The James Bond watch you should buy, full-stop! 

Which isn't to say the Brosnan era watches aren't luxury. The automatics, in particular, are chronometer certified pieces which wipe the floor with a great many watches, even 30 years after the quartz model first debuted.

@@HaveYouSeen Ah of course. The Brosnan SMP is definitely luxury. Just something about the applied markers. Even though I have the 2220.80, the 2531.80 is something I'd love to add to my collection one day because I grew up watching Brosnan playing Bond and that watch of his was always something I've wanted but couldn't afford because I was only in high school when I first saw my first Bond movie which was Tomorrow Never Dies. By the time it was 2012, the 2531.80 was long phased out and a fresh and new 2220.80 was something I'd want after seeing it around Craig in the hit that was Casino Royale 6 years prior. And it's still going strong after all these years.

@@HaveYouSeen The Brosnan era watches are indeed a piece of history, and no one should understate that, be it quartz or the auto. The auto particularly is basically a slightly modified ETA 2892-A2, with some reliability improvements, making it an unbelievably stout movement. That said, I must admit I find the 2220.80 to be a substantial improvement over the 2531.80 for 2 main reasons: 1. While almost perfect, the Brosnan 2531.80's lack of applied markers on the dial really was unacceptable as a Rolex competitor, even back then, and while said wave dial, in general, is still a cut above a simple enamel Rolex dial, the 2220.80 really elevated and completed the look with a dial that, frankly, should have shipped back in 1993. 2. The second major improvement is a bit more controversial, and points definitely do go to the earlier model when it comes to it: the movement. Omega's 2500 Co-axial movement, while still technically a HEAVILY modified 2892, was their first true in house movement of the modern era. And that Co-axial escapement really was smart, albeit notoriously difficult to work on. Like Rolex's 3135 and its ilk, the custom escapement really sets it apart from other brands that simply add a few jewels to an ETA, or worse, simply source an ETA or Sellita and slap on a custom rotor (I'm looking at you, Tag-Heuer). As an added bonus, such movements have never been fully replicated by the illegal replica manufacturers, as those escapements are just to difficult to copy reliably. That said, The 2500, particularly the A, B, and C variants, suffered reliability concerns as the first of Omega's brand a new movement. The complexity of the escapement was prone to failure, though Omega did mitigate the issue in the 2500D model, when they simplified some of the levers and reduced the number of parts. So, for all the talk and craftsmanship, I must award points to the earlier 2531.80, as that ETA based 1120 was reliable, easy to service almost anywhere, and yet still was manufactured, and stamped by Omega, NOT ETA. Regardless, as much as I like my Craig era 300m more, you cannot go wrong either way, and the older models still have very real advantages. The Quartz 2541.80, in particular, is the thinnest of the bunch, which makes it the ultimate pick to wear with a suit, if you can fathom such blasphemy ;)

It's all relative to when they were purchased. I have a 1999 version of the automatic featured in this video and it was around USD$1500 new. The 40th anniversary watch you have - which is based on the watch in this video, but is updated in a number of ways and, of course, isn't 'screen accurate' like the one in this video for obvious reasons - came out in 2002 and while I don't believe it cost a lot more at retail, has appreciated faster due to it being limited to 10,007 units. The watch in this video, meanwhile, was made for over a decade and they made A LOT of them, which has kept the price low on the market, so they remain - as I said in the video - an absolutely outstanding purchase today; even one in need of a major service.