By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
Blimey, what phone do you have?! I have a Google Pixel for £30 a month. I don't know anyone who has a phone worth more than a grand, as far as I know. So sorry, no, you can't equate the two.
Also a phone does EVERYTHING. A watch does one thing.
I would also dispute it's "far easier and more natural to look at your watch than get your phone out." I get my phone out regularly, to check notifications, emails etc. - far more than I would look for the time. So as I do that regularly I know what the time is anyway. I suspect most people are like this.
EDIT: Also, a phone isn't constantly on display like a watch is.
Sounds to me that you just like having a flashy watch on your arm and are looking for excuses to justify it.
[Post edited 15 Dec 2023 14:37]
Even when there is no argument to have, do you literally just pick the opposite side and throw out as much rambling rubbish about it as you can just to pick a fight.
But you’ve already been told for many people it’s an investment. Some people like to have something more tangible, and with a better return than a ISA. Your phone is just a depreciating asset. New cars cost more than Rolex’s, do you get triggered by people buying those too - all those flash g1ts buying a Ford Puma eh.
Firstly, I'm not remotely triggered. I just said I don't understand it myself. It's very clear that you expensive watch wearers have been triggered by my responses though. I suspect it's because you know there's a fair bit of truth in what I'm saying!
Secondly, I've answered the investment angle. If it were purely as an investment you wouldn't wear it at all - you'd keep it in a nice case at home where it won't get wear and tear, damaged or stolen (less likely to be, anyway).
Firstly, I don't have a Pixel 8 Pro - you're doing Glassers' trick of trying to find an expensive phone to justify your argument. So your logic is flawed.
Secondly, a comparable Rolex to the phone you've used, as tractorboy says above, costs £5k-£10k. And it does one thing, as opposed to the multitude of things a smart phone does.
You might be right that regularly taking you phone out is risky, but we all do it don't we? It's a case of being sensible about it/having your wits about you. But the point is we all do it anyway, it's the modern world we live in. And the time's right there along with everything else.
I'm not telling people they shouldn't wear watches and I'm not saying you need to justify it to me or anyone. You're putting words in my mouth. I said it sounds to me like you're trying justify it. I'm not asking you to.
This comparison to a phone is an odd one IMO. People don't buy a watch primarily for its functionality to tell us the time anymore. The same way its not really a toss up as to whether people buy electricity from Octopus each month or candles for their living room. The primary intent isn't to provide us with light.
I'm sure there's a multitude or reasons why people buy luxury watches, whether it be fashion / design, perception of quality, investment pieces, status symbols. They're probably all true to a degree, but they're also true of all premium products aren't they? Same reason anyone buys an Audi Q7 for twice the cost of a Peugeot 3008.
Even when there is no argument to have, do you literally just pick the opposite side and throw out as much rambling rubbish about it as you can just to pick a fight.
You lonely?
Translation: I don't like your position in this debate so I'm going to throw out an insult instead.
This comparison to a phone is an odd one IMO. People don't buy a watch primarily for its functionality to tell us the time anymore. The same way its not really a toss up as to whether people buy electricity from Octopus each month or candles for their living room. The primary intent isn't to provide us with light.
I'm sure there's a multitude or reasons why people buy luxury watches, whether it be fashion / design, perception of quality, investment pieces, status symbols. They're probably all true to a degree, but they're also true of all premium products aren't they? Same reason anyone buys an Audi Q7 for twice the cost of a Peugeot 3008.
People were saying I have an expensive phone so I'm a hypocrite, essentially.
Except my phone costs a fraction of the cost of an expensive watch, and does way more things.
You're quite right about your reasons - you're actually agreeing with me to a certain extent because I've been saying exactly that - fashion/jewellery/status symbol, which some seem to be afraid to acknowledge. Don't get me wrong, it's fine if people want a watch for those reasons.
Translation: I don't like your position in this debate so I'm going to throw out an insult instead.
Well I get you, even if no one else does.
However, a true judgmental arsehole would:
a) not have a 30 quid a month phone, but a £100 no-brand special (hats off from me) b) have no sympathy with someone who gets robbed of their Rolex (apologies, but I just can't get excited by a symbol of extreme wealth* being taken)
In short dolly, you're a lightweight.
*even if not always worn by the extremely wealthy.
Has anyone ever looked at their own postings for last day or so? Oh my... so sorry. Was Ullaa
a) not have a 30 quid a month phone, but a £100 no-brand special (hats off from me) b) have no sympathy with someone who gets robbed of their Rolex (apologies, but I just can't get excited by a symbol of extreme wealth* being taken)
In short dolly, you're a lightweight.
*even if not always worn by the extremely wealthy.
Yeah but we all know your judgement is questionable, just look at that rabble you support on a Saturday afternoon.
a) not have a 30 quid a month phone, but a £100 no-brand special (hats off from me) b) have no sympathy with someone who gets robbed of their Rolex (apologies, but I just can't get excited by a symbol of extreme wealth* being taken)
In short dolly, you're a lightweight.
*even if not always worn by the extremely wealthy.
I've only recently upgraded to a £30 a month phone anyway, I was paying £8 a month before that. I'm quite frugal, generally.
But yeah, I don't think my position would be that controversial to most people. It's just the expensive watch wearers who've got upset. Probably because they know I've got a bit of a point.
I've only recently upgraded to a £30 a month phone anyway, I was paying £8 a month before that. I'm quite frugal, generally.
But yeah, I don't think my position would be that controversial to most people. It's just the expensive watch wearers who've got upset. Probably because they know I've got a bit of a point.
What's the cut-off for expensive? Is it relative to income, or to the cost of other things? E.g. if a teacher has a £50 watch vs. Hirst and his Rolex?
I've only recently upgraded to a £30 a month phone anyway, I was paying £8 a month before that. I'm quite frugal, generally.
But yeah, I don't think my position would be that controversial to most people. It's just the expensive watch wearers who've got upset. Probably because they know I've got a bit of a point.
Oh you gonna get it now!
Has anyone ever looked at their own postings for last day or so? Oh my... so sorry. Was Ullaa
Interesting. Would suggest it's probably a bit more nuanced.
Not really sure what you mean, but happy to debate it! I've never been one for expensive material possessions, but that's probably mostly down to my upbringing.
Not really sure what you mean, but happy to debate it! I've never been one for expensive material possessions, but that's probably mostly down to my upbringing.
What's the cut-off for expensive? Is it relative to income, or to the cost of other things? E.g. if a teacher has a £50 watch vs. Hirst and his Rolex?
I have no idea TBH. I was just making the point that to me, having something worth thousands of pounds (sometimes tens of thousands) on display on your arm, that in practical terms literally does one (now redundant) thing, on the face of it seems odd, and more about vanity than anything else.
I have no idea TBH. I was just making the point that to me, having something worth thousands of pounds (sometimes tens of thousands) on display on your arm, that in practical terms literally does one (now redundant) thing, on the face of it seems odd, and more about vanity than anything else.
Hard to argue with that.
But (and here's my attempt at nuance) I think that's fine.
I have no idea TBH. I was just making the point that to me, having something worth thousands of pounds (sometimes tens of thousands) on display on your arm, that in practical terms literally does one (now redundant) thing, on the face of it seems odd, and more about vanity than anything else.
I bought mine predominantly as an investment but I am a pompous w@nker from time to time and wear it. I certainly don't wear it when I know there is a good chance I will be p!ssed.
I bought mine predominantly as an investment but I am a pompous w@nker from time to time and wear it. I certainly don't wear it when I know there is a good chance I will be p!ssed.
I've only recently upgraded to a £30 a month phone anyway, I was paying £8 a month before that. I'm quite frugal, generally.
But yeah, I don't think my position would be that controversial to most people. It's just the expensive watch wearers who've got upset. Probably because they know I've got a bit of a point.
So essentially you are just tight. Not sure we needed three pages to get to that point but here we are.
It's not to show off though. If you buy a suit, no pun intended, then you buy the best suit that you can afford at the time. Same with cars, TV's, handbags and pretty much most things.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
