Horological Meandering

Anonymous Postumous
1

• Show profile
• Show other posts

But that's precisely the problem of pricing . . .

Placing an emphasis on the price of how much a watch sells for at an auction or on the secondary market cheapens the watch. That was the very original intent behind not discussing the prices, but rather the watches themselves, what they have to offer, not what the fleeting market makes of them. Clearly there is an increasing trend in limited editions (read: Royal Oaks) selling for huge premiums just because the market will tolerate it. And! there is money to be made in flipping the watches. There is a real frenzy out there now which undermines the integrity of the watches themselves and horology in its purist sense.
Regarding the guidelines, I repeat, I have seen posts by moderators discouraging these kinds of discussion for the same reasons I mentioned above: they undermine the watches themselves and the horology in them. The watches are reduced to mere commodities to be traded or sold off. I hope the moderators are not becoming  influenced by the frenzy of huge price premiums.
I think that whatever the community wants to discuss is up to them, but if a topic is emphatically discouraged for whatever reason in the past, as a general site guideline, then it should be made known if the site policy is changing or that the guideline no longer applies and all the participants should be able to talk about that particular subject, for example pricing and auction results. I am worried, however, if certain taboo topics can just become appropriate matters of discussion on the whim of the moderator only.

Trying to keep it civil,
ANM