# Should your watch cost approximately your monthly average income?



## Oleg1987 (Feb 12, 2019)

How much do you think your watch should cost to match your income?


----------



## VanAdian (Apr 11, 2018)

96 to go...


----------



## Motik (May 17, 2015)

Shouldn't that be 86?


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

_Should cost_?

Your watch _should_ cost about what you make an hour. If you have one at all.


----------



## Carl.1 (Mar 27, 2006)

Ha ha it is not an engagement ring. There is no ratio for a watch, spend as little or as much as you are comfortable is the rule as it is a total luxury beyond the simple affordables that 'do the job'.


----------



## marcbull (Mar 20, 2018)

I buy watches i like, all with different prices. Just buy what you like and forget about what it "should cost" compared to your monthly income.


----------



## RPF (Feb 28, 2008)

Oleg1987 said:


> How much do you think your watch should cost to match your income?


Where does this stop? Your clothes, your dog, your car, your house, perhaps even a trophy girlfriend or wife. If you go down the social marker route, life will be an endless series of prisons you build for yourself, without the possibility of parole.

That is what I call spending your money to make others happy, and yourself miserable.

You know what? 99.99999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of mankind doesn't give a damn about you. Or me. Or for that matter, anyone here in particular.

Spend your hard-earned $ to make yourself happy.


----------



## Luciano Oliveira (Nov 9, 2017)

Wow, how many rude and aggressive responses. Op, I think you should evaluate your expenses vs income and see where you can go, but if your point is a month of salary for a year clock then I consider plausible, at least at the beginning.


----------



## Carl.1 (Mar 27, 2006)

Interesting, i did not see one rude or aggressive response. What are you? The forum snowflake. (Yes i know that was a little rude i admit).


----------



## Luciano Oliveira (Nov 9, 2017)

Carl.1 said:


> Interesting, i did not see one rude or aggressive response. What are you? The forum snowflake. (Yes i know that was a little rude i admit).


Your comment only reinforces my initial point of view.


----------



## noleblooded (Aug 21, 2017)

I think it should cost whatever you are comfortable spending and able to afford. Like others said, watches are something that none of us actually need, but most of us buy them anyway because of the joy they bring us.


----------



## Justsumguy (Nov 24, 2018)

Oleg1987 said:


> How much do you think your watch should cost to match your income?


Pardon my saying so, but this is a ridiculous premise. I assume it is based on the "engagement ring cost rule" (promulgated by the jewelry industry no doubt) that an engagement ring should cost approximately three month's gross salary. Your watch should cost whatever you want to spend on it. Some people feel it should be a few hundred, and some feel it should be a few thousand or more. Who cares?


----------



## Drumguy (Jun 24, 2014)

How much should your watch cost compared to your monthly average income? That's easy.............


----------



## Carl.1 (Mar 27, 2006)

Luciano Oliveira said:


> Your comment only reinforces my initial point of view.


Lighten up. No one was rude or aggressive and if my post offended you ......oh well.


----------



## Ticktocker (Oct 27, 2009)

Your watch should cost whatever you feel is justifiable. From what I've seen by dealing with friends and family, you may not want, like or be able to justify any watch that costs what you make in an average month. Some that average $8000 a month income like $800 watches and wouldn't pay $8000 for any watch and some that average $2000 a month find a way to comfortably spend $8000 on a watch. I don't think there is a definite "should cost". For me, it's not like buying a house or car. 

I would go crazy if I started to do the math before I bought a watch. If I can't afford it at the moment, I either wait until I can, quickly flip watches I haven't worn or take a look at what I can afford at the moment. For me, there are always watches I want, expensive, affordable and on the cheap.


----------



## zagato1750 (Sep 10, 2018)

Carl.1 said:


> Lighten up. No one was rude or aggressive and if my post offended you ......oh well.


Agreed

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Premise (Jul 31, 2016)

I'm a cheap ass when it comes to buying watches. Thinking about a month of pay to buy a watch makes my eyes water, though I can think of some sweet choices in that price range.


----------



## Nokie (Jul 4, 2011)

The watch I buy costs whatever it took me to save up for it....


----------



## Mnmcoll (Feb 3, 2018)

I buy watches because i like them and can afford them, it doesn't have anything to do with what my monthly average income.


----------



## Weetabix (Jun 10, 2018)

I'll try to take this seriously.

If you need one to impress people you work with or for, see what the people one level up wear. Dress for the job you want, not the job you have, right? Right now, I'm dressed as Batman.

For me, it has no relationship to my income. It has a relationship to what percentage of my unallocated funds I feel comfortable spending on a watch.


----------



## jtf8751 (Oct 8, 2015)

I agree, buy what you like.


----------



## Oleg1987 (Feb 12, 2019)

noleblooded said:


> I think it should cost whatever you are comfortable spending and able to afford. Like others said, watches are something that none of us actually need, but most of us buy them anyway because of the joy they bring us.


Agree!


----------



## Ray916MN (Feb 11, 2006)

The notion of gauging expenditures on luxury items based on income is fundamentally weak. It implies that income should be spent. Income should be saved. Savings should be spent. If you run your life spending your income, you will live a hand to mouth existence. You run your life, saying you can afford the payments which is always true if you can afford to not have savings.

You do a good job saving your income and spending a year's income on a watch can be no big deal. You do a poor job saving your income and you can be pawning that watch you could afford with your income, if your income is interrupted.


----------



## Mr.Sawyer (Jun 27, 2017)

i've never heard the cost of a watch put in terms of a persons monthly income. me personally, i saved "extra" money along with part of my monthly income for about 7 or 8 years before i finally bought my dream watch, iwc portuguese. i don't think there's any hard set rule. i agree with the ones who say buy what you like, but don't be foolish about it. I like any A. Lange but I'm not gonna go in debt to buy one.


----------



## Pastextian (Sep 9, 2018)

Whatever your budget has room for. Don't go broke over a watch.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


----------



## Cravings7 (Jan 18, 2019)

Pastextian said:


> Whatever your budget has room for. Don't go broke over a watch.
> 
> Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


Exactly. It really has nothing to do with your income. You can still have pretty good savings but just know your worth and make a budget.


----------



## socalmustang (Sep 26, 2013)

Peace. Buy what you like and can afford, just like everything else. Although I recommend saving up and going big when you can! 

Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk


----------



## Tricky73 (May 28, 2017)

Cost whatever you want there is no magic formula to work out what it ‘should’ cost


----------



## johnmichael (Oct 14, 2017)

Oleg1987 said:


> How much do you think your watch should cost to match your income?


Don't forget to tithe this month!


