the same class as Panerai, Audemars Piguet, Blancpain, Breguet, Chopard (some), Glasshute, Frank Muller, IWC, Jaeger-le-Coultre and you might even find a Vacherin Constantin at £3K if you're lucky although you won't get an A. Lange & Sohne or a Patek Phillipe for that money. There are many others too numerous to mention here. A lot of these manufacturers still make their own in house movements and these are highly desireable pieces. £3K or less will buy you at least one model of most of the above or for that matter a Rolex with a lot of change. Take a look at www.collectorstime.com who has a great selection at very competitive prices and is also very trustworthy. (I have bought from him) Even if you get done for duties etc the favourable exchange rate will still make it cheap. There is virtually no watch in your budget that will show you a profit over time allowing for inflation unless you are lucky or wise enough to buy trade and sell retail (a bit like cars really). What you will get with a well looked after quality watch is a lifetime of service and minimum depreciation. I would absolutely agree that you should avoid all quartz watches and their like. Mechanical is the way to go and it does not matter whether it is automatic or hand wind.
Hope this is helpful to you.

Kent.

Kazi just checked out the Patek Phillipe watches kent is talking bout.they are v nice.You arent looking for a dressy watch tho are you,as the ones that you have selected seem to be robust not delicate.

Patek Phillipe are probably the finest watchmakers in the world but as I said, £3k is unlikely to buy one. They do the Nautilus and the Aquanaut models which are robust and suitable for those with an active lifestyle. Most of the Major Watchmakers have at least a few sports models in their inventory. I have owned a lot of watches in the past but I must admit that a Patek has always been out of my reach especially as some of them can cost as much as a new Lexus! Still, one day maybe! The Vacherin Constantin Overseas Model is another very very handsome sports style watch and is close to a budget of £3K if you import. As a previous poster pointed out, stainless steel offers the best value. Who wants to buy Gold or Platinum and then wrap it round a watch movement?

Regards,

Kent.

Have you considered BVLGARI they do really nice watches.

Bvlgari chrono

Watches link

Kent - Pierce Brosnan who is also an embassidor for Omega, is the only one who represents Omega and does not have to wear one. Ive been lead to believe he actually wears a Patek Phillipe. £3K would not get me one of those thats for sure.

Briefly looked at Rolex and thought they were all to much in your face. Not nice at all. There others mentioned im sure are great examples but although keen eyes can spot nice watches and non commercial brand names, they are probably not heard of at all by many people who arent so clued up and so I feel, a guess a snobbery thing also plays a part in what I buy. Bit like when I bought the Lex. The badge is in essence is important.

Rsarin - Got a safe already mate for my current time peice

My watch was for sale up until 30 mins ago just sold to a customer randomly! He saw the watch brochures on my desk and I got talking to him, now SOLD! so thats a good result! Trouble is, its put a bit more urgence on me sorting another out now.


Took the plundge and order the Omega, my luck its not in stock and there is a 3 week delivery time

Still, negotiated a 20% discount


Many thanks for all your input

Of the three my fave is the Omega (used to have one) however for a budget of 3K how about :

Rolex GMT 2?

or

Rolex Submariner?

I used to have an Omega years ago but got rid of it after some problems and bought a Breitling.
Now on my second Breitling, no problems with either one, latest one blue faced Chronograph, great watches!!!

Omega: Omega Seamaster

For Me.

I can't get my head round this at all.

I would spend more money on an expensive car than a cheap car because it performs better, has more features or is bigger.

I would spend money on a bigger house because it is better than a small house.

But a £3000 hour is exactly the same as a £20 Casio hour. You have to adjust your watch twice a year anyway - who cares if it is 0.5seconds out each time.

Ian

then why buy a lexus instead of a toyota, or citroen or fiat etc....... ???

Ahh, but I did - Toyota Altezza RS200 - much better than an IS200. That's my point - I'm not saying don't spend the money you've got - but why spend it on something that has no added value other than snobbery?

