Rolex

[UKBob]

Firstly, how much are do the top of the range Rolex watches go for?

And to what degree is the price affected by the quality engineering, or is 90% of the cost there, just because of the name?

[thunderstruck]

I think they have sold up to c£100k.

I'm sure that the name accounts for some of the premium, as (and this is an uneducated guess) I'm sure that the movement although good, is not necessarily that much better than the equivalent Omega, for example.

[alexkp]

Depends on what you call top of the range Bob.

If you want something that makes you look like a pimp and is ncrusted with diamonds then you can easily spend 100k on an Platinum Oyster President with full bling.

I have a few Rolexes, and much prefer the simpler Stainless Steel sports models, although as I type this I am wearing an 18k/SS blue face Submariner.

Rolex aren't the best or most desirable brand anyway - they are just the best known of the prestige brands.

I much prefer Blancpain or Patek Phillipe or Ulysse Nardin for exclusivity and style.

A Rolex is always good to flash though just becuase they are so recognisable....is that why you want it? lol.

[bennno]

thunderstruck said:

I think they have sold up to c£100k. I'm sure that the name accounts for some of the premium, as (and this is an uneducated guess) I'm sure that the movement although good, is not necessarily that much better than the equivalent Omega, for example.

The most desirable watches in order are the stainless steel Daytona (£4500) Submariner Date (£2800) and Explorer ii (£2400).

The ones with gold and diamonds seem to be over the top and dont offer anything extra.

Omega is made by Swatch, the main difference is that if you went in to town to buy a watch almost every jewlers sells Omega and has a safe full of each model - whilst there may be 1 or perhaps 2 maximum Rolex dealers and you will have a wait of 12 months to 6 years for the desirable watches.

If you look at the quality of both the rolex is better, plus of all the people I know most buy a Omega or Tag Heuer before buying a Rolex - whilst those who buy a Rolex keep it

Bennno

>> Edited by bennno on Tuesday 14th June 14:13

[bruciebabe]

Look at Zenith to get a better watch for Rolex money.

[UKBob]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I was just curious as to whether or not there was impecable engineering or some such, which in part affected the price of the watches which were not made of gold, nor diamond encrusted. Its just my entrepreneurial brain wondering about profit margins on actual products pre-marketing costs etc.

I cant say I wouldnt buy one if I had a 5 figure budget for a watch, but respectfully, they have never appeaed. Im quite happy with my leaky TVR watch

[Vipers]

Brought my Seadweller in 78 for £200, coz there wasnt much else on the maket for serious diving activities, got it serviced last year, that cost bloody £300, still current value being £2400 not a bad investment, but at the end of the day, all it does is tell the time, and day of the month.

[alexkp]

Omega movements are arguably superior to Rolex. I have a Speedmaster Professional Moonwatch with the hesalite crystal back - it is amazing and of course it was the one Armstrong and Aldrin were wearing when they stepped onto the moon... Nasa chose the watch because it was the only one that passed all their tests.

BTW - if anyone wants a Rolex I have one of these up for grabs - mine has a nicer red face. It is an Oyster Perpetual with the rare California face and "Mercedes" hands. It is from the Tudor range, but is properly branded as a Rolex on the dial, crown, buckle and case back. A very smart watch.

<a href="www.watchismo.com/page55.htm">www.watchismo.com/page55.htm</a>

Let me know if you are interested here, and then email me with a sensible offer. I won't be home until later 9pm ish, so will have a look then.

When I say sensible I mean if you offer £50 you won't get it, but if you offer, say £500 you just might. Your very own Rolex for around £500 - only to PH'ers!

>> Edited by alexkp on Tuesday 14th June 14:35

[apache]

UKBob said:

anonymous said: [redacted] I was just curious as to whether or not there was impecable engineering or some such, which in part affected the price of the watches which were not made of gold, nor diamond encrusted. Its just my entrepreneurial brain wondering about profit margins on actual products pre-marketing costs etc. I cant say I wouldnt buy one if I had a 5 figure budget for a watch, but respectfully, they have never appeaed. Im quite happy with my leaky TVR watch

As far as the engineering goes I believe the Daytona internals were from a modified Zenith. I like em but that's because they were all I knew as a popular statement of wealth, there are much better watches for the money. I've got a Seamaster which is nearly as accurate as a radio controlled jobber I have and looks nicely understated. If money were no object I'd buy an IWC

[UKBob]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

So its probably fair to say that the majority of the purchase price is for prestige, rather than performance, I guess.

[ledger]

bennno said:

The most desirable watches in order are the stainless steel Daytona (£4500) Submariner Date (£2800) and Explorer ii (£2400).

all of the "sports models" in steel are the most deirable

bennno said:

The ones with gold and diamonds seem to be over the top and dont offer anything extra.

and will have he worst resale values (as a percentage od purchase price)

bennno said:

Omega is made by Swatch,

they are part of the same group

[quote=bennno]
you will have a wait of 12 months to 6 years for the desirable watches.
[quote=bennno]
unless you are prepared to pay a premium. You can get any new Rolex staright away on the grey market for a price.

[quote=bennno]
If you look at the quality of both the rolex is better, plus of all the people I know most buy a Omega or Tag Heuer before buying a Rolex - whilst those who buy a Rolex keep it
[quote=bennno]

I own a Rolex, which I love, but never owned an omega so can't comment. But there are certainly better quality watches available for Rolex money, IWC for example.