----------



## jkpa (Feb 8, 2014)

As many have said, it’s personal. I’d say never spend more than you can afford to flush down the toilet. These are pure luxuries after all. A $50 Casio will outlive you. (Boy, I love Casio but I digress). 

Never let peer pressure dictate how you live or spend your money. Nobody, I mean nobody, cares what you wear so don’t feel pressure to buy something to impress.


----------



## steadyrock (Aug 4, 2015)

36 times your annual income, not a cent less. Anything else makes you a peasant and we don’t allow those here. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## De Wolfe (Jul 23, 2015)

It should hurt your account and slow down your life progress, that way you'll enjoy and appreciate the watch


----------



## ibrar (Feb 3, 2017)

I think one should spend as long as it remains fun. Gone are the days when watch was a rich man’s gadget. 
For me I will only consider a watch for which I don’t have to save or once paid for the watch I don’t have to check my account to see what is left. 


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## jamesmartin11 (Feb 13, 2019)

It isn't a wise decision but yet again what is life without happiness? Thus if it maakes you happy then why not?


----------



## imaCoolRobot (Jan 1, 2014)

Carl.1 said:


> Ha ha it is not an engagement ring. There is no ratio for a watch, spend as little or as much as you are comfortable is the rule as it is a total luxury beyond the simple affordables that 'do the job'.


Engagement rings are a scam.


----------



## imaCoolRobot (Jan 1, 2014)

I take my net income, subtract my expenses, buy other cool stuff, and if I somehow have anything left over, I buy a watch.


----------



## Carl.1 (Mar 27, 2006)

imaCoolRobot said:


> Engagement rings are a scam.


I do not think they are. Buy one or don't! But if you do you give a declaration of love that lasts a lifetime. Call me old fashioned.


----------



## Ten-Ten (Feb 6, 2014)

Weetabix said:


> I'll try to take this seriously....
> .... Dress for the job you want, not the job you have, right? Right now, I'm dressed as Batman.


Weetabix wins!


----------



## sailon01 (May 20, 2015)

Oleg1987 said:


> How much do you think your watch should cost to match your income?


A bit of a pointless question. Its a tactic that the jewelry industry uses to get someone to justify an expensive purchase. The size of the stone in the ring has nothing to do with the success of the marriage. If this were the calculation, what would it be? Income per week, month or year??

Make smart purchases and after you have paid your taxes, your mortgage, your bills, funded your retirement account and put some away for a rainy day; then figure out what watch really speaks to you!


----------



## imaCoolRobot (Jan 1, 2014)

Carl.1 said:


> I do not think they are. Buy one or don't! But if you do you give a declaration of love that lasts a lifetime. Call me old fashioned.


Given a 40% divorce rate in the United States....
I say scam
My gf says...if I have $3000 to spend, put $2970 on camera gear and a vacation and $30 on the ring.


----------



## Carl.1 (Mar 27, 2006)

The divorce rate has nothing to do with it. As i say it is a declaration of love. The cost of the ring is immaterial. Just make sure the metal does not react to the skin.........not sure what your gorlfriend is getting for $30!


----------



## LCandela (Feb 13, 2017)

I like to keep it around a month’s salary, but I don’t like to put an exact number on it.


----------



## jkingrph (Feb 6, 2018)

Really whatever floats your boat! I'm mostly retired working about 1/2 day a week, but in one of the higher paid professions. Based on what I would make weekly if working full time, I generally go for watches in the range that would cost me 1 to 1 1/2 days pay, maybe a little more.


----------



## jkingrph (Feb 6, 2018)

imaCoolRobot said:


> Given a 40% divorce rate in the United States....
> I say scam
> My gf says...if I have $3000 to spend, put $2970 on camera gear and a vacation and $30 on the ring.


48 years ago when I got engaged, my wife to be did not want expensive. I was a jr Capt in the USAF, not really making that much, but doing ok, so ended up spending about what would make in a week-week and a half. I had orders for overseas, and we had to get furniture and some applicances when we got to our station as there was no base housing, we had to live on the economy in Izmir, Turkey, so needed the funds for more important things. I did buy her some nice, unique jewelry pieces while there, although she has never cared much for jewelery. Lately I have been buying her some nicer watches for special occasions and she has been thrilled as that I about the only jewelry other than her wedding ring she will wear.


----------



## jkingrph (Feb 6, 2018)

Really whatever floats your boat! I'm mostly retired working about 1/2 day a week, but in one of the higher paid professions. Based on what I would make weekly if working full time, I generally go for watches in the range that would cost me 1 to 1 1/2 days pay, maybe a little more.


----------



## imaCoolRobot (Jan 1, 2014)

Carl.1 said:


> The divorce rate has nothing to do with it. As i say it is a declaration of love. The cost of the ring is immaterial. Just make sure the metal does not react to the skin.........not sure what your gorlfriend is getting for $30!


https://qalo.com/collections/silicone-rings/products/qalo-womens-aqua-foxfire-silicone-ring


----------



## TgeekB (Nov 1, 2015)

Luciano Oliveira said:


> Wow, how many rude and aggressive responses. Op, I think you should evaluate your expenses vs income and see where you can go, but if your point is a month of salary for a year clock then I consider plausible, at least at the beginning.


Rude? I don't think anyone was rude at all. People should buy, and enjoy, watches because they like how they look not how much they cost.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## SeizeTheMeans (Dec 11, 2018)

Comfortable is the level I shoot for. I've actually been saving some coin, and I've said way more then I've ever applied to a watch before. The more I save, the less I want to spend it ALL on a watch.


----------



## zengineer (Dec 23, 2015)

I think for working people who earn a paycheck the amount you spend on watches, cars, guns, star wars figurines, sneakers, lap dances and any other non-essential stuff should be based on what you have left after basic things including a reasonable savings rate are satisfied. 10 grand a month in NYC might mean you should be buying a Seiko SKX or relying on the clock on the building across the street. That same income in other places might leave a few grand excess each month. 
Regardless, watches that cost anywhere near a month's pay even if you work at Subway are a luxury item and should only be purchased if you have everything else under control and don't need a loan to do so,

My entire collection of 6 barely amounts to a month's earnings and I probably have more into watches than 99% of the people I know.


----------



## Ron521 (Feb 20, 2014)

Speaking only for myself, the cost of my watches ranges from less than one hours wage to about 8 hours wage. But I have roughly 25 watches....even so, altogether they don't add up to a months' wage. I suppose I could have saved up my money and bought one single watch, but I don't really think any single watch that cost a month of my wages is actually any better at doing what watches do than the watches that I already own. It would be just decoration.

