northcentralsouth
43
Romans
I just realized that the dial has two different interpretations of the roman numeral 4. On the outer dial is "IIII" and the leap year indication it is "IV". I've seen "IIII" on clock faces, but I was taught that "IV" is more correct. Is there a rule in which cases these would be used?
Why is there a sudden lack of interest in PP5050?
Is this watch going out of fashion? The selling price and auction price have been going crazy low lately. This was a very sought after timepiece in the past and now gong into unpopular category. I wonder why is that? Anyone care to comment?...
I don't have the slightest idea.
Show me a great example with box & papers and I'll run after it. This reference is as great as always. Best, Kari
Most of them come complete..
Price have gone down to almost 40% in some cases. Auction has been terrible too and usually unsold. This watch in my eye is simply gorgeous and truly a good representative of what Patek is. A Quintessential Patek.
I agree...
I like this in platinum as I'm not too crazy about WG being rhodium plated for patek watches.
It is just my personal thing but if the watch is made both in WG and platinum,
I always go for the heavier. If it is made only in WG, I think very carefully and normally wait in case I really love the watch. Best, Kari
Not considered "vintage"
The demand is for vintage watches. This one is sort of in between but most do not consider this a vintage Patek perpetual --- the 3450 was the last such one to many. So this gets bunched up with the 5059, 5158, 3940, etc, and ALL of those references have ...
You are probably correct.
These watches are caught in between...probably a great time to relook at them. Disclosure: I no longer own the 5050J and now i'm looking to get a 5050G or P. I sold the 5050J to get the journe tourbillon and I still miss it.
I think because......
I think because no one talks about it anymore and therefore interest and demand waned. Plus there are just so many watches out there now to fight for collectors' attention. That puts downward pressure on the price as owners seek to unload. It's still a ve...
A very charming watch...
You are the second person I know who say this is a handsome watch . I think charming is what I would use to describe this piece. It feel like vintage Patek and yet had the modern accuracy and condition. I have never thought such desirable piece would be i...
Size may be an issue here...the piece is small by today's standards.
That is important for many buyers.
Well...partly correct.
The size in dimension maybe small but in reality, this watch wears bigger than the number.
Small is relative
The 5050 is a perfect fit to the wrist in the photo, as contrasted with the many happy and well-received postings from people wearing watches that are obviously too big for their wrists. Park
My comment wasn't judgmental.
It was just an observation of the market's apparent preferences.
I've always liked this one.
It\'s sadly out of my price range (even with low auction results) but one day I will get one. Very unique displays for calendar indicators
Romans
I just realized that the dial has two different interpretations of the roman numeral 4. On the outer dial is "IIII" and the leap year indication it is "IV". I've seen "IIII" on clock faces, but I was taught that "IV" is more correct. Is there a rule in wh...
Watch is small
as stated and this 315 SC based movement had a lot of problems with the retrograde hand sticking. They corrected that on the newer 323 based models which are very soft also sale wise. My take on it is folks do not like the retrograde calendar and the clut...
This looks like 5016 ..
san minute repeater . The hand sticking problem is the first batch. After that it never has any issue. I had two of this watch before and never have such problem.
I think it's a wonderful watch.
Yes, 35mm maybe too small for some, but I think the size couples well with the complication. It\'s what I like about PP. Small but powerfully formed. Just take the 5004 as an example.