![]() ![]() I work in the City (financial heart of London, although I myself am a consultant not a banker), and here if you see a Rolex, it's most likely because that person is making a point of fitting in with their wealthy co-workers, and 'climbing the luxury watch hierarchy'. Beautiful watch, great, classy, understated choice.īut on the other hand, just Google "Goldman Sachs Elevator explains the hierarchy of watches on Wall Street". Once he left office, the first expensive watch he was seen with was a Rolex Cellini. But in London they're gauche by association with the main demographic you see using them.Īn example: Obama always wore cheap watches while in office, because whatever you think of his politics, he's quite a classy guy. Yes a Leica is stealthy, but they also market them as luxury goods to people who want the fanciest camera possible to go with their LV travel accessories.Īgain, I like Leicas, I like Rolex's, I like Lambos. These brands target people who want to make a show of having money, and that puts me off. But in London, 95% of the time you see one, it's being driven by an absolute a$$. Lambos are wonderful, when they're out driving, rather than revving up and down Knightsbridge. That doesn't change the fact that most of the time when you see a Rolex, it's because the wearer wants to make a point of displaying wealth. I'm not sure how many times I need to repeat that I respect many of these things on their merits.Ī quick look at watch forums reveals a huge community of nerdy Rolex fans who geek out over the huge technical accomplishments of the brand. ![]() This conversation has become very about absolutes. Some people are always going to call them a pauper version, but frankly I'm far more interested in their huge technical accomplishments. I'd take a Sinn or a Grand Seiko over a Rolex or a Tudor, and I'd take a Fuji over a Leica. But in London their stores are next to investment bank offices, besides the luxury Swiss watch dealers, and that tells you everything about who they think their market is. Honestly I'd feel a bit embarrassed walking around with one, because in this world of huge financial divides I'd find it awkward holding a third of a shop assistant's annual wage in a luxury throwback toy (the luxury aspect is important, in case you point out how much a D5 costs.) Yes I do know they're great tools to some, well-built by people who care about quality. Sure some people own a Leica or a Rolex for their functional qualities, but most people wear them to show off. Leica's are great, but also often a symbol of gauche wealth. I would own an X-Pro 3 and I don't want a Leica. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |