ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Clay · 1 June 2014, 01:54 AM

So here you have two (For the purpose of this post) Identical watches…

The model number is unimportant…

The only different between the two; One has White markers and hands and one has markers and hands that have an off white Patina to them that matches…

Question: Would you pay:

More for the watch WITH the Patina???

More for the watch WITHOUT the Patina???

Or do you feel that they would be worth the same amount of money???

And if you would pay MORE…Then how much more, % wise…10%, 20…???

Vincent65 · 1 June 2014, 02:22 AM

Well, one thing's for sure - sellers will add a premium for it, so it's whether that's what one would want/would pay extra for, I suppose!

I like patination, so I'd be willing to pay a bit extra, but hard to put a %age on it. Maybe 10%? Certainly not a fifth.

CrownMe · 1 June 2014, 02:27 AM

I would pay more for patina as long as it's original. Mainly because creamy patina is one of the features I like most about vintage. It gives it a great charm.

While I still like vintage watches with snow white plots I just prefer nice patina.

unclesallie · 1 June 2014, 02:31 AM

patina is so cool. yes. pay more, enjoy a whole lot more.
that said, all of this stuff with watches is subjective....it's what YOU enjoy.

David Woo · 1 June 2014, 02:32 AM

some models just come that way

Baco Noir · 1 June 2014, 02:38 AM

Interesting question Clay. My answer is yes and no! I'd pay a bit more for one with 'light' patina, but once it gets too dark, I'm not even interested in buying it. So for me it would range from +10-15% to -100%

GinNtonic · 1 June 2014, 02:40 AM

No, I would buy a watch without it and wear it for years until it got it.

andromeda160 · 1 June 2014, 03:10 AM

It dosn't work like that ginntonic, usually the patina comes from lack of uv exposure. I personally would pay more for a white markered watch. From pictures I always liked watches with patina, but when I actually tried them on the white markers struck my fancy. I like watches that look like NOS, and I most certainly wouldn't pay extra for discoloration. Someone posted a mil sub a few months back that lost it's patina after a few weeks of wear as well, which would also suck, pay 10% extra for something that possibly fades away.

ExplorerChris · 1 June 2014, 03:21 AM

If that's the look I'm going for and the patina is original sure. They are going to charge more for it anyway.

mluther · 1 June 2014, 03:23 AM

Over two identical watches I would choose the one with the patina - however, would only consider "normal" creamy patina as opposed to "orange". I have experienced patina reversal to a certain extent, so now would be less likely to pay more than a 10% premium. For me it is one of the charms of vintage - white plots don't do it for me. Great question Clay..

Ben39 · 1 June 2014, 05:17 AM

It's all about patina clay:)

southtexas · 1 June 2014, 06:22 AM

Yes I'd pay more for light patina.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

bluemartinifan · 1 June 2014, 06:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mluther

Over two identical watches I would choose the one with the patina - however, would only consider "normal" creamy patina as opposed to "orange". I have experienced patina reversal to a certain extent, so now would be less likely to pay more than a 10% premium. For me it is one of the charms of vintage - white plots don't do it for me. Great question Clay..

Michael said it well. I have a 16750 that came with stunning patina and has already begun to lighten up - I still love it and my lesson is once I wear it the look will likely change. I would pay extra, I am not attracted to stark white plots.

GinNtonic · 1 June 2014, 07:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andromeda160

It dosn't work like that ginntonic, usually the patina comes from lack of uv exposure. I personally would pay more for a white markered watch. From pictures I always liked watches with patina, but when I actually tried them on the white markers struck my fancy. I like watches that look like NOS, and I most certainly wouldn't pay extra for discoloration. Someone posted a mil sub a few months back that lost it's patina after a few weeks of wear as well, which would also suck, pay 10% extra for something that possibly fades away.

Is tropical the one that is from sun exposure?

Beaumont Miller II · 1 June 2014, 07:14 AM

I definitely might.

ss5422 · 1 June 2014, 07:35 AM

I would pay some premium for even patina. With photoshop I made the picture on the right which has just about enough patina for me.

magnetized · 1 June 2014, 07:49 AM

creamy patina attracts me on vintage,but not orange

stmoore · 1 June 2014, 08:30 AM

I'd pay a small premium for patina, but nothing orange.

I'd also pay a small premium for tickets to see Harold Bacon's standup act and traveling watch display.

crowncollection · 1 June 2014, 08:38 AM

I would pay a little more

AWS · 1 June 2014, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stmoore

I'd pay a small premium for patina, but nothing orange.

