Tag Heuer watches vs. Rolex etc. - Young buyer

[Wills2]

That's what I like about PH always a sensible discussion without anyone posting clap trap.....

It's a just a watch not a Nazi tattoo on your face...the mind boggles at the person that would choose to correlate the two and push that forward as a reasonable argument.

[battered]

Wills2 said:

That's what I like about PH always a sensible discussion without anyone posting clap trap.....

It's a just a watch not a Nazi tattoo on your face...the mind boggles at the person that would choose to correlate the two and push that forward as a reasonable argument.

It's called an analogy. You may also choose to look up reductio ad adsurbum. The 2 devices are each used to illustrate a point.

The point is that people make assumptions about you based on your appearance, be it clothes, haircut, watches, facial tattoos or anything else. Some of these will provoke an extreme reaction, some not. But they all produce a reaction. At a wedding recently someone recognised the brand of shirt that I was wearing and commented that it was old, because the logo is now bigger, and what kind of cheapskate turns up to a wedding in an old shirt? I kid you not. Now not many people will see that and still fewer will comment on it or make assumptions, but even something like a shirt logo can get a reaction from some people some of the time. Nazi tattoos may generate more or less reaction, you decide.

Is this right? No, but it's the way the human race has been since for ever. Can any of us change it? No. Still think this is claptrap? Be my guest, if you are that hard of understanding then it's your loss.

[frye]

battered said:

13m said:

Most Rolexes aren't "in your face" in today's world. In fact, many would argue that some of them appear humdrum. Yes, you can buy jewel-encrusted horrors, but most of the steel watches are pretty low-key.

All of which said, Rolex does have an unshakable arriviste image. Rightly so perhaps.(snip)... in that capacity they somehow become "in your face" without actually being in your face.

Thank you 13m for an intelligent reply that hits the ball not the bowler.

While you are right that the arriviste image makes them "in your face" when they may not so overtly be so, I do think they have a very masculine and aggressive design language. A big chunky SS body, big bold bracelet, the bezel, and so on. All of these set up a very bold, assertive, masculine kind of image, which does of course go with the image that the marketing department set out to portray and the buyers inevitably buy into. "I'm a rufty tufty outdoor sportsman, if you get in my way on the way to the decompression chamber I'll make you sorry".

All modern Rolex models, be they Sub, Air King, Milgauss, share these design elements to a greater or lesser extent, and retain the family resemblance. They therefore retain the image, but subtle they are not.

The Rolex watches that don't share this design language are the vintage models from the 50's. Now these are considerably more discreet. They don't shout across the room "Hey, look! I'm a Rolex!" in the way that a modern Sub does. If I were going to buy a Rolex, these are the models I would be choosing from.

Edited by battered on Saturday 14th January 10:03

Have to agree with you there. I also get that impression with Rolex and I would prefer something a little more subtle / discreet but having exquisite craftsmanship.

Hence why I'm looking for the most suitable Grand Seiko out there for me.

[Wills2]

battered said:

Wills2 said:

That's what I like about PH always a sensible discussion without anyone posting clap trap.....

It's a just a watch not a Nazi tattoo on your face...the mind boggles at the person that would choose to correlate the two and push that forward as a reasonable argument.

It's called an analogy. You may also choose to look up reductio ad adsurbum. The 2 devices are each used to illustrate a point.

The point is that people make assumptions about you based on your appearance, be it clothes, haircut, watches, facial tattoos or anything else. Some of these will provoke an extreme reaction, some not. But they all produce a reaction. At a wedding recently someone recognised the brand of shirt that I was wearing and commented that it was old, because the logo is now bigger, and what kind of cheapskate turns up to a wedding in an old shirt? I kid you not. Now not many people will see that and still fewer will comment on it or make assumptions, but even something like a shirt logo can get a reaction from some people some of the time. Nazi tattoos may generate more or less reaction, you decide.

Is this right? No, but it's the way the human race has been since for ever. Can any of us change it? No. Still think this is claptrap? Be my guest, if you are that hard of understanding then it's your loss.

