Watches! What do y'all have on your wrists?

[JeffS7444]

Apologies, my info was obsolete. As part of the July 2025 Big Beautiful Bill it is now...

".. As of late 2025, the federal tax reporting threshold for online marketplaces like eBay is set to revert to its previous level for 2026: $20,000 and more than 200 transactions. This was confirmed by the IRS in October 2025, overturning a lower, phased-in threshold that was previously announced.
What this means for sellers

• Form 1099-K: An online marketplace is legally required to issue a Form 1099-K to sellers who meet both conditions of the $20,000/200 transaction threshold.
• This does not change your tax obligation: All business income is taxable, regardless of whether you receive a 1099-K. The form is only an informational document sent to both you and the IRS.
• Gross vs. net income: The 1099-K reports gross payments, which is the total amount received before deducting fees, refunds, shipping costs, or your original cost for the item. You are only taxed on your net profit. .."

Good for USA sellers like me who are operating glorified garage sales, though I cleared out the juiciest of the low-hanging fruit during the pandemic, when the world was stuck and home and desperate for diversions. Following a guide that I found online, I reported "misc" for both purchase date and price on my taxes, and didn't itemize, because the eBay 1099-K didn't, and because I honestly didn't know.

 

[pablolie]

Depends on size and condition. 36mm watches are not that popular even now, and even Rolex, and watches that are looking the worse for wear are also not going to attract the highest price. But you may still be surprised if you offer it up.

Surges and collapses notwithstanding, my observation of Rolex collectors is that they have lost their minds.

Rick "doesn't own a Rolex partly because of that" Denney

I have never seen a Rolex that costs less that $4.5 these days. My GF has 3 of them (NONE of which she'll ever sell, ever :-D). I have to give it to Rolex, their luxury marketing approach is never in your face, and yet they are a brand that *everybody* knows even when they know absolutely nothing about mechanical watches... and that serves their customer base very well. Not so much new buyers.

But I also have to admit the Universal Rolex Look design language is not my personal preference (plus the watches are too small for me, only the 44mm Yachtmasters (discontinued) made me lust some). But again - zero disrespect mixed with a touch of envy... Rolex most certainly know what they are doing at many levels.

 

[pablolie]

Good for USA sellers like me who are operating glorified garage sales, though I cleared out the juiciest of the low-hanging fruit during the pandemic, when the world was stuck and home and desperate for diversions. Following a guide that I found online, I reported "misc" for both purchase date and price on my taxes, and didn't itemize, because the eBay 1099-K didn't, and because I honestly didn't know.

Indeed. My issue is that I honestly barely recall how much I paid for my watches, I have always been utterly incompetent when it keeps to keeping records [1], so what if the IRS audits me and I can't convince them (which is hard to begin with) that I paid $5k for a watch I sold at $4.9k? I'd end up *losing* a lot of money, which certainly is not the purpose of selling some stuff.

[1] GF always scolds me about it but now all my important documents are with her, neatly organized.

 

[JiiPee]

A classic case of Royal Oak envy, but quite nearly contemporary with it in its original version. The panda dial is a worthy addition to the design concept.
...
Rick "considering the camera on the computer to be a failed experiment, but you get the idea" Denney

Sorry, but I did not get the meaning of "Royal Oak envy". Could You enlighten me about it. The A384 panda dial was one of the original three versions introduced in 1969 together with similarly cased A 385 (khaki dial with silver sub dials) and A386 with round case and silver dial with blue/anthracite/silver sub dials.

 

[pablolie]

Sorry, but I did not get the meaning of "Royal Oak envy". Could You enlighten me about it. The A384 panda dial was one of the original three versions introduced in 1969 together with similarly cased A 385 (khaki dial with silver sub dials) and A386 with round case and silver dial with blue/anthracite/silver sub dials.

The Audemars Piguet Royal Oak... very iconic watch. Thank Stallone and Schwarzenegger... Panerai owes them too.

 

[JiiPee]

The Audemars Piguet Royal Oak... very iconic watch. Thank Stallone and Schwarzenegger... Panerai owes them too.

I know, but these Zenith El Primeros predate all AP Royal Oaks, not to mention the Royal Oak chronographs that were introduced over two decades later...

 

[rdenney]

Sorry, but I did not get the meaning of "Royal Oak envy". Could You enlighten me about it. The A384 panda dial was one of the original three versions introduced in 1969 together with similarly cased A 385 (khaki dial with silver sub dials) and A386 with round case and silver dial with blue/anthracite/silver sub dials.

Back in 1970, Gerald Genta was hired by Audemars Piguet to design this:

Here's his sketch:

(Both images from AP's website)

AP called it the Royal Oak. The shape of the case is a slab with slanted surfaces providing attachments for an integral bracelet. It's become known as a slab design. It was the first high-end steel sport watch that retailed for over a thousand dollars, when the first ones were introduced to the public at the '72 Basel Fair, but the case design concept had already taken the industry by storm. AP is still making them, and have made a number of different versions all with the same basic case shape. (If you want one, bring your checkbook. Rolex dreams of getting the money that AP gets for a simple three-hand steel watch, at least at first sale.)

The octagonal bezel with the exposed screws was also part of the look, and that was the part of the look for which Genta and AP were able procure a design patent. But the basic slab shape popped up everywhere. The Vacheron Constantin Overseas, the IWC Ingenieur--even inexpensive watches from Seiko. The original A384 actually made it to market before the Royal Oak did, though with a plain acrylic crystal and without the characteristic bezel treatment.

(from a Chrono24 sale)

The case shape has become a classic. I have a Concord from 2018 that uses the same shape.

(sheesh! excuse the dust)

Rick "a classic sport-watch design" Denney

 

[JiiPee]

Back in 1970, Gerald Genta was hired by Audemars Piguet to design this:

.....

Rick "a classic sport-watch design" Denney

AP's big idea was really to set a ridiculously high price for a time-only stainless steel watch. I don't think the A384/385 El Primeros were inspired by the Genta design. While Genta introduced the concept of extra-thick bezel with visible screws, the "slab-case" design had already been used before the Royal Oak. Not only by Zenith, but also by several other brands. For example, the Fliegeruhr design from 1930s used by brands like Longines, Eterna, and Lemania had that type of case.

Btw, here's my 1:st generation vintage Zenith Defy, which was also introduced before Royal Oak:

 

[rdenney]

That Defy is cool, except for the ladder bracelet, but it is, of course, a whole different look. I'm envious

I've seen cushion cases and C cases from the 30's, but I'm not sure I've ever seen a slab case with integral lugs for an integral bracelet before the 70's, though I would love to be wrong and see some examples.

But, please believe me, every watch company in the business wanted AP's markup. Not even Zenith, though, was able to deliver AP's level of finish. There is nothing easy to manufacture about that original Royal Oak, using the tooling available in the day. I'd bet those hexagonal holes in the bezel, for example, had to be hand-broached in the quantities they were making them. Even today, the brushing of the steel bracelet is done by hand in a special jig, one bracelet at a time, after assembly. And then it is disassembled and cleaned. They do that so that the brush marks are absolutely consistent from link to link.

And AP extensively redecorated the LeCoultre 920 that became the AP2120 used in the original Royal Oak (and it may still be used for all I know). The anglage and decouverture would have been hand-beveled, and the côtes de Genève would have been applied one part at a time by hand. The balance is hand-poised Glucydur and the watch is adjusted to chronometer standards back when that was done by hand, including adjusting the hairspring and drilling tiny dimples in the balance as needed. And then there was the hand-cut dial. Yes, it was expensive and some would say overpriced, but at least they established a quality standard consistent with the price. (That movement was used by Patek Philippe and Vacheron + Constantin, too.)

As good as Zenith was and is--and I deeply respect the company and its history--it has never had the finish standard used by AP then or now.

Rick "might prefer a Vacheron Overseas, though, except for what they cost" Denney

 

[JeffS7444]

Indeed. My issue is that I honestly barely recall how much I paid for my watches, I have always been utterly incompetent when it keeps to keeping records [1], so what if the IRS audits me and I can't convince them (which is hard to begin with) that I paid $5k for a watch I sold at $4.9k? I'd end up *losing* a lot of money, which certainly is not the purpose of selling some stuff.

[1] GF always scolds me about it but now all my important documents are with her, neatly organized.

From my perspective, you seldom lose in resale, because you had exclusive access to the thing, and often it winds up being a fairly cheap "rental". And once in awhile, if you are very lucky, you effectively get paid for your time with it.

As a private individual who occasionally sells excess bric a brac, I keep the bare minimum of tax records suggested by the IRS, and the only reason I might keep sales receipts is as proof of authenticity (very useful for works of art) or for warranty purposes.

 

[xanalog]

@rdenney,

So, what happens to these exquisite timepieces when they only tell the time correctly twice a day?

I've had a few 'robust' automatic watches that did not last much longer than 4 years.
I must be tough on my watches, as once they get to this stage -where they require 'expert repairs'- I don't want to have anything to do with them anymore.
My last Bell&Ross BR03 required three separate visits to the B&R authorized repair shop (FL) in the last 4 years.

I had requested a movement [ETA 2892-2] replacement but it was nixed.
Upon return, it stopped working after a few months and I had put it away, while cussing 'em out.

It turned out that B&R warranty workmanship is for a full year.
I contacted them yesterday, after finding this receipt, but was notified that the warranty period expired.
Even if they had allowed repairs under warranty, I would have never worn that BR03-92 EVER again...
So, I just hung up the phone w/o argument and cut my losses.

 

[pablolie]

... original Royal Oak, using the tooling available in the day. I'd bet those hexagonal holes in the bezel, for example, had to be hand-broached in the quantities they were making them. Even today, the brushing of the steel bracelet is done by hand in a special jig, one bracelet at a time, after assembly. And then it is disassembled and cleaned. They do that so that the brush marks are absolutely consistent from link to link.

Unless it is one of their "forged carbon fiber" models...

As good as Zenith was and is--and I deeply respect the company and its history--it has never had the finish standard used by AP then or now.

My precious (Titanium Royal Oak Offshore chrono) lives in the safe. This is one I have learned to baby. No way I can polish it at home (I am pretty handy these days with most watches... but this one is impossible unless you are very trained), and it shows every scratch... and when you send it in for re-finish and service it'll set you back 2k+, easy... just comes out for extremely special events. And these days I am not a fan of watches I need to baby, so it's one I sometimes consider to sell... but not yet. Oh I also had one of the hands in one of the sub dials fall off - that they fixed on warranty, but of course they did the polishing/refinishing while it was there, assuming I wanted to do it for over 1k... :-D

 

[JiiPee]

That Defy is cool, except for the ladder bracelet, but it is, of course, a whole different look. I'm envious

I've seen cushion cases and C cases from the 30's, but I'm not sure I've ever seen a slab case with integral lugs for an integral bracelet before the 70's, though I would love to be wrong and see some examples.

But, please believe me, every watch company in the business wanted AP's markup. Not even Zenith, though, was able to deliver AP's level of finish. There is nothing easy to manufacture about that original Royal Oak, using the tooling available in the day. I'd bet those hexagonal holes in the bezel, for example, had to be hand-broached in the quantities they were making them. Even today, the brushing of the steel bracelet is done by hand in a special jig, one bracelet at a time, after assembly. And then it is disassembled and cleaned. They do that so that the brush marks are absolutely consistent from link to link.

And AP extensively redecorated the LeCoultre 920 that became the AP2120 used in the original Royal Oak (and it may still be used for all I know). The anglage and decouverture would have been hand-beveled, and the côtes de Genève would have been applied one part at a time by hand. The balance is hand-poised Glucydur and the watch is adjusted to chronometer standards back when that was done by hand, including adjusting the hairspring and drilling tiny dimples in the balance as needed. And then there was the hand-cut dial. Yes, it was expensive and some would say overpriced, but at least they established a quality standard consistent with the price. (That movement was used by Patek Philippe and Vacheron + Constantin, too.)

As good as Zenith was and is--and I deeply respect the company and its history--it has never had the finish standard used by AP then or now.

Rick "might prefer a Vacheron Overseas, though, except for what they cost" Denney

Obviously Zenith and AP represent different price categories. Traditionally Zenith's approach has been to create technically very good movements with the finish that ensures precise and reliable operation and keeping decorative stuff at the level that enables reasonable pricing. As a long-time watch collector, I'm well aware of the merits of AP, and I have nothing against them, but imho, even taking into account the level of construction and finish, they are too expensive. Of course, when there are enough clients willing to pay those prices, I don't blame them. (and I don't think they are worse than Patek, Vacheron and some others in this respect)

I simply love the ladder bracelet. While the old fashioned clasp may feel a bit cheap compared to the newer models, it works ok, and the open construction is great especially in hot summer days. It competes with IWC Pilot watches beds of rice bracelets for the title of the most comfortable bracelet that I have ever had.

 

[rdenney]

Service in the industry is a big problem, in my view. Factory service centers are understaffed, overworked, and overwhelmed with backlog. They control that by 1.) making it impossible in many cases for independent watchmakers to obtain parts (yes, that is the opposite of controlling the problem), and 2.) increasing service prices to control demand.

The industry's unwillingness to support independent watchmakers is in part motivated by there being no standards for who can claim to be a qualified watchmaker in most places. Switzerland is not like that, of course--watchmakers there have to be fully trained and experienced before they can hang out a shingle.

Some companies have better service policies than others. Ebel is owned by Movado, which is a U.S.-based company. Their main service department in the U.S. is in New Jersey, but they don't do complicated repairs there at all. When you send a watch to them for service, they will routinely replace the movement with a freshly serviced movement and send it back to you. Then, the one they removed will go to Switzerland for servicing and then back in inventory. It usually takes about three weeks. If the watch is chronometer-certified, they used a COSC-certified movement for the replacement. They will usually move the rotor from the old movement to the new movement to preserve the appearance. For some of my Ebels, I have the COSC certificates and requested that they not exchange the movement. They honored that request, but it took an extra three months.

Mechanical watches are not indestructible, and I'll leave that to you to determine what that means in your case. The price on your receipt for a full service for a 2892 is high but not outrageously so by factory service standards. Omega would be a little higher, Rolex higher still, and MGI would be a little lower. A high-end service shop in New York would be higher, but an old established watchmaker could service a 2892 for probably half of that.

Where the independents run into trouble is with parts that don't interchange, like case gaskets, specially shaped crystals, case screws, crowns, hands (which are often replaced unless you request that they not be) and dials. Of those and absent damage, any decent watchmaker will only need the gaskets, but they'll need the gaskets. If the manufacturers won't supply them, then they either have to reuse the old gaskets or they decline the service. All watchmakers that can service mechanical movement (vs. battery-changers) are in demand, so it's not like they can't be picky.

The only mechanical watch that has failed in use for me is my Cartier Santos 100 XL, which as a 2892-2 movement. It got jarred somehow--I have no recollection of how--and the hairspring got hung up and had to be straightened. The store where I bought it had their watchmaker do that for me while I had lunch, so it wasn't much of a problem. I have repaired a few watches that I bought in poor condition, and I have had some warranty work done on Ebels bought as overstocks that had been in a shop display for some years.

When I need to have my Zenith serviced, I will probably see if I can get it done by an independent. My Ulysse Nardin will need to go to the factory--it uses a silicon hairspring and balance that is quite special. The Ebels and Concords go to MGI Service. The Breguet is old enough and the case is conventional enough that it can go to an independent. The Heuers will go to the LVMH service center, but I'm not sure I want to send the Zenith there. The vintage watches go to {REDACTED FOR VIOLATION OF SECRETS OF STATE}

But I don't wear any one watch all that much, so I don't observe anything like the usual service interval. I might wear one of my vintages once a year for a day or two, and even if they are dry as a bone that won't hurt them appreciably.

Watch collectors either learn how to service watches themselves, or they develop their own network of repair guys and keep secrets, sorta like with car mechanics.

Rick "learning how to service watches, but will always have limits" Denney

 

[rdenney]

Obviously Zenith and AP represent different price categories. Traditionally Zenith's approach has been to create technically very good movements with the finish that ensures precise and reliable operation and keeping decorative stuff at the level that enables reasonable pricing. As a long-time watch collector, I'm well aware of the merits of AP, and I have nothing against them, but imho, even taking into account the level of construction and finish, they are too expensive. Of course, when there are enough clients willing to pay those prices, I don't blame them. (and I don't think they are worse than Patek, Vacheron and some others in this respect)

I simply love the ladder bracelet. While the old fashioned clasp may feel a bit cheap compared to the newer models, it works ok, and the open construction is great especially in hot summer days. It competes with IWC Pilot watches beds of rice bracelets for the title of the most comfortable bracelet that I have ever had.

Agreed on all counts except for the ladder bracelet. My beef with it is the checkered tan it gives my arm

But you need to experience the liquid metal of an Ebel bracelet, which have been routinely praised as the most comfortable on the market by collectors at both ends of the pool.

Rick "or the white skin that shows through because other watches prevented the tan" Denney

 

[pablolie]

Service in the industry is a big problem, in my view.

I concur 200% if mathematically possible. For so many reasons. Too long to get into it, but it is a major reasons that pushed me into loving Glycine... super reliable movements because they don't try to do fancy mods yet use very reliable and proven stuff very reasonable prices with very good craftsmanship (without getting super fancy)... and if one were to break (yet none has) it'd be "oh OK I'll just get another one".

Except they got acquired and now they are no longer anywhere near where they used to be design wise.

In 20 years I have never serviced a single one of my Glycine watches and they just keep going. Only other brand I have had that experience with is IWC (Aquatimer) or the Panerai Submersible or Franck Muller. There seems to be a reliability advantage when brands stick to proven base movements and just decorate them some, IMO.

Blancpain, Audemars and others have had issues, and have cost a few thou in service (per watch).

In a nutshell, I would never consider spending a. mill on a hyper complicated in-house movement watch with a perpetual calendar and a tourbillion and such...

 

[HedgeHog]

Thx for the info. When I got my Pannies (probably 2 decades ago), I found the general public made fun of their ETA movements. Can't recall why. Most liked the pre-Vendome iterations. Then there was that bruhaha with a Pannie member. Then ppl started hating on Pannies like Bimmers (mainly a status symbol for the newly wealthy) and the commie symbol for the Italian navy. I llke mine still but it seems all my watches are ones most say "eww, why those?". lol

 

[pablolie]

Thx for the info. When I got my Pannies (probably 2 decades ago), I found the general public made fun of their ETA movements. Can't recall why. Most liked the pre-Vendome iterations. Then there was that bruhaha with a Pannie member. Then ppl started hating on Pannies like Bimmers (mainly a status symbol for the newly wealthy) and the commie symbol for the Italian navy. I llke mine still but it seems all my watches are ones most say "eww, why those?". lol

I have never encountered that, but then again I never start watch conversations and I could not care less what anyone thinks about what I am wearing, driving, riding, listening to etc etc :-D

 

[rdenney]

Thx for the info. When I got my Pannies (probably 2 decades ago), I found the general public made fun of their ETA movements. Can't recall why. Most liked the pre-Vendome iterations. Then there was that bruhaha with a Pannie member. Then ppl started hating on Pannies like Bimmers (mainly a status symbol for the newly wealthy) and the commie symbol for the Italian navy. I llke mine still but it seems all my watches are ones most say "eww, why those?". lol

General public? I've never encountered any awareness of watch brands as "obscure" as Panerai in the general public, except maybe among young, male Stallone fans. Watch enthusiasts are all over the map with Panerai, just as with, say, TAG-Heuer. The enthusiast community, in my view, goes nuts over minor infractions of the watch idiot savant code, which is that a movement is not a legitimate in-house movement if any part of it resembles any part of a movement made by a disrespected brand, and if the company CEO misdescribes that, he should be taken out and shot. In Heuer's case, that was Seiko's technology that Heuer licensed for the 1885, and in Panerai's case, it was ETA. But it's highly likely that the common 2892 is a more refined movement that is thinner, more accurate, easier to own, and cheaper to keep serviced than whatever customization Panerai's movement contractor constructs just for them.

And then there was the anti-Stallone crowd--watch people are utterly quixotic about who they will and won't accept as spokespeople for watch brands. Somehow, Stallone was on the unacceptable list. And Panerai was accused of being a ghost brand, which is true, but some ghost brands get nothing but favor. Go figure. Watch enthusiasts are crazy. You won't see very many recent posts from me on Watch-U-Seek because of that--I just got tired of it.

Rick "would still like to own a Luminor GMT" Denney

 

[pablolie]

General public? I've never encountered any awareness of watch brands as "obscure" as Panerai in the general public, except maybe among young, male Stallone fans. Watch enthusiasts are all over the map with Panerai, just as with, say, TAG-Heuer. The enthusiast community, in my view, goes nuts over minor infractions of the watch idiot savant code, which is that a movement is not a legitimate in-house movement if any part of it resembles any part of a movement made by a disrespected brand, and if the company CEO misdescribes that, he should be taken out and shot. In Heuer's case, that was Seiko's technology that Heuer licensed for the 1885, and in Panerai's case, it was ETA. But it's highly likely that the common 2892 is a more refined movement that is thinner, more accurate, easier to own, and cheaper to keep serviced than whatever customization Panerai's movement contractor constructs just for them.

And then there was the anti-Stallone crowd--watch people are utterly quixotic about who they will and won't accept as spokespeople for watch brands. Somehow, Stallone was on the unacceptable list. And Panerai was accused of being a ghost brand, which is true, but some ghost brands get nothing but favor. Go figure. Watch enthusiasts are crazy. You won't see very many recent posts from me on Watch-U-Seek because of that--I just got tired of it.

Rick "would still like to own a Luminor GMT" Denney

And let's not forget that many brands are somewhat artificial marketing constructs that are firmly integrated into very large luxury conglomerates and leverage economies of scale. It's basically all about Swatch Group, LVMH, Richemont and Rolex.