OpenAI CEO Sam Altman has been a hot topic in tech news recently after being cast out by the company, only to be reeled back in just a few days later.

While we’re not interested in one guy’s LinkedIn status, we are interested in the choice of luxury watches people wear.

If you’re wondering what watch Sam Altman wears, at least one of his choices appears to be a Greubel Forsey Invention Piece 1.

In 2018, Wired hosted Sam Altman and Sebastian Thrun in a discussion about the future of AI.

In the event video, Mr. Altman is sporting a light blue button-down with a gray jacket over denim jeans – a basic Silicon Valley business casual OOTD that made the huge golden object on his wrist all the more difficult to ignore…

Video – WIRED25: Sebastian Thrun & Sam Altman Talk Flying Vehicles and Artificial Intelligence

The low-res frames didn’t help the identification process, but the Greubel Forsey Invention Piece 1 immediately came to mind when I saw the timepiece popping out of Sam Altman’s cuff.

In the comparison below, the watch was flipped to put the crown on the right side. From there, you can see the long tourbillon bridge and main dial location seem to match the layout of the Greubel Forsey.

Let’s look at the overall layout side-by-side. The image below includes a Greubel Forsey image with a similar red gold/silver dial configuration.

The watch may stick out prominently from Mr. Altman’s sleeve, but that doesn’t make it any easier to identify from the video. However, the thickness, short lugs, and bar across the lower left are definitely leaning towards the Invention Piece 1.

Because this model was produced in ultra low quantities between 2008 and 2009, information is sparse and images are limited. Based on the year, perhaps Altman picked it up as a reminder of the time Businessweek called him one the of the Best Young Entepreneurs in Technology back in ’08 (the same year KTT was founded!).

Greubel Forsey Invention Piece 1:

Greubel Forsey’s creations tend to look like concept watches produced for magazine editorials and social media. These aren’t watches you’ll see out in the wild every day.

Not to mention, pieces like this carry retail prices so far from obtainability that the average watch collector finds them to be fun to gawk at and read about, but that’s about it – the way car people might drool over images of the Ferrari Daytona SP3 or Lamborghini Sian (although Greubel Forsey is more along the lines of a Pininfarina Battista or Pagani Utopia).

The price is not the only limitation in acquiring an Invention Piece 1… there were only 33 total watches available in the entire world. Just enough for a few dozen one percenters to adorn their wrists with memorizing double tourbillon rotating glory!

If you’re going to spend that much on a timepiece, you probably want people to see it. The Invention Piece 1 is the perfect wingman in that regard. Boasting a diameter of 43.5mm and standing tall at almost 17mm in thickness. These are Invicta numbers here.

Either way, with a piece like this, it can’t be denied that Sam Altman has some affinity to old school tech. At about 13 seconds into the video… wait a minute, is that Sam Altman doing a classic watch geek move of looking down at his wrist to make sure his watch is exposed? Hahahahaha (laughing because I can relate).

The Invention Piece 1’s standout DNA is its extra long tourbillon bridge spanning across the dial from around what would typically be the 9:30 to 5:00 positions. This bridge is the upper support system for the brand’s claim to fame beneath it: the Double Tourbillon 30°.

With this patented design, the outside tourbillon does its thing with 4 minutes of rotation and an angled tourbillon rotating every 60 seconds on the inside.

“It took us four years of research and development to realise our first invention, the Double Tourbillon 30°, which features an innovative double tourbillon mechanism with one tourbillon – inclined at 30° and rotating in 60 seconds – inside another rotating in four minutes. The combination of the 30° inclination with the different rotational speeds of the two tourbillons improves timekeeping by averaging out positional errors due to gravity, especially in stable positions.” -Greubel Forsey

Editor’s Side Note: As brilliant as some haute horology brands are, they often miss the obvious. Here we have the Double Tourbillon 30 as the main idea behind the Invention Piece 1, featured in a watch that is limited to 33 pieces. If I were the Creative or Marketing Director of this brand, I think I’d make the limited edition run an even “30” to reflect upon the achievement.

Apart from its unique hours and minutes display, this watch also gives wearers a small running seconds subdial in the vicinity of 11:00, as well as a sweeping power reserve (up to 72 hours) indicator towards the direction of the crown.

In Greubel Forsey’s own words:

“Reminiscent of orbiting astronomical indicators, the displays reinforce the link between the mechanism and the indication. Two triangular indicators – red hours, blue minutes – show the time, while a sub-second dial (top left) and a power reserve indicator complete the dial.”

The Invention Piece 1 is available in 18K white gold, 5N red gold, or platinum. 11 pieces were produced in each metal type.

The retail price was roughly 540’000 CHF (roughly $595,000 USD) when it was available.

Edited for clarity:

The retail price for the platinum model was listed at 540’000 CHF (roughly $595,000 USD) when it was available. The gold versions may have been priced lower at around $520,000 USD, but that has not been confirmed. Brand new, it was about a .5 million dollar watch either way you slice it.

Editor’s note on pricing: 16 years after its release, there isn’t much pricing information to be found. Not to mention pricing for haute horlogerie is typically listed in Swiss Francs and doesn’t always add up dollar-for-dollar when converting to other currencies due to VAT (Value-Added Tax) and other variables (such as conversion rates at that time, precious metal value at that time, etc.) which are discussed privately between the brand and the buyer when the order is placed. Also remember that, just like supercars, out-of-touch pricing is another marketing element for a lot of these types of timepieces.

Editor’s note on celebrities wearing watches: Just because someone is seen with a watch doesn’t mean it’s theirs. It also doesn’t mean they paid cash for it brand new. They could have borrowed it from a friend, they could have traded something for it, who knows! Being in the luxury watch industry long enough, you start to see that many of the rich and famous actually get good deals on the items we all admire them for. Believe it or not, many celebs have their people source used goods. Some get loaners from brands to be able to wear to events – either for free or for rent. Others get discounts because wearing the item is free advertising for the brand – it’s another type of trade deal. The point is, try not to use the facts (celeb A wore brand A and brand A is worth X) to make assumptions about the unknown. And another point worth making is… who cares what someone else wears and what the price is listed at in bold at the bottom of a blog post? Do you.

Please excuse the blurry video screengrabs above. It’s the best we could do aside from this event shot by Matt Winkelmeyer for Getty Images.

Quick Specs:

• Movement: Swiss made, manual wind
• Caliber: GF02N
• Case Diameter: 43.5mm
• Case Thickness: 16.64mm
• Water Resistant: Up to 30m/100ft

Learn more at greubelforsey.com

Disclaimer: Not all celebrity watch collectors make a point to appear in watch publications to secure bragging rights about their acquisitions. Some simply dangle a slither of everyone’s grail just off the cuff – and when a watch enthusiast catches a glimpse, they promptly redirect their attention to the watch. Pausing the video, taking screenshots at various frames, zooming in and racking their brains to remember where they saw that watch before. But as with most watch identifications from blurry screenshots pulled from video footage, there is always possibility of margin of error.

But what do you think? Did we nail it?