Investment or not

[MadsA]

Åh Gud

Ikke ét eneste modargument, men derimod en masse undskyldninger for ikke at svare på konkrete spørgsmål, der netop omhandler det, du gerne vil diskutere (så længe folk ikke modsiger dig med bedre argumenter). Det er netop derfor, jeg personligt ikke har lyst til at "debatere" med dig, for argumenter tæller åbenbart ikke, hvis de er underbygget med kilder.


/Mads

[cfnissen]

Haha Willy,

It is always such great fun to see what happens when someone gives you a bit of pushback on your posts and the always very interesting opinions/claims they contain.

When other people write about watches they are always characterized as uninformed, not knowledgeable, minions of PR departments , uninteresting or just plain liars or unethical people without the ability to form their own opinions.

When you defend your own opinions/claims they are always based on many, many years of experience, ownership of every single watch being discussed, informed dialogue with key insiders in the industry, thousands of sources and not least having a closer relationship to 'the ultimate truth' about watchmaking than any other living person on this planet.

I really find it hard to believe that the difference between the quality of your opinions and those of others is as big as you claim.

I carry no illusion about being able to make you change your behavior in any way - and neither would I want to. This is a forum for all of us, after all. It is just an observation across a growing number of discussions where you have participated.

As for your conspiracy theories about people having ulterior motives....isn't that just another way of discounting the opinions of people who disagree with you? If people have opinions different from yours, they are not necessarily based on anything other than just having a different point of view/perspective.

*** back on topic ***

As for the investment discussion itself, it is my OPINION that PP will rule the auctions and other secondary markets for many years, together with Rolex. There are many reasons for this.

First, there are general trends (my personal observations), such as

- A general increase in the awareness of 'normal people' of mechanical watches - from newspaper articles, magazines, gadget blogs, fashion blogs, etc. It is so easy to start becoming a connoiseur these days.
- Low returns on traditional financial assets creating a need for alternative investment vehicles and an increased appetite for taking on risk to get good returns.
- Increasing awareness of the potential benefits of investing in rare watches in general (chance of increase in value, portability across borders, as a store of cash, hiding money from the tax authorities, etc. - there are many ulterior motives behind this).
- Watches increasingly being seen a an asset class on par with other fine art (paintings, sculptures, etc. - but this obviously only applies to the best/rarest/most complicated of the watches - and mostly in the US and parts of Asia)

Then there are Patek-specific trends, such as
- PP's hard-nosed and unsentimental efforts to build an image of PP products as the ultimate investment - some of it through auction shennanigans but also through their strong focus on being able to service and repair the best of their old products across generations, as demonstrated during my visit to PP last month.
- The relative rarity of key PP complicated references (not the standard Calatravas and other basic fluff that PP produces every year in large numbers) - a fact highlighted by and backed up with numbers and examples by two industry heavy hitters in New York last month, Aurel Bacs of Phillips and Mr. John Reardon, Head of watches at Christie's. Both pretty much experts in their field.
- The personal prestige related to having the means and connections to acquire the rarest of PPs

Lange is not there yet, in my OPINION. They are certainly moving in that direction if you take a look at their product strategy as expressed by their CEO to me in New York some five months ago
- Fewer points-of-sales to better manage the brand and the customer relationship
- Higher average sales prices across the range - they are moving their products upwards in (perceived?) quality - more complications, more limited editions, etc.
- More 'flagship' products such as Zeitwerk repeaters, Datographs, multi-complications, etc.
- Limited production numbers - and no plans to increase them

In reality they are many years behind PP in creating a similar market presence or share of mind, if you like. Yes, they have significant resources (financial, management talent, watchmaking talent, etc) behind them as part of the Richemont group - but they also have a steep mountain to climb.

And Lange is also resorting to fancy marketing tricks, in my view. Look at the latest jubilee models celebrating the 200th birthday of one of the original Lange family members. If you take a look at the communications supporting those models, you will quickly see that they are not very clear on the fact that they are celebrating the 200th birthday of a person, not the company itself (that only opened for business in 1994). See here for one example

http://www.alange-soehne.com/en/news-and...ders-2015/

I am certainly not one to follow auction results slavishly - but in a room full of very high-end, very active and discerning collectors last month it was pretty clear that Lange carries a lot of love and respect for their finishing and general German qualities but most of them were talking PP (and Rolex...) references when they really got engaged in discussions on watches as investments. Lange and the independents were mostly seen as interesting from a horological perspective.

