Tony C.
1239
There are many different angles...
from which to approach the question you raise. The simple answer is, of course, that the correlation between price and quality is not taut. Watches which cost twice as much as others are not going to be identifiable as "twice as good".
I would use the analogy of audio equipment: there is a tremendous step up in quality from a $1,000 system to a $5,000 system; the two will not be comparable to anyone's ears – even unsophisticated listeners. There will be a noticeable, but smaller step up in quality from $5,000 to $10,000, and smaller yet from $10,000 to $20,000, etc. So, in effect, there is a curve which begins quite sharply, then tapers as the prices escalate.
I'd argue that the same is basically true of watches, though, to get to the heart of your question, at any point along that curve it may be possible to identify watches (or amplifiers, speakers, etc.) which represent good value.
To complicate matters, "value" has different meanings to different people. It could very reasonably be argued that a $300 mechanical watch which keeps very good time represents stupendous value relative to all of the watches which cost far more. Others might argue – as I would – that the best pure value available is found in the vintage market. Many of the best vintage watches are exceptionally well designed and built, and, in stark contrast to the vast majority of contemporary watches, they are also very like to appreciate in value.
Regards,
Tony C.
Value for money relation in top brands?
Value is subjective...
