My Response to The Watch Bros: What a Good Beginner Watch Collection Looks Like (My First Year). ***Spoiler: It’s Not Good*** · Watch Lover

My Response to The Watch Bros: What a Good Beginner Watch Collection Looks Like (My First Year). ***Spoiler: It’s Not Good***

No doubt many, if not all of you, have seen The Watch Bros., of YouTube fame, newest video where guest and collaborator Felix, displayed an extensive beginner collection as someone new to the world of watches. It was exciting to see his passion and display unfold in those 30 minutes where he broke down what he has, what he paid for it, and his thoughts on the piece. However, as entertaining as it was, it gave me serious concerns as to what he was truly telling the community and any idea he may be giving young and impressionable enthusiasts.

Watch collecting, at its core, should be a patient, deliberate journey marked by sacrifice, contemplation, and earned milestones. It is a hobby where the value

lies not merely in the objects themselves but in the discipline required to acquire them, the months of saving, the careful research, the self-questioning

that transforms a purchase into something meaningful. Yet the recent video from Felix, who spent $10,000 on sixteen watches in his first year represents everything wrong with modern collecting culture. His approach violates my sacred principle of "Collect Smarter NOT Harder," turning what should be a lifelong conquest into an impulsive shopping spree enabled by extraordinary financial privilege and mentorship access that most collectors will never experience.

As a 41-year-old data analyst and father,earning $115,000 annually, with a carefully curated 5-6 watch collection. Each piece in my collection, from my Hamilton Field to my Citizen Attesa, represents weeks or months of deliberate saving and soul-searching. When we examine the socioeconomic reality of watch collecting against Felix's cavalier spending, the disconnect becomes apparent.

According to Social Security Administration data, the median annual earnings for men aged 30-39 (across all races) range from $40,900 to $78,300, with significant disparities affecting Black and Hispanic workers. For the 40-49 age group, the prime demographic for watch collectors, median earnings range from $43,200 to $100,500 depending on race. The typical watch collector, a man aged 35-49, is navigating family obligations, mortgage payments, and retirement savings. The notion that this demographic can casually deploy $10,000 in discretionary spending during a single year on a new hobby is not just unrealistic, it’s irresponsible.

His journey began with what he frames as "intentional" collecting when he purchased a Seiko SRPH87K1 for under $300 as his first watch, immediately followed by a Casio A168WG "seconds after" because his mentor convinced him to. The spending accelerates rapidly, a G-Shock Hodinkee collaboration with Online Ceramics, a gifted Seiko 55 Fathoms, a Tissot PRX Powermatic 80 purchased through gray market channels, a Baltany monopusher (later gifted away), an Aura Skeleton, a vintage Seiko Tank, a Timex Q reissue, three watches from Praesidus (sponsored content), a Tissot PRX Forged Carbon (gifted for his birthday), a Kurono Rollsmith ($760), a Goofy Panda which is a microbrand chronograph he "couldn't stop thinking about, an MD Design Tyrannus, a Wristste Moonwalker, an Omega × Swatch Moonswatch Earthphase which was an impulse purchase he bought on vacation, and a Freestyle Shark watch which was a gift.

Let us examine what is revealed here. Of the sixteen watches, at least four were gifts , and three were provided by sponsors. This means his actual out of pocket spending was on thirteen watches totaling approximately $10,000, an average of $770 per watch acquired with personal funds. For context, my most expensive watch, the Citizen Attesa I bought for $1,350, took me five months to save while balancing the financial responsibilities of a 40something parent. Each deposit into my "watch fund" represented a conscious choice of bringing lunch from home instead of eating out, skipping a weekend entertainment expense, negotiating with my daughters mom about discretionary spending. When I finally made that purchase, the watch meant something beyond its specifications because it represented tangible proof of discipline and delayed gratification.

My sacred rule of “Collect Smarter NOT Harder" is built on several foundational principles that Felix systematically violates. Watch collecting is supposed to be a lifelong conquest, not a sprint. Yet, he accumulated sixteen watches in twelve months. This pace is antithetical to collecting anything meaningful. It’s supposed to be a journey that at 41, I might own 5-6 significant pieces, each marking a different significant chapter of my life. At 50, I might have 8-10. At 65, perhaps 12-15 watches, each with a story that spans years, not weeks. Felix treats collecting like trading Pokémon cards, checking off categories (diver, dress, chronograph, quirky microbrand) without allowing any piece to develop meaning both physical and emotional.

