First, I am proud to be an actual Boomer and second I am proud to own all of my Boomer watches. I will find no happieness in the day that will certainly come, when all of m newly minted collector friends who have bought their Patek 96s and little Cartiers at the recently inflated price find that they are buried in them...and I am pretty sure they will find themselves buried sooner than I will be even though I am probably twice most of their ages. A lot of these new collectors will probably feel burned that their investments have proven to be bad and leave the watch world and that is not a good thing. I guess the big lesson the long time collector learns is that the market is cyclical. What is cool today may be crap tomorrow and what is crap today may be cool again tomorrow. The best investment is always the best examples of what you like and think you will continue to like despite the whims of the market. The second best lesson is that anyone who tells you that holding on to vintage watches is always a great investment hasn't lived long enough to know. This is another good article Tony. Thanks for the excuse to have an old man rant.
Loved your reply here. Watches were never meant to be investments. They ARE a form of wearable art, but to these folks who are buying them as investments? I feel badly for them. When the worm turns, as it invariably will, they will be left with things they may no longer enjoy simply because they bought them for the wrong reason. Buy what you love and you’ll love what you bought!
Another fabulous post Tony. It’s funny, sometimes I get to thinking about the “value” of my watches and what would happen if Rolex truly fell out of fashion.
Simple, I’d lose some $$ on paper, but the value of my collection would remain constant as I simply love wearing them. I really feel for those with the kind of psyche that need their watches to be monetarily valuable in order to enjoy them.
If someone buys a Journe today and it’s worth 50% less in two years, will they still be just as happy wearing it? If the answer is “no,” they probably should think twice before making that purchase…oh wait, does any still wear their Journe now that their prices have exploded?
well said! someone has mentioned it in the comments here before, but if you 'lose value' on your watches, this can simply be viewed as the rental cost for wearing and enjoying something you love.
I’ve bought a Dato 45, a Camaro, and a pre-moon Speedy this year, all in good condition from good dealers, and they were cheap! I hope the boomer watch stays unfashionable long enough for me to fill my watch box.
So, personally, I’m not a big vintage Rolex guy. It’s not as though I don’t appreciate the historical and cultural significance of a Big Crown - I just don’t crave the ownership experience? I guess I feel the same about vintage cars: cool to look at, less interested in driving them.
This feeling is probably exacerbated by just how tricky vintage Rolex can be. Huge differences in value based on minute dial variations and component originality. And the stakes aren’t low.
There are some vintage pieces I love. Actually just bought my first “true” vintage watch (1950s). And I suspect I’ll buy a Polerouter if the right reference comes to market. But that’s a $5k watch, not a $100k vintage Big Crown. I don’t need to scrutinize whether the font on the dial is correct or not.
Generally speaking, I gravitate toward neovintage (mostly 80s - 00s). I guess because they offer post quartz crisis premiumization without the industrialization of modern.
to your point i do think a more existential threat to vintage Rolex or perhaps expensive vintage watches more broadly is this exact perception that there's so much risk around correctness, redials, service parts, etc., and the sometimes seedy business around it all.
More than trend cycles swinging back and forth, I think this is the biggest threat to vintage watches continuing to be collected
It does increase the value-add (and power) of top dealers / auction houses. That seal of approval becomes all important. Like the vintage watch I recently bought came from John Reardon - and he might be the only person I would have purchased it from.
But this reduced liquidity makes the watches that much less accessible. It’s just easier to buy a 20-30 year old watch where you are pretty sure nothing has been massively altered, documentation exists, servicing was probably done by the manufacturer, etc.
Servicing is another big issue for these older pieces. The Trinity is unusual in their support of vintage pieces. Rolex has made a some progress with their “Atelier de Restauration“ - but it is far from perfect (limited, expensive, slow, etc.). Generally, you are going to have to seek out an independent watchmaker and hope nothing goes wrong. If you live outside NYC, you will likely struggle to find one.
i've seen the documentary about him, but idk enough about how wine is viewed to know if he was viewed as one bad apple or part of a system that's seen as compromised. Whereas I do think to many, pre-owned and older watches still have the perception of 47th street or 'dealer selling them out of a trench coat'
Buying old, vintage wine is very similar to vintage watches…buy the seller and know the provenance!! It’s also endlessly complicated…especially for Burgundy with its innumerable vineyards, climats, vintages, etc.
Yes, Rudy was one bad apple, but once you get into the upper stratosphere of wine collecting (the stuff that’s $5k+ per bottle) there endless temptation for people to create forgeries. And, unlike a watch, you cannot simply open it up and/or look at it to make sure it’s legit. You have to pop the cork and at that point, you’re 100% committed!!
I will go on record as saying that not only will vintage Rolex not go the way of the Model T, but in fact many of the folks chasing the latest, greatest Indies will come back to them (rather unfortunately for those of us wanting to buy them reasonably and WEAR them) and push prices higher than their previous high water marks.
There is something simply wonderful about a beautifully designed watch as a tool…and the birth of that starts (or at least its popularity starts) with Rolex. Period. Timeless design never goes out of fashion. And the 1+ million new Rolexes sold every year provides incredibly fertile ground for the vintage market.
Simple math…let’s assume that just 5% of the folks who bought a 124060, 114060, 14060M or 14060 (of which there were collectively around 460,000 made as of the date of publication of Foulkes’ Sub book) became interested in owning a 5312, of which there were just over 17,000 made? And how many of those 5312’s are still extant, let alone in desirable condition?
The reality is that the number of watch collectors is increasing and the number of quality vintage Rolex classics in good condition is forever decreasing. That equation is only helped, not hurt, by the rise of the Indies bringing more people into the watch collecting fold.
agreed - the number of 'watch buyers' is only growing, and i believe it's safe to assume some will head down the dangerous path of becoming 'collectors'!
One of the few economic principles that is utterly true for watch collecting: change in consumer taste. Meaning what’s trendy or not, things really do come and go out of fashion — what I’ve noticed though, is that even amongst pieces that resurrect toward the spotlight again, are those that generally have an appealing context around. First Calatrava, which one could argue is the archetype of a dress watch, Cartier Santos going back to its aviation heritage, Rolexes being tools that turned out to be beautiful.
There’s substance within the blue chip brands, precisely because they have a colorful context. Albeit vintage can be “narrowed” down into charm and rarity, as long as there’s mild depth beneath their surfaces, it’ll stand. And that’s easier for certain brands, no doubt.
yes, that's something i think about often. when collectors were buying pre-war wristwatches in the 1980s-90s, they were buying Art Deco American watches (Hamilton, Elgin, etc.), Rolex Princes, Calatravas, complicated Pateks, etc. Trends swung away and now seem to be swinging back towards that era, but only to a very select few, i.e., 96s and Bubblebacks. I like to think it has something to do with the historical and horological importance of these watches rising above the others, but not sure.
Some interesting comments as a Baby Boomer now in the overtime game of my life the watches in my collection were purchased for enjoyment and because the meaning of time is so important to our lives. As some of the younger writers will appreciate this is one item TIME you cant buy, trade and put a price tag on this subject. My hope is the younger generation find their way back to wearing a watch vs the finding all their enjoyment on their phones this includes my grandson. His knows and has picked out the watches he would like given to him when my game is over.
The generation before the Boomers (let’s count them as those born 1930-1945) entered their prime buying years in the 1970s and 1980s, while the youngest boomers in turn turned 50 in 1995.
Was it a mere coincidence that the mechanical renaissance occurred in the mid-90s? Or was it partly a case of not wanting to wear a Dad Watch?
I don’t think there will be a general recovery of ‘boomer watch’ prices. There is no lack of other inventory to take their place in the sun.
perhaps—the broader reasons for the 'mechanical renaissance of the 90s' is an interesting question that probably deserves investigation. this is one part, i think the development of technology and its impact on what could be accomplished with watchmaking was another. probably worth a further dive...
agreed. they’re only going down, not up. sure everything is cyclical, but the cycle on these is not coming back around for another 20 years. and that is too long for the pump-and-dumpers to wait.
I’ve read across the horological journal sphere the last few days a few stories of Rolex AD’s selling upon request, which I only highlight because it’s the antithesis of the usual “waitlist” fare. Movement manufacture is about to experience a supply chain stall due to the ongoing conflict between Iran / US as noted by one independent manufacturer (Nodus), who sent an email detailing this issue - which feels very COVID. It’s fascinating how the suppliers “throttle” inventory across brands. My humble opinion (who fuxking cares)…Vintage Rolex will shift in value, drastically, between models, as you pronounce, and seems to be the safe(est) place to park your dough. When 1 in 5 are fake, and the fake output only seems to be getting better…
I largely agree with the characterisation here - while generational labels are blunt instruments there is some truth in the correlation of certain brand/styles, tastes and generation.
As a gen Xer I guess I feel compelled to point out the generational door swings both ways - to say that some watches struggling for purchase today are 'boomer' watches automatically means that the watches that are trending now are "millennial" watches, almost certain to meet the same fate when Z's and A's step up to the plate.
On that front I see Tudor, Nomos and a lot of other current millennial darlings having definite use by dates.
But - this isnt going to be the fate of 'modern' Rolex/AP/Patek steel sports watches. Not because they are timeless, but rather in a process kicking off around 2010 and cemented in place in 2021 their value isnt set by desirability - rather their value is set by the sentiment of the financial markets. Just as currency traders dont care what year the currencies they trade were made, the industry trading these 'instruments' dont/wont care particularly in 2030/2040/2050 if the watches are from any particular era - only that it is recognizable as a member of the traded class.
your last point is interesting, and i wonder how it will unfold! i agree that they are largely traded as financial assets, but they still derive some of that value from having cultural capital, so wonder about the interplay of the two.
Information and education is key. And then it has to go viral through the algo. There you have it - the next vintage must-have watch will be resurrected.
A really interesting debate. My dad and I have discussed similar ideas with Porsche and for a similar reason to what you’re describing, he sold his 356 not long ago. It also feels like the way demand is shaped now vs even 10 years ago is so different. Feels more manufactured by watch influences and dealers. They’ll always need something new to push by definition.
I think there's a generation gap between precovid and pandemic era collectors. I stopped going to redbar after my kid was born in 2019 and then obviously 2020 wasn't great, and when I started going again in like 2024 the watches there went from piles of polerouters, subs, tudor sub, pie pan constellations to the great majority being preowned modern or maybe neovintage. So like people who were into vintage and vintage inspired from Hodinkee turned into their crown and caliber customers. I don't know what it's like now in 2026. But I remember the Heuer mania, it was like, oh it has a valjoux 72 so it's like a Daytona but it has all these other cool things about it and in some ways you might say it's EVEN BETTER, and btw did you know other brands used the same parts to make the poor man's Heuer and they are SO AFFORDABLE. it was when I was first getting into things as a newbie and the navitimer was super cool and desirable and even PHIL TOLEDANO WROTE A LOVE LETTER TO BREITLING ON TALKING WATCHES, let us never forget, because BREITLING WAS LIKE A POOR MAN'S HEUER BUT BETTER BECAUSE IT'S BREITLING AND BTW IN SOME WAYS YOU MIGHT SAY IT'S BETTER BECAUSE SLIDE RULE BEZEL ETC ETC ETC TOOL WATCHES AIRPLANES ZOOM ZOOM ZOOM HIGHWAY TO THE DANGER ZONE....
PS BTW DID YOU KNOW THAT HEUER AND BREITLING PARTNERED ON THE CHRONOMATIC AND BTW IT'S THE ANNIVERSARY AND BTW DID YOU KNOW THE FIRST AUTOMATIC CHRONOGRAPH WAS THE CHRONOMATIC OR MAYBE SEIKO OR MAYBE ZENITH BUT WHATEVER SO BREITLING ISN'T REALLY A POOR MAN'S HEUER AT ALL IT'S EVEN BETTER BECAUSE AIRPLANES ARE IN THE SKY AND RACECARS GO ON THE GROUND SO PLANES ARE MORE ZOOM ZOOM THAN VROOM VROOM WHICH IS BETTER OK???
First, I am proud to be an actual Boomer and second I am proud to own all of my Boomer watches. I will find no happieness in the day that will certainly come, when all of m newly minted collector friends who have bought their Patek 96s and little Cartiers at the recently inflated price find that they are buried in them...and I am pretty sure they will find themselves buried sooner than I will be even though I am probably twice most of their ages. A lot of these new collectors will probably feel burned that their investments have proven to be bad and leave the watch world and that is not a good thing. I guess the big lesson the long time collector learns is that the market is cyclical. What is cool today may be crap tomorrow and what is crap today may be cool again tomorrow. The best investment is always the best examples of what you like and think you will continue to like despite the whims of the market. The second best lesson is that anyone who tells you that holding on to vintage watches is always a great investment hasn't lived long enough to know. This is another good article Tony. Thanks for the excuse to have an old man rant.
Loved your reply here. Watches were never meant to be investments. They ARE a form of wearable art, but to these folks who are buying them as investments? I feel badly for them. When the worm turns, as it invariably will, they will be left with things they may no longer enjoy simply because they bought them for the wrong reason. Buy what you love and you’ll love what you bought!
Well said.
“Anyone who tells you that holding on to vintage watches is always a great investment hasn't lived long enough to know”
Precisely. Beware any generalizations like ‘X is always a great investment’
Another fabulous post Tony. It’s funny, sometimes I get to thinking about the “value” of my watches and what would happen if Rolex truly fell out of fashion.
Simple, I’d lose some $$ on paper, but the value of my collection would remain constant as I simply love wearing them. I really feel for those with the kind of psyche that need their watches to be monetarily valuable in order to enjoy them.
If someone buys a Journe today and it’s worth 50% less in two years, will they still be just as happy wearing it? If the answer is “no,” they probably should think twice before making that purchase…oh wait, does any still wear their Journe now that their prices have exploded?
well said! someone has mentioned it in the comments here before, but if you 'lose value' on your watches, this can simply be viewed as the rental cost for wearing and enjoying something you love.
Exactly…unless you are doing it solely to make a profit, in which case there are much safer ways to do that! LOL…
I’ve bought a Dato 45, a Camaro, and a pre-moon Speedy this year, all in good condition from good dealers, and they were cheap! I hope the boomer watch stays unfashionable long enough for me to fill my watch box.
i kinda agree, many of these watches were unaffordable when i got into collecting, but prices haven't moved :)
So, personally, I’m not a big vintage Rolex guy. It’s not as though I don’t appreciate the historical and cultural significance of a Big Crown - I just don’t crave the ownership experience? I guess I feel the same about vintage cars: cool to look at, less interested in driving them.
This feeling is probably exacerbated by just how tricky vintage Rolex can be. Huge differences in value based on minute dial variations and component originality. And the stakes aren’t low.
There are some vintage pieces I love. Actually just bought my first “true” vintage watch (1950s). And I suspect I’ll buy a Polerouter if the right reference comes to market. But that’s a $5k watch, not a $100k vintage Big Crown. I don’t need to scrutinize whether the font on the dial is correct or not.
Generally speaking, I gravitate toward neovintage (mostly 80s - 00s). I guess because they offer post quartz crisis premiumization without the industrialization of modern.
to your point i do think a more existential threat to vintage Rolex or perhaps expensive vintage watches more broadly is this exact perception that there's so much risk around correctness, redials, service parts, etc., and the sometimes seedy business around it all.
More than trend cycles swinging back and forth, I think this is the biggest threat to vintage watches continuing to be collected
It does increase the value-add (and power) of top dealers / auction houses. That seal of approval becomes all important. Like the vintage watch I recently bought came from John Reardon - and he might be the only person I would have purchased it from.
But this reduced liquidity makes the watches that much less accessible. It’s just easier to buy a 20-30 year old watch where you are pretty sure nothing has been massively altered, documentation exists, servicing was probably done by the manufacturer, etc.
Servicing is another big issue for these older pieces. The Trinity is unusual in their support of vintage pieces. Rolex has made a some progress with their “Atelier de Restauration“ - but it is far from perfect (limited, expensive, slow, etc.). Generally, you are going to have to seek out an independent watchmaker and hope nothing goes wrong. If you live outside NYC, you will likely struggle to find one.
Rudy Kurniawan never scared away wine collectors nor has the complexity and endless nuance of Burgundy scared away collectors…
i've seen the documentary about him, but idk enough about how wine is viewed to know if he was viewed as one bad apple or part of a system that's seen as compromised. Whereas I do think to many, pre-owned and older watches still have the perception of 47th street or 'dealer selling them out of a trench coat'
Buying old, vintage wine is very similar to vintage watches…buy the seller and know the provenance!! It’s also endlessly complicated…especially for Burgundy with its innumerable vineyards, climats, vintages, etc.