Some of the activities that I do while wearing my watches are pretty active, and I might now want to risk a very expensive watch during those activities. Better to have watches specifically suited to the purpose....so I have a G-Shock, and some nicer chronographs, some dive watches, etc.


----------



## Tommywine0 (Nov 11, 2015)

Well, if there is a rule like that, don’t tell all those guys wearing Apple watches. They’re going to be pi$$ed!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Golder (Apr 24, 2013)

Double post


----------



## Golder (Apr 24, 2013)

Yeesh, everyone here getting all fired up! Why does everyone think that a post like this is asking for THE ANSWER, to a question about reasonable spending on watches, and why do folks think this is such a ridiculous question? Of course there is not one answer, but perhaps the OP is interested to read a variety of responses from those of us who are in similar positions considering what is reasonable to spend on watches. Then the OP can decide which responses they identify with in order to make a decision they are comfortable with. 

So here is how I think about this and just take this as one reasonable mans thoughts. First I would like to echo other comments that what is important is not your income but your savings. Many people can make $8,000 a month and their financial positions can vary extremely despite having identical monthly incomes. Therefore my recommendation is to look at your LIQUID SAVINGS. Liquid savings is money you have either in a savings account or an investment account (not retirement account), that you could reasonably turn into $100 bills and put in a briefcase within a few days if you really had to. Also you should subtract any debt you have from this except for maybe your mortgage. So if you have $80k in the bank but a $30k car loan then you've got $50k. My personal opinion is that you really shouldn't spend more than 5% of your liquid savings on a watch. These savings are your security and your future, this money should be in the S&P 500 growing at a reasonable rate, not depreciating on your wrist and costing you in maintenance costs. So this means if you want that $8,000 rolex then you should have $160,000 in the bank or investment account. For myself, I've surpassed this threshold quite some time ago and my most expensive watch is $500 and I'm just now starting to think about my first luxury watch. Now I'm young and I've got three kids to put through college eventually so that impacts my thinking.

A luxury watch is an incredibly useless, frivolous thing. If you want to be a reasonable responsible adult then it should not impact your overall finances in any significant way. This is one mans opinion, think about it what you wish.


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

Golder said:


> Yeesh, everyone here getting all fired up! Why does everyone think that a post like this is asking for THE ANSWER, to a question about reasonable spending on watches, and why do folks think this is such a ridiculous question? Of course there is not one answer, but perhaps the OP is interested to read a variety of responses from those of us who are in similar positions considering what is reasonable to spend on watches. Then the OP can decide which responses they identify with in order to make a decision they are comfortable with.
> 
> So here is how I think about this and just take this as one reasonable mans thoughts. First I would like to echo other comments that what is important is not your income but your savings. Many people can make $8,000 a month and their financial positions can vary extremely despite having identical monthly incomes. Therefore my recommendation is to look at your LIQUID SAVINGS. Liquid savings is money you have either in a savings account or an investment account (not retirement account), that you could reasonably turn into $100 bills and put in a briefcase within a few days if you really had to. Also you should subtract any debt you have from this except for maybe your mortgage. So if you have $80k in the bank but a $30k car loan then you've got $50k. My personal opinion is that you really shouldn't spend more than 5% of your liquid savings on a watch. These savings are your security and your future, this money should be in the S&P 500 growing at a reasonable rate, not depreciating on your wrist and costing you in maintenance costs. So this means if you want that $8,000 rolex then you should have $160,000 in the bank or investment account. For myself, I've surpassed this threshold quite some time ago and my most expensive watch is $500 and I'm just now starting to think about my first luxury watch. Now I'm young and I've got three kids to put through college eventually so that impacts my thinking.
> 
> A luxury watch is an incredibly useless, frivolous thing. If you want to be a reasonable responsible adult then it should not impact your overall finances in any significant way. This is one mans opinion, think about it what you wish.


I think the issue people have is with the word _should_. As in there's some sort of imperative that a watch ought to be worth a certain amount. I, at least, perceived this topic as being less about fiscal responsibility in watch buying (i.e. what's the maximum I can / should spend), and more about watches as a wealth or status signaling device.


----------



## Adventureman (Sep 5, 2018)

A month income for a luxury watch sounds about right.


----------



## zengineer (Dec 23, 2015)

Adventureman said:


> A month income for a luxury watch _collection_ sounds about right.


Slight change in red and I'm with you.


----------



## Adventureman (Sep 5, 2018)

zengineer said:


> Slight change in red and I'm with you.


Target market for entry level luxury watch buyers is probably $100K and higher. That's $8333 a month pre-tax so about $5000 net? That's around the median for lower end luxury watches?


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

Adventureman said:


> Target market for entry level luxury watch buyers is probably $100K and higher. That's $8333 a month pre-tax so about $5000 net? That's around the median for lower end luxury watches?


That sounds like a reasonable watch collection to me. $100 000 a year isn't what it used to be. It's a healthy salary - but if you have other interests, and regular adult responsibilities (a mortgage, kids, food, bills, etc.) and you want a collection, I don't think you're spending that much per watch. If you're happy with a single watch - that changes things.


----------



## Adventureman (Sep 5, 2018)

$100K goes a lot further in rural America than it goes in Manhattan or Orange County, CA so always tricky to use general numbers. $5000 should buy a nice collection but not in luxury watches.


----------



## LosAngelesTimer (Aug 24, 2017)

Carl.1 said:


> Ha ha it is not an engagement ring. There is no ratio for a watch, spend as little or as much as you are comfortable is the rule as it is a total luxury beyond the simple affordables that 'do the job'.


Even the engagement ring thing - was it two months salary? - was something invented by DeBeers to get people to spend beyond their means. How do I know this? I used to write marketing copy for that accursed cabal of utter creeps but heck, they paid extremely well.


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

Adventureman said:


> $100K goes a lot further in rural America than it goes in Manhattan or Orange County, CA so always tricky to use general numbers. $5000 should buy a nice collection but not in luxury watches.


That depends a lot on what you call a "luxury" watch. But it seems a little odd to say that a watch costing $1000 isn't a luxury watch. At least from my perspective.


----------



## dan360 (Jun 3, 2012)

Ratios for purchasing items were made up by marketeers like DeBeers, etc.

Buy what you like. There are very few ratios one should really pay attn to in life. Watch price/income is not one of them.


----------



## TgeekB (Nov 1, 2015)

LosAngelesTimer said:


> Even the engagement ring thing - was it two months salary? - was something invented by DeBeers to get people to spend beyond their means. How do I know this? I used to write marketing copy for that accursed cabal of utter creeps but heck, they paid extremely well.


