1 00:00:08,640 --> 00:00:11,480 Welcome to this Watch live. Hi, I'm Lydia Winters. 2 00:00:11,520 --> 00:00:13,800 And I'm Vu Bui. And today, we're going to talk 3 00:00:13,800 --> 00:00:17,120 about aesthetics versus specifications. 4 00:00:17,200 --> 00:00:21,720 It's a showdown. They're not in competition. 5 00:00:21,760 --> 00:00:23,840 Aren't they? Well, well. 6 00:00:23,880 --> 00:00:25,760 Maybe they are. Are they a couple? 7 00:00:26,920 --> 00:00:29,960 They're a good pair. Yeah, hand in hand aesthetics 8 00:00:30,200 --> 00:00:32,360 and specifications. But one of them is clearly 9 00:00:32,360 --> 00:00:35,200 superior and everyone knows it so. 10 00:00:35,320 --> 00:00:40,520 I was gonna say it depends on the person, but you said that in 11 00:00:40,520 --> 00:00:43,720 a different way. True. 12 00:00:44,160 --> 00:00:50,360 Yeah, we have a question from Trish at Watch Girl Life. 13 00:00:52,440 --> 00:00:55,680 Hi Lydia and Boo. This is Trish AKA Watch Girl 14 00:00:55,680 --> 00:00:58,400 Life. I just have a quick question. 15 00:00:59,360 --> 00:01:03,200 How do you balance the subjective elements of watches 16 00:01:03,640 --> 00:01:08,040 around personal taste and style with objective factors like 17 00:01:08,040 --> 00:01:12,200 technical specs? When choosing a watch, are you 18 00:01:12,200 --> 00:01:16,360 more down the aesthetic path or you look at technical specs 19 00:01:16,360 --> 00:01:18,920 first? Hope you're well. 20 00:01:18,960 --> 00:01:22,720 Thank you. Thank you so much, Trish. 21 00:01:22,720 --> 00:01:26,160 If you don't follow Trish on Instagram, she is an incredible 22 00:01:26,280 --> 00:01:28,160 photographer. Watch Girl Life. 23 00:01:29,520 --> 00:01:35,400 Well, I think as with many of these things, it's a balance of 24 00:01:35,400 --> 00:01:39,760 both, At least for me it is. I I think they are both very 25 00:01:39,760 --> 00:01:43,760 important and OK, this is my hot take. 26 00:01:44,000 --> 00:01:45,760 OK. OK. 27 00:01:46,000 --> 00:01:51,280 In my mind, there are people, I probably most people would say, 28 00:01:51,400 --> 00:01:54,160 oh, it's a blend of both that that that's what I that's. 29 00:01:54,320 --> 00:01:56,320 Pretty fair. Believe, people would say. 30 00:01:57,160 --> 00:02:00,520 But I do think there are people who would say one or the other, 31 00:02:00,520 --> 00:02:04,640 like, no, I'm really only about the aesthetic or oh, I'm really 32 00:02:05,160 --> 00:02:09,320 about the specifications. And I think those people are 33 00:02:09,320 --> 00:02:11,680 lying. Or wrong maybe. 34 00:02:11,720 --> 00:02:15,240 Lying to themselves. Yeah, yeah, yeah. 35 00:02:15,240 --> 00:02:17,160 I didn't mean that they were lying to us. 36 00:02:17,560 --> 00:02:19,200 No, I meant. They were lying to. 37 00:02:19,360 --> 00:02:20,720 Themselves. OK, Why? 38 00:02:20,800 --> 00:02:23,240 OK, they're just wrong. OK, why well? 39 00:02:24,360 --> 00:02:28,120 We'll go through that I I I have a case for that and it it a. 40 00:02:28,240 --> 00:02:31,680 Case size or a case? Look a case. 41 00:02:31,760 --> 00:02:34,640 Speck Speck puns from Lydia Winters. 42 00:02:34,800 --> 00:02:37,680 Always. So people are drawn to different 43 00:02:37,680 --> 00:02:40,600 things like that's we we know that, right? 44 00:02:40,600 --> 00:02:44,160 Like people are they're into different things for different 45 00:02:44,160 --> 00:02:47,960 reasons. And it's very rare to find two 46 00:02:47,960 --> 00:02:51,320 people who are just like, Oh yeah, we are exactly the same, 47 00:02:51,320 --> 00:02:54,440 and we like exactly the same things for the same reasons. 