Don’t compare apples and oranges.

I was making a point about the market valuing things. Any thing could have been used that wasn't a commodity as an example.

To say Seiko’s are a luxury good on the same level secondhand as brands like Rolex or Patek is ridiculous.

I didn't meant to imply that. I am using "luxury" in a very broad sense, ie, spending more than necessary on an item. If people just want to tell the time and have a robust reliable watch, they don't need to spend more than $100.

Any watch that is above what is strictly necessary for the needed function is a "luxury".

Patek and Rolex are an entirely different sort of market than the Alpinist will ever be in, but both are more expensive than one needs to spend if one just wants a good looking functional watch.

Rolex is known for holding its value secondhand

Not all models. Some Seiko watches hold value or increase in value too, as you noted.

On the other hand, Seiko buyers are buying their SARB watches for less than that margin.

The choices of fans whose views we do not share will always be baffling. But that is the watch market in general.

Look at MVMT for an example. Their products are barely changed cheap Chinese watches sold for a huge markup to the ignorant masses with extensive marketing. That is a bigger problem than Seiko fans spending more than retail on used discontinued Seiko models.

And you noted that there are many sellers. I think that people who wanted the watch are snapping them up to try them, and then if they don't really love them, they resell them.

People buying them are not taking big risks, because they value is retained, at least for now, so the only people keeping them are those who really love them.

I'm sure it will sort itself out in time. People aren't going to be shuffling these watches around forever.

And honestly, a few hundred over time is a tiny price to pay.