Exactly and it's amazing how many people fall for this marketing.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## amg786 (Jul 24, 2016)

I’ve always subscribed to the ‘buy according to one’s means’ philosophy 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TgeekB (Nov 1, 2015)

amg786 said:


> I've always subscribed to the 'buy according to one's means' philosophy
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


There's such a variety of watches that anyone can enjoy the hobby (and they all keep time!). No reason to go into debt.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## francorx (Feb 19, 2016)

The whole formula on what to spend is a scam perpetuated by Marketing. Diamonds (DeBeers) are the biggest scam artists trying to con the masses on some made up BS formula. For watches spend what you can afford. Its simple.


----------



## Weetabix (Jun 10, 2018)

TgeekB said:


> Exactly and it's amazing how many people fall for this marketing.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro


It mostly only matters that the women fall for it.

Sent from my VS996 using Tapatalk


----------



## LuxuryRevolution (Sep 7, 2018)

In my humble opinion, the watch you buy should reflect what you want in that watch. If you want an Breitling Chronomat 44 then buy one. If you want a Nautilus 5711 then save up and buy one. Hell you can trade up to what you want to save some money too. But that's just me


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

Weetabix said:


> It mostly only matters that the women fall for it.
> 
> Sent from my VS996 using Tapatalk


In my experience men are just as into peacocking with engagement rings as women are. The bigger, the flashier, the more carats, the better.


----------



## Weetabix (Jun 10, 2018)

TheWalrus said:


> In my experience men are just as into peacocking with engagement rings as women are. The bigger, the flashier, the more carats, the better.


That's funny! Mine is the simplest plain gold band we could find. My school class ring irritated me, and I always took it off and set it somewhere. I was pretty sure it would be unacceptable if I did that with my wedding ring, so I went small enough that I knew it wouldn't annoy me.


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

Weetabix said:


> That's funny! Mine is the simplest plain gold band we could find. My school class ring irritated me, and I always took it off and set it somewhere. I was pretty sure it would be unacceptable if I did that with my wedding ring, so I went small enough that I knew it wouldn't annoy me.


Obviously that observation doen't apply to everyone.

But in my experience - a guy that got engaged to a woman who wanted a big ring, was equally excited about buying her a big ring.

Women who want something simple and down to earth as an engagement ring, typically end up with guys that have a similar perspective. So the point, I guess, is that the advertising is directed at both men and women - and it works (or doesn't) on both men and women equally.


----------



## kanye_mouse (Jul 31, 2018)

TheWalrus said:


> Obviously that observation doen't apply to everyone.
> 
> But in my experience - a guy that got engaged to a woman who wanted a big ring, was equally excited about buying her a big ring.
> 
> Women who want something simple and down to earth as an engagement ring, typically end up with guys that have a similar perspective. So the point, I guess, is that the advertising is directed at both men and women - and it works (or doesn't) on both men and women equally.


I'm doing as much as I can to spread the word that a watch should be the male engagement ring: see here, for example.

As far as what it _should _cost, tough to say. I would *base it more on net worth* than income though, because you never know when that income might leave you (additionally, don't make a watch/lifestyle you can't afford your golden handcuffs tying you to a job you don't like).


----------



## 14060 (Nov 27, 2010)

Buy what appeals to you that you an comfortably afford. Lots of great watches from G-Shock to Patek.


----------



## Carl.1 (Mar 27, 2006)

kanye_mouse said:


> I'm doing as much as I can to spread the word that a watch should be the male engagement ring: see here, for example.
> 
> As far as what it _should _cost, tough to say. I would *base it more on net worth* than income though, because you never know when that income might leave you (additionally, don't make a watch/lifestyle you can't afford your golden handcuffs tying you to a job you don't like).


No to the first paragraph and no to the second.

Ladies get engagement rings. Men do not, nor an equivalent unless they want to be a lady! There should never be a formula for a watch, buy what you can afford and without stress.


----------



## Golder (Apr 24, 2013)

kanye_mouse said:


> I'm doing as much as I can to spread the word that a watch should be the male engagement ring: see here, for example.
> 
> As far as what it _should _cost, tough to say. I would *base it more on net worth* than income though, because you never know when that income might leave you (additionally, don't make a watch/lifestyle you can't afford your golden handcuffs tying you to a job you don't like).


I used to work for a company that was based in Pamplona Spain, and I worked with many Spaniards that were doing ~2 year stints in the US office of the company. I worked there when I got engaged so there was some lunchtime discussions about cultural differences around the issue. They told me that in Spain, the man spends far less money than typically is spent in the US on the engagement ring, and they said that tradition is that the woman or the womans family buys the man a nice watch usually some time between engagement and the wedding. When I told the couple guys I was close with how much I spent on the ring they were completely flabbergasted (and I didn't spend anywhere near the 3 month "rule"). One guy said: "how is it possible that there aren't women walking around the US missing a finger because they have been robbed and had their fingers cut off for their ring!"


----------



## Watchguy08 (Feb 28, 2019)

I don't think this is a thing, it's like Bills Gates wearing a Casio. I don't think you can find a watch that cost a months worth his salary.


----------



## expatwatcher (Mar 23, 2019)

i dont think this is a thing. i know americans are wired differently but for me income really doesnt count for either engagement ring or my own luxury purchases (which watches are obv a part of)

if anything purchasing a watch should be done with a certain % of your savings or hard net worth. if you have a negative networth thanks to student debt or car loans you are really just digging your hole deeper with any watch over a few hundred bucks.

the whole income only gets part of the equation if you have a couple hundred grand net worth and are still expected to earn well and save more, I think you can spend as much as 10-20% on a watch if you really want to. why not. 

if you inhertited your money and have no active income streams I think spending as low as 1% for luxury .... before getting your act together is dangerous


----------



## nomking77 (Nov 24, 2018)

Getting a watch which cost approximately your monthly income is really Insensitive to me.


----------



## meking (May 7, 2019)

Carl.1 said:


> The divorce rate has nothing to do with it. As i say it is a declaration of love. The cost of the ring is immaterial. Just make sure the metal does not react to the skin.........not sure what your gorlfriend is getting for $30!


Admittedly, I got sucked into the "trap" set by the industry and bought my wife a reasonably expensive engagement ring (which she adores, btw). When it was my turn to choose my wedding band, I went with a ~$10 stainless steel ring from Amazon. I agree with you--more about the sentiment than the materials.


----------



## jalquiza (Jan 4, 2014)

> Should your watch cost approximately your monthly average income?

This seems janky/unwise.


