WatchProSite|Market|Digest

Patek Philippe

I don't agree that one must be debt-free in order to consider luxuries

 

While I agree that one should be financially prudent when it comes to luxuries, I do not believe in the one dimensional view that all debts are bad and therefor must be satisfied before indulging in extraneous expenses.

Even in the case that I were not considering a fancy watch, there are much more lucrative investments to be made that yield more than the 4.5% interest I pay on my mortgage. So while you could make a perfectly legitimate argument that I should invest the money in some other assets rather than a watch, I do think that having some debt can be quite financially smart and allow for use of capital in better assets. This is especially true in the current macroeconomic environment where money can be borrowed almost for free on a short term basis.

I would question how many owners of 5970 and other six figure watches here are completely debt free when it comes to their real estate positions, but that will be the topic for another poll!

  login to reply

Available on the marketplace