LOL the clap trap was your tortured attempt at a comparison between the reaction to Nazi tattoos and a watch, yes that's right a watch. It doesn't illustrate a point when the comparison is absurd and people just laugh....it defeats the object and makes you look silly.

Comparisons work best when you keep things in perspective and Nazi tattoo vs. Rolex watch is a bit of a stretch.

But you carry on....

[DJMC]

We went to look at a range of Rolex watches today. He likes the Submariner and GMT II.

Submariner wins currently. What's a good price for pre-owned, when did ceramic bezel come in, and what is the best age to look for?

I'm thinking £4k would be a good buy?

Should we only buy from Rolex authorised dealers?

[SturdyHSV]

foxsasha said:

I don't think the Perpetual looks too aggressive. It's my favourite of the Rolex range as it doesn't look like it is trying to hard nor a status watch.

I had not seen that before, that is bloody lovely.

I'm more than a little relieved the better half carries the same Rolex prejudice I do and hasn't really looked at them, because the watch she fell in love with and now wears is this Tag Calibre 5 Blue (yes it's a gents watch, she's never been a big fan of little women's watches):



Worryingly similar style, that could have been a very expensive visit

[13m]

DJMC said:

We went to look at a range of Rolex watches today. He likes the Submariner and GMT II.

Submariner wins currently. What's a good price for pre-owned, when did ceramic bezel come in, and what is the best age to look for?

I'm thinking £4k would be a good buy?

Should we only buy from Rolex authorised dealers?

Does he want a date complication? The GMTII has one anyway, the Sub can be had with or without. The one without is the nicer looking of the two, but a date is useful.

Then there is the ceramic vs pre-ceramic. The ceramic ones have bigger lugs and are, in my opinion, not as attractive as the pre-ceramic. All of which said, I seem to recall you mentioned your son it quite a big chap, that being the case he'd carry off the chunkier ceramic model.

The Sub ceramic bezel came in 2012, the GMT 2007.

The ceramic version of the Sub or GMT has a nicer bracelet than the non-ceramic.

Should you only buy from a Rolex AD? Not necessarily, but if you don't know what you're doing it would be a good idea to buy from a "proper" dealer. All of which said, it is worth contacting Goldsmiths who have a large stock, across the company, of pre-owned Rolex. They are a Rolex AD and tend not to discount steel Rolexes, but they will haggle on used stock. All used Rolex are newly serviced and have 2 years warranty.

[battered]

Wills2 said:

battered said:

Wills2 said:

That's what I like about PH always a sensible discussion without anyone posting clap trap.....

It's a just a watch not a Nazi tattoo on your face...the mind boggles at the person that would choose to correlate the two and push that forward as a reasonable argument.

It's called an analogy. You may also choose to look up reductio ad adsurbum. The 2 devices are each used to illustrate a point.

The point is that people make assumptions about you based on your appearance, be it clothes, haircut, watches, facial tattoos or anything else. Some of these will provoke an extreme reaction, some not. But they all produce a reaction. At a wedding recently someone recognised the brand of shirt that I was wearing and commented that it was old, because the logo is now bigger, and what kind of cheapskate turns up to a wedding in an old shirt? I kid you not. Now not many people will see that and still fewer will comment on it or make assumptions, but even something like a shirt logo can get a reaction from some people some of the time. Nazi tattoos may generate more or less reaction, you decide.

Is this right? No, but it's the way the human race has been since for ever. Can any of us change it? No. Still think this is claptrap? Be my guest, if you are that hard of understanding then it's your loss.

LOL the clap trap was your tortured attempt at a comparison between the reaction to Nazi tattoos and a watch, yes that's right a watch. It doesn't illustrate a point when the comparison is absurd and people just laugh....it defeats the object and makes you look silly.

Comparisons work best when you keep things in perspective and Nazi tattoo vs. Rolex watch is a bit of a stretch.

But you carry on....

That is rather the point of a Reductio ad absu...
Oh sod it, waste of time.
Like I said, your loss.