48 00:02:54,760 --> 00:03:00,240 So I thought it'd be good for us to talk specifically about what 49 00:03:00,360 --> 00:03:06,480 draws us to watches and like. But I, I, I've phrased at least 50 00:03:06,480 --> 00:03:08,640 the first thing is a question for you. 51 00:03:09,240 --> 00:03:14,160 Like what aesthetics do you think are the most important to 52 00:03:14,160 --> 00:03:21,600 you? Yes, I think color, I think like 53 00:03:21,600 --> 00:03:25,280 brushed verse polished surfaces, but that is also a. 54 00:03:25,280 --> 00:03:30,200 So yeah, I have a little bit of like is it a, is it a spec or is 55 00:03:30,240 --> 00:03:32,280 it. Yeah, they kind of blend a bit. 56 00:03:32,760 --> 00:03:37,920 But I would also say, like, I love like different features and 57 00:03:37,920 --> 00:03:40,840 the look like, I care a lot about what the numerals look 58 00:03:40,840 --> 00:03:44,040 like, The font of the numerals, where the font plays, the 59 00:03:44,040 --> 00:03:47,560 actual, yeah, the design. Like then that's very aesthetic. 60 00:03:47,560 --> 00:03:53,360 That's like design, design and like some of the heritage 61 00:03:53,360 --> 00:03:57,560 watches, like I don't care as much if they if they feel 62 00:03:57,560 --> 00:04:02,560 exactly like the original, but it's more of like do I like the 63 00:04:02,560 --> 00:04:05,520 feeling of the current one. Like is it? 64 00:04:05,560 --> 00:04:08,120 Is it like a heritage vibe that you enjoy? 65 00:04:08,240 --> 00:04:12,840 Yeah, I do really like it, like the BB50, the tutor BB 54, like 66 00:04:12,840 --> 00:04:15,880 I just feel that it it really matches my style. 67 00:04:15,880 --> 00:04:19,120 So that's the other thing is like for me the important 68 00:04:19,120 --> 00:04:23,840 aesthetic is, does it match my, like Lydia style? 69 00:04:24,560 --> 00:04:27,960 And well, I would say that you have many different styles too. 70 00:04:28,000 --> 00:04:30,000 Yes, but. Do I see it fitting? 71 00:04:30,040 --> 00:04:31,000 Yeah. Do I see good? 72 00:04:31,200 --> 00:04:32,880 Good. That's why I have so many 73 00:04:32,880 --> 00:04:33,800 watches. Perfect. 74 00:04:33,920 --> 00:04:37,720 Just do the occasion. Just to match the many looks of 75 00:04:37,720 --> 00:04:41,160 Lydia Winters, I I mean even to me like. 76 00:04:41,560 --> 00:04:44,680 So as I thought about this, I thought, OK, you've got your 77 00:04:44,680 --> 00:04:47,600 your your specs things and you've got your aesthetics 78 00:04:47,600 --> 00:04:50,720 things, but as you just said. They really, they spend a lot. 79 00:04:50,800 --> 00:04:53,480 Together, because I started to think, OK, well, let's just 80 00:04:53,480 --> 00:04:56,120 think about what what makes a tool watch a tool watch? 81 00:04:56,840 --> 00:04:59,000 And you would think, oh, that's specs. 82 00:04:59,600 --> 00:05:03,520 But I'm here to argue that as I thought through what people 83 00:05:03,520 --> 00:05:08,040 think about and argue about when it comes to tool watches, it is 84 00:05:08,040 --> 00:05:11,320 mostly aesthetic. What? 85 00:05:12,320 --> 00:05:17,080 OK, so most watches these days I believe are pretty durable. 86 00:05:18,080 --> 00:05:21,560 Like the movements themselves, they have shock protection. 87 00:05:21,800 --> 00:05:26,160 All of those technologies have even permeated very lower cost 88 00:05:26,160 --> 00:05:31,760 movements and watches, and so as long as you have just most 89 00:05:31,760 --> 00:05:35,360 watches, they they can survive going hiking. 90 00:05:36,120 --> 00:05:38,080 You know many. Of the things that we're doing, 91 00:05:38,200 --> 00:05:39,120 except. Maybe. 92 00:05:39,520 --> 00:05:43,280 Real extremes, which most like most of us, aren't doing. 