----------



## horrij1 (Oct 1, 2014)

I bought a Rolex Submariner when I was in the service in 1984. Interestingly I was able to afford it because I didn’t receive my hazardous duty (jump) pay for about a year, and once I received that back pay check, i spent it all on the Sub date (16800). The cost was about a month’s pay, and to be honest I don’t think anyone ever gave me a hard time over that choice. I was not a collector, and only owned that single watch. If I fast forward to today, if I were to spend a month’s salary on a new watch from an AD, I am not sure that even gets me much beyond certain Rolex steel sports models like a GMT or Daytona. If that were to be my only watch, I don’t think anyone in my family would have a problem with that either. So, ya for me personally maybe one month’s salary for a single watch guy is a decent starting point.


----------



## zcat1958 (Jan 31, 2015)

You buy the most expensive watch you can afford. If you have a Timex income, it's a Timex, if you have a Rolex income, it's a Rolex. If you have a Timex income and you wear a Rolex, you might want to review your priorities. Now, it's possible to save a bit over time to make such a purchase as long as you are not ignoring your other responsibilities.


----------



## Msiekierski (Sep 13, 2016)

It all depends on your financial situation and other hobbies. I get an eye roll from some guys when they find out what I spent on watches...but they are fully justified to blow all that and more on boats, fishing gear, cameras, what have you. As long as you’re not going in debt because of it, go for it and enjoy!


----------



## Kjian414 (Jun 9, 2019)

My watch and income have no correlation


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

Kjian414 said:


> My watch and income have no correlation


I would hope there's some correlation. Otherwise you could be buying million dollar Pateks on a part time student worker's salary.


----------



## Viper98912 (Feb 27, 2018)

Depends on your habits and other hobbies

Smoke? Yea those aren't cheap
Bars? Definitely not cheap
Alcohol? Has it's pluses and minuses...
Monthly car payment?
Young kids with activities?

It's all relative to what your left with and what makes you "happy". Many (most) people would freak out on this kind of cost for a watch, but if it makes you happy, do it.


----------



## diver321 (Jun 21, 2019)

Would spend what you are comfortable with and can afford!


----------



## TgeekB (Nov 1, 2015)

TheWalrus said:


> I would hope there's some correlation. Otherwise you could be buying million dollar Pateks on a part time student worker's salary.


How would one do that?

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro


----------



## CaptainCustard (Jun 8, 2019)

My 10c:

You buy what you like, as long as it is within affordable limits. 

Forget about ratios, this is watch ownership not day trading. There are no candlestick charts telling you what to buy (yet).

Buy a watch that you think suits you and looks nice. 

A months salary is a lot of money. What will you or your family be going without to get that watch? 

I had a fellow student who failed Corporate Finance in his MBA. He had tears in his eyes. I told him not to worry, do it again next semester. He told me his kids had the worst Christmas ever, no presents, no Christmas dinner, to pay for his studies. He had let them down. He dropped out - and that was an MBA. 

I tell you mate, watching your son learn to swim for the first time on a holiday, or walking on a moonlit beach at midnight with the girl of your dreams, or doing one of the Seven Summits, or a host of other memorable things, far outweigh a watch on your arm. 

FWIW I would give up every single Rolex I own to walk once on a beach at midnight with a certain girl, or to do one more Summit. (the easy ones are easy, the hard ones will kill you - girls and mountains).


----------



## zcat1958 (Jan 31, 2015)

So much of what we do has to depend on judgement and planning. Being a WIS, I can always find a way to justify the next purchase that I "absolutely need." In my approach, I make sure my children and wife have the things that make them happy. After the bills are paid, I put money into my vacation account and of course my retirement account is covered as well. Then, I make a monthly deposit into an account for my stuff. My stuff includes the toys that I love: Cars, Watches 1911's... At the end of every year or so, when I have an itch and the opportunity presents itself for that thing that is occupying my head, the money is there. Or at least, a large part of it. It's all in the budget and how you handle your disposable cash.


----------



## carlosimery (May 13, 2019)

Stupid post


----------



## zcat1958 (Jan 31, 2015)

carlosimery said:


> Stupid post


Sorry you feel that way. This is a conversation, a discussion. As you grow here, I'm sure you'll see how much you can learn from positively participating.


----------



## LosAngelesTimer (Aug 24, 2017)

carlosimery said:


> Stupid post


Don't be so hard on yourself.


----------



## NapoleonDynamite (Jul 30, 2016)

Oleg1987 said:


> How much do you think your watch should cost to match your income?


You seem to think the majority of us only have one watch! Haha.

Sent from my SM-G950F using Tapatalk


----------



## yuji (May 23, 2018)

Should be as much or as little as you feel comfortable spending! If having this watch means that you have to eat instant noodles every day and sell your house, it's probably not a good idea.


----------



## Atom_99 (Feb 3, 2014)

I tried to come up with a framework and rules of thumb for a watch budget but all I ended up doing was tweaking my rules to allow me to get what I wanted. So I would say buy whatever you can afford to pay cash for and won’t suffer too much from the depreciation and be done with it.


----------



## urbino (Jun 28, 2015)

Your watch should cost approximately what you want to pay for a watch.


----------



## slickman (Nov 22, 2012)

Just buy what you want and are comfortable paying for. At the end of the day, it’s what makes you happy and shouldn’t correlate to income. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Fredette (Jun 11, 2019)

Doesn't matter how much the watch costs. If you buy at the right price you can always sell and make a profit or break even later when you want something else. Use sites like eBay and chrono24 to check the market. What watch are you thinking about?


----------



## LForward1 (Jul 23, 2019)

I have hall of watches, old and vintage, some of them are costing now thousands of dollars, but I bought them cheap, and I will neer spent a monthly income on an watch, only if it is my favorite from '76


----------



## jz1094 (Jul 19, 2016)

watch = 6 yr salary, jk it doesnt matter. I know people who make 50k and wear a rolex and people who make 250k who wear timex


----------



## toxy (Nov 10, 2018)

Personally your income to your price of watch does not matter buy a watch because you love it enjoy your watch as much as you can worry less about the pricce relative to your income.


----------



## Maverixk (May 19, 2014)

Some of my watches costs a years salary? \

I dont believe in the 1 week 1 month bs


----------



## Atom_99 (Feb 3, 2014)

No. Like any habit, whatever you can afford while being able handle your business. Just cuz you make $20k a month doesn’t mean you should be looking for a royal oak if you have tuition, medical bills, debt etc.


----------



## ADAMSWATCHCOLLECTION (Apr 16, 2020)

Nokie said:


> The watch I buy costs whatever it took me to save up for it....


Well can't deny that logic 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## ShortOnTime (Dec 22, 2013)

I think when you're adult with various expenses/responsibilties you have a pretty good feel for what you can get away with buying. I never put pen to paper for anything, but I know what I make, what my expenses are, and how much extra I have. I know how much debt i'm willing to get into for how long. 