Edited by battered on Saturday 14th January 18:44

[Brads67]

You won`t get a ceramic for 4k

Steel bezels look better anyway.

You should find a non date sub, sub date or GMT for that sort of money without too much grief.

He`s making the right choice anyway.

[DJMC]

13m said:

Does he want a date complication? The GMTII has one anyway, the Sub can be had with or without. The one without is the nicer looking of the two, but a date is useful.

Then there is the ceramic vs pre-ceramic. The ceramic ones have bigger lugs and are, in my opinion, not as attractive as the pre-ceramic. All of which said, I seem to recall you mentioned your son it quite a big chap, that being the case he'd carry off the chunkier ceramic model.

The Sub ceramic bezel came in 2012, the GMT 2007.

The ceramic version of the Sub or GMT has a nicer bracelet than the non-ceramic.

Should you only buy from a Rolex AD? Not necessarily, but if you don't know what you're doing it would be a good idea to buy from a "proper" dealer. All of which said, it is worth contacting Goldsmiths who have a large stock, across the company, of pre-owned Rolex. They are a Rolex AD and tend not to discount steel Rolexes, but they will haggle on used stock. All used Rolex are newly serviced and have 2 years warranty.

Thanks. Goldsmiths have no pre-owned Subs.

[kmpowell]

If you're going for pre-owned, don't bother with Goldsmiths, speak to DomH, he'll give you advice and sort you out with what you want at a price that suits your pocket.

[13m]

kmpowell said:

If you're going for pre-owned, don't bother with Goldsmiths, speak to DomH, he'll give you advice and sort you out with what you want at a price that suits your pocket.

If Goldsmiths had got a Sub, however, it would have been newly Rolex serviced and with 24 months warranty. But they don't so it's academic and neither does Hackett AFAIK.

[DJMC]

kmpowell said:

If you're going for pre-owned, don't bother with Goldsmiths, speak to DomH, he'll give you advice and sort you out with what you want at a price that suits your pocket.

Who is DomH please? Do you have a link to his web site? Thanks.

[13m]

DJMC said:

Who is DomH please? Do you have a link to his web site? Thanks.

https://www.hackettwatches.co.uk/

[13m]

These guys have some, including a late chronometer Sub. Which is probably my favourite of the bunch, but quite pricy.

http://www.armourwinston.co.uk/rolex-watches/rolex...

[warren182]

DJMC said:

We went to look at a range of Rolex watches today. He likes the Submariner and GMT II.

Submariner wins currently. What's a good price for pre-owned, when did ceramic bezel come in, and what is the best age to look for?

I'm thinking £4k would be a good buy?

Should we only buy from Rolex authorised dealers?

Looking at Chrono24, £4k is very much the bottom end price wise. 5k would give him lots more options.

[DJMC]

Yes, I see £4,750 on Chrono24 gives a mint Sub, from a dealer, with box papers etc.

Knowing these are faked I'd rather he buy from a dealer and by credit card for safety.

[warren182]

DJMC said:

Yes, I see £4,750 on Chrono24 gives a mint Sub, from a dealer, with box papers etc.

Knowing these are faked I'd rather he buy from a dealer and by credit card for safety.

UK list for a new, non date ceramic sub is £5450 according to the rolex website. For the sake of £700, I'd tell him to be patient and get a new one. £700 extra for being the first owner, having warranty etc, more than worth it!

[foxsasha]

DJMC said:

Yes, I see £4,750 on Chrono24 gives a mint Sub, from a dealer, with box papers etc.

Knowing these are faked I'd rather he buy from a dealer and by credit card for safety.

What are faked and how do you know?

[13m]

DJMC said:

Yes, I see £4,750 on Chrono24 gives a mint Sub, from a dealer, with box papers etc.

Knowing these are faked I'd rather he buy from a dealer and by credit card for safety.

You are getting towards new pricef you're going to pay that you may as well get interest free credit from a main dealer.

I seem to recall your son only has £1500. So whichever route he takes he hasn't enough money. It's a personal thing but when I got my first well-paid job I waited until I could pay cash before buying a watch.