93 00:05:43,680 --> 00:05:44,680 The really. Big. 94 00:05:44,680 --> 00:05:46,240 Extremes. The big extremes. 95 00:05:46,440 --> 00:05:51,880 So for most of us, like what a tool watch really is, is a set 96 00:05:51,880 --> 00:05:56,560 of aesthetics. It's more brushed surfaces, less 97 00:05:56,560 --> 00:05:58,160 polished. That's true. 98 00:05:58,200 --> 00:06:01,000 Right, like there there's certain things that makes. 99 00:06:01,040 --> 00:06:04,280 Now there are specifications as well that make something more 100 00:06:04,280 --> 00:06:06,720 tool watchy. I mean we talked about the Rolex 101 00:06:06,720 --> 00:06:12,200 Explorer in 2 Tone and how that really made people upset like 102 00:06:12,200 --> 00:06:15,400 that. It wasn't true to, but it is a 103 00:06:15,400 --> 00:06:18,920 bit more wasn't true to the aesthetics because again, it's 104 00:06:18,920 --> 00:06:21,200 like. It's slightly cold. 105 00:06:21,400 --> 00:06:23,360 Is yeah. It's a little heavier, more, 106 00:06:23,360 --> 00:06:24,920 more scratchy and a little more scratch. 107 00:06:25,560 --> 00:06:28,320 Scratch can be scratched. Scratchable. 108 00:06:28,600 --> 00:06:32,080 Scratchable. But it's still as durable. 109 00:06:32,080 --> 00:06:34,480 So I guess then you're like, oh, if you care about the weight, 110 00:06:34,480 --> 00:06:36,640 then that would be. Then that makes sense and I 111 00:06:36,640 --> 00:06:39,400 thought the same thing because it was like, well, the Rolex 112 00:06:39,400 --> 00:06:42,680 Chinelli had the same exact movement as the Rolex Explorer 113 00:06:43,800 --> 00:06:47,520 And you know, I wouldn't say that the case they were only 50m 114 00:06:47,520 --> 00:06:50,800 water resistant, but again it's that Rolex 50 meters where they 115 00:06:50,800 --> 00:06:53,120 say 50 meters means you can do the thing. 116 00:06:53,960 --> 00:07:00,200 So to me, a Chinelli from a can it withstand perspective is 117 00:07:00,200 --> 00:07:02,840 probably up there with most other tool watches. 118 00:07:02,880 --> 00:07:06,440 That's true. But it does it look toolish? 119 00:07:06,880 --> 00:07:10,400 No. So then if that can be the case 120 00:07:10,400 --> 00:07:14,080 so easily with with with such easy examples that just popped 121 00:07:14,080 --> 00:07:18,080 in my head, then then I really do believe that tool watch is 122 00:07:18,080 --> 00:07:21,760 just an aesthetic. Yeah, I mean this blending of 123 00:07:21,760 --> 00:07:26,480 what is an aesthetic versus what is a spec that that actually 124 00:07:26,480 --> 00:07:30,360 because I would have probably answered this question as like I 125 00:07:30,360 --> 00:07:34,120 care about aesthetics really not much about specs. 126 00:07:34,560 --> 00:07:37,760 But then when I started thinking about it, I was like well 127 00:07:37,760 --> 00:07:42,520 actually case size and watch thickness are really important 128 00:07:42,520 --> 00:07:45,800 to me. And those are factors which do 129 00:07:45,800 --> 00:07:49,760 determine if I'll even go try on a watch even though I have tried 130 00:07:49,760 --> 00:07:52,920 on watches that are much larger than I want or maybe smaller 131 00:07:52,920 --> 00:07:54,880 than I want. But it's still. 132 00:07:55,120 --> 00:08:00,720 It is a defining part of when, like the package of the watch 133 00:08:00,720 --> 00:08:04,320 that might make you feel like this watch is for me, or oh, 134 00:08:04,320 --> 00:08:06,440 that watch is beautiful, but it's not for me. 135 00:08:06,720 --> 00:08:10,000 And that first impression can also go really far in whether 136 00:08:10,000 --> 00:08:11,960 you want it or not. So you're talking about the 137 00:08:11,960 --> 00:08:16,560 specs that they they affect the aesthetics, like the size of a 138 00:08:16,560 --> 00:08:19,920 watch makes a huge difference, and and also that ends up being 139 00:08:19,920 --> 00:08:23,120 so personal to you because the size of a watch on your wrist 140 00:08:23,600 --> 00:08:25,800 may look amazing on someone else. 141 00:08:25,800 --> 00:08:28,640 But. Exactly, but and also so like 142 00:08:28,640 --> 00:08:32,840 watch thickness. Again, I would say that I don't 143 00:08:33,440 --> 00:08:37,799 care very much about movements or I'm, I'm not like bothered. 144 00:08:38,520 --> 00:08:41,000 Yeah, you don't think. Much about indifferent to 145 00:08:41,000 --> 00:08:42,919 movements? Like you think you are. 146 00:08:42,960 --> 00:08:46,200 Yeah, I think I am, except then when I was thinking about the 147 00:08:46,200 --> 00:08:49,800 fact that aesthetically the thickness is. 148 00:08:49,920 --> 00:08:52,840 It's important to you. Yeah, like, I want to make sure 149 00:08:52,840 --> 00:08:56,200 the watch feels really sleek, looks nice, that is affected by 150 00:08:56,200 --> 00:08:57,800 the movement. So again, you're back to this 151 00:08:57,800 --> 00:09:02,400 like aesthetics, the aesthetics and specifications they are. 152 00:09:02,400 --> 00:09:04,640 So yeah, they are so intertwined. 153 00:09:04,960 --> 00:09:08,160 They really are. I mean, and then you have 154 00:09:08,280 --> 00:09:12,880 certain specs that affect things like comfort, right? 155 00:09:12,880 --> 00:09:17,640 So as I love to whine about, not all watches with a bracelet, 156 00:09:17,640 --> 00:09:19,720 have a quick adjustable clasp and. 157 00:09:19,720 --> 00:09:22,520 To me that and if you see that that's not in the 158 00:09:22,520 --> 00:09:25,600 specifications, you're like you're out. 159 00:09:26,040 --> 00:09:27,680 There now. And for that reason. 160 00:09:28,200 --> 00:09:33,040 I I will admit like my new Grand Seiko, I I have bought watches 161 00:09:33,040 --> 00:09:37,200 without quick adjustment because sometimes you like there's so 162 00:09:37,200 --> 00:09:39,000 many factors. But now you're saying, well it's 163 00:09:39,000 --> 00:09:42,120 because it's Titanium, so it's not as. 164 00:09:42,400 --> 00:09:48,280 Again, it's like you're using you're using specs to justify 165 00:09:48,280 --> 00:09:50,840 that you aesthetically love this watch and just wanted it. 166 00:09:50,920 --> 00:09:54,720 But but but I will admit that I aesthetically wanted to watch. 167 00:09:54,720 --> 00:09:58,440 But I will also say that even though this is a supposed deal 168 00:09:58,440 --> 00:10:03,200 killer of mine, it did not kill this deal and I went and and 169 00:10:03,200 --> 00:10:08,480 then I did also justify it by saying yes it it weighs over 30% 170 00:10:08,480 --> 00:10:12,640 less than my steel watches. Therefore, therefore. 171 00:10:12,680 --> 00:10:16,600 It doesn't flop around as much, therefore the perfect fit is a 172 00:10:16,600 --> 00:10:19,280 little less important, but I still want. 173 00:10:19,400 --> 00:10:21,000 You're loosey goosey with this. OK. 174 00:10:21,160 --> 00:10:28,000 So I thought about like what are certain because when I think 175 00:10:28,000 --> 00:10:30,080 about specs, yeah you've got case size. 176 00:10:30,080 --> 00:10:32,760 You've got water resistance, you've got is it a screw down 177 00:10:32,760 --> 00:10:36,160 crown or not you've got the bracelet or strap what what all 178 00:10:36,160 --> 00:10:39,680 of those things. But I usually tend to go towards 179 00:10:39,680 --> 00:10:42,240 movements which must be something that I care about. 180 00:10:43,280 --> 00:10:47,040 I don't think movements are the end all be all, but there are a 181 00:10:47,040 --> 00:10:50,200 few movements that I'm like yeah, I've talked about wanting 182 00:10:50,200 --> 00:10:52,800 watches with these movements for quite a while. 183 00:10:53,040 --> 00:10:57,560 So like Rolex has the 4130, that's the movement in most of 184 00:10:57,560 --> 00:11:00,720 the Daytonas or it where it was they they've updated it. 185 00:11:01,040 --> 00:11:05,000 But like I've heard multiple watchmakers and I've spoken to 186 00:11:05,000 --> 00:11:07,720 watchmakers who just talk about how great that movement is. 187 00:11:08,000 --> 00:11:11,960 But also something you mentioned earlier like a, it is an 188 00:11:11,960 --> 00:11:17,080 automatic chronograph movement and the Daytona is a nice slim 189 00:11:17,120 --> 00:11:19,680 watch with 100 meters of water resistance. 190 00:11:19,920 --> 00:11:23,920 So like it allows you to have a chronograph and very slim. 191 00:11:24,040 --> 00:11:26,520 Most automatic chronographs are thick. 192 00:11:26,640 --> 00:11:29,880 Yeah, exactly. So the Daytona would have like 193 00:11:29,920 --> 00:11:34,720 aesthetically I love it, but if that specification was different 194 00:11:35,320 --> 00:11:38,320 then I probably it would be like a deal breaker. 195 00:11:39,080 --> 00:11:42,880 I think if that was 15mm thick you probably would not be into 196 00:11:42,880 --> 00:11:45,760 it. Nomos has the 6160 movement 197 00:11:45,760 --> 00:11:48,520 which is in the Metro update. I like or. 198 00:11:48,520 --> 00:11:52,080 I want one of these because it's got a really innovative date 199 00:11:52,080 --> 00:11:54,760 mechanism. So like one of the annoying 200 00:11:54,760 --> 00:11:57,360 things about quick set date is it only goes in One Direction. 201 00:11:57,400 --> 00:11:59,280 Well, this one goes in both. Oh, that's cool. 202 00:11:59,480 --> 00:12:03,320 So like if you have to go from, you know if your watch is on the 203 00:12:03,320 --> 00:12:05,840 2nd and today is the first you have to go through the whole 204 00:12:05,840 --> 00:12:08,200 month right? But with this, you could just go 205 00:12:08,200 --> 00:12:12,080 backwards and it also fixes the problem that you sometimes 206 00:12:12,080 --> 00:12:14,240 forget about, which is that you should not change the date 207 00:12:14,240 --> 00:12:18,600 between, you know, around 10:00 PM and and sorry, yeah, 10:00 PM 208 00:12:18,600 --> 00:12:22,400 and 2:00 AM because that's when the mechanism is changing and 209 00:12:22,400 --> 00:12:24,320 you could grind gears and all of this stuff. 210 00:12:24,800 --> 00:12:27,280 I definitely they have occasionally created a. 211 00:12:27,280 --> 00:12:30,600 Mechanism that gets around that. So I'm like I've never done 212 00:12:30,600 --> 00:12:34,040 that, but I want it. I want it because they put the 213 00:12:34,120 --> 00:12:38,560 effort into into making it or like I I really want a Grand 214 00:12:38,560 --> 00:12:43,960 Seiko Spring Dr. 9 RA Two. It's like their newer Spring Dr. 215 00:12:43,960 --> 00:12:45,400 movement. It's in the white Birch that 216 00:12:45,400 --> 00:12:48,280 everyone loves. It's a five day power reserve. 217 00:12:48,280 --> 00:12:51,280 That's 120 hours. I don't know why they say five 218 00:12:51,280 --> 00:12:53,680 day. I feel like 120 hours sounds so 219 00:12:53,680 --> 00:12:57,320 much more cool when everyone else is like 43 hours 72 hours. 