I'd also pay a small premium for tickets to see Harold Bacon's standup act and traveling watch display.

springer · 1 June 2014, 10:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CrownMe

I would pay more for patina as long as it's original. Mainly because creamy patina is one of the features I like most about vintage. It gives it a great charm.

While I still like vintage watches with snow white plots I just prefer nice patina.

X2. I will, and have paid premiums based on dial patina.

Max72 · 1 June 2014, 10:17 AM

I would pay more for patina. It's a good 70% of the visual impact of the watch.
I'm a patina addict, not only I look for it in Rolex dials but on other collectibles of interest too like WWII militaria.

EdwardHBLW · 1 June 2014, 10:20 AM

I would, but it would depend on the patina as others have said...

z32turbo · 1 June 2014, 10:24 AM

I probably wouldn't.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

StaceeJaxx · 1 June 2014, 12:29 PM

Nope

BNA/LION · 1 June 2014, 12:39 PM

The creamy stuff, for sure.

slcbbrown · 1 June 2014, 12:46 PM

No

springer · 1 June 2014, 01:04 PM

Pumpkin patina!

One you don't see very often.

1680 Submariner, Mark I

soundserious · 1 June 2014, 03:07 PM

If it looks right then of course, the dial is what you see most!

Ben39 · 1 June 2014, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bluemartinifan

Michael said it well. I have a 16750 that came with stunning patina and has already begun to lighten up - I still love it and my lesson is once I wear it the look will likely change. I would pay extra, I am not attracted to stark white plots.

Well said, cud'nt agree more mate

1 June 2014, 01:54 AM	#1
Clay Banned Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Up a tree Posts: 4,001	Would you pay "Extra" for Patina…??? So here you have two (For the purpose of this post) Identical watches… The model number is unimportant… The only different between the two; One has White markers and hands and one has markers and hands that have an off white Patina to them that matches… Question: Would you pay: More for the watch WITH the Patina??? More for the watch WITHOUT the Patina??? Or do you feel that they would be worth the same amount of money??? And if you would pay MORE…Then how much more, % wise…10%, 20…???

1 June 2014, 02:38 AM	#6
Baco Noir "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2007 Real Name: Roger Location: Colorado Watch: this ya'll Posts: 4,962	Interesting question Clay. My answer is yes and no! I'd pay a bit more for one with 'light' patina, but once it gets too dark, I'm not even interested in buying it. So for me it would range from +10-15% to -100% __________________ Current Collection: Rolex 126619LB, 116710BLNR, and 216570 polar Explorer II; Omega Apollo 8 Speedmaster and Planet Ocean 42; Tudor BB Bronze Bucherer Blue Edition; Nomos Neomatik 42; Breitling Aerospace, Avenger Blackbird, & SuperOcean 44; Doxa 300 Pro Carbon; Stowa Limette; Laco Napa Flieger; Mickey Mouse Timex Electric; and dare I say it...an Apple Watch too

1 June 2014, 03:21 AM	#9
ExplorerChris "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2014 Real Name: Chris Location: Ontario, Canada Watch: Explorer II 16550 Posts: 1,401	If that's the look I'm going for and the patina is original sure. They are going to charge more for it anyway. __________________ There's a crown for every achievement A Watch Is Just A Watch A Rolex Is A Timepiece

1 June 2014, 06:22 AM	#12
southtexas 2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member Join Date: May 2011 Location: Great State of TX Posts: 5,761	Yes I'd pay more for light patina. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk __________________ Forty six & 2 are just ahead of me. Follow me on Instagram @ccrolex

1 June 2014, 07:14 AM	#15
Beaumont Miller II "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: USA Posts: 2,615	I definitely might. __________________

1 June 2014, 02:22 AM	#2
Vincent65 "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: Switzerland Posts: 14,298	Well, one thing's for sure - sellers will add a premium for it, so it's whether that's what one would want/would pay extra for, I suppose! I like patination, so I'd be willing to pay a bit extra, but hard to put a %age on it. Maybe 10%? Certainly not a fifth.

1 June 2014, 02:27 AM	#3
CrownMe "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2013 Real Name: Kevin Location: Maryland Watch: My Open 6 Posts: 3,433	I would pay more for patina as long as it's original. Mainly because creamy patina is one of the features I like most about vintage. It gives it a great charm. While I still like vintage watches with snow white plots I just prefer nice patina.