This time make no mistake on my personal motives or ulterior motives here, please. I actually have a Lange that I love due to its very German qualities. I do not own a PP - and I am not sure that I ever will.

Claus


---
Claus har været ur-interesseret i efterhånden mange år - det hele startede med at han fik lov til at låne sin fars Jaeger-LeCoultre ur som dreng - og siden er det gået ned ad bakke. Kan følges på Instagram under navnet @cfnissen.

[willy]

(01-01-2016, 03:07 PM)cfnissen Skrev: Haha Willy,

It is always such great fun to see what happens when someone gives you a bit of pushback on your posts and the always very interesting opinions/claims they contain.

When other people write about watches they are always characterized as uninformed, not knowledgeable, minions of PR departments , uninteresting or just plain liars or unethical people without the ability to form their own opinions.

When you defend your own opinions/claims they are always based on many, many years of experience, ownership of every single watch being discussed, informed dialogue with key insiders in the industry,  thousands of sources and not least having a closer relationship to 'the ultimate truth' about watchmaking than any other living person on this planet.

I really find it hard to believe that the difference between the quality of your opinions and those of others is as big as you claim.

I carry no illusion about being able to make you change your behavior in any way - and neither would I want to. This is a forum for all of us, after all. It is just an observation across a growing number of discussions where you have participated.

As for your conspiracy theories about people having ulterior motives....isn't that just another way of discounting the opinions of people who disagree with you? If people have opinions different from yours, they are not necessarily based on anything other than just having a different point of view/perspective.

*** back on topic ***

As for the investment discussion itself, it is my OPINION that PP will rule the auctions and other secondary markets for many years, together with Rolex. There are many reasons for this.

First, there are general trends (my personal observations), such as

- A general increase in the awareness of 'normal people' of mechanical watches - from newspaper articles, magazines, gadget blogs, fashion blogs, etc. It is so easy to start becoming a connoiseur these days.
- Low returns on traditional financial assets creating a need for alternative investment vehicles and an increased appetite for taking on risk to get good returns.
- Increasing awareness of the potential benefits of investing in rare watches in general (chance of increase in value, portability across borders, as a store of cash, hiding money from the tax authorities, etc. - there are many ulterior motives behind this).
- Watches increasingly being seen a an asset class on par with other fine art (paintings, sculptures, etc. - but this obviously only applies to the best/rarest/most complicated of the watches - and mostly in the US and parts of Asia)

Then there are Patek-specific trends, such as
- PP's hard-nosed and unsentimental efforts to build an image of PP products as the ultimate investment - some of it through auction shennanigans but also through their strong focus on being able to service and repair the best of their old products across generations, as demonstrated during my visit to PP last month.
- The relative rarity of key PP complicated references (not the standard Calatravas and other basic fluff that PP produces every year in large numbers) - a fact highlighted by and backed up with numbers and examples by two industry heavy hitters in New York last month, Aurel Bacs of Phillips and Mr. John Reardon, Head of watches at Christie's. Both pretty much experts in their field.
- The personal prestige related to having the means and connections to acquire the rarest of PPs

Lange is not there yet, in my OPINION. They are certainly moving in that direction if you take a look at their product strategy as expressed by their CEO to me in New York some five months ago
- Fewer points-of-sales to better manage the brand and the customer relationship
- Higher average sales prices across the range - they are moving their products upwards in (perceived?) quality - more complications, more limited editions, etc.
- More 'flagship' products such as Zeitwerk repeaters, Datographs, multi-complications, etc.
- Limited production numbers - and no plans to increase them

In reality they are many years behind PP in creating a similar market presence or share of mind, if you like. Yes, they have significant resources (financial, management talent, watchmaking talent, etc) behind them as part of the Richemont group - but they also have a steep mountain to climb.

And Lange is also resorting to fancy marketing tricks, in my view. Look at the latest jubilee models celebrating the 200th birthday of one of the original Lange family members. If you take a look at the communications supporting those models, you will quickly see that they are not very clear on the fact that they are celebrating the 200th birthday of a person, not the company itself (that only opened for business in 1994). See here for one example

http://www.alange-soehne.com/en/news-and...ders-2015/

I am certainly not one to follow auction results slavishly - but in a room full of very high-end, very active and discerning collectors last month it was pretty clear that Lange carries a lot of love and respect for their finishing and general German qualities but most of them were talking PP (and Rolex...) references when they really got engaged in discussions on watches as investments. Lange and the independents were mostly seen as interesting from a horological perspective.

