Question for the watch experts. Is it safe to assume that “Price Available Upon Request” is the equivalent of “If you have to ask, you can’t afford it”?
That’s my reaction whenever a website says “Please call for quote”
Yup. They want to be able to talk you out of sticker-shock. Or, it is only meant for people who have no idea what sticker-shock is.
In some cases, with some watches and super-high end cars, they want to know if you are special enough to own one of their products. For example, I read of some limited edition cars Ferrari made and, if you were not a well known (to them), life-long buyer of Ferraris you just didn’t even get on a list to get one of the cars.
Don’t already have a dozen Ferraris in your garage? Then piss off. Spend 30+ years collecting and then, maybe, they will talk to you.
Maybe not by the 1970s, at least not as a status symbol. My understanding is that, post-WWII, wristwatches became more commonplace, and inexpensive models and brands, such as Timex, were widely sold, at least in the U.S.
I know that, by 1975 (when I was 10), I had both an inexpensive Timex wristwatch, and an equally-inexpensive pocketwatch; the fact that a middle-class pre-teen had two watches suggests that they were no longer status symbols. 
I think as flight became more common accurate timepieces were necessary and, to some extent, for the whole military as timing of things became more important. But especially for pilots. It was a necessary tool of the trade.
WWII saw lots and lots more planes in use. So, cheap(ish), mass produced timepieces became important.
IIRC wristwatches were not a thing until WWI when they became the best way to carry a timepiece during the war. And knowing the time became important in WWI (moreso in WWII).
Question for the watch experts. Is it safe to assume that “Price Available Upon Request” is the equivalent of “If you have to ask, you can’t afford it”?
Yep.
In that case, that’s the Piaget Altiplano - the thinnest wristwatch ever made. I think they make them to order.
Watchfinder has a 2 part series on that watch . It’s astounding. Here’s part 1:
Part 2. In the thumbnail, that’s the sideview of the watch, not (as I first thought) the clasp.
If you can only manage ±30 seconds per day, why are you even bothering to put a timepiece in your jewelry? I certainly expect any timepiece I own to be closer than a half-minute, and I’m certainly not going to take the time to reset it every day, either.
If you can only manage ±30 seconds per day, why are you even bothering to put a timepiece in your jewelry? I certainly expect any timepiece I own to be closer than a half-minute, and I’m certainly not going to take the time to reset it every day, either.
A decent mechanical wristwatch (Rolex etc) will certainly keep better time than 30 sec/day. My “nice” watches are generally within 2-3 seconds.
But no one spends thousands of dollars on a watch because oft he timekeeping.
“Clock Repairman” by Norman Rockwell
I was able to find some more details. 410,000 swiss francs or a little under $450K US. While that’s doable (as if), you are correct that it’s a special request and limited to 3 per year.
I guess I’ll continue with unadorned wrists a little longer.
Oh, and the connection between clocks and tennis is probably due to the scorekeeping, which used to be marked on a clock face (hence the “fifteen, thirty, forty[-five]”).
This has been an interesting thread. Before this morning, I would have guessed that the lowest end Rolex would have cost around $800 and I was off by almost an order of magnitude. And someone sporting a low end Rolex would be looked down upon by a true watch aficionado.
As an engineer I appreciate the art and intricacy of a mechanical watch. Also as an engineer I appreciate the efficiency and functionality of the time keeping on my iPhone.
Certainly many watches can do better but this $1000 Seiko has an accuracy of +25 to -15 seconds per day so you have to start getting expensive for really good accuracy.
Of course, I expect that Seiko would actually keep much better time that that. Those are it’s worst case scenarios (lots of things can affect it like temperature).
Still, accuracy = money but, as you said, you are not really buying these to keep super-accurate time. Pretty close is good enough. The rest is bragging rights.
That looks a LOT like the clock hanging on the old Marshall Fields building in Chicago.
I’m pretty sure it is, and that it’s looking to the west along Randolph Street, as that also looks like the bottom half of the sign for the old Oriental Theater (now the Nederlander) in the lower right corner of the picture.
Was the original question that started this thread actually answered? 
COSC chronometer certification tests the watch in 5 positions at 3 different temperatures (-8°, 23°, and 38°C) over a 15 day period, and the watch can’t deviate more than -4/+6 seconds per day on average (10 second range).
Omega uses METAS certification, which is more stringent: 0-5 sec/day (5 second range)
When a watch is a certified chronometer, it has been tested and certified by either COSC or METAS.
To be fair…I don’t think your iPhone does much timekeeping. It can, but I doubt it is especially good. It doesn’t need to be though since the cell network is keeping time for it and updating it on a frequent basis. The real timekeeper is an atomic clock somewhere that all the cell providers get their time from.
And those atomic clocks are cool. 
Do they test every watch individually for certification or just one and deem all others built the same as sufficient?
Do they test every watch individually for certification or just one and deem all others built the same as sufficient?
They test every watch individually. That’s why you pay a lot more for watches with chronometer certification.