All,
Does anyone have a view on what LE numbers play well? especially on editions
where they are individually numbered? obviously 1 and the last of the run
stand out, but does anyone think that round numbers sit 'hotter' than ones
between?
Just canvessing opinion.
Thanks,
Trevor
Hi Trevor, interesting question, but I do think it's mainly a personal
preference thing. Obviously, really low numbers (<10 I would say) are very
attractive, for the rest I don't see it as added value.
Just my 2 cents, regards,
Bob
As Bob mentioned, the early adopters may see some value in the low numbers and
of course there's the last number in the limitation that may be desireable.
For the most part I think it's personal preference or a number of significance
to the collector to who cares enough about it. They're chasing that number vs.
the 1-10 or "end of run" status.
I agree with Clem on that one! Personaly I don't care much for the first or
the last. I just love the appeal of my number on a watch that is very limited
The desire for particular numbers is clearly up to the owner. However, I have
heard that some cultures value particular numbers for their meaning. A friend
of mine told me some collectors who shared his ethnic background (Chinese)
prefer the number 8, because in some Chinese dialects the word for "eight" and
"luck" sound similar. I recently read that 9 is a lucky number in Thailand. So
perhaps multiples of a number considered "lucky" in some cultures could bring
greater interest, like number 888 of 1000?
Personally I prefer low numbers in a run, but I don't appreciate them enough
to chase them or pay a large premium to own them.
Totally agree that it's personal preference and what number the owner wants to
have - no rhyme and no reason to choosing.
However, I have heard that repeating numbers (11/222/3333/etc) is more
desireable/valuable and better to have from a "rarity" perspective due to
there only being a very few repeating numbers in a collection e.g. there are
only 9 watches with two repeating numbers in a limited edtion of 100 watches,
99 watches with 3 repeating numbers in a limited edition of 1,000 watches etc.
In addition, repeating numbers are more eye catching and probably get more of
a "wow" reaction when someone see it. True or not, it does make sense.
That being said, each number is one of a kind in any limited edition run,
since there can only be one watch labeled "38/100". And it's also very
impressive if someone has X number of watches all with the same number.
In the case of IWC however - and very very annoyingly - they're limited edtion
runs (at least recent ones) are labeled as "ONE OUT OF 100" or 500 watches
labeled as "ONE OUT OF 500" !
For me LE does has its appeal, especially if it is rare enough. Lately
however, IWC however does not give a unique number to anything less than 250
pieces and would just label as 'One of XXXX'. There's also some special
editions which has no limitations and has an undisclosed limitation in
production per year, etc.
I also enjoy the thrill of the hunt and the gratification of owning such a
watch, knowing that it'll not be produced again, and as such, the product of
its time, or to commemorate certain events.
But in the end of the day, I suppose it comes down to the design of the watch
and personal preferences. There are some regular pieces which are just as
desirable as any LE out there and represents the tenets of the brand just as
well.