Clarkson has a pop at Rolex
Discussion
audidoody said:
Amen to that. My year 2002 16710 cost £1950 in 2003 and is showing a notional return of 8 per cent a year for the last 12 years (circa £3,850 now private sale).
Thats great, but it's not really got much to to with the negative image of Rolex watches. In fact the high demand actually supports clarksons comments. Rolex like the 911 is the default choice for anyone wanting to show off. swerni said:
Is it that negative other than in certain factions?
I dislike Breitling, i find them bling and tacky, as I'm sure many others do. Does that mean they have a negative image?
I agree with you entirely and Clarksons comments actually tell us he's the one a bit obsessed with image and branding. Just that he associates himself more with other brands, which somehow makes him more in the know. I dislike Breitling, i find them bling and tacky, as I'm sure many others do. Does that mean they have a negative image?
Read the original article. I have a RRS and a SS sub. I feel awful! I do kind of like JC and I used to enjoy top gear. I even used to half heartedly agree with much of his populist ranting. Now I know he hates me, too!!
Having said that, I sometimes wear a rolex on a black rubber strap, which is visually indistinguishable from JC's Planet Ocean with black leather strap (at ten paces) and he drives a Range Rover, too.
Does that make me feel better?! Christ, life is so hard these days.
(On a completely different note, I think that he oyster is a stunning watch and I saw a girl in a yellow gold rolex president recently. It was a beautiful watch. A design that is 60 years old, worn by men or women? It'll never be bettered)
Having said that, I sometimes wear a rolex on a black rubber strap, which is visually indistinguishable from JC's Planet Ocean with black leather strap (at ten paces) and he drives a Range Rover, too.
Does that make me feel better?! Christ, life is so hard these days.
(On a completely different note, I think that he oyster is a stunning watch and I saw a girl in a yellow gold rolex president recently. It was a beautiful watch. A design that is 60 years old, worn by men or women? It'll never be bettered)
el stovey said:
Rolex like the 911 is the default choice for anyone wanting to show off.
Interesting. Where is the qualitative research that supports this incisive thesis? How many people were interviewed in your survey? 1,000? 6,6000? Did your researchers show them pictures of a gold and diamond Daytona and ask them if it exhibited the same factor of "show off" as a 40-year-old steel Datejust or Explorer?
Did the interviewees understand the price points of Rolex? Was their view of the brand the same when they were shown a £3,700 Explorer as a white gold GMT for £21,000? Or a gold Sky Dweller for £23,000?
Did you show them pictures of Hublot Big Bangs and Richard Mille Aerodyne's at more than £100,000 and ask them if people bought these to "show off".
Or should the statement "Rolex is the default choice of anyone wanting to show off" be filed under cliched and rather puerile stereotypes along with "MX5's are for hairdressers?"
el stovey said:
Thats great, but it's not really got much to to with the negative image of Rolex watches. In fact the high demand actually supports clarksons comments. Rolex like the 911 is the default choice for anyone wanting to show off.
I'm not sure it's 'showing off' to have something nice. Is having a sports car 'showing off'?Whilst I don't own a Rolex, I know they bring pleasure to millions - it's a private sense of achievement rather than showing off in many cases.
NDA said:
I'm not sure it's 'showing off' to have something nice. Is having a sports car 'showing off'?
Whilst I don't own a Rolex, I know they bring pleasure to millions - it's a private sense of achievement rather than showing off in many cases.
That's not really what clarksons said. He said certain brands are known to be a expensive so people who buy something so others know they can afford it, gravitate to those brands. If you are buying a car or watch so others can see you can afford it, you're not going to get something more obscure or less well known. That's where the comments about "know nothing" show offs come from. Whilst I don't own a Rolex, I know they bring pleasure to millions - it's a private sense of achievement rather than showing off in many cases.
el stovey said:
NDA said:
I'm not sure it's 'showing off' to have something nice. Is having a sports car 'showing off'?
Whilst I don't own a Rolex, I know they bring pleasure to millions - it's a private sense of achievement rather than showing off in many cases.
