This post is about perceived value from the perspective of watch buyers and watch makers or sellers. I argue here, that watch makers should increasingly look towards the value of storytelling to ‘create value’ for consumers.
The horizon, unlike the equator or North Pole, isn’t a static property or location on Earth. It is a local phenomenon, where the convexity of the earth limits visibility distance. If you take a 6ft tall person for example… their ‘visible distance’ would stretch just over 3 miles (~5km); whereas a bird flying at an altitude of 1 mile would have visibility stretching about 100 miles in every direction. Read on, to figure out what this has to do with watches!
I recently watched a TED Talk by Professor Jamil Zaki, a Stanford neuroscientist. Worth watching the talk, but I wanted to explore a few of the concepts he discussed. In particular he talked about the learnings from a study of two Brazilian fishing villages which I found particularly fascinating, and which I wanted to connect with watch collecting.
As we collect, we find ourselves seeking advice and opinions from those around us. Inevitably, we might receive so much positive external input about a watch that the idea of owning it seems too good to ignore… and against our own better judgement, we fall into the trap of succumbing to this idea of owning that particular watch… only to find we don’t really enjoy owning it at all.
The winner’s curse is not a new concept, and it came up recently in an online newsletter, and got me thinking about how it applies to watches. As always, I look forward to your feedback on the topic.
Authorised dealers can sometimes act like you owe them something more than the retail price of a watch, simply for being allocated the watch. I figured we could talk about this in more detail, and consider how the reciprocation bias comes into play.