Here is one from my box of gold ones, Illini by Illinois

[A.F.W.]

Please take a look at the inscription. My be it is one of THE Guggenheims...
http://www.afinewatch.com/images/goldPW2.JPG
http://www.afinewatch.com/images/illinoisillini14K5.JPG
http://www.afinewatch.com/images/illinoisillini14K4.JPG
http://www.afinewatch.com/images/illinoisillini14K3.JPG

http://www.afinewatch.com/images/illinoisillini14K2.JPG
http://www.afinewatch.com/images/illinoisillini14K1.JPG

[Tom McIntyre]

A quick glance at Google shows Stein-Bloch as a firm in the Garment District of New York with a buyer named Guggenheim.

There were a couple of more expensive examples of this particular watch including the most expensive watch Illinois offered for sale at the time with a carved case and carved gold dial.

It does not really matter to me about your big pictures since I have a broadband connection and the traffic does not go through the message board for your pictures, but those with slower connections must really be suffering with a 2 Mbyte post like the one above.

[A.F.W.]

A quick glance at Google shows Stein-Bloch as a firm in the Garment District of New York with a buyer named Guggenheim.

There were a couple of more expensive examples of this particular watch including the most expensive watch Illinois offered for sale at the time with a carved case and carved gold dial.

It does not really matter to me about your big pictures since I have a broadband connection and the traffic does not go through the message board for your pictures, but those with slower connections must really be suffering with a 2 Mbyte post like the one above.

Sorry about the pics. Should I just post one at a time in the future ?
That Guggenheim could have been a relation...

[Tom McIntyre]

I am sure the Guggenheim was a relation. It is not that common a name. All the McIntyres are related also. Presumably all the male McIntyres share a common Y chromosome.

On the picture front, the reason we have picture attachments here is twofold.

By hosting the pictures we can ensure their integrity. They will not mysteriously change to advertising some day.
The use of thumbnails and highslide viewing reduces the work (and computer load) for viewers to enjoy the pictures.


If you put pictures in a single post, they will likely be shown on more than one page, which will help with the initial delay for viewing.

It is a personal kind of thing, but to me, very large pictures are equivalent to someone standing right in my face to talk to me. I like a little more space. ;)

[Bryan Eyring]

I am sure the Guggenheim was a relation. It is not that common a name. All the McIntyres are related also. Presumably all the male McIntyres share a common Y chromosome.

On the picture front, the reason we have picture attachments here is twofold.

By hosting the pictures we can ensure their integrity. They will not mysteriously change to advertising some day.
The use of thumbnails and highslide viewing reduces the work (and computer load) for viewers to enjoy the pictures.


If you put pictures in a single post, they will likely be shown on more than one page, which will help with the initial delay for viewing.

It is a personal kind of thing, but to me, very large pictures are equivalent to someone standing right in my face to talk to me. I like a little more space. ;)

Agreed - Thumbnails make is much easier for those of us with slow connections to preview and subsequently download photos. Thank you Tom for addressing this.
Regards,
Bryan

[Don Dahlberg]

This from the 1924 Otto Young Catalog.

33456

Don

[A.F.W.]

Don, thanks for this info. Back in 1920s this was a lot of money !!!
May be an equivalent to $15,000 today.

[Tom McIntyre]

There is another ad from that period (1922) that also shows the engraved dial. The watch was $10 more with the engraved dial in the engraved case.

$210 in 1924 is $2,612.22 in 2009 according to my CPI inflation calculator.

I had to look hard to find the earlier thread, but here is the post (http://mb.nawcc.org/showpost.php?p=214005&postcount=17) that shows my engraved example and the earlier ad with the dial.

[A.F.W.]

There is another ad from that period (1922) that also shows the engraved dial. The watch was $10 more with the engraved dial in the engraved case.

$210 in 1924 is $2,612.22 in 2009 according to my CPI inflation calculator.

I had to look hard to find the earlier thread, but here is the post that shows my engraved example and the earlier ad with the dial.

I will not argue with the figure you submitted of $2612.22 but many people make this much today in a month as teachers.
I think teachers or comparable professions did not make $210 a month back in 1924. I may be wrong of course.

[Tom McIntyre]

I will not argue with the figure you submitted of $2612.22 but many people make this much today in a month as teachers.
I think teachers or comparable professions did not make $210 a month back in 1924. I may be wrong of course.


Your observation is true but not relevant. CPI is based on how much things cost to buy, not how much money people earn. The number is a theoretical extension of the raw CPI data that the Department of Commerce publishes.

My wife's mother made $900 teaching in Borger TX in 1924. However, she only made $3,600 teaching in Avoca TX in 1964. :eek:

[A.F.W.]

Your observation is true but not relevant. CPI is based on how much things cost to buy, not how much money people earn. The number is a theoretical extension of the raw CPI data that the Department of Commerce publishes.

My wife's mother made $900 teaching in Borger TX in 1924. However, she only made $3,600 teaching in Avoca TX in 1964. :eek:

O.K. I think it proves my point if the figures you submitted were annual salary. It would take her 4 and 1/2 months of work just to buy that watch in 1924.

[Tom McIntyre]

You miss my point. School teachers were not the market for the watch. The major of Stamford TX could not have afforded the watch.

The inflation adjusted price of the watch in 1954 was $330.35 and I assure you she still would not have bought it, even though it was only a bit over a month's salary then.

When you talk about the increase in value due to inflation, you need to use the inflation index, which is the CPI for most purposes. If the economy does not recover soon, we could have a negative CPI change this year.

Jewelry has actually inflated more than commodities for a variety of reasons, but your number was still way too high.

In any case the watch today is worth what someone today is willing to pay. Although I love them, no one is willing to pay much for 12 size watches. :(

[A.F.W.]

You miss my point. School teachers were not the market for the watch. The major of Stamford TX could not have afforded the watch.

The inflation adjusted price of the watch in 1954 was $330.35 and I assure you she still would not have bought it, even though it was only a bit over a month's salary then.

When you talk about the increase in value due to inflation, you need to use the inflation index, which is the CPI for most purposes. If the economy does not recover soon, we could have a negative CPI change this year.

Jewelry has actually inflated more than commodities for a variety of reasons, but your number was still way too high.

In any case the watch today is worth what someone today is willing to pay. Although I love them, no one is willing to pay much for 12 size watches. :(
I do not think I am missing your point. I know what CPI is.
I am just looking at it from another angle.
I am just relating the fact that this watch was intended for people with means. $2000 was not that much money for professionals to spend on a watch until recently...