Aquatimer

i don´t know how many of you are agree with me, but i prefer the previous aquatimer with internal bezel, than the new one . Let me know your opinions, thanks.

I Like the Older & Newer Styles.........

...Pick whichever you like best!

• Joe

The Old ATimers are my favorites

1 I plan to have both. nt.

The Old ATimers are my favorites

The new ones look bad.

It seems that the newer it gets, the uglier it looks.

Again, just my opinion.

Best,
Leon.

Joseph, that second lume photo is great!

sure, vintage is great, but with a HUGE caveat...

As you know, I've been a strong advocate of vintage IWCs. But now I must reject them --because I think the current market prices are ridiculous and will not last. Buying them is a good way to overpay or lose a lot of money, in my opinion,

The 812AD/1812 you showed here cost me, first time around about 10 years ago, about 1000 USD, I bought my second one for 4000 USD about 6 years ago. I absolutely won't pay 8000 USD or whatever the current market is for one now. The watch "intrinsically" isn't worth it --it's only by supply and demand that these stratospheric prices are being paid, especially in this still-somewhat-weak economy. But much of this "demand" has been created by IWC and its recent success.. I believe that at best this pricing has reached a plateau (in today's dollars) or will decline. As much as a I like these watches, I still consider them economic commodities.

Please note the watch shown here. It is a very rare Baume & Mercier diving watch from the 1960s. It is 20 ATM water resistant, antimagetic and a chronograph (using a Landeron base). On specifications it meets or exceed anything by IWC, although its movement finishing isn't as nice. On style I submit it's everything the 812 from IWC is. But with a good purchase it's under 1000 USD --and it's worth far more than 1/8 or 1/10 of the IWC..

Regards,
Michael

Love the VC Aquatimer - love the new ones >>

The new ones, with the sapphire bezel and that bright, neon-like Luminous glow is amazing!!!

Exactly my words!

What a great light and the reflection on the dial is stunning!

Kind regards,

Clemens

I could not agree more...

the current prices for Ref 812s are ridiculouly high and may very well come down. or not. It does not really matter. I am not collecting selected vintage IWCs as an investment, but for the thrill of the hunt and the pleasure of owning a beautiful and timeless piece. I guess I am a romantic after all.
In any event, which will be the depreciation of a new IWC bought at the AD?
BTW, I actually like the new AT Ref 3568 in all its variations and plan on buying one 25 years from now, or today if it is offered as the CFA (Collector's Forum Aquatimer). I do not know about the AT Chonograph. I just can't anticipate when the need will arise to chronograph and event underwater. I guess one should always be prepared. :))

Well said Michael! nt

I really like the new one...

... even so much that I ordered one. It has a more modern contemporary look in combination with some nice technological innovations. I must admit it took some time and my first impression wasn't that positive, but after seeing it a few times in real life I think it is a great looking watch and a prefect size for me at 44mm.

Regards
Norbert

a further comment about "investments"...

I concur --no one should buy a watch as an investment. But also they are economic goods and one has to chose between them and others, I know of no one with unlimited resources for everything. Even "romanticism" has its price, or at least limits.

On every watch I've bought, I don't think I was ever motivated by a good deal in itself. But knowing that something might hold its value, or was "worth it" relative to any alternatives, has some merit --even if the watch is bought for other reasons.

Let me give you another example, beyond the Baume divers chronograph vs. the IWC 812. Consider the Jaeger LeCoultre Geophysic vs. a Cal. 853/8531 Ingenieur. Both are antimagnetic watches of the same era. The JLC is rarer, a chronometre, and even arguably at least as equally important watch in the history of horology. I also would claim that its movement finishing might be a shade higher.

But the IWC is more expensive, usually than the JLC --probably because IWC has promoted its history more, by Vintage Collection models, this forum, and indeed a whole historical-based marketing approach over the past 15 years. If both watches look equally nice to a buyer (and they are similar) , and work the same --which is the "better buy"?

And shouldn't that also be considered? After all, these physical objects aren't free.

Regards,
Michael

To be honest I think ..

that these watches have their price. Like a good Mondrian is more expensive that a painting made by most artsist these days.

Life is a lot about emotions and I must say that I really like these vintage watches. This doesn't mean I dont like the new ones... but I tend to pay more for the vintage pieces. They are more unique and came from a time marketing was not so big like nowedays and these watches were build just to do the job.

To me these watches represent the history of company the most.

So a vintage portugieser at 30.000 usd maybe a lot I consider to be a great watch.... and can't be compared to another watch or company.

I agree that buying watches for investment isn't a good thing but so are stocks.... at least the watches make a lot of fun!

I also remember that K. Klaus once said to me he don't understand the Jones. A wristwatch with only 3 hands at that price.... he's more interested in the technical part of a watch like perpetual calander and deep one. Someone else might love the Jones for it's aesthetics.

Everybody might have another reference.

So vintage Aqua's 812 at 8000 usd.... in my opinion is worth the money..... but maybe I'm too romantic?

Greetings, Martijn

Martjin. Your taste in watches ia unassailable...

but your taste in art is :)). Why choose Mondrian as an example? IMHO Mondrian is a fraud. Had you chosen Kandinsky we would be 100% in agreement.
Best regards,
Tony in Cascais, Portugal, wearing a vintage Portugieser with cal 98 from 1951 just to answer your posting.

Well I chose that because I like ' De Stijl' a lot

and thanks for your reply.

But maybe Van Gogh would also apply?

Greetings, Martijn

wearing vintage Jumbo Ingenieur

Who can argue with Vincent? :-) nt

Michael - if you know where to find.....

a good clean 812 for $8000 you should share that information - that sounds like a bargain in the UK.

The debate about the value of watches (new as well as vintage) generally ends with the conclusion that they are worth whatever someone is prepared to pay - arguably, the intrinsic value of most watches is only a few dollars (a few more if made from a precious metal).