1 June 2014, 02:31 AM	#4
unclesallie 2024 ROLEX SUBMARINER 41 Pledge Member Join Date: Aug 2007 Real Name: dan Location: Pennsylvania Watch: keystone pocket Posts: 5,917	patina is so cool. yes. pay more, enjoy a whole lot more. that said, all of this stuff with watches is subjective....it's what YOU enjoy.

1 June 2014, 02:40 AM	#7
GinNtonic Member Join Date: May 2014 Location: Somewhere Posts: 51	No, I would buy a watch without it and wear it for years until it got it.

1 June 2014, 03:10 AM	#8
andromeda160 Banned Join Date: Dec 2012 Real Name: Greg Location: michigan Watch: Rolex Oyster Posts: 4,046	It dosn't work like that ginntonic, usually the patina comes from lack of uv exposure. I personally would pay more for a white markered watch. From pictures I always liked watches with patina, but when I actually tried them on the white markers struck my fancy. I like watches that look like NOS, and I most certainly wouldn't pay extra for discoloration. Someone posted a mil sub a few months back that lost it's patina after a few weeks of wear as well, which would also suck, pay 10% extra for something that possibly fades away.

1 June 2014, 03:23 AM	#10
mluther "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2010 Real Name: Michael Location: Brussels Watch: aholic Posts: 1,108	Over two identical watches I would choose the one with the patina - however, would only consider "normal" creamy patina as opposed to "orange". I have experienced patina reversal to a certain extent, so now would be less likely to pay more than a 10% premium. For me it is one of the charms of vintage - white plots don't do it for me. Great question Clay..

1 June 2014, 05:17 AM	#11
Ben39 "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2011 Real Name: Ben Location: Asia Watch: Gilt sub Posts: 1,669	It's all about patina clay:)

1 June 2014, 07:35 AM	#16
ss5422 "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: New York, NY Watch: Red 1680, 114060 Posts: 24	I would pay some premium for even patina. With photoshop I made the picture on the right which has just about enough patina for me.

1 June 2014, 07:49 AM	#17
magnetized "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2014 Real Name: Jeff Location: Los Angeles CA. Watch: aHolic Posts: 331	creamy patina attracts me on vintage,but not orange

1 June 2014, 08:30 AM	#18
stmoore Banned Join Date: Nov 2012 Location: US Watch: Gilt Posts: 1,592	I'd pay a small premium for patina, but nothing orange. I'd also pay a small premium for tickets to see Harold Bacon's standup act and traveling watch display.

1 June 2014, 08:38 AM	#19
crowncollection "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2011 Real Name: David Location: australia Posts: 20,215	I would pay a little more __________________ watches many

1 June 2014, 10:17 AM	#22
Max72 "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Chicago Watch: Explorer II 1655 Posts: 220	I would pay more for patina. It's a good 70% of the visual impact of the watch. I'm a patina addict, not only I look for it in Rolex dials but on other collectibles of interest too like WWII militaria.

1 June 2014, 10:20 AM	#23
EdwardHBLW Member Join Date: Aug 2013 Location: Orlando, Fl Watch: Tudor Black Bay Posts: 39	I would, but it would depend on the patina as others have said...

1 June 2014, 10:24 AM	#24
z32turbo "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2009 Location: Sea Level Watch: Varies Posts: 6,877	I probably wouldn't. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk __________________ Instagram @z32turbo

1 June 2014, 12:29 PM	#25
StaceeJaxx Banned Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Just Fly Casual Posts: 698	Nope

1 June 2014, 12:39 PM	#26
BNA/LION 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: May 2011 Real Name: Larry Location: San Diego, CA Watch: ROLEX Posts: 25,613	The creamy stuff, for sure. __________________ ✦ 28238 President DD 18K/YG ✦ 16610LN SS Sub ✦ 16613 18K/SS Serti ✦ 16550 Exp II Non-Rail Cream Dial ✦ Daytona C 116500 ✦ 126710 BLRO GMT-Master II ✦ NEXT-->? ⛳ Hole In One! 10/3/19 DMCC 5th hole, par 3, 168 yards w/ 4-Iron.

1 June 2014, 12:46 PM	#27
slcbbrown "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2009 Real Name: steve Location: dallas area Watch: 50's TT t-bird Posts: 3,689	No

1 June 2014, 03:07 PM	#29
soundserious "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2011 Location: usofmfa Posts: 3,157	If it looks right then of course, the dial is what you see most!

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)