to people that say "people who like Rolex are actually financially frustrated, noveau rich wannabes who want Patek? In time, you'd want to have a Patek/Lamge/Dufour instead the extra ten thousand in your pocket."
The funny thing is that when I worked on Wall Street or been in places where people have old money and lots of it (or just good taste) I've never found that people have much need to show off their "wealth." Never saw people with diamond-studded gold Rolexes there. Yup, the watch of choice for pimps, salesman, and middle managers everywhere.
Also love the argument that Rolexs have better resale - it they're such great watches, then why think about selling before you've even bought it?
And this fallacy about watches being
"investments" is just pathetic - if you need to worry about "investing" a couple of thousand in a watch, spend time trying to acquire some skills so you can make more money instead of playing with watches.
I also enjoy reading about Rolex owners who like to boast about how accurate or tough their watches are based on personal experience (usually with one or two watches) or ancedotal evidence from the Internet. The usual argument is: "I read about a Patek that stopped yesterday. I've owned my Rolex for five years, and it's never stopped. Therefore, none of the Rolex 800,000 watches Rolex makes every year ever have problems." Amazing how otherwise intelligent people reason like complete morons when it comes to a stupid little watch. In my brief time as a watch guy, I've come across dozens of stories of problems with every watch (yes, and Rolexes from personal experience), yet have not seen fit to make broad generalizations.
As for Omega - I like them, they're good value for money and make nice everyday watches. But if I wanted a real work of horological art, I certainly wouldn't turn to the average Omega, and most certainly not to Rolex either.
