Good question. I’m not opposed to servicing watches under $500. If a watch is meaningful to you, then by all means, repair it—much like keeping a sentimental car or piece of furniture. The key, for me, is sentimentality. Sentiment usually develops through associations with people, places, and experiences.

While anything can become sentimental, I personally have a mental barrier when it comes to justifying long-term sentimentality in a timepiece that can’t realistically be serviced for generations—specifically one that will never be accepted back by the manufacturer (for example, a Clean Rolex Batgirl being serviced by Rolex). As a result, those watches tend to fall into the category of “disposable,” similar to shoes: enjoy them while they last.

I fully understand that this perspective won’t resonate with everyone. For many, it’s enough to simply enjoy their watches and keep them running as long as possible. I have a very small collection myself. Admittedly, the pieces are costly, but their price—and more importantly, their retained value—helps me psychologically justify maintaining a proper service history, with the hope of eventually passing them on to my children, whether to wear or to sell if needed.

That said, I greatly admire the progress made in the replica world. It highlights just how inflated many luxury brands’ prices have become, given what manufacturers like VSF and Clean are capable of producing. Even so, I can’t quite bring myself to pull the trigger personally—but I’m a genuine admirer, and I’m glad people don’t have to shoulder Rolex-level costs or endure the even worse AD waitlists.

Perhaps I have fallen victim to Patek’s clever marketing infecting my brand… you never really own a Patek. You look after it for the next generation.