Yes, Rudy was one bad apple, but once you get into the upper stratosphere of wine collecting (the stuff that’s $5k+ per bottle) there endless temptation for people to create forgeries. And, unlike a watch, you cannot simply open it up and/or look at it to make sure it’s legit. You have to pop the cork and at that point, you’re 100% committed!!
I will go on record as saying that not only will vintage Rolex not go the way of the Model T, but in fact many of the folks chasing the latest, greatest Indies will come back to them (rather unfortunately for those of us wanting to buy them reasonably and WEAR them) and push prices higher than their previous high water marks.
There is something simply wonderful about a beautifully designed watch as a tool…and the birth of that starts (or at least its popularity starts) with Rolex. Period. Timeless design never goes out of fashion. And the 1+ million new Rolexes sold every year provides incredibly fertile ground for the vintage market.
Simple math…let’s assume that just 5% of the folks who bought a 124060, 114060, 14060M or 14060 (of which there were collectively around 460,000 made as of the date of publication of Foulkes’ Sub book) became interested in owning a 5312, of which there were just over 17,000 made? And how many of those 5312’s are still extant, let alone in desirable condition?
The reality is that the number of watch collectors is increasing and the number of quality vintage Rolex classics in good condition is forever decreasing. That equation is only helped, not hurt, by the rise of the Indies bringing more people into the watch collecting fold.
agreed - the number of 'watch buyers' is only growing, and i believe it's safe to assume some will head down the dangerous path of becoming 'collectors'!
great write up! and so true! go for boomers :)
Another great, thought-provoking piece. Thank you.
thanks for reading clyde!
One of the few economic principles that is utterly true for watch collecting: change in consumer taste. Meaning what’s trendy or not, things really do come and go out of fashion — what I’ve noticed though, is that even amongst pieces that resurrect toward the spotlight again, are those that generally have an appealing context around. First Calatrava, which one could argue is the archetype of a dress watch, Cartier Santos going back to its aviation heritage, Rolexes being tools that turned out to be beautiful.
There’s substance within the blue chip brands, precisely because they have a colorful context. Albeit vintage can be “narrowed” down into charm and rarity, as long as there’s mild depth beneath their surfaces, it’ll stand. And that’s easier for certain brands, no doubt.
yes, that's something i think about often. when collectors were buying pre-war wristwatches in the 1980s-90s, they were buying Art Deco American watches (Hamilton, Elgin, etc.), Rolex Princes, Calatravas, complicated Pateks, etc. Trends swung away and now seem to be swinging back towards that era, but only to a very select few, i.e., 96s and Bubblebacks. I like to think it has something to do with the historical and horological importance of these watches rising above the others, but not sure.
Some interesting comments as a Baby Boomer now in the overtime game of my life the watches in my collection were purchased for enjoyment and because the meaning of time is so important to our lives. As some of the younger writers will appreciate this is one item TIME you cant buy, trade and put a price tag on this subject. My hope is the younger generation find their way back to wearing a watch vs the finding all their enjoyment on their phones this includes my grandson. His knows and has picked out the watches he would like given to him when my game is over.
The generation before the Boomers (let’s count them as those born 1930-1945) entered their prime buying years in the 1970s and 1980s, while the youngest boomers in turn turned 50 in 1995.
Was it a mere coincidence that the mechanical renaissance occurred in the mid-90s? Or was it partly a case of not wanting to wear a Dad Watch?
I don’t think there will be a general recovery of ‘boomer watch’ prices. There is no lack of other inventory to take their place in the sun.
perhaps—the broader reasons for the 'mechanical renaissance of the 90s' is an interesting question that probably deserves investigation. this is one part, i think the development of technology and its impact on what could be accomplished with watchmaking was another. probably worth a further dive...
agreed. they’re only going down, not up. sure everything is cyclical, but the cycle on these is not coming back around for another 20 years. and that is too long for the pump-and-dumpers to wait.
I’ve read across the horological journal sphere the last few days a few stories of Rolex AD’s selling upon request, which I only highlight because it’s the antithesis of the usual “waitlist” fare. Movement manufacture is about to experience a supply chain stall due to the ongoing conflict between Iran / US as noted by one independent manufacturer (Nodus), who sent an email detailing this issue - which feels very COVID. It’s fascinating how the suppliers “throttle” inventory across brands. My humble opinion (who fuxking cares)…Vintage Rolex will shift in value, drastically, between models, as you pronounce, and seems to be the safe(est) place to park your dough. When 1 in 5 are fake, and the fake output only seems to be getting better…
I largely agree with the characterisation here - while generational labels are blunt instruments there is some truth in the correlation of certain brand/styles, tastes and generation.
As a gen Xer I guess I feel compelled to point out the generational door swings both ways - to say that some watches struggling for purchase today are 'boomer' watches automatically means that the watches that are trending now are "millennial" watches, almost certain to meet the same fate when Z's and A's step up to the plate.
On that front I see Tudor, Nomos and a lot of other current millennial darlings having definite use by dates.
But - this isnt going to be the fate of 'modern' Rolex/AP/Patek steel sports watches. Not because they are timeless, but rather in a process kicking off around 2010 and cemented in place in 2021 their value isnt set by desirability - rather their value is set by the sentiment of the financial markets. Just as currency traders dont care what year the currencies they trade were made, the industry trading these 'instruments' dont/wont care particularly in 2030/2040/2050 if the watches are from any particular era - only that it is recognizable as a member of the traded class.
your last point is interesting, and i wonder how it will unfold! i agree that they are largely traded as financial assets, but they still derive some of that value from having cultural capital, so wonder about the interplay of the two.
Such a great piece. Research + humor = 🙌. Read it twice.
🙏🙏🙏
Information and education is key. And then it has to go viral through the algo. There you have it - the next vintage must-have watch will be resurrected.
A really interesting debate. My dad and I have discussed similar ideas with Porsche and for a similar reason to what you’re describing, he sold his 356 not long ago. It also feels like the way demand is shaped now vs even 10 years ago is so different. Feels more manufactured by watch influences and dealers. They’ll always need something new to push by definition.
true. i don't know much about cars, but someone sent me this reel from DeMuro talking about porsche market dynamics right now, sounds pretty similar:
https://www.youtube.com/shorts/ZBNS4Xz-Nqo
I think there's a generation gap between precovid and pandemic era collectors. I stopped going to redbar after my kid was born in 2019 and then obviously 2020 wasn't great, and when I started going again in like 2024 the watches there went from piles of polerouters, subs, tudor sub, pie pan constellations to the great majority being preowned modern or maybe neovintage. So like people who were into vintage and vintage inspired from Hodinkee turned into their crown and caliber customers. I don't know what it's like now in 2026. But I remember the Heuer mania, it was like, oh it has a valjoux 72 so it's like a Daytona but it has all these other cool things about it and in some ways you might say it's EVEN BETTER, and btw did you know other brands used the same parts to make the poor man's Heuer and they are SO AFFORDABLE. it was when I was first getting into things as a newbie and the navitimer was super cool and desirable and even PHIL TOLEDANO WROTE A LOVE LETTER TO BREITLING ON TALKING WATCHES, let us never forget, because BREITLING WAS LIKE A POOR MAN'S HEUER BUT BETTER BECAUSE IT'S BREITLING AND BTW IN SOME WAYS YOU MIGHT SAY IT'S BETTER BECAUSE SLIDE RULE BEZEL ETC ETC ETC TOOL WATCHES AIRPLANES ZOOM ZOOM ZOOM HIGHWAY TO THE DANGER ZONE....
i always tease phil—'you used to have such GOOD TASTE, whatever happened to the breitling slo mo and speedmasters, etc?!'
PS BTW DID YOU KNOW THAT HEUER AND BREITLING PARTNERED ON THE CHRONOMATIC AND BTW IT'S THE ANNIVERSARY AND BTW DID YOU KNOW THE FIRST AUTOMATIC CHRONOGRAPH WAS THE CHRONOMATIC OR MAYBE SEIKO OR MAYBE ZENITH BUT WHATEVER SO BREITLING ISN'T REALLY A POOR MAN'S HEUER AT ALL IT'S EVEN BETTER BECAUSE AIRPLANES ARE IN THE SKY AND RACECARS GO ON THE GROUND SO PLANES ARE MORE ZOOM ZOOM THAN VROOM VROOM WHICH IS BETTER OK???