..at least for me, i go by, if you know a Brand really puts in the effort and technological know-how, finishing, new materials, creativity, originality, an idea or emotional appeal of what their watches stand for, whether they have stood the time or has heritage, history, proven track record, they modify but with subtle changes, not too complicated, simplicity but with appropriate functions, then i may fork out some money to acquire them.
If its all about jumping on the bandwagon because the other brands are doing it, or reviving history but with little efforts to really create intrinsic value, or making really complicated functions that one never uses but just to look at and admire for aesthetic reasons, or some materials which you have never heard of, i mean does a watch really need to be encased in a material where the Brand claims to be excellent and after spending millions into research and they tell you, believe us, this is better than stainless steel... c'mon.. not sensible. I can live with stainless steel, or maybe ceramic. This two materials are good enough for me.
When it comes to pricing, we have to relate them to something else such as other avenues to create more wealth, or other investment products for your life and retirement, unless you have loads of spare cash, imo but then again, a watch should not be acquired as an investment, as this is wrong, unless there are only 10 available units coming from established big brands which have successfully brainwashed the world's watch collectors. we all should know our own limits to afford a watch. Happy watch collecting guys