<p>I look at it as Kim and Kanye having gold-plated toilets in their new home. Regular old ceramic toilets are like telling time off your cellphone, functional. But if it makes someone feel good to sit on a golden throne, or have a blinged out watch, ain’t no big deal.</p>
<p>I know someone who loves having a blinged out cellphone corner, full of crystals. She also likes wearing lots of sparkly jewelry. It makes her happy, even if tastes differ.</p>
<p>So a tasteful Rolex is like a gold-plated toilet? Love it! Geez! I’m wearing a toilet on my wrist!</p>
<p>I have a high school friend who has had a difficult life, to say the least. She is on welfare and lives in Section 8 housing. I like to buy her lunch when I go back to our hometown. She feels guilty and tries to insist that I let her pay. What I say to her is “N- for me to buy you lunch is like you spending a penny. It’s something I want to do for you and it doesn’t impact me at all.” She appreciates that and allows me to pay. </p>
<p>I think for people who have the means to enjoy quality luxury items, it’s a similar situation. It works for them, and with the exception of some very foolish pro athletes, most people aren’t mortgaging the house twice over to buy the jewelry, cars or trips they enjoy.</p>
<p>Nah, the toilets are like $750,000 lol. Well for four of them, maybe with a volume discount?
A chacun son gout, always. I suppose being rich enough for either the toilet or the watch means not giving a damn what anyone thinks.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not so sure about that. There are people other than a few foolish pro athletes who are in heavy debt due to heavy spending on luxury items, although some may perceive such luxury items as “necessities”.</p>
<p>Or, if not in heavy debt, they are spending almost every dollar that they make, leaving little buffer or savings for unexpected surprises (e.g. medical bills), or their kids’ college (how many postings around here involve people who say they are “middle class”, but “won’t get financial aid anywhere”, and have trouble paying even for an in-state public university for their kid?).</p>
<p>I said “most people”, ucbalum. I think that’s accurate. I have a job, a retirement fund, an older car and some nice jewelry AND we were able to pay for our kids’ education. My triathlete son has a bicycle that cost as much as my watch, I suspect. He paid for it.</p>
<p>Gourmetmom sums it all up for me in post #141. (Thank you Gourmetmom!! :)) I read a lot of style blogs. A recurring theme is what luxury really means. I find it an interesting conundrum.</p>
<p>Does anyone have an opinion about Breitlings? I always thought they were nice and sporty looking - appropriate for a younger man perhaps.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Except that’s not what I said. I didn’t say “people who are practical minded by nature and don’t think it wise to spend $$ on watches, easily lost / stolen, invest in the IRA” were “people who didn’t know how to dress well.” I said nothing about people who are practical minded. I don’t know why they’d bother posting on a thread in which I said this is what I was wanting to do, but whatever, free country.</p>
<p>I thought I was pretty clear – there is a segment of people who don’t know how to dress well who, upon hearing of a luxury / expensive watch (or designer handbag, or whatever) will automatically think of something that’s very showy and in-your-face. Every time we discuss nice things – whether it’s a watch or a designer handbag or whatever – there are always those who start snotting about “doing it to impress others” or thinking that we’re talking about something that is visible from across-the-room. These are the same people who, when we talk about dressing nicely for everyday, always take it to “oh, so that means I need to totter around on high heels just to do the grocery shopping?” and other ridiculousness. It’s my observation that such people don’t know how to dress well, and consequently they don’t understand that, for example, designer bag does not equal “splashy logos visible a mile away” or, in this case, a Rolex does not equal “bling visible from across the room.”</p>
<p>Bay - I haven’t looked at Breitlings, but that’s an interesting consideration.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>See, this is what I mean. Nowhere have I talked about anything being blinged out. But someone made the assumption that I was talking about blinged out. I’m guessing that this poster must not have a lot of experience with classic luxury items if he / she assumes that these watches are blinged out.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Then that’s their problem. I recognize you have exquisite sensitivity to what you perceive as “showing off” or “impressing others / pointy-haired bosses,” but it is not the problem of the person who has something nice that other people view it as showing off. Having something and showing it off are two different things. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Except I’m not royalty and no one is revolting against me, so I don’t see what this has to do with anything.</p>
<p>I’m not touching the watch stuff- spend your money the way you want but I will back up Cobrat- my kids always associate those names with turtles. They know better now but at 13 they would have been more in tune with critters not artists.</p>
<p>It’s very strange to me that anyone thinks of a basic Rolex oyster watch as being showy or ostentatious. I’ve always thought of mine as being more sporty and casual and have never even had anyone seem to notice it as anything special. Maybe everyone who notices it at all assumes it’s a fake, lol.</p>
<p>I do have a strong distaste for “blinged out” Rolexes (though I’d never say anything about it to someone wearing one). They just look weird to me, as if someone had mink trim on their sneakers (if those exist, I don’t want to know).</p>
<p>Pizzagirl, what a nice idea! My H has several watches that he purchased as an “investment”. I just took a peek in his watch winder and he seems to favor Ulysses Nardin and Jaeger Couture. Personally, I love the David Yurman watches we bought for each other for our 20th. I think those were around $2500 each - though prob not classified as investment. </p>
<p>In case you didn’t know, Barnes and Noble actually sells monthly magazines specifically on the subject of watches. The ads are fantastic and the articles about certain watches or watchmakers can be fascinating.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is what I am interested in: the idea that there actually is some sort of universally accepted standard of dressing well. Who gets to define this? And for whom?</p>
<p>Pizzagirl- My husband is an avid collector of timepieces but his go to, everyday watch is a Rolex Oyster Perpetual Datejust. I have one with a pink face and he has the silver. We have had these for many years with absolutely no issues. They are beautiful and classic. There are so many wonderful choices of classic watches, and although we all use our phones to check the time… nothing will replace a classic and beautiful watch!!</p>
<p>There is always the gift of a Vertu - a decent, blinged out smartphone that costs a few grand… Or a Porsche Design Blackberry…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The mere fact you feel the need to say “Then that’s their problem.” illustrates the very types of tone-deafness you are displaying…especially when you go on to mention how those who do make criticisms or otherwise non-congratulatory remarks about luxury items you’re discussing “lack taste” as illustrated in your post here:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>BTW: the above can reasonably be viewed as something an imperious personage like a snobby Queen would say to the “rubes”.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Am I supposed to be shamed by this, or what? You often make the accusation that someone is snobby (based on very thin evidence), with the implication that being snobby is the worst thing in the world. It is to you, of course, because you have a lot of sensitivity over what you perceive as snobbery. But what you see as snobbery, others see as simply having good time and enjoying fine items.</p>
<p>I haven’t read this thread since yesterday but why would anyone make a negative comment about parents wanting to buy their children a thoughtful gift- no matter how expensive.
alh- there is a universal standard for dressing well. I think it was Justice Potter Stewart who determined the standard. He said we know it when we see it.</p>