Actually, this DID make sense to me, as I had come to the same conclusion myself some time ago. I have nothing against watches in that price range, and for myself, I'd narrow that gap to 1500-3000. It's just that I would not want to pay that price range as I've come to realize you can get a many of those (that usually list for 2k) for under 1k anyway. Many a GLYCINE, or a LACO, for example.
And if I was bent on spending $3,500 on a watch, I would just add another 500 - 1,000 to get to the next orbit altogether since the difference between among MOST watches in that range 1000-3500 comes down really to styling -- SINN and DAMASKO being the two notable exceptions -- and I'm just paying for their advertising. Of course, IF one likes the style of INVICTA Diver, with all the trimmings, by all means, one should pay $1500 and get one.
But as for being a "snob" - as much we'd like to think that we're not, really, who could possibly resist the temptation of being one when confronted with someone who has spent 1.5K on a friggin' gold-plated Invicta , and is proud of it?
Besides, a watch that costs beyond 3500 is no longer (just) a watch anyway: you're buying something else in the form of a watch.