looking for a dress watch.

1/16/2007 2:24:14 AM

for a DRESS watch the patek philippe looks better cause its simpler. rolex celini?

1/16/2007 2:33:54 AM

Definitely the Patek Philippe--it looks cooler and black and silver go with more things. And I'll bet those white threads in the band of the Breitling probably won't stay white for very long.

1/16/2007 2:56:59 AM

what was the point for that huge jpeg, my man?

I mean damn...

1/16/2007 3:23:25 AM

^ Yeah, I think I saw a quark.

1/16/2007 3:39:42 AM

id get the first one because it has a huge ass picture

1/16/2007 4:01:42 AM

this is one of those "HAHA look what I can afford" threads.

1/16/2007 5:58:14 AM

jesus, a 5MB picture???

1/16/2007 8:53:54 AM

The Bentley Mulliner Tourbillon is my favorite.... When you're ready to drop $170k on it, let me know and I'll be glad to place the order for ya. (Yes, that really is what it cost)

1/16/2007 10:25:38 AM

Patek

1/16/2007 10:55:57 AM

it was late and i was too lazy to resize.

shoulda had a warning.

Quote :

"When you're ready to drop $170k on it, let me know and I'll be glad to place the order for ya. (Yes, that really is what it cost)"

The markup on fine watches/everything is outrageous.

and I'm cheap.

[Edited on January 16, 2007 at 12:45 PM. Reason : cheap i tells ya]

1/16/2007 12:31:14 PM

the Patek Philippe is not a watch, its a chronograph

1/16/2007 2:38:35 PM

#1 is going to clash with anything that isn't warm hues ... reds, browns, etc.

That said

#2 will look better with most of the things upper-level management would be wearing ... black/navy suits and such

I'd go with #1 if it has a black/silver version, otherwise #2.

1/16/2007 3:51:23 PM

^^ you mean the Breitling.

BTW, the most expensive watch I have seen with my own eyes (in a jewellery store) cost a cool 200K

Covered with diamonds and shit!

1/16/2007 6:03:11 PM

i will pass on the shit covered watch

1/16/2007 8:32:06 PM

^^ The Tourbillon pictured above on bracelet is more expensive than any traditional watch covered in diamonds. That watch in platinum on bracelet is $260k... As shown it's about $160k-$170k in Rose gold.

Quote :

"the Patek Philippe is not a watch, its a chronograph"

That Patek is not a chronograph

1/16/2007 10:16:23 PM

i can't do diamonds on a watch.

of course i'm not a big fan of diamonds anyway.

i'm just a fan of rose gold.

titanium is my first (unavailable) choice.

[Edited on January 16, 2007 at 10:25 PM. Reason : ef]

1/16/2007 10:25:05 PM

I'd probably go with the silver watch since it matches any outfit you wear

gold watches dont look right with certain colors

other than the color issue, I like the Breitling better

1/16/2007 10:28:48 PM

Have you looked at the Rose gold Montbrillant like mine? (Men's watch) It's an awesome watch, and isn't more $ than a house.... and they do have a decent amount of options in the lines. If you want, give me a list of things you want it to be (rose gold, chronograph, croc deploy strap, etc) and I'll tell you what they make that fits the bill. I practically have everything in current production memorized.
P.S. There are 5 Titanium options, just none that are dressy.


[Edited on January 16, 2007 at 11:18 PM. Reason : This is all Breitling specific]

1/16/2007 11:16:00 PM

Patek Philippe

1/17/2007 12:29:06 PM

I got a $20 watch at Target. Mossimo. bitch.

1/17/2007 1:18:30 PM

I've got one from Fossil, and it's the best watch I ever had.

1/17/2007 1:27:45 PM

#2 - more neutral coloring...

1/17/2007 9:01:44 PM

what's the commision on a 250K watch i wonder...



http://www.swissluxurywatches.com/breitling/bentley-mulliner-tourbillon.php?wid=888&lanID=3&redirect=1

that's all fucking levels of silly

[Edited on January 17, 2007 at 9:28 PM. Reason : .]

1/17/2007 9:25:32 PM

i suggest #2 as the owner of a couple nice timepieces.

1/18/2007 3:40:50 AM

1

1/18/2007 4:25:02 AM

Quote :

"Have you looked at the Rose gold Montbrillant like mine? (Men's watch) It's an awesome watch, and isn't more $ than a house.... and they do have a decent amount of options in the lines."

I'm not a big fan of the Monbrillant. The price isn't a concern for me. It's more of the looks, weight, feel, geek factor, etc.

Owning a watch that features a Tourbillon is more along the lines of what I'm looking for.

The more complications, the more I'm interested.

I've looked at Omega, Breitling, Audemars Piguet, Zenith, etc...

At the moment, I'm keeping an eye out for something that possesses both a Tourbillon, self-winding mech movement, and a perpetual calendar. I haven't found it yet and it can't be as large as the HUGE ass Breitling's. I'm not getting them to flash around and brag (also I'm a small man). I just love technology.

1/18/2007 4:10:30 PM

put it in the talk shop thread.. we need, needless bandwidth whoring in there

1/18/2007 4:14:19 PM

Tourbillon AND Perpet. Calendar both in one watch is going to be a beast to find...

The only breitlings that are one or the other are:
a> the one you listed
b> the traditional Bentley Mulliner (I sold one of those a couple years ago in Rose gold on bracelet, and have never spent that long setting a watch in my life) or
c> The Navitimer QP, which is about 2 years out of production, but you can still find them. They were pretty limited when I sold one in '04.

Perpet. Calendar isn't hard to find in Analog/ Digital models, but they're quartz (or super quartz).

And Grande complication pieces like a Tourbillon are going to be selfwinding mechanical.

Tough call!

Quote :

" The markup on fine watches/everything is outrageous."

Mark-up on Patek/Breitling/Rolex/etc isn't nearly as much as you would think. It COSTS a S***-Ton to produce a tourbillon mvmnt.

Quote :

"what's the commision on a 250K watch i wonder..."

Not nearly as much as you'd think.... And not nearly as much as I'd like

[Edited on January 19, 2007 at 7:27 AM. Reason : ]

1/19/2007 7:22:46 AM