As well as the fear of robbery for such a low value and traceable item.
Edit because I can't reply:
Just off duty police. Police have significant powers, even off duty. In addition, if you pay them well they might do favors for you when on duty. Like looking for someone in the police databases, telling you about police operations etc.
There are many security guards who are not people who failed to become police. Some are ex police, ex Army etc, but there are limited situations when an armed response is rational, and a $50k Mac is not one of them. An insurance policy is much cheaper.
Having said that, I recommend Samoans (wide) and Sudanese (tall) for unarmed intimidation potential.
Low value is relative. $50k is a lot to many people, but compared to human life, $50k isn't worth the risk.
Many families have watches or jewellery that gets passed down the family tree. A $50k watch or a piece of jewellery is something that lasts for many generations. Most people who own a watch of in that price point never paid for it, but got it as a gift. Also, timepieces of that value often rise up in value.
Anyway, it's beside the point. Whether the average person owns what doesn't affect what $50k is relative to a human life.
Well-made watches from known brands with a heritage keep their prices very well, even during economically difficult times. If you look at a mid-level luxury brand such as Rolex, you can invest $8000 for a watch that has a great track record in keeping its value: https://imgur.com/0XeTVg5 And that's not even a top-level brand. Rolex is considered mid-tier in terms of luxury watches and the Submariner is one of their lower priced models.
I find it hard to believe that you have some kind of special power to predict how such a stable market will suddenly experience a crash. Though I hope you're right, because I'd love to have access to great watches for a lower price.
Uhhhmmm... Not many? And those who wear, it's either an apple watch or some cheap utilitarian model.
> I'd love to have access to great watches for a lower price.
Expensive watches require regular service to retain their value. Let's see how it will work when Rolex asks you for $1000 a piece for your briefcase full of watches.
I can see many owners of inherited watches being unwilling to pay up for servicing their watch. Which will prompt many of them to sell it, thus creating an increase in supply. At the same time demand for Rolex-type watches will be dropping, or at best remain stable. Thus, these watches will lose value.
Me? I've yet to find those deals.
> Uhhhmmm... Not many? And those who wear, it's either an apple watch or some cheap utilitarian model.
Are those not watches? You said watches are obsolete, and now you're discounting a big part of them. Apple watches, utilitarian watches are watches. Some people like them, others don't. I would never want an Apple watch, but I love my Swatch. No data tracked anywhere, no need to recharge, and looks and feels much nicer than an Apple watch for a fraction of the cost.
At the lower end of the market, Apple alone makes something like $35 billion on watches from nothing a decade ago.
Mid-tier makers like Rolex haven't been able to meet demand for a decade now.
I think a lot of the smaller manufacturers will go away. There's something like 500 watch companies in Switzerland alone and I'm guessing most of those don't have much of a future.
Personally I navigate life without hiring any security guards. But I recognize that some people and/or circumstances might have legitimate need for one.