220 00:12:57,520 --> 00:13:00,120 Oh, I think five, I think 5 days. 221 00:13:00,120 --> 00:13:01,880 So much more useful. Yeah. 222 00:13:01,880 --> 00:13:03,440 To be. It sounds like way more than 223 00:13:03,440 --> 00:13:06,360 120. If you were like, how many days 224 00:13:06,360 --> 00:13:08,600 is 120 hours? I don't think I would 225 00:13:08,880 --> 00:13:13,240 immediately survive, OK? OK, OK, but OK, so this this 226 00:13:13,240 --> 00:13:15,640 movement also has like better accuracy. 227 00:13:15,640 --> 00:13:20,560 And then I like do we need? So I love accuracy, don't need 228 00:13:20,560 --> 00:13:23,920 it, don't need it. Not at this level, but my new 229 00:13:24,000 --> 00:13:28,000 Grand Seiko I have. I said it 14 days ago, so it's 230 00:13:28,000 --> 00:13:32,320 been 2 weeks and right now it's running plus .5 seconds. 231 00:13:32,320 --> 00:13:33,360 That's amazing. Not per day. 232 00:13:33,640 --> 00:13:35,400 That's for that whole two week. Period. 233 00:13:35,400 --> 00:13:36,760 Or at least I think that's amazing. 234 00:13:36,760 --> 00:13:40,040 That's a loosey goosey I have. No, no it is. 235 00:13:40,120 --> 00:13:43,240 Really amazing. Run by a mainspring, this is a 236 00:13:43,240 --> 00:13:47,800 mechanical watch and it's only regulated using electromagnetic. 237 00:13:47,840 --> 00:13:50,560 OK, I'm not getting into it, but it's amazingly accurate. 238 00:13:50,800 --> 00:13:54,560 The new spring Dr. movement is even more accurate because it's 239 00:13:54,560 --> 00:13:57,640 also temperature regulated. So it, like measures the 240 00:13:57,640 --> 00:14:01,760 temperature like 500 times a day and is like, oh, because it's 241 00:14:01,760 --> 00:14:03,280 hotter. I know that's going to affect 242 00:14:03,280 --> 00:14:05,720 how fast the quartz crystal oscillates. 243 00:14:06,160 --> 00:14:07,760 That's pretty cool. That is really cool. 244 00:14:07,760 --> 00:14:10,280 Again, don't need it, but I love these things. 245 00:14:10,280 --> 00:14:13,200 And the last one I'll talk about, and it's not really 246 00:14:13,200 --> 00:14:18,120 specific to the New Moon Watch, but one of the reasons I sold my 247 00:14:18,480 --> 00:14:23,240 1861 Movement Moonwatch was because the 3861 came out and it 248 00:14:23,240 --> 00:14:25,840 was meta certified and I was like, that's what I want. 249 00:14:25,840 --> 00:14:28,880 Yeah, the Omega Speedmaster. The Omega Speedmaster 250 00:14:28,880 --> 00:14:32,600 Professional Moonwatch I think meta certification is great. 251 00:14:32,680 --> 00:14:37,240 It basically is just a a set of specs that they have to test to 252 00:14:37,240 --> 00:14:42,360 and the the one is that I think is so great in modern times or 253 00:14:42,360 --> 00:14:47,200 at least we're told it is, is that it's almost anti magnetic. 254 00:14:48,360 --> 00:14:50,520 Yeah, all these phones and headphones and everything has 255 00:14:50,680 --> 00:14:53,720 magnets in. It these days, which you know, 256 00:14:53,800 --> 00:14:56,440 didn't used to be the case, I don't know if it's that big of a 257 00:14:56,440 --> 00:14:58,720 problem because I don't ever have magnet problems with my 258 00:14:58,720 --> 00:15:02,000 watches. You know, I've had one watch be 259 00:15:02,000 --> 00:15:05,480 magnetized ever, right? I have no idea. 260 00:15:06,400 --> 00:15:08,720 If any of mine are and, I'm not bothered. 261 00:15:08,760 --> 00:15:11,320 By it, you'd probably never notice if one of your watches 262 00:15:11,320 --> 00:15:13,440 was running in one or two minutes fast today. 263 00:15:13,560 --> 00:15:15,280 I don't think so. I don't genuinely. 