Seiko - The Millenial Rolex?
Discussion
Hey Folks
Was chatting to a friend about this the other day, he was showing off his Alpinist that he picked up last month, right before the price spikes upon the news of their discontinuing.
The basic premise being, to my knowledge Rolex in the 60s, 70s, and even into the early 80s, was THE reputable tool watch brand to have, the watch you would buy with ~1 months salary in your 20s and wear it every day for the next subsequent decades. With prices sitting around £500-2000 when accounting for inflation put the cost of them as tool watches right in the sweet spot for the masses between 'luxury' and usable practicality. With the luxurification of the 80s, 90s and 00s putting the brands more legendary watches out of reach to the masses, but solidifying their current customer base.
Are Seiko not in this position today? They appear to be the go to brand among younger buyers looking for a long term every day watch in the 1 or 2 months pay kind of price range (SKX's starting around £200, prospex and GS lines going into the £500-2000 range). And whilst you frequently hear the decline of sales of Swiss watches, Seiko, and their Japanese counterparts at Citizen & Orient appear to be chugging along comfortably. Seiko in recent years also appears to be quietly discontinuing, or threatening to discontinue it's cheaper lines, with the more modern replacements being more 'upmarket'.
So I pose the question to you guys, do you think Seiko is going to undergo the same slow luxurification over the first half of the 21st century that Rolex did in the last half of the 20th. And if this is the case, will Rolex, and the other luxury Swiss tool watch producers (Omega, Tudor etc) change their ways in any way with their old guard customers (literally) dying off, and their branding not being enough to draw in the newer audience.
Was chatting to a friend about this the other day, he was showing off his Alpinist that he picked up last month, right before the price spikes upon the news of their discontinuing.
The basic premise being, to my knowledge Rolex in the 60s, 70s, and even into the early 80s, was THE reputable tool watch brand to have, the watch you would buy with ~1 months salary in your 20s and wear it every day for the next subsequent decades. With prices sitting around £500-2000 when accounting for inflation put the cost of them as tool watches right in the sweet spot for the masses between 'luxury' and usable practicality. With the luxurification of the 80s, 90s and 00s putting the brands more legendary watches out of reach to the masses, but solidifying their current customer base.
Are Seiko not in this position today? They appear to be the go to brand among younger buyers looking for a long term every day watch in the 1 or 2 months pay kind of price range (SKX's starting around £200, prospex and GS lines going into the £500-2000 range). And whilst you frequently hear the decline of sales of Swiss watches, Seiko, and their Japanese counterparts at Citizen & Orient appear to be chugging along comfortably. Seiko in recent years also appears to be quietly discontinuing, or threatening to discontinue it's cheaper lines, with the more modern replacements being more 'upmarket'.
So I pose the question to you guys, do you think Seiko is going to undergo the same slow luxurification over the first half of the 21st century that Rolex did in the last half of the 20th. And if this is the case, will Rolex, and the other luxury Swiss tool watch producers (Omega, Tudor etc) change their ways in any way with their old guard customers (literally) dying off, and their branding not being enough to draw in the newer audience.
Kickstart said:
The Grand Seiko is a lovely thing and about £10k
They start at not much over £2k and rise to over £10k, though if you told 99.99% of people that you could pay so much for a "Seiko" they'd think you were off your meds.Grand Seiko is playing a slowly slowly catchy monkey game, they've started to raise brand awareness in the UK yet they're aware that they can't just thrust the brand into the public's eye. They'll get there, yet they're not trying to dominate that price range in the way that Rolex do. Grand Seiko will still be a niche brand.
As for (just) Seiko, that brand won't suffer the ebb and flow in sales that luxury watches may suffer from (it's only recently that yearly worldwide consumption has dropped, mostly due to the single drop in sales in Hong Kong) simply due to the fact that their price-point protects them. Go to Japan, and maybe a few other countries out that way, and you'll see plenty of +£500 Seikos though the respective markets are used to that.
Hoofy said:
Can't see it happening. Seiko is far too common. There are far too many cheap Seikos in circulation, too. And they made them to last. I've got mine from when I was in school still.
Exactly that. What's happening at the bottom end is every bit as important. If Rolex were selling watches with 'ROLEX' on the dial for £150 in addition to their current line up, do you suppose they'd still have the same brand cachet?
Funny enