[Rocket13]

   

What do you guys think about this, for some reason the blue and brown really appeal to me but it's a bit more than I normally would spend on a watch, runs about $550.

Thoughts?

[WestIndianArchie]

The cute animal is a no go for me.

WIA

[Hotwheels]

Yep. The dog logo puts it in the mickey mouse category for me.

Saying that, buy what you like. You're the one that's going to wear it.

[_DC_]

This is much better. Gotta throw down another $5000 though.

[samsamsam]

Please don't blow 500 bucks on that.

Try these threads on this google search

https://www.google.com/search?q=good+500...2&ie=UTF-8

[Sp5]

Have not worn a watch for years. Phone keeps time.

[Flavius Aetius]

(12-28-2013 05:14 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

Have not worn a watch for years. Phone keeps time.

100% agree. Watches are obsolete with the invention of the phone. Why would anyone waste $500 let alone $5000 on a watch? I have a $35 phone which tells time perfectly. Invest the difference and watch the 8th wonder of the world in action--compound interest.

[RawGod]

For a budget of under $500, I suggest a simple Swiss sport watch.

[Windom Earle]

(12-28-2013 05:23 AM)Flavius Aetius Wrote:  

(12-28-2013 05:14 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

Have not worn a watch for years. Phone keeps time.

100% agree. Watches are obsolete with the invention of the phone. Why would anyone waste $500 let alone $5000 on a watch? I have a $35 phone which tells time perfectly. Invest the difference and watch the 8th wonder of the world in action--compound interest.

If watches were purely about keeping time, they would be obsolete.

[Hotwheels]

(12-28-2013 05:23 AM)Flavius Aetius Wrote:  

(12-28-2013 05:14 AM)Sp5 Wrote:  

Have not worn a watch for years. Phone keeps time.

100% agree. Watches are obsolete with the invention of the phone. Why would anyone waste $500 let alone $5000 on a watch? I have a $35 phone which tells time perfectly. Invest the difference and watch the 8th wonder of the world in action--compound interest.

Ever heard of jewelry and exuding class?

A broad doesn't see your compound interest when you hit her up in the hotel bar.

[MHaes]

"Why would I ever buy nice clothes? My sweatpants and hoodies clothe me perfectly."

[MHaes]

"Why buy a nice apartment or house? Section 8 housing shelters me perfectly."

[Flavius Aetius]

(12-28-2013 10:46 AM)MHaes Wrote:  

"Why buy a nice apartment or house? Section 8 housing shelters me perfectly."

Most people can't afford to buy a home if they waste their money on $5000 watches/stupid jewelry, thousand dollar outfits (excluding suits for work), and useless luxury items including cars--all to exude class. This is what advertisers tell "aspirational buyers" to con them into buying high priced stuff they can't afford.

I own my own home because I do the exact opposite of most people my age (26) with a good job, etc. They waste money/renting depreciating assets and I invest my money in appreciating assets (housing, stocks,etc).

When you tell a typical hamster you own your house while she is living at home with her parents or renting with roommates--you have more leverage than anyone in some overpriced "designer suit" with a rolex.

[Christian McQueen]

^The irony of people critiquing others for being 'flashy' by wearing a watch is that some cats can afford it all and it not dent their bank account.

1. House? Check

2. Watches? Check

3. Luxury cars? Check

4. Private jet? Check

If a guy can afford ALL of these, then how is he foolish?

He's not.

To answer the OP's Question:

The dog looks tacky and the leather band seems to be a cheaper type of leather.

You can get better watches for that price, however I agree that the blue face with the brown strap is eye catching.

[CaliforniaSupreme]

Nice colors, just don't like the watch.

[Enigma]

(12-28-2013 03:24 PM)Flavius Aetius Wrote:  

Most people can't afford to buy a home if they waste their money on $5000 watches/stupid jewelry, thousand dollar outfits (excluding suits for work), and useless luxury items including cars--all to exude class. This is what advertisers tell "aspirational buyers" to con them into buying high priced stuff they can't afford.

I own my own home because I do the exact opposite of most people my age (26) with a good job, etc. They waste money/renting depreciating assets and I invest my money in appreciating assets (housing, stocks,etc).

When you tell a typical hamster you own your house while she is living at home with her parents or renting with roommates--you have more leverage than anyone in some overpriced "designer suit" with a rolex.

Somehow I doubt telling a chick about your mortgage payments gets the pussy wetter than stories about your world travels.

This forum is about being an international playboy. Stylish, edgy, free to drop everything and fly to another country on a whim.

There is a place for being responsible with money/investing and there's nothing wrong with living your life in another way, but I think you're barking up the wrong tree with the home owner talk.

[Vaun]

not digging this one, but a few good brands in this price range are Tissot and Tourneau. You could save another $500-$1000 and buy a TAG. Stopped in a Tourneau today and they are having a really good sale, not sure if it applies to online;

http://www.tourneau.com/shop/price/1000-500

[Capitán Peligroso]

@Original poster: how many watches do you already own? In my opinion, this type of watch shouldn't be considered until you already own at least 2-3 others. You need to buy a watch that's more stylistically versatile, one that you can wear with almost anything ie: black/silver.

I personally own three watches that I wear with any regularity, and about half a dozen others that sit in a drawer most of the time. What do the three that I wear regularly have in common? They all have versatility.

I share the same criticisms about this particular watch that the other guys have expressed, and I also agree with Flavius that someone new to the game should be putting that $500 into paper assets before dropping it on a watch. Kenneth Cole has some sharp looking watches for around a C-note that can get you started.

[Tiguere]

What's the consensus on The Player Watch by Nixon these days? I know it has been discussed before. Just struggling to decided if I am still a fan or not...Any thoughts?

http://www.nixon.com/us/en/mens/watches/...-A140.html

[Capitán Peligroso]

^^^ Definitely not my style. When I consider buying a watch, the question is never whether I'm a fan or not, it's how much of one I am. Two of my main watches I bought on the spot, the other I thought about it for a week, went back and looked at it, and snagged it.

[SDGuerro]

The band looks too cheap, like pleather, for a $500 watch in my opinion.

[HonantheBarbarian]

(12-28-2013 08:42 PM)MasculineProfiles Wrote:  

What's the consensus on The Player Watch by Nixon these days? I know it has been discussed before. Just struggling to decided if I am still a fan or not...Any thoughts?

http://www.nixon.com/us/en/mens/watches/...-A140.html

Look man, without getting into too many details on here I fix watches for a living. Its my "day job". I work on and take apart watches every day.

DON'T buy any Nixon watch. They are fucking retarded, bulky, poorly constructed overpriced whiteboy watches that have zero substance to them. Some of their models go for several hundred and when I take them apart they have the innards of a $60-80 Fossil watch. They are for dumb bros and surfers who don't know what the fuck their buying. Their build quality and construction is laughable. I just really wish people would stop buying into this brand. You are better off with a Fossil or even a Timex.


To the OP, that watch is atrocious for $500 and I wouldn't be caught dead in it. The metal work around the dials, the band, that particular shade of blue. Everything exudes CHEAP about that watch. The price is a joke. That watch has an actual value of probably > $80.

If that's the style your set on, you should get a Seiko 5. For anyone that's just starting to get into watches and wants something of substance, that won't break the wallet, that's the first one I show them. You get a lot of watch for your money and they last forever, plus its cheaper than the poser one in the OP. I have one in my collection with a dark brown leather band and its pimp.

Maybe set it up like this guy has it:

[Edmund Dantes]

^That's a nice watch. I'm into simple ones. I'm gonna buy this one for everyday use.



Only $19.99 at Target.

http://www.target.com/p/merona-men-s-str...large_1_18

I'll keep Seiko in mind for a step up.

[RouteBackwards]

(12-27-2013 08:00 PM)Rocket13 Wrote:  

What do you guys think about this, for some reason the blue and brown really appeal to me but it's a bit more than I normally would spend on a watch, runs about $550.

Thoughts?

I disagree with the other gentlemen that the dog looks weird. I think this is a very nice watch, and It would look dope with a pair of shoes that have a similar tone to the leather, and a nice blue dress shirt to match the inside. That tone of brown is really nice.

I would wear this watch with confidence sir.

[Tex Pro]

Jeez, man...for $550 you can buy a Rolex counterfeit from Hong Kong so good that only an experienced watchsmith would be able to tell the difference between it and the real thing, and only after opening it up and inspecting the movement thoroughly.

I agree with others, get a decent starter watch (like a Seiko) before you plunk down some serious cash for a watch.