This time make no mistake on my personal motives or ulterior motives here, please. I actually have a Lange that I love due to its very German qualities. I do not own a PP - and I am not sure that I ever will.

Claus


---
Claus har været ur-interesseret i efterhånden mange år - det hele startede med at han fik lov til at låne sin fars Jaeger-LeCoultre ur som dreng - og siden er det gået ned ad bakke. Kan følges på Instagram under navnet @cfnissen.

I said the thread was closed for me.So why the personal attack you know i cannot answer?

[cfnissen]

(01-01-2016, 03:39 PM)willy Skrev: I said the thread was closed for me.So why the personal attack you know i cannot answer?

I did not know that we had reached a point where you could not answer ( - even though you apparently can in a limited way.)

As for the post, I just got fed up with your approach to dialogue and discussions, Willy. Don't worry - won't happen again. I will go back to ignoring you. I hope that you will extend the same favor to me.

...and I did add my opinions on watches (PP in particular) as an investment - along the lines of the original post.

Claus

[Stensbjerg]

Jeg vil gerne slutte min deltagelse i denne tråd endegyldigt af med
At præcisere nu da jeg kan læse at emnet er sat på dagsorden,
Og at det ikke er en selvfølgelighed for alle hvilke jeg fejlagtig har gået ud fra...

Alt jeg skriver herinde er et udtryk for min holdning,
Og nej min holdning vil ikke altid være garnieret med links.

Og da jeg intet penge baseret har at forsvare ,
Er den ikke skrevet fordi jeg vil have flere til at mene det samme,
Men blot er et udtryk for at jeg har en gammeldags naiv interesse i gode ure,
Og endnu holder af at debattere den med ligesindet.

I den tilgang ligger ikke et krav om at folk skal underbygge alt hvad de skriver,
Jeg kan som et selvstændig tænkende individ sagtens selv sortere i hvad der virker for mig,
Og da jeg ikke er medlem af curling generationen så kan jeg også sagtens selv
"Efterforske" de holdninger jeg evt. Ikke er enig i hvis det behov skulle opstå.

Fordi jeg fra barnsben af er blevet lært at klare mig selv mest muligt,
Hvilke er en gave jeg ville ønske alle var blevet udstyret med.

[TDN]

(02-01-2016, 12:19 PM)Stensbjerg Skrev: Jeg vil gerne slutte min deltagelse i denne tråd endegyldigt af med
At præcisere nu da jeg kan læse at emnet er sat på dagsorden,
Og at det ikke er en selvfølgelighed for alle hvilke jeg fejlagtig har gået ud fra...

Alt jeg skriver herinde er et udtryk for min holdning,
Og nej min holdning vil ikke altid være garnieret med links.

Og da jeg intet penge baseret har at forsvare ,
Er den ikke skrevet fordi jeg vil have flere til at mene det samme,
Men blot er et udtryk for at jeg har en gammeldags naiv interesse i gode ure,
Og endnu holder af at debattere den med ligesindet.

I den tilgang ligger ikke et krav om at folk skal underbygge alt hvad de skriver,
Jeg kan som et selvstændig tænkende individ sagtens selv sortere i hvad der virker for mig,
Og da jeg ikke er medlem af curling generationen så kan jeg også sagtens selv
"Efterforske" de holdninger jeg evt. Ikke er enig i hvis det behov skulle opstå.

Fordi jeg fra barnsben af er blevet lært at klare mig selv mest muligt,
Hvilke er en gave jeg ville ønske alle var blevet udstyret med.

Du har tydeligvis ikke forstået hvad tråden handler om. Det mange og herunder også mig, er trætte af er at Willy laver hans holdninger om til at det er facts. Hvis det bare var hans mening eller holdning er det jo ikke noget problem, men når nogle er uenige hans udsagn, så bliver man belært om at man bare kan google så finder man +1000 hit der understøtter hans udsagn eller hans egen erfaring, eller hvad han har læst andre ur eksperter har sagt og dette gør det til den endegyldige sandhed.....

[P.N.]

Hej Stensbjerg
Du er en særdeles fornuftig mand og i dette tilfælde har jeg det fra en særdeles troværdig kilde nemlig dit eget statement. Det ville være befriende hvis alle havde den tilgang til debatten. Og lad nu være med at opfatte det ironisk, jeg er helt enig i dine synspunkter 
Mvh.
P.N.