264 00:15:18,000 --> 00:15:23,040 But yeah, so I I think there are, even for someone like 265 00:15:23,040 --> 00:15:28,800 myself who I would say I'm aesthetic first, the specs still 266 00:15:28,800 --> 00:15:32,080 really matter. And they they they go towards 267 00:15:32,080 --> 00:15:35,320 this complete package of what a watch is. 268 00:15:35,320 --> 00:15:37,440 And part of it is how does it look. 269 00:15:37,800 --> 00:15:41,880 But to me, aesthetics will always win because I would take 270 00:15:41,880 --> 00:15:45,800 a watch that is beautiful, that I love the look on my wrist, 271 00:15:46,240 --> 00:15:49,160 that has what I considered terrible specs. 272 00:15:50,240 --> 00:15:53,800 I I would wear that, but I would not wear a watch that I think is 273 00:15:53,800 --> 00:15:55,520 horribly ugly. Yeah, that's. 274 00:15:55,840 --> 00:15:59,720 Chasing specifications. It's like not only just a like, 275 00:15:59,720 --> 00:16:02,120 primary, secondary thing like it. 276 00:16:02,120 --> 00:16:05,440 It is like a deal killer. Yeah, it is a deal killer. 277 00:16:05,640 --> 00:16:07,200 I agree. I mean, when you bring up the 278 00:16:07,200 --> 00:16:13,040 moon watch too, it feels like it's been changed so many times. 279 00:16:13,040 --> 00:16:19,600 Yeah, but it has the history, which is more of the aesthetics 280 00:16:19,640 --> 00:16:21,880 than, you know, like. No, but it is. 281 00:16:21,920 --> 00:16:25,320 I think you're right. So the if you think about what 282 00:16:25,320 --> 00:16:29,920 makes the moon watch like this historical watch hits mostly the 283 00:16:29,920 --> 00:16:32,400 look because so many things have changed on that watch. 284 00:16:32,400 --> 00:16:34,320 The movement has changed. The bracelet has changed. 285 00:16:34,320 --> 00:16:36,560 You know the now it's got a sapphire because then the. 286 00:16:36,560 --> 00:16:41,720 Technical specifications are updated, but yet the reason you 287 00:16:41,800 --> 00:16:44,080 kind of want it is the. Aesthetic. 288 00:16:44,080 --> 00:16:45,480 And it's because of the aesthetic. 289 00:16:45,640 --> 00:16:47,600 So they can't change the aesthetic too much. 290 00:16:47,880 --> 00:16:49,880 Otherwise it will feel like a different watch. 291 00:16:50,160 --> 00:16:53,720 And then that historical connection is much less 292 00:16:54,120 --> 00:16:59,000 prevalent. So I I Yeah, Even even people 293 00:16:59,000 --> 00:17:03,480 who love watches for their historical significance, it's 294 00:17:03,480 --> 00:17:06,680 still very aesthetic driven. Yeah, because they look like 295 00:17:06,680 --> 00:17:08,640 those watches, but they aren't those watches. 296 00:17:08,680 --> 00:17:10,760 Yeah. And I mean, I think either way 297 00:17:10,920 --> 00:17:17,560 is fine, but I do agree that it's probably, especially since 298 00:17:17,599 --> 00:17:21,520 I found this, they much more rely on each other than you 299 00:17:21,520 --> 00:17:24,599 think. It is an overlap, maybe more 300 00:17:24,599 --> 00:17:26,640 than you have originally thought. 301 00:17:26,640 --> 00:17:28,840 Because for me that is definitely what happened. 302 00:17:28,840 --> 00:17:33,000 I would have been all aesthetic, no care towards specification, 303 00:17:33,000 --> 00:17:36,680 but they really go together. Yeah, you realize, like specs 304 00:17:36,680 --> 00:17:39,400 matter. They do matter a little, a 305 00:17:39,400 --> 00:17:39,920 little. Bit. 306 00:17:39,920 --> 00:17:43,480 A little bit, just a. Little, No, they they matter. 307 00:17:43,480 --> 00:17:45,400 Whatever you like. It's good, yeah. 308 00:17:45,400 --> 00:17:50,240 But we'd love to know where you fall on this aesthetics. 309 00:17:50,600 --> 00:17:54,720 I guess now we're saying and specs, not versus specs. 310 00:17:55,520 --> 00:17:57,880 FedEx. No, no, please. 311 00:17:58,040 --> 00:17:59,160 No. Bye.