I just bought what is likely to be the most expensive watch I will ever want to own--a GO panoreserve. It had an MSRP of a sliver under $10k. I knew that well before I bought it. I knew that gray and used market prices are well below that. I knew what the general range I wanted to sp3nd was---but right there, I just trimmed about 25% off the cost of a new one at msrp. Money saved. I also ended up selling 7 watches, the proceeds from which went to the GO. I have some cash back accounts and my inlaws give me a few hundred bucks for my birthday and christmas. That all went towards the GO. 

Before I pulled the trigger on gray/preowned, I tried out the cost at a single AD. They gave me a price right there with the other sources. So I bought it on the spot. At the end of the day, the the real money out of my pocket was about 40% of MSRP. So that sort of thing really helps offset costs. I will likely do something similar when I get my next chronograph. I gotta a lot of crap I can sell off that I have no plans to use which will help future watch costs. 

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


----------



## hokedli83 (Mar 7, 2020)

toxy said:


> Personally your income to your price of watch does not matter buy a watch because you love it enjoy your watch as much as you can worry less about the pricce relative to your income.


I'm always so surprised how lazily do people handle money here.
My grail watch is a Submariner, but when I consider that I should work almost half a year to earn that amount of money (and probably several years to save it) I always go to the conclusion that no matter how much I would enjoy it, it just doesn't worth it. To be honest, probably I would never enjoyit it, as I would be too afraid to wear such an expensive piece.


----------



## mikemark (Aug 11, 2019)

hokedli83 said:


> I'm always so surprised how lazily do people handle money here.
> My grail watch is a Submariner, but when I consider that I should work almost half a year to earn that amount of money (and probably several years to save it) I always go to the conclusion that no matter how much I would enjoy it, it just doesn't worth it. To be honest, probably I would never enjoyit it, as I would be too afraid to wear such an expensive piece.


Why would it take you so long to afford a Sub?

Don't want you to take this as an attack. Genuinely curious.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## hokedli83 (Mar 7, 2020)

mikemark said:


> Why would it take you so long to afford a Sub?
> 
> Don't want you to take this as an attack. Genuinely curious.
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I live in a country where an average yearly salary is about a price of a Submariner. So if average Joe here does not buy anything for a year (not even food) then he can buy a Sub.  I've have salary which considered pretty good here, but a Sub is still far away.


----------



## cowboyjack (Apr 21, 2020)

The single wealthiest man I ever knew wore a Timex from WalMart.


----------



## humzark (Jun 1, 2019)

It all depends on the person. Some would rather spend more on a watch than others. Can’t really go by income 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## SolarPower (May 14, 2012)

You should strive to make your average monthly income to match your watch cost


----------



## Glock2710 (Jun 4, 2006)

Interesting topic for sure. I never really thought about it this way. I’ve owned watches at various price ranges but did not base it on salary. It was more about what I had saved at that time and for my most expensive, a special 20 year anniversary. So my watch has multiple meanings to me making it beyond special.


----------



## Mr.Jones82 (Jul 15, 2018)

mikemark said:


> hokedli83 said:
> 
> 
> > I'm always so surprised how lazily do people handle money here.
> ...


Yeah, weird...you mean not everyone can just drop 8k (or more...) on a sub?


----------



## SolarPower (May 14, 2012)

Mr.Jones82 said:


> Yeah, weird...you mean not everyone can just drop 8k (or more...) on a sub?


Or way more...That's why I said- You should strive to make your average monthly income to match your watch cost. This is a correct way of thinking.  No matter how many goals the rival scores we score more!


----------



## mdinana (Apr 14, 2014)

hokedli83 said:


> I'm always so surprised how lazily do people handle money here.
> My grail watch is a Submariner, but when I consider that I should work almost half a year to earn that amount of money (and probably several years to save it) I always go to the conclusion that no matter how much I would enjoy it, it just doesn't worth it. To be honest, probably I would never enjoyit it, as I would be too afraid to wear such an expensive piece.


I don't think "lazily" is the right word.

Maybe casually. Haphazardly. Frivilously.

My salary varies greatly, from paycheck to paycheck. If I wanted, I have some months where I could barely cover monthly expenses, and other months where I could pay cash for a Submariner - I'm fortunate to have a steady job and a side job that allows me to pick up shifts when I want to.

I suspect, like many others, that I'll never drop $8k on a watch, because the Household Finance Committee won't approve.

To the OP, the most I spent was $1500 on a Breitling. I ended up getting rid of it, and currently most expensive is a TSAR. So, for me, a watch should be under one day's work.


----------



## Analog4ever (Aug 25, 2018)

Depends solely on the individual, and their priorities. We all tend to have slightly different perspectives in this regard.


----------



## Margahm (May 10, 2020)

A responsible person should meet all their needs first, and save for the future. Past that you should spend how it makes you happy. Some people will spend all thier spare cash on a safari once every five years, others on surfing every weekend or their pub every night. Put it all into watches or split it between cars, motorcycles and lower mid range pieces. 

The only advice I would feel comfortable giving to people I don't know is to start small. You may find that you aren't as into scuba or hang gliding or watches as you initially thought and they just don't make you happy. Best if you didn't spend too much before you learn that.


----------



## King0424 (Dec 27, 2015)

Oleg1987 said:


> How much do you think your watch should cost to match your income?


Yeaaahhhh...That's not really a possible question to answer. 
Everyone has different situations and tendencies.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## texwatch (Nov 10, 2019)

There should be no reference to a ratio to income. Many of us buy high and low end watch just because we want too. It's all about the budget you have at the time and the watch that catches your eye. As long as you can pay your bills and put a little away you should buy what ever makes you happy.


----------



## brianinCA (Jan 13, 2014)

It really depends on your situation. If you are up to your eyeballs in debt and have lots of expenses and people who depend on you, then spending a month's income (or even a week's) income on an unnecessary watch is too much. Impossible to answer this question universally. Use your best judgment and make spend however much you are comfortable spending.


----------



## mg512 (Jun 1, 2020)

I really actually like ratio rules. The reason being is that all of the advice to do what makes you happy is snowflake nonsense. Numbers are a very rational thing. We also have emotional value too. We need to balance those two halves of our selves. You have to decide where you want to be in 5, 10, and 20 years. How much of your net worth you want to dedicate to your watches is a better gauge than how much of your income you want to dedicate. And it should probably pertain to your entire collection and not just one watch. My humble opinion is that your watch collection should be no more than 3% of your net worth if you're under 45 (when you're younger you need more years of compound growth from the stock market). So let's say your net worth is 1,000,000 USD, then your watch collection could be $30,000. Someone with a net worth of $100,000 could have a $3,000 watch or watch collection. Of course, I think a 1% net worth collection would be totally fine too. You hit your first million, buy a Rolex Submariner or GMT. 