Second, the journey includes learning and changing your mind, our tastes and choices grow over time. True learning requires time and context and Felix even admits he wore his Tissot PRX constantly and took 50 photos on his iPhone the night he got it, yet within the same twelve-month period, he has acquired fifteen other watches competing for wrist time. How can he genuinely understand his relationship with that Tissot when he has barely given it time to become part of his daily life? The entire purpose of collecting has a meaning and from wearing a watch through multiple seasons, through personal triumphs and setbacks, through changes in taste and circumstance; you cannot compress this wisdom into a single year of acquisition frenzy.

Also, saving for that dream watch builds character and appreciation but Felix only mentions setting aside money and being patient, but his actions reveal no genuine financial sacrifice. He impulse-bought the Omega × Swatch Moonswatch Earthphase for $325 while on a birthday vacation because he was "already in a spending spree." He purchased the Studio chronograph because he "could not stop thinking about it" after handling one in person. This is not the behavior of someone who is carefully allocating limited resources. This is someone who represents disposable income readily available for impulse gratification.

While this is America, and he is free to spend his money how he feels, is this practical? Can Mark Zuckerberg truly hone his watch tastes and how they act as a reflection of him, and he’s worth billions, yet doesn’t have enough hours in a day to wear even a fraction of them to fit his lifestyle? How can any person, with any budget of any limit, be able to develop a relationship with his tastes, brands, and styles when they have too many watches of too many types than they can manage?

Furthermore, influences have a huge impact on impressionable youth and young adults. Does this spending and method of collecting set a good example for those who aren’t old enough to understand financial responsibility on a limited budget, wealthy or not? Is Felix responsible for the spending habits of others? Certainly not, but one could argue he does have an ethical responsibility to insist he is in the minority of this lifestyle?

Do we see videos of Mr. Beast spending money on pure vanity with impractical expectations? When his vast spending is documented, it’s normally for building his empire, setting world records for entertainment purposes (the largest Lego tower), competitions, or even giving back to the community. Would we support Jake or Logan Paul supporting this lifestyle? That’s a trick question, because if you think the Paul’s are suitable role models for an impressionable youths lifestyle then you are wasting your time reading this because you’re already too far gone.

Consider my own experience, acquiring my Tissot PRX in Rose Gold for $950. I first saw this watch in early 2023. I tried it on three separate occasions over four months at an authorized dealer. I read online forums and watched more Teddy Baldasarre videos than I probably should have. I questioned whether the rose gold would remain versatile in my wardrobe and calculated exactly how many bi-weekly paychecks I would need to divert $75 from to reach my goal without impacting my family's budget. Thirteen paychecks later, about six and a half months, I made the purchase. That watch represents not just 260 hours of my working life (at my hourly equivalent) but also 269 hours of anticipation, doubt, research, and conviction. When I wear it, I feel the weight of that journey. This is what collecting smarter means, and what collecting should be about.

Furthermore, Felix’s collection is riddled with impulse purchases, despite his claims of intentionality. The Moonswatch Earthphase purchased during a mall visit, Casio bought "seconds after" his first watch, The Studio Underdog acquired because he "couldn't stop thinking about it”, the Aurora Skeleton because it was originally to gift but kept because he "ended up liking it." (That last one further proves my point on not being a responsible influence to impressionable collectors. Imagine your son telling you that when your nephew doesn’t get a thoughtful gift on his birthday.)

These are textbook impulse buys, yet he frames them as intentional decisions because he had a mentor whispering justifications in his ear. Contrast this with my approach to adding the Xeric Xeriscope Automatic Hour-jump ($200 marked down from $300 via preorder) to my collection. When I first encountered the microbrand I was intrigued by the unusual time display mechanism but skeptical of the build quality and long-term reliability. So I did what collectors should do. I watched video reviews, searched for owner reports of problems, and I joined the Xeric Facebook group to understand the community and company responsiveness, I compared it against other microbrands in the same price range. Even for a $200 watch, I invested more deliberation than he applied to pieces costing five times as much.

The most troubling aspect of this video is its complete detachment from the financial reality of its audience. I went down “the rabbit hole” after watching this video, and according to the demographic research cited, the average watch collector is a man aged 35-49. Further, the Social Security Administration shows that median earnings for this demographic range from $43,200 , Hispanic men aged 40-49, to $100,500 , Asian men aged 40-49, with most groups falling in the $45,000-$71,000

range.

Let the Data Analyst in me take over an run a realistic budget analysis for a collector in this demographic.

Assume a 40-year-old man earning $55,000 annually which is close to the median for Black and Hispanic men in this age group. After federal taxes, state taxes, and FICA, his take-home pay is approximately $42,000, or $3,500 per month. Typical expenses:

- Housing (rent/mortgage, utilities): $1,200-1,500

- Transportation (car payment, insurance, gas): $400-600

- Food: $500-700

- Healthcare (insurance premiums, co-pays): $200-400

- Childcare/family expenses: $300-800

- Retirement savings (essential for future security): $300-500

- Emergency fund contributions: $100-200

- Debt payments (student loans, credit cards): $200-400

- Miscellaneous necessities (clothing, household items): $150-300

This totals roughly $3,350-5,400 per month. For someone at the lower end of the income spectrum, there is virtually nothing left for discretionary hobbies. For someone at the median, perhaps $150-300 per month might be available for all entertainment and hobby spending combined, not just watches, but also dining out, travel, other hobbies, gifts, etc. If a hypothetical collector dedicates $100 per month exclusively to watch saving, requiring sacrifice in other areas, he accumulates $1,200 per year. At this rate, purchasing a single $950 Tissot PRX takes nearly ten months and building a collection of 5-6 watches averaging $700 each would take 3-4 years of dedicated saving. This is the reality for the majority of watch collectors.

Now consider Felix, who spent $10,000 in twelve months. This represents $833 per month in discretionary spending on watches alone, more than five times what a typical collector might allocate to all entertainment combined. To have this level of disposable income while also covering all living expenses suggests an annual income well into the six figures, placing him in the top 20% of earners for his age group. Yet he presents his journey as if it were accessible and to his viewers.

The demographic data I uncovered last night reveals another uncomfortable truth, the wage gaps by race are substantial and persistent. White and Asian men in their 40s earn 49-67% more than Black men and 53-71% more than Hispanic men in the same age group. Watch

collecting, already a hobby associated with disposable income, becomes even more exclusive when practitioners normalize spending that requires top-quintile earnings. When anyone casually discusses buying sixteen watches in a year without acknowledging the extraordinary financial privilege this represents, he

sends an implicit message: if you cannot keep pace with this level of acquisition, you are not a serious collector.

The video's greatest harm lies in its influence on newer collectors who lack the financial literacy or self-control to recognize the dangerous patterns being modeled. When Felix said he "built something actually intentional" and "very sophisticated" while demonstrating the exact opposite, he provides justification for irresponsible spending habits.

Young collectors watching this video will internalize several toxic message; that "Real" collecting requires rapid accumulation and implies that one needs sixteen watches in the first year to have a legitimate collection creates artificial pressure to spend beyond one's means.

The reality is that some of the world's most respected collectors have small, highly curated collections built over decades. But Felix repeatedly makes impulsive purchases then constructs narratives about their intentionality and this is precisely backwards. True intentionality means resisting impulse and only purchasing after careful deliberation and by modeling this behavior, he teaches viewers that if you can tell a good story about why you bought something, the purchase was justified which is a recipe for financial disaster.

Felix repeatedly credits his mentor, Jason from Watch Bros, with guiding his purchases and framing this as a positive. But as a Veteran, Father, and Team Leader mentorship in collecting should emphasize restraint, not enablement. A responsible mentor would say, "You just bought a watch last month; wear it for six months before

considering your next purchase." Instead, this mentor appears to encourage acquisition, even participating in the impulse buy of the Casio "seconds after"

the first watch purchase. This is not guidance; it is enabling. Would you speak like that to your protege?

Nowhere in the video does Felix discuss meaningful sacrifice and he does not mention skipping other purchases, taking on extra work, or making budgetary

tradeoffs. The watches simply appear, funded by seemingly unlimited discretionary income. This creates a false impression that collecting can happen without

difficult choices and is a dangerous illusion for viewers operating on limited budgets.

The contrast with my own collection philosophy, “Smarter Not Harder, could not be more different. When I discuss my watches with other collectors or with younger people interested in the hobby, I am explicit about the tradeoffs. My Hamilton Field Auto represents a summer of skipped Foo Fighters Concerts. My Citizen Attesa meant waiting for the new Conjuring movie to hit streaming services, instead of seeing it in theaters. These are not complaints, they are badges of honor because my watches mean more because they cost more than money,they cost time, patience, and alternative experiences. This is the lesson that should be passed to new collectors. My collection is approximately $4,900 which took approximately two and a half years with the average time from initial interest to purchase per watch six months. Number of impulse purchases from this collection? Zero.

This is what intentional collecting looks like because piece serves a specific role and was preceded by extensive research and financial sacrifice. My collection has room for growth and that growth will happen gradually, as my financial situation allows and as I identify genuine gaps in my collection's functionality or aesthetic range.

Compare this to Felix's collection, where multiple pieces fill the same niche. Tell me, how many casual/sports watches with integrated bracelets does one need in

the first year? Here several watches were acquired and then immediately deemed unsuitable, and the overall pace suggests acquisition for its own sake rather

than a suitable purpose. Collecting, when done properly, is a practice in mindfulness and self-knowledge and requires asking difficult questions. Do I truly need this, or do I simply want the dopamine hit of a new purchase? Will this watch see regular wear, or will it sit in a box after the novelty fades? Does this purchase align with my financial priorities and long-term goals? Am I buying this watch for myself, or for the approval of others? Have I given myself adequate time to move past the initial infatuation and assess my genuine interest?

If you feel like you can’t answer these questions right away, that’s the point. They require time, reflection, and often, the experience of wearing the watches you already own to understand your actual needs versus your perceived wants. Felix’s journey demonstrates none of this introspection. He buys the Studio Underdog because he "couldn't stop thinking about it" after seeing it in person. He purchased the Moonswatch on vacation acknowledging the impulsive context. He keeps the Aura Skeleton despite originally intending it to be a gift it, suggesting he has not even defined clear boundaries for his collection.

Content creators in the watch space bear a responsibility to model healthy collecting habits, particularly when their audience includes younger viewers and new collectors with financial limits. A more honest video would have included a brief disclosure of the creator's income level or at minimum, and an acknowledgment that $10,000 in first-year spending is far above what most collectors can afford. If he did make sacrifices, what were they to fund these purchases? What lifestyle adjustments did he make? Did he skip that usual latte at Starbucks for a month? We don’t know. Perhaps acknowledging that having access to The Watch Bros. and industry connections represents privilege unavailable to most collectors. At no point did he encourage others to research more than spend less, reflect on mistakes, and encourage the journey more than the destination.

Instead, the Fekix celebrated overconsumption while paying lip service to intentionality. He claims he is "enjoying his Phase 4 collecting journey” and suggests that some pieces will be culled from the collection next year to create space for more acquisitions. FYI, this is not a collecting journey, it is a spending journey.

The most revealing moment in the video comes when he describes unboxing the Tissot PRX saying "I unboxed it at my kitchen table after dinner, and I was in love immediately. I think I took like 50 photos on my iPhone." This is the behavior of someone addicted to the acquisition, not someone building a meaningful relationship with an object. True love for a watch develops over months and years of wear, as you discover how it looks in different lighting, how

it feels in different contexts, how it ages and develops character. Immediate love followed by fifty photographs is infatuation fueled by consumerist dopamine encourages impressionable subscribers to chase the same hollow satisfaction through repetitive purchasing.

The watch collecting community stands at a crossroads. On one path lies the traditional approach of patient accumulation, careful research, financial discipline, and deep appreciation for each piece. On the other path lies the Instagram-era approach with rapid acquisition, trend-chasing, flex culture, and treating watches as disposable fashion accessories. Felix, despite its claims of intentionality, firmly plants itself on the second path. By normalizing $10,000 in first-year spending, by celebrating impulse purchases that are rationalized after the fact By failing to acknowledge the extraordinary privilege that enables this behavior, the creator actively harms the collecting culture he claims to participate in.

For those of us who believe that watch collecting should be a "lifelong conquest," the antidote is to advocate a different approach. We must be transparent about the financial sacrifices our collections represent, emphasize quality over quantity, curation over accumulation, the patience we practiced and the doubts we worked through, helping younger buyers budget responsibly, and remember that collecting doesn’t come from the volume of watches but how we connect with each of them.

This is what "Collect Smarter NOT Harder" means. This is what we should be teaching new collectors. And this is what the watch community desperately needs more of and what videos like this one undermine.

7 comments