[thunderstruck]

bruciebabe said:

Look at Zenith to get a better watch for Rolex money.

Agreed. A friend has a Zenith El Primero which has the same movement as a Rolex Daytona.

[bruciebabe]

thunderstruck said:

bruciebabe said: Look at Zenith to get a better watch for Rolex money. Agreed. A friend has a Zenith El Primero which has the same movement as a Rolex Daytona.

The mechanisms supplied to Rolex were detuned and ran at a far lower speed. The genuine El Primero is much better.

[shadowninja]

UKBob said:

anonymous said: [redacted] So its probably fair to say that the majority of the purchase price is for prestige, rather than performance, I guess.

I've got an old Timex that rates well in the performance stakes... it gains 3 minutes a day. Much quicker than those so-called quality watches.

[800]

One of the reasons that a Rolex will hold its price so well is supply management. Just try an authorized Rolex dealer and try to buy a stainless steel Submariner / LV / Seadweller / Daytona. You will be told to join the queue and wait a few years

[T5-R]

Personally, I can't justify ever paying hundreds, or even thousands of pounds for a watch.

IMHO, people buy the Rolexes, Tag Heuers, Omegas, etc... for status and to be a bit flashy. I have no doubt they are extemely good quality, but then you can get quality watches for a fraction of the price of a Rolex, etc...

I must admit, though, I have a liking for the Breitling style of watch.

My advice...if it's the status of owning one of these watches your after and you don't quite have the thousands to spend on one, get yourself on a plane to Kuala Lumpur, where you can get some seriously top quality "genuine imitation" watches in the Chinese night market for the equivalent of £20 (depending on your haggling skills). You may not be buying the real thing, but you get to experience another country/culture and everything else this bustling city has to offer.

I got my Breitling Navitimer Heritage imitation there last year and while I was at it, I splashed out on a Rolex for my brother

Both watches are oyster perpetual (no battery / self winding) and are very difficult to tell from the genuine article. Both are still going strong, I'm pleased to say

[800]

You could get a kit car replica 'Farrari' to go with it - plenty on ebay

[apache]

I've bought fakes in Taiwan, Saudi Arabia and Korea, I even bought good copies on ebay, while they look ok the quality most definitely is not there and they all tarnished and fell apart. I now have a Seamaster which I bought tax free in Bermuda, it is superbly built and the strap is a wonderful bit of engineering, it is spookily accurate (quartz) and exudes a quality no copy could. You pays your money etc

[animal]

Cobblers!

I didn't buy any of my watches to show them off, I bought them because I liked them.

I've been told that Rolex drip-feed their distributors to sustain waiting lists and, having compared a Sub to my old Seamaster, I can't see what the fuss is about. The Oyster bracelets have hollow links, which either make them feel light or flimsy, depending on your view.

Rolex did use the Zenith El Primero movement for the Cosmograph Daytona, but are apparently now producing their own chrono movements, no doubt based largely on the Zenith.

I put my name on the list for a Sea-Dweller in London a few years ago and was told to wait a minimum of 18 months...bout three hours later one miraculously appeared in stock!

If you've got £2-3000 to spend you should also consider IWC (had one of these, very well made), Zenith (got one of these, OK quality), Omega (owned by the Swatch Group, good quality components), Breitling or Ulysse Nardin.

Better yet, go to somewhere like The Watch Gallery in Fulham and ask for their advice.

[fishtek69]

I was bought a Rolex Submariner Date watch for my 21st birthday (3 years ago). I'd always loved the black-faced model and so was delighted (and suprised) when I got my present.

After about 6 months I had loads of trouble with it. The mechanism used to stop whenever it felt like it, and both the hands and the date would play up. We took the watch back to the jewellers and they sent it away, only for it to play up again as soon as I got it back.

I ended up exchanging the watch at the jewellers for a Rolex Yacht-Master Date with a silver/white face and red second indicator. It cost a fair bit more than the Submariner model, and I'm not as keen on the colour, but the watch has been trouble-free for 3 years now and I have to say I'm happy with it. Seems to be holding on to its value quite well too.

If I'm being honest the main reason I wanted/got a Rolex was because of the branding. I also own a couple of 'replica's' and often wear them day-to-day (they're actually really reliable, very realistic, and cost about £50 each from Turkey). But I wanted a bit of authentic, acceptable 'bling' and that's what I got, so in that respect it was a reasonable purchase. I perhaps can't justify the cost over, say, a £500 watch and a Nissan Pulsar GTiR, but then I hope I don't need another watch for many, many years. Plus I didn't pay for it, so I'm not bothered!

I personally think the latest range of Seiko Kinetic Auto-Replay models are fantastic, and I suspect that (at my age) if I was spending my own money, this is where my cash would go.

Edited to say: If I had £4k to spend on a watch again I would definately get a Breitling Emergency watch. They're totally unnecessary (distress-beacon built in) and massively-massive, but they look and feel awesome. If it weren't for the fact that my Rolex was a pressie, I'd have traded it in already (especially as I have my replica Rolex's that fool most people anyway).

>> Edited by fishtek69 on Tuesday 14th June 17:29