I can sense this is an argument that is going to get me shot down in flames - it's one of theose things you either "get" instinctively, or will never understand

Not robust as such, just the style, understated. Didn't want anything to shiney chromey etc etc and be able to wear it on any occassion and not look out of place.


On another as I have to commend the shop Ive bought my previous watch from and the current purchase. He added two links to my old watch while I waited free of charge, and heres the best part, as my new watch is out of stock, he has lent me his old Omega which is identical to the one ive just sold!

Hows that for service? Can't fault that at all! Well chuffed!!!!

Breitling use a cheap movement and are easily broken i have heard many stories from owners who have knoocked or dropped the watch for the hands to fall off

Good quality then?

QUOTE(fluff34567 @ Jun 24 2006, 08:20 PM) [snapback]361635[/snapback]

Breitling use a cheap movement and are easily broken i have heard many stories from owners who have knoocked or dropped the watch for the hands to fall off

The original poster has now chosen his watch so its all a bit academic really but I would be interested to hear more about the "cheap" and unreliable Breitling movement. The three watches in the original shortlist all use the same base movement or "Ebauche", that is, the Valjoux 7750. This is the most common chronograph movement in the world and is used by dozens of quality watchmakers as a base module. It is recognised as an extremely robust, accurate and reliable movement throughout the watch world. The quality of the finished movement depends on the amount of personalisation that a Manufacturer puts into this base movement. Thus, a company such as IWC will modify and personalise to such a degree that it finishes up with a movement totally unrecognisable from the original. Tag Heuer, Breitling and others will not usually do very much at all with the original other than specifying the best quality materials and then adding a few swirlies to make it look good. hence the price differential. A lot of watch "snobs" won't buy a watch unless the movement is made in house and this helps to create the market for the Pateks of this world.

"can't get my head round this at all.

I would spend more money on an expensive car than a cheap car because it performs better, has more features or is bigger.

I would spend money on a bigger house because it is better than a small house.

But a £3000 hour is exactly the same as a £20 Casio hour. You have to adjust your watch twice a year anyway - who cares if it is 0.5seconds out each time."

Ian


Buying a high quality watch is not only for telling the time. The £20 Casio will be far more accurate than most mechanical watches anyway. An investment of £5K on a sought after timepiece will still be worth a lot of money in 50 years time and even more in 100 years time. My first good watch was my Fathers Rolex which I inherited many years ago. This started off my ruinously expensive passion for watches which, thank *** has now cooled to the extent that I now own only one really good watch and that is a Panerai (which incidently uses the Valjoux 7750 as its base movement) Spending more than £20 on a watch is not foolish. Who says a big house is better than a small house? or an expensive car is better than a cheap car? It depends surely on the quality/location. Almost anything I can think of comes in a variety of qualities and it just depends what you want from an item whether it is worth spending more on.

I don't buy the investment argument - if you want to invest money for the future, there are far better ways to make more money - over 100 years you can pretty much guarantee a 7% pa increase on the stock market, turning £5000 into over 4 million quid. How many expensive watches are going to be worth that in 100 years time?

The thing with the house or car argument, is that you can point to a factual reason why you have spent more money - ie a flat in the centre of London is worth more than a mansion in the outskirts of Huddersfield for a tangible reason.

The only argument I can understand is that what you are actually buying is a piece of jewellery, and the associated feelgood factor. It's an emotional purchase, not a rational one - hence the reason a logical engineer like myself can't see the point.

At the end of the day, it's your money - do whatever you like with it that makes you happy

Ian

all i can comment on is the experience i had from quite a few people that own ( did own) breitling watches and i work with them every day. the situation with the hands falling off was shocking - not something you would expect for a watch that costs so much - i remember that breitling wanted about £400 to just look at it repair etc was more, funnily enough he had quite a few calls to say that they had found x required repair, he paid about £1K in the end for the repair.

