I could have posted this in the public forum but given that a lot of people buy watches in the $100 to $750 range I don't think the replies would have been recipient to the point/question I want to make/ask.
Some posters in the High End forum grind my gears a bit when they say "resale value is of no consequence, I buy what I like" or/and write "resale value has no place in a topic about what watch to buy". The reason this boils my urine is that it is often written (or this is my perception anyway) in a kind of haughty 'I'm better than you' kind of way. Almost like the subject of money is somehow low grade and that horological purists just wouldn't consider it? Clearly I disagree with that.
My watch collection must have cost me about £250,000 (I've not added it up) - but to give you some background I was born in a VERY poor area in the UK (being the son of an immigrant where we were all shoved into one terribly run down region in the middle of the country). I've never forgotten where I came from - what money is worth - and whilst I don't feel guilty in treating myself (well sometimes I do) I do need to know that if everything went badly I could at least get a sensible return when liquifying assets. So if it is a marginal call between watch A and B but watch A will only depreciate (even after heavy discount) at 10% and watch B will lose 30% I would most likely go for watch A. For me some watches just depreciate too fast and too hard for me to justify the purchase price.
Now to be clear - I'm not saying I am right and others that don't consider this factor are wrong. Each to their own. But I do object to the aforementioned 'lecture' you often get in here about "buy what you like and resale is all irrelevant". If you think it is all nonsense then skip this consideration when it is posited and move on please. I'm a big boy and I don't need telling what should be important to me and what shouldn't.
I would be interested in the thoughts of everyone else - even if I am in the minority.