Sep 162008
 

I’m told I’m difficult to buy gifts for, and I believe it.  I rarely know what to tell people when they ask.

Well, this Christmas your problems are solved.  Albert Einstein’s Longines wristwatch is up for auction on October 16 (hat tip, Watchismo Times).  (Incidentally, there are some exceptional close photographs of several additional fine watches on this page.  Just click the thumbnail for the modem-burner version.)

Several photographs showing Dr. Einstein wearing the watch are included.

It’s valued at $25,000 to $35,000, and I think that’s laughable.  Watch people are insane.  There have never been more interesting and/or expensive watches available—both new and vintage—and there have never been more dollars floating around with which to consume them.  Einstein’s watch?  Seriously?  I think it sells for six figures.

Something else that struck me about this auction is that they’re moving these watches around to Tokyo, Hong Kong, and Beverly Hills to give potential buyers a look at them.  Now just the 13 watches displayed on the highlights page are expected to bring $3 million or so.  How’d you like to be in charge of schlepping a $5 million watch collection around the world?  Can you imagine the security?

Be Sociable, Share!
 Posted by at 8:25 pm

  7 Responses to “Albert Einstein’s watch”

  1. That is very cool. I think it’d be interesting to own something like that, but for reasons I won’t get into here because you probably don’t buy the mumbo-jumbo about people’s energy lingering on things they kept close to them, yadda, yadda.

    Still, it’s a PRETTY timepiece.

  2. I think you think I’m way more of a hardass on such matters that I am, Mrs. Chili. I’m sensitive to my friends’ feelings, and I’m never going to laugh in your face concerning something important to you, no matter what.

    It is a pretty watch. I don’t currently own one with this case shape–what is generally known as a “tonneau” case–but I suspect I will eventually. I seem to recall a stainless Tissot automatic with black Roman numerals…hmmm… 😉

  3. At the risk of sounding like a total dummy, I don’t know why all watches these days aren’t digital (instead of having old-fashioned clock “faces”). I know, I know, somebody who people apparently listen to decided digital watches are for dorks not long after they came along.

    My watch, which I wear once in a blue moon, is not digital. It is, however, solar powered. I usually keep it on a windowsill so it gets a dose of sunlight every day.

    I’m not much on the previously-owned objects of famous people. On a practical level, I have no way of knowing they are authentic, so am apt to be jobbed if I were to acquire one. Otherwise, I find no “mojo” in them.

  4. Well, if anyone’s mojo *did* choose to linger on something I bought, I would sure appreciate getting a dose of Albert’s. Guess it’s all um….relative. 🙂

  5. Theoratically speaking, of course… 🙂

  6. Gerry: I think “read-off” is better on an analog. Think about how you look at an analog watch. How often do you read it, then actually mentally consider an exact time, like 11:37? Don’t you just kind of “know” whatever it is you need to know when you look at the time? You’re reading hand position, i.e. a picture. It’s the same cognitive paradigm, though to a lesser degree, that has kept analog speedometers the norm. (There’s the rate of change angle there too, but that’s not really relevant to a regular old time-of-day watch.)

    I have several digitals and a couple of ana/digi combos. If I had to pick one watch for the rest of my life, though, it’d definitely be an analog.

    Melanie: Booooooo. 🙂

    Lea: Don’t get her started. 🙂

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)

BoWilliams.com is using WP-Gravatar