For anyone that is serious about watches you need to attend "Basel World" THE worlds premier watch show - but book your hotels early because every single hotel in about 60km radius will be fully booked.

[
I don't buy the investment argument - if you want to invest money for the future, there are far better ways to make more money - over 100 years you can pretty much guarantee a 7% pa increase on the stock market, turning £5000 into over 4 million quid. How many expensive watches are going to be worth that in 100 years time?The only argument I can understand is that what you are actually buying is a piece of jewellery, and the associated feelgood factor. It's an emotional purchase, not a rational one - hence the reason a logical engineer like myself can't see the point.


Ian
[/quote]

I agree with the investment point although 7% is a low estimate of a 100 year return and historical increases have been mostly in double figures. However I did not and would never recommend watches as a wise investment, I merely pointed out that unlike a car, which will probably have wasted away to nothing in 20/30 years, quality watches are built to last several lifetimes and can retain a very high percentage of original cost even allowing for inflation. In the meantime you have had decades of pleasure wearing them and showing them off to other watch buffs. Most house and car purchases are far more emotional than rational in my experience. Only investors and builders buy rationally. Most people, including me, take an area they can afford to buy in and then buy the house they fall in love with. I would bet that most people on this forum have bought at least one car which was not the most practical, wisest choice but had that "I want it and I want it now" factor.

Kent.

Because they get you places in style, while a watch just tells you you're late?
I haven't had a watch for 30 years..
Mugger approached; rolled up sleeves. 'Look, idiot!! No watch! Don't have a phone!! I'm walking so don't have a car! WHAT do you want!!??'
Just mumbled...Sorry mate...and went off.
( I WAS going to my lock-up to get Lexus out, but.....)
There IS a watch called a SKELTON, so I'd have to wear that. But really, it's just image when you look at it.
You might get past it?

Are you sure? There are plenty of Skeleton watches but I've never heard of a Skelton brand.

I am happy with my Rolex MOP President.
Only gripe is the that it has to be worn at least every 2nd day to keep the perpetual motion running.
At £25k its not exactly a watch i wear to the gym or cleaning up the house.

BTW Kazi i dont like any of the watches you mentioned but if that was a choice go for the Breitling.

To late mate, Omega is on its way longer than expected mind, was told this morning I have to wait 5 - 6 weeks now

Trouble is with Rolex, there a bit bling if you get what I mean. Bit in your face, works of art in terms of quality don't get me wrong, but again, loads of knock offs about.

I actually meant to say Omega Kazi!

I agree with the cheaper end of the Rolex spectrum i.e the stainless steel sh!tty models and the likes.

You cant fake the sheer exuberance of the high end models though mate.
People know when they see it straight away.

What Omega did you go for in the end?

I have one of the those Junghams atomic titanium jobbies - well chuffed.

Click on the linky on post #1




No idea what they are

You happy with the watch mate?

Hermmmm interesting timing mate. The watch only came in on Monday, the guy down the round popped into to see me yesterday, left it with me, I had a good look, feel etc etc....and im not so keen on it now. Little to thick on my skinny wrists. Its an excellent example of great build.


Anway, Ive decided to just buy another Seamaster like the James Bond one (like the one I had) . So, all not a success really.

Think im to fussy.


Cheers for asking though Pip.

No problem mate.
Like you i appreciate the nicer things in life.
Not being funny i work out and by no means have small forearms but some of these HUGE faced watches as just disgusting and look daft, breitlings especially.
It wouldnt suit me and i have the forarms to possibly carry it off.

I have no chance of pulling it off then, I have girly wrists! I think it also come down to the fact im not great at changing what I like. The price of the watch or any of the others was not a factor really, im not buying something for the sake of it just to look poncy.

The watch itself was not huge in terms of the face of it, very simular in size to what ive had but the thickness of the watch was to much....

I take it no one would want to buy this watch