(02-01-2016, 12:19 PM)Stensbjerg Skrev: Jeg vil gerne slutte min deltagelse i denne tråd endegyldigt af med
At præcisere nu da jeg kan læse at emnet er sat på dagsorden,
Og at det ikke er en selvfølgelighed for alle hvilke jeg fejlagtig har gået ud fra...

Alt jeg skriver herinde er et udtryk for min holdning,
Og nej min holdning vil ikke altid være garnieret med links.

Og da jeg intet penge baseret har at forsvare ,
Er den ikke skrevet fordi jeg vil have flere til at mene det samme,
Men blot er et udtryk for at jeg har en gammeldags naiv interesse i gode ure,
Og endnu holder af at debattere den med ligesindet.

I den tilgang ligger ikke et krav om at folk skal underbygge alt hvad de skriver,
Jeg kan som et selvstændig tænkende individ sagtens selv sortere i hvad der virker for mig,
Og da jeg ikke er medlem af curling generationen så kan jeg også sagtens selv
"Efterforske" de holdninger jeg evt. Ikke er enig i hvis det behov skulle opstå.

Fordi jeg fra barnsben af er blevet lært at klare mig selv mest muligt,
Hvilke er en gave jeg ville ønske alle var blevet udstyret med.

[TopClocks]

- I would put money on the bet, that all of those who have argued against Lange, love or have bought a Patek. This is quite normal, you see it on every watch site in the world. There are more people who own Pateks compaired to Lange. So i am in the minority, with my views.

Jeg synes godt om både Lange og Patek - dog springer jeg ikke på alt, de har lavet af ure i tidens løb. Jeg fører en kritisk fremgangsmåde, hvilket udgør et væsentligt skel mellem ''fans'' og ''groupies''. Jeg fascineres af ref. 5970 eller ref. 404.032 af andre grunde end navnene på deres tavle, mens mit mundvand ikke begynder at løbe, hvis Calatrava eller 1815 uden kronograf-funktion indtager podiet.

-It reminds me a bit of Lemmings running off the edge of a cliff. The world is full of followers, without any real opinions of their own.

Hvis du havde læst mit indlæg grundigt, vil du have opdaget et udfordrende statement. Jeg er kritisk anlagt ift. Dufour's ''kåring'' af Datograph som værende den absolut bedste inden for sin kategori, idet Dufour endnu har til gode at fremstille et ur med kronograf-funktion, jf. http://www.ablogtowatch.com/philippe-duf...hmakers/2/. Voutilainen har derimod skabt flere ure med kronograf-funktion, hvorfor jeg havde tillagt hans udsagn mere værdi i den sammenhæng, jf. http://www.voutilainen.ch/site/the-watch...-/details/.

Jeg er derfor i stand til at give udtryk for min holdning, som jeg gerne understøtter gennem en eller flere kildehenvisninger. Det kan du lære noget af, Willy.

-But i do question their motives. You have really no right what so ever to question the conduct of people who are just giving their opinions. Usually it is people who are basicly cowards, who hide behind anonmity. We do not know if you are working for Patek or own a big collection of them. It would give us all a better insight if we knew your motives.

Jeg har som tidligere nævnt ikke noget imod at udveksle holdninger, om end det klart skal fremgå at der er tale om holdninger i den type af debat. Det formår du ikke altid at gøre, idet du ofte fremstiller kritiske røster som værende fakta - uden en enkelt kildehenvisning. Du lader til at være oprevet, især efter at være blevet stillet til regnskab for dine udsagn, hvorfor jeg vælger at ignorere dit brug af ukvemsord. Dog vil jeg gerne fremhæve følgende ordsprog; tyv tror hvermand stjæler, Rodney. Inden du forsøger at fremstille det som en injurie, vil jeg venligt henvise til udtrykkets betydning, jf. http://ordnet.dk/ddo/ordbog?query=stj%C3%A6le.

Mit motiv er at hæve kvaliteten herinde eller i det mindste nuancerer billedet, således at det ikke fremstår ensidigt - i modsætning til dine indlæg i nogle tilfælde. Nej, jeg arbejder (stadigvæk) ikke for Patek. Mit motiv er derfor sagligt begrundet, idet jeg ret beset er en nørd som synes godt om ure generelt - uanset om der står Schweiz, Japan eller Tyskland på tavlen.

