Why buying intelligently matters more than predicting appreciation.
I buy watches because I love watches. The design, the movement, the history, the way a particular piece feels on the wrist. But I also care what they are worth.
Those two things can comfortably coexist.
Somewhere along the way, the watch conversation became crowded with the language of finance: asset classes, returns, liquidity, investment potential. A purchase that once needed only enthusiasm suddenly seemed to require a prediction about its future price.
My view is straightforward: collectors should understand value. They should be much more cautious about expecting appreciation.
There is a meaningful difference between buying intelligently and buying as an investment.
An asset class, with qualifications
There is a reasonable case for viewing collectible watches as an alternative asset class. They are tangible possessions with secondary markets, and qualifying pieces can serve as collateral for loans.
Through specialist companies such as Borro and The Treasury, owners can explore borrowing against qualifying watches rather than selling them outright.
That matters. A watch can have financial value beyond the pleasure of owning it.
But a lender’s willingness to accept a watch as collateral reflects its value as security for a loan. It does not establish that its price will rise.
Collateral value and investment potential are two different things.
Calling watches an asset class does not make every watch a sound investment—or every price a sensible one.
A great watch can still be a poor purchase
A watch can be beautifully made, historically important, and highly desirable, yet be a poor financial purchase at the wrong price.
The quality of the watch and the wisdom of the transaction are separate judgments.
A watch generates no income simply by sitting in your collection. Any financial gain depends on what you eventually receive compared with what you spent. Tax, servicing, insurance, and selling costs all count. If you borrow against it, interest and fees count too.
The ability to access cash against a watch adds flexibility. It does not turn ownership into a profitable investment.
Buy with your eyes open
“Buy what you love” is good advice. It becomes incomplete advice when it is used to dismiss the price.
I want to know what comparable examples actually sell for. I want to understand condition, originality, and service history. And I want a realistic sense of what I could recover if my circumstances or tastes changed.
That is part of making a smart purchase.
Sometimes the sensible choice is buying pre-owned. Sometimes paying more for an exceptional example is justified. Sometimes a watch you love will lose value, and you decide the enjoyment is worth the cost.
None of those decisions requires a prediction that prices will rise.
The important thing is knowing what you are paying for—and being honest about why you are buying.
Before purchasing, I think every collector should ask:
If this watch were worth meaningfully less in five years, would I still be glad I owned it?
If the answer is yes, the potential loss can be understood as part of the cost of enjoyment.
If the answer is no, perhaps the expected profit is doing too much of the work.
There is nothing foolish about choosing a watch that may depreciate. The mistake is needing it to appreciate to justify buying it.
My judgment
Watches can be valuable assets. Some can serve as collateral. Some owners will make money.
I still think the healthiest approach to collecting begins with enjoyment, supported by an honest understanding of price and resale value.
Buy the watch you want to wear. Understand what you are paying. Be realistic about what you could recover.
And leave room for the possibility that its greatest return will be the pleasure of owning it.