This is my view on it. I reserve the right to amend it or rescind it.


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

mg512 said:


> I really actually like ratio rules. The reason being is that all of the advice to do what makes you happy is snowflake nonsense. Numbers are a very rational thing. We also have emotional value too. We need to balance those two halves of our selves. You have to decide where you want to be in 5, 10, and 20 years. How much of your net worth you want to dedicate to your watches is a better gauge than how much of your income you want to dedicate. And it should probably pertain to your entire collection and not just one watch. My humble opinion is that your watch collection should be no more than 3% of your net worth if you're under 45 (when you're younger you need more years of compound growth from the stock market). So let's say your net worth is 1,000,000 USD, then your watch collection could be $30,000. Someone with a net worth of $100,000 could have a $3,000 watch or watch collection. Of course, I think a 1% net worth collection would be totally fine too. You hit your first million, buy a Rolex Submariner or GMT.
> 
> This is my view on it. I reserve the right to amend it or rescind it.


There are still too many variables for any hard and fast rules to apply. If you have a net worth of a Million dollars - but you also want to drive a new BMW every year. And have the biggest mortgage you could afford at the longest term. And eat out every night. And have a variety of other expensive hobbies and interests. Then the $30 k limit makes very little sense. Similarly, if you have a less extensive net worth - but you drive a 20 year old car. Are aggressively paying off your mortgage. Are saving money. And have no (or few) other interests and eat Kraft dinner most nights. You can probably spend more than 3% of your net worth on a watch collection.


----------



## mg512 (Jun 1, 2020)

TheWalrus said:


> There are still too many variables for any hard and fast rules to apply. If you have a net worth of a Million dollars - but you also want to drive a new BMW every year. And have the biggest mortgage you could afford at the longest term. And eat out every night. And have a variety of other expensive hobbies and interests. Then the $30 k limit makes very little sense. Similarly, if you have a less extensive net worth - but you drive a 20 year old car. Are aggressively paying off your mortgage. Are saving money. And have no (or few) other interests and eat Kraft dinner most nights. You can probably spend more than 3% of your net worth on a watch collection.


My response would be that there should be a % of budget allocated towards cars or frivolities that have an ongoing cost/payment associated with them. If it's your first car it goes in your necessities column. You could follow the 50/30/20 rule. 50% of net income is necessities. 30% is frivolities. 20% is savings (I would include pre-tax savings and yes I said net so you're going to have to calculate net as if you had no 401k, then when you make 401k you do the math to account for the largesse of the government and your employer).

A watch should not be part of a monthly budget though. Don't buy them on credit!

So I'd say there's two types of purchases those that are a reallocation of your net worth. And those that are a monthly budget item. Most of your monthly budget items should be utilitarian but can have a bit of panache.

So for the gentleman who has put 1 million away in net worth but has expensive car habits, that's going to be an ongoing hole in his wallet much worse than allocating 3% of his net worth to watches and if he follows the 50/30/20 personal finance rules he should be fine even with his car shopping frivolities.


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

mg512 said:


> My response would be that there should be a % of budget allocated towards cars or frivolities that have an ongoing cost/payment associated with them. If it's your first car it goes in your necessities column. You could follow the 50/30/20 rule. 50% of net income is necessities. 30% is frivolities. 20% is savings (I would include pre-tax savings and yes I said net so you're going to have to calculate net as if you had no 401k, then when you make 401k you do the math to account for the largesse of the government and your employer).
> 
> A watch should not be part of a monthly budget though. Don't buy them on credit!
> 
> ...


But I guess what I'm saying is that if a person _really, really, REALLY_ liked watches - they could still sink 30% of their income into them. A person making $100 000 a year would in theory be able to buy a nice Patek or two. Of course they better be really sure that watches are their one and only frivolous love.

I'm not 100% sure I agree with not buying a watch on credit. I know it's controversial - but I think it can, sometimes, be just as wise (or at least no less unwise) as saving up and buying a watch once you have the money in the bank. Obviously that's highly dependent on a lot of factors - interest paid, ability to pay it off, security of employment, other debt, and so on and so forth.


----------



## mg512 (Jun 1, 2020)

You can be the devil on the guy's shoulder and I'll be the nerdy accountant angel.


----------



## ShortOnTime (Dec 22, 2013)

mg512 said:


> I really actually like ratio rules. The reason being is that all of the advice to do what makes you happy is snowflake nonsense.


The thing is your "rules" are also snowflake nonsense. Seems like the percentages you mention are also pulled out of your rear end. Responsibilities like housing and children have a significant impact on what you can actually afford. Then add in other things people buy with their money and it's impossible to come up with any "rules" that apply to everyone--which is the topic of the thread.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk


----------



## Kspowell13 (Jun 17, 2019)

Also, consider whether you're willing to liquidate the watch. If so, and it retains its value, then sure, spend a lot and then sell it if you need the cash back. If it's the right watch, maybe you'll make some money on it and get to wear it the meantime. If it's not, though, and you won't or can't sell it, then the equation changes.


----------



## upupa epops (Apr 24, 2016)

Depends how much of that paycheck is already committed. The rest is all up to individual priorities. 

Fairly easy.


----------



## Kspowell13 (Jun 17, 2019)

Bill Gates wears a $50 Casio. Why not? Whatever you want to wear, just own it.


----------



## j1n (Feb 28, 2011)

Whatever gives you enjoyment and what you can afford without going into debt. If you don't have debt, and the watch retains its value, you could always sell it and it generally wont have too much of a hit on your net worth.


----------



## ZisguyZaphod (Feb 20, 2019)

My entire collection is less than my monthly income.


----------



## Gordon Gartrelle (Oct 15, 2018)

Oleg1987 said:


> How much do you think your watch should cost to match your income?


There should definitely be a guideline, especially for those that need some advice. Spending too little will not work out. Spending too much is no good either.

If you are at a point where you can then spend no less than what you would spend on haircuts over 15.2 years.

Now someone please tell me to do exactly that, please.


----------



## Kuzushi (Mar 3, 2016)

I think these kind of rules are artificial and silly. Everyone's situation is different. 

Just like the cost of engagement ring:monthly income ratio. It encourages snobbery if you underspend. It can encourage overspending if you happen to have a few good months followed by some poor months. 

ppl should just get a handle on their spending and how it fits into their lives and values and not be bound by societal rules.

