/fa/ - Fashion

>>18020811
The answer is twofold. For one, as the other anon mentioned, conventional financial advice dictates that savings should come first in priority in terms of where you should be putting your money. So 401k, roth ira, bitcoin, index funds, stock, whatever.

The second is that most people do not value watches to the level of where a lot of enthusiasts do. Most people you talk to would prefer to use that money on a down payment for a house, buy a nicer car, save up for vacation, spend it on eating out, whatever.

The first point you can't really argue against since that just makes sense. It's not financially responsible to spend money on a watch when you don't have the money to live first and you're mortgaging your future by spending money on it.

However, the second point, and why I personally think it's totally fine for somebody to be making $80-100k a year and buy a Rolex (albeit probably one on the cheaper end so OP, airking, explorer, a smaller datejust, etc) is that people prioritize things differently. If you don't want to buy a house right now because you don't think you're going to be living in the city you occupy for the next twenty years, you're totally justified in buying a rolex. If you don't care about the car you drive (because let's be real cars are just as bad if not worse in terms of a financial black hole as watches are, plus nobody ever drunk drove a rolex and killed a family of four) and you're fine driving a cheaper car to buy the rolex, buy the rolex. If you're fine not going out all the time, drinking, eating at expensive restaurants every weekend, etc, buy the rolex.