Originally Posted by kaskade22
You clearly don't know anything about watches. The more accurate the more expensive the watch usually is. Hence why Patek Philippe is usually price around 30-60 grand for solid gold watches. However, if you were to spend 10k on a watch I would go with a Breitling, a much more beautiful face and over all design, very accurate as well.
CLEARLY, you're the one who doesn't know anything about watches; no matter how many Patek Philippe (try spelling "Philippe" correctly) watches you own. Consider the following that any 10-year-old could have found via Google:
"Most inexpensive and medium-priced watches used mainly for timekeeping are electronic watches with quartz movements. Expensive, collectible watches valued more for their workmanship and aesthetic appeal than for simple timekeeping, often have purely mechanical movements and are powered by springs, even though mechanical movements are less accurate than more affordable quartz movements." (see Wikipedia)
I could easily produce hundreds of references to refute your claims that the more costly a watch is, the more accurate it is. Certainly, some mechanical movements are more accurate than other mechanical movements due to increased complexity. The increased complexity would of course increase the cost of the watch. However, mechanical movements are not (and probably never will be) as accurate as quartz movements. Feel free to provide evidence to the contrary.
The OP (who has probably lost interest in this thread long ago) requested feedback on whether to buy a watch or a BBK. Like many others, I provided my input in a polite and non-judgmental manner. A few people like you have chosen to attack others who you perceive as being opposed to spending a lot of money on a watch. Worse is that you think you know more than you actually do. You obviously have a lot of money (two Ferraris in your garage) and apparently several expensive watches in your jewelry box. Don't you have anything better to do than to attack people on a Web forum?