-You also mention the type of people you like to see on a watch site. This statement is quite unbelievable, and i hope you are not serious. What you like or do not like to see is of absolutly no interest to anyone else. All are welcome here. And people do not need others who think they can set the standards for them.

Jeg har intet sagt om etablering af en over- og underklasse eller noget lignende, Willy.

Jeg foretrækker en bred sammensætning af brugere, da det er med til at give et bredt perspektiv. Jeg er eksempelvis ikke fan af bestemte kategorier inden for ure, men jeg synes godt om at møde personen bag en given samling eller et ur og fornemme vedkommendes passion! Det kan nogle gange være mere interessant end at se med fingrene på et eksotisk ur.

Hvordan adskiller din sidste bemærkning sig fra den adfærd, du i gennem tidens løb har udvist herinde?

-I honestly think your motives for writing here are personall. And you are not keeping to the subject this thread started with. I have promised the moderators on this site, not to be drawn into personal arguments that throw us all off course. It was a good thread were we all just exchanged our opinions. But as usual someone gets personal.I think this is very sad. In the future when someone mentions my name in a thread, it had better be to disagree with my opinions, but not my person.

Jeg var nødt til at nuancere billedet, idet du hovedsageligt talte til Lange's fordel, hvilket mit første indlæg herinde bekræfter. Tråden var god efter din opfattelse, så længe du ikke fik et sagligt modspil. Mit indlæg dannede måske (bemærk ''måske'') grundlag for at andre brugere blev fristet til også at deltage eller i det mindste give deres opfattelse til kende, heriblandt Baun og Cfnissen. Jeg synes godt om at udveksle viden og holdninger med andre, hvorfor jeg har læst deres indlæg med interesse.

-This thread is closed for me now.

Det samme er tilfældet for mit vedkommende, medmindre du giver svar på tiltale.

[Stensbjerg]

Nej nu skriger det satme til himlen,
Sidste pip herfra det lover jeg.  

Det med modsigelser går jo begge veje her,
Topclocks beder om links for udsagn fra særligt Willy.

Mens man på samme tid er anonym med en profil mere herinde (gæt har intet vandtæt bevis)
Uden egentlig at være det.

Hvis du forlanger Willy skal stå op for sine udtalelser,
Så gavner det ikke din sag at dine udfald På samme tid kommer i anonymitets ulidelige skygge.

Det siger mere om dig end du nogensinde kan skrive dig ud af,
Slut herfra.

PN: 

[TopClocks]

(02-01-2016, 02:00 PM)Stensbjerg Skrev: Nej nu skriger det satme til himlen,
Sidste pip herfra det lover jeg.  

Det med modsigelser går jo begge veje her,
Topclocks beder om links for udsagn fra særligt Willy.

Mens man på samme tid er anonym med en profil mere herinde (gæt har intet vandtæt bevis)
Uden egentlig at være det.

Hvis du forlanger Willy skal stå op for sine udtalelser,
Så gavner det ikke din sag at dine udfald På samme tid kommer i anonymitets ulidelige skygge.

Det siger mere om dig end du nogensinde kan skrive dig ud af,
Slut herfra.

PN: 

Et medlemskab af dette forum forudsætter ikke angivelse af de oplysninger, som står anført på ens sygesikringsbevis, Stensbjerg. Hertil kommer, at anonymitet accepteres af flere brugere herinde. Det skal i øvrigt tilføjes, at flere aktive brugere ikke gør brug af deres formelle navn, hvorfor et særskilt krav herom i mit tilfælde vil udgøre usaglig forskelsbehandling. Dog er det helt i orden, at du forsøger at træde i karakter for din kammerat, hvilket nok står de fleste aktive brugere herinde klart.  

Hvorvidt jeg er en midaldrende mand eller en ungdommelig kvinde med interesse for ure bør ikke tillægges betydning, så længe indholdet af mine udsagn holder sig inden for reglerne på dette forum og i øvrigt er sagligt begrundet.

Du og Willy mangler tilsyneladende også at angive oplysninger om jer selv, medmindre dette forum udelukkende er forbeholdt brugere med anciennitet? Det skal i øvrigt tilføjes, at der er forskel på at foretage kildehenvisninger og angive personoplysninger. Førstnævnte angår indholdet af debatterne, mens sidstnævnte ikke har nogen betydning ift. indholdet af debatterne herinde.

Dit argument holder derfor ikke vand.