Edit: Also, as far as rules go, the math on this doesn't make any sense. A $500 sarb033 should be worn by people living in (north american) poverty making $6K a year?


----------



## SolarPower (May 14, 2012)

The focus should be on driving your [average] income to the point where this question is irrelevant


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

SolarPower said:


> The focus should be on driving your [average] income to the point where this question is irrelevant


Oh good God no. The focus should be on minimizing desires so that you can live comfortably on your [average] income and can avoid turning your life in to a perverse amalgam of stress, fatigue, and disintegrating physical health.


----------



## Noelandry (Nov 21, 2019)

Perhaps a watch collection of say 5 or 6 to line up with your monthly income? One “grail”. A couple mid range and a couple tool watches? One singular to line up with monthly income would result in a fine, fine watch for most people marking 50 to 60k per year. $200 to $300k would be one hell of a watch!


----------



## Tekkamaki (Aug 6, 2018)

10% of my monthly income is max. I already have 15% monthly tied up in my boat (moorage/fuel/upkeep & repair). Priorities. The boat is like our second home.


----------



## Baldnyc (Jun 16, 2020)

Depends on your income. If you’re a billionaire I wouldn’t expect you to spend. Large percentage 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Mr.Sawyer (Jun 27, 2017)

Wow!, this question has been ongoing more than a year. Well here's my two cents, "whatever man". I know many of the responses have been, buy what you like and can afford, and I totally agree. I have never once taken my monthly income into consideration. I've been buying / collecting since the early 90's, my income has changed. I saved up for my potuguese for 10 years, so comparing monthly income to that isn't even a thing. Bottom line, buy what u can when you can.


----------



## SolarPower (May 14, 2012)

TheWalrus said:


> Oh good God no. The focus should be on minimizing desires so that you can live comfortably on your [average] income and can avoid turning your life in to a perverse amalgam of stress, fatigue, and disintegrating physical health.


"perverse amalgam of stress, fatigue, and disintegrating physical health" - seriously?
Being in a good shape and being financially independent is more about doing what you really like and therefore being successful in what you do. Make more than what you spend. Don't minimize your desires, have a goal and work towards it. Different mentality for different ppl


----------



## Baldnyc (Jun 16, 2020)

There will never be a general rule for this. I’m not sure why you’d want to try to make one. People will try to save and then there will be people like myself that don’t need to flex that hard. My most expensive piece is an ap which is probably more of a weekly income. I’d never spend my monthly on one watch. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## TheWalrus (Mar 16, 2009)

SolarPower said:


> "perverse amalgam of stress, fatigue, and disintegrating physical health" - seriously?
> Being in a good shape and being financially independent is more about doing what you really like and therefore being successful in what you do. Make more than what you spend. Don't minimize your desires, have a goal and work towards it. Different mentality for different ppl


Being financially independent isn't the same thing as 'driving your income to the point where questions about cost' are irrelevant. I've seen far too many people burn out chasing that kind of dream. I've also seen a lot of people think that if they could only make money off of their passions, they'd be all set. End up destroying both their income and their passions. Nope - just give me a secure monthly salary to live on, doing a job I don't mind. I'll save some of it. Invest some of it. And enjoy some of it.


----------



## SolarPower (May 14, 2012)

TheWalrus said:


> Being financially independent isn't the same thing as 'driving your income to the point where questions about cost' are irrelevant. I've seen far too many people burn out chasing that kind of dream. I've also seen a lot of people think that if they could only make money off of their passions, they'd be all set. End up destroying both their income and their passions. Nope - just give me a secure monthly salary to live on, doing a job I don't mind. I'll save some of it. Invest some of it. And enjoy some of it.


I understand what you saying, but I disagree. The focus isn't the money. The focus is to do what you love either through good employment or running your own business or both. Doing what you love doing brings lots of enjoyment in the life and more often than not makes people successful in what they do, which usually translates in financial progress and success. Although the money does not bring happiness, the more one makes the more opportunities to go do things, experience things, see places, invest in new endeavors etc. one has. And at the end of the day, once what I call financial independence is built one can buy a watch (s)he wants with no need to think about the cost vs monthly income. Some of the watches sure may cost so much that anyone still would think about dropping so much dough for a watch, but this is at the level well above monthly or even annual income.


----------



## JD10 (Dec 26, 2017)

Oleg1987 said:


> How much do you think your watch should cost to match your income?


I've said this in a previous thread but I believe if you can buy it 3x, you can afford it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## JimBianchi (Sep 18, 2019)

My wife’s engagement ring was about one months salary (1990) or $1k. 
I current most expense 3 watches don’t make my current one month income, I am simply to practical to buy a watch that expensive. 
My OP39 was an impulse buy and I doubt I’d do it again soon. Too many great watches in the sub 1k range, my sweet spot.


----------



## obomomomo (Nov 4, 2014)

I think the one month salary rule was valid back in the day when a man's watch really meant something. I remember reading a vintage article from the early 70's saying something of the sort. Then a man would have only one quality watch or two at most at any one time that would be expected to last his lifetime or for a good many years at least. Nowadays with cheap quartz and smartphones available the value of a man's watch is not held in the same importance and high regard.


----------



## drlagares (Jul 13, 2020)

Im just here for the comments.


----------



## skim0039 (Mar 12, 2017)

Watch like every non-essential spending, should cost what you have budgeted for that item. Don't think of it as how much it should cost as ratio of income and don't finance a watch thinking you can afford the monthly payment.


----------



## Henry Horology (Jan 28, 2015)

Oleg1987 said:


> How much do you think your watch should cost to match your income?


3 months


----------



## 5.39×10^−44 s (Feb 15, 2020)

Carl.1 said:


> Ha ha it is not an engagement ring. There is no ratio for a watch, spend as little or as much as you are comfortable is the rule as it is a total luxury beyond the simple affordables that 'do the job'.


I own a diamond/gem manufacturing company with a jewelry subsidiary. You absolutely don't need to spend some arbitrary ratio of your income on an engagement ring either. Like any purchase, it depends on your discretionary income. If you're living paycheck to paycheck, you shouldn't spend 3 or even 1 month of your income on a ring. Especially if you haven't even been able to get a mortgage yet. If someone makes $500k/yr and 60% of that is discretionary, then go buck wild. Even then, it's up to your preference. I have clients who make $5M/yr that spent $5k on their ERing, and I know some that make $400k/yr who spent $100k.


----------



## brianinCA (Jan 13, 2014)

No such thing as "should". I have many watches, none of which cost more than one month's salary, but not because of any rule, just because that's what I'm currently comfortable with. Spend whatever you're comfortable with.


----------



## Pongster (Jan 7, 2017)

My monthly income varies


----------