That's not really what clarksons said. He said certain brands are known to be a expensive so people who buy something so others know they can afford it, gravitate to those brands. If you are buying a car or watch so others can see you can afford it, you're not going to get something more obscure or less well known. That's where the comments about "know nothing" show offs come from. Whilst I don't own a Rolex, I know they bring pleasure to millions - it's a private sense of achievement rather than showing off in many cases.
Even if someone buys a Rolex as a 'private sense of achievement', it's probably because (to a degree) they've bought into the image enough to believe owning a Rolex is an 'achievement'.
For many, it's not private, it's a DISPLAY of that achievement, because the brand is one they know will achieve instant recognition. If you have to explain a brand's desirability to someone, it probably has none to them. Rolex is a brand even the most Watch 'unsavvy' person will be aware of and know they're a) not cheap and b) perceived as desireable.
M
el stovey said:
NDA said:
I'm not sure it's 'showing off' to have something nice. Is having a sports car 'showing off'?
Whilst I don't own a Rolex, I know they bring pleasure to millions - it's a private sense of achievement rather than showing off in many cases.
That's not really what clarksons said. He said certain brands are known to be a expensive so people who buy something so others know they can afford it, gravitate to those brands. If you are buying a car or watch so others can see you can afford it, you're not going to get something more obscure or less well known. That's where the comments about "know nothing" show offs come from. Whilst I don't own a Rolex, I know they bring pleasure to millions - it's a private sense of achievement rather than showing off in many cases.
Neither of these things should worry someone who understands watches / cars and likes Rolexes / 911s for what they actually are - which are brilliant watches / cars.
Edited by AstonZagato on Monday 29th June 08:52
PJ S said:
michael gould said:
Chris Stott said:
I have a 911 and 2 Rolex's... but I'm not from Essex, so I must be OK, right?
I sold my 2 Rolex's and have never owned a Porsche ....i own an Aston Martin and a couple of JLC's ....does that make me very "Cheshire" ?
. 
Sorry, couldn't resist – you left yourself wide open for it.
happy to be the resident t-o-s-s-e-r ............i only do it to make the rest of you feel good about yourselves AW111 said:
How many people buy Glenfiddich as a safe choice in single malts?
(Particularly as a gift.)
Nothing wrong with it, but there are lesser known alternatives.
well your analogy aint a bad one but what LVMH has done with TAG is to persuaded us that a bottle of Glenfiddich is worth £200(Particularly as a gift.)
Nothing wrong with it, but there are lesser known alternatives.
Well I'm doomed....I'm a 'Steve' and just bought my 2nd Rolex. 
Don't own a 911 but did have a Boxster.
I'm sure 'Clarkson' would make some comment but let me show you my bothered face.
I own watches from other 'premium' brands too, I just buy what I like, and it just happens that the 1st Rolex I bought has been an outstanding investment showing about a 75% increase in value.
Don't own a 911 but did have a Boxster.
I'm sure 'Clarkson' would make some comment but let me show you my bothered face.
I own watches from other 'premium' brands too, I just buy what I like, and it just happens that the 1st Rolex I bought has been an outstanding investment showing about a 75% increase in value.
I'm not sure how much there is to be gained from second-guessing the purchase motivations of complete strangers, but if we're going along that road, my 2p worth is as follows:
1/ Porsche and Rolex have both become famous, at least in part due to a combination of great products/design that has become iconic as a result of very gradual change, as well as great marketing strategies and execution.
2/ Both brands operate at the upper end of the mid-range, with entry level products that are affordable to quite high numbers of people (in comparison to, say, Patek Philippe and Ferrari). The products are therefore realistically aspirational and widely available for many people, whereas the more esoteric, less obvious choices might not be.
3/ We must surely accept that an interest in sports cars is niche and an interest in mechanical watches is highly niche, and therefore the great majority of people that buy a sports car or mechanical watch to enjoy will not take a huge interest in the finer points of the design, construction etc. It is possible to enjoy using these products without expert knowledge.
4/ It's hardly surprising therefore that most people who decide to buy a sports car, or mechanical watch, will look for the reassurance of brand, history and what others have bought, when making a decision to part with their (presumably) hard earned money, in the same way that I did when I bought a camera recently - I wanted a decent camera and ended up buying a Nikon SLR because a few people I know told me they are good and I'd heard of the brand. Presumably camera enthusiasts would sneer at this, but I really don't care, and nor should Rolex/911 owners - they made a good choice, good for them. Should we all only buy products that fit our level of general interest in them? The alternative is that you can't buy a good road bike unless you can climb like Chris Froome, can't buy a set of Ping irons unless you have a swing like Rory McIlroy? What a load of crap.
Personally, as a 911 and Rolex owner (S/S Sub and 1951 Oysterdate among my very modest watch collection) I think there are much ''blingier" brands for cars and watches at the same price point. Rolex watches and 911s attract little to no attention in my experience - if I had wanted to pose, I'd have probably bought an R8 and a Hublot or something of that ilk that sits bigger on the road/wrist (NB: not saying these are poseur's choices, just likely to appear more expensive/flash to the general public than 911/Rolex).
Following that lengthy diatribe, in summary, I think some of us are too quick to judge people based on their own preconceptions and we should just live and let live. It's only a watch!
Anyway, I'm off to drive my Fiat Panda whilst wearing my Seiko 5, not sure what this says about me? 😜
1/ Porsche and Rolex have both become famous, at least in part due to a combination of great products/design that has become iconic as a result of very gradual change, as well as great marketing strategies and execution.
2/ Both brands operate at the upper end of the mid-range, with entry level products that are affordable to quite high numbers of people (in comparison to, say, Patek Philippe and Ferrari). The products are therefore realistically aspirational and widely available for many people, whereas the more esoteric, less obvious choices might not be.
3/ We must surely accept that an interest in sports cars is niche and an interest in mechanical watches is highly niche, and therefore the great majority of people that buy a sports car or mechanical watch to enjoy will not take a huge interest in the finer points of the design, construction etc. It is possible to enjoy using these products without expert knowledge.
4/ It's hardly surprising therefore that most people who decide to buy a sports car, or mechanical watch, will look for the reassurance of brand, history and what others have bought, when making a decision to part with their (presumably) hard earned money, in the same way that I did when I bought a camera recently - I wanted a decent camera and ended up buying a Nikon SLR because a few people I know told me they are good and I'd heard of the brand. Presumably camera enthusiasts would sneer at this, but I really don't care, and nor should Rolex/911 owners - they made a good choice, good for them. Should we all only buy products that fit our level of general interest in them? The alternative is that you can't buy a good road bike unless you can climb like Chris Froome, can't buy a set of Ping irons unless you have a swing like Rory McIlroy? What a load of crap.
Personally, as a 911 and Rolex owner (S/S Sub and 1951 Oysterdate among my very modest watch collection) I think there are much ''blingier" brands for cars and watches at the same price point. Rolex watches and 911s attract little to no attention in my experience - if I had wanted to pose, I'd have probably bought an R8 and a Hublot or something of that ilk that sits bigger on the road/wrist (NB: not saying these are poseur's choices, just likely to appear more expensive/flash to the general public than 911/Rolex).
Following that lengthy diatribe, in summary, I think some of us are too quick to judge people based on their own preconceptions and we should just live and let live. It's only a watch!
Anyway, I'm off to drive my Fiat Panda whilst wearing my Seiko 5, not sure what this says about me? 😜
Disagree.
I said Chanel, when I meant Cartier. They invented the wristwatch, even though they started off as a jeweller.
Bvlgari is the one that I forgot.
https://www.hautehorlogerie.org/en/brands/brand/s/...
https://www.hautehorlogerie.org/en/brands/brand/h/...
https://www.hautehorlogerie.org/en/brands/brand/s/...
Victorinox would be the most recent of the brands mentioned, starting watch production in 1989, again even though they were a knife manufacturer to begin with.
Charriol began in 1983.
So to all intents and purposes, they're watch manufacturers who have fragrances as part of their overall luxury goods portfolio.
I said Chanel, when I meant Cartier. They invented the wristwatch, even though they started off as a jeweller.
Bvlgari is the one that I forgot.
https://www.hautehorlogerie.org/en/brands/brand/s/...
https://www.hautehorlogerie.org/en/brands/brand/h/...
https://www.hautehorlogerie.org/en/brands/brand/s/...
Victorinox would be the most recent of the brands mentioned, starting watch production in 1989, again even though they were a knife manufacturer to begin with.
Charriol began in 1983.
So to all intents and purposes, they're watch manufacturers who have fragrances as part of their overall luxury goods portfolio.
PJ S said:
Disagree.
I said Chanel, when I meant Cartier. They invented the wristwatch, even though they started off as a jeweller.
Bvlgari is the one that I forgot.
https://www.hautehorlogerie.org/en/brands/brand/s/...
https://www.hautehorlogerie.org/en/brands/brand/h/...
https://www.hautehorlogerie.org/en/brands/brand/s/...
Victorinox would be the most recent of the brands mentioned, starting watch production in 1989, again even though they were a knife manufacturer to begin with.
Charriol began in 1983.
So to all intents and purposes, they're watch manufacturers who have fragrances as part of their overall luxury goods portfolio.
I can't understand why Rolex's "eau de submariner" never took off. It was better than their perpetual oyster cologne.I said Chanel, when I meant Cartier. They invented the wristwatch, even though they started off as a jeweller.
Bvlgari is the one that I forgot.
https://www.hautehorlogerie.org/en/brands/brand/s/...
https://www.hautehorlogerie.org/en/brands/brand/h/...
https://www.hautehorlogerie.org/en/brands/brand/s/...
Victorinox would be the most recent of the brands mentioned, starting watch production in 1989, again even though they were a knife manufacturer to begin with.
Charriol began in 1983.
So to all intents and purposes, they're watch manufacturers who have fragrances as part of their overall luxury goods portfolio.
Really who cares?*
Every which way that someone spends their money will be seen as a waste / sheep / TOWIE / 'wannabe' / idiot / PH Director / Q7 Driving / White BMW etc by a certain part of society.
Some of my friends choose to drive expensive-leased cars, I chose to spend my money travelling the world - they can't see the point in experiencing different cultures and I can't see the point in leasing.
People pay £x00's to go and watch football week in and week out following clubs across the country and in some cases Europe, why? You can just watch the game on the television(ditto for music), I don't 'get it' but each to their own.
I always wanted a Rolex and yes it probably is an accurate comparison to the 911 (although no thanks to one of those), people think its a waste of money yet are happy to spend £300-500 on Armarni / Hugo Boss / Tissot every three that are valueless as soon as you have paid!
Every which way that someone spends their money will be seen as a waste / sheep / TOWIE / 'wannabe' / idiot / PH Director / Q7 Driving / White BMW etc by a certain part of society.
Some of my friends choose to drive expensive-leased cars, I chose to spend my money travelling the world - they can't see the point in experiencing different cultures and I can't see the point in leasing.
People pay £x00's to go and watch football week in and week out following clubs across the country and in some cases Europe, why? You can just watch the game on the television(ditto for music), I don't 'get it' but each to their own.
I always wanted a Rolex and yes it probably is an accurate comparison to the 911 (although no thanks to one of those), people think its a waste of money yet are happy to spend £300-500 on Armarni / Hugo Boss / Tissot every three that are valueless as soon as you have paid!
- I do own a Rolex, Oyster Datejust on the classic bi-metal 62523 bracelet. Not a fan of the modern 'blingy / fat' bracelets.
WGAS what Clarkson says or thinks? He's probably only venting because Rolex won't send him a freebie now he's off TG (or maybe he's all grumpy because someone offered him a cold platter).
The only person who sways my buying decisions is Mrs MikeVeal, I couldn't give a monkey's about some random pugilist's opinion.
The only person who sways my buying decisions is Mrs MikeVeal, I couldn't give a monkey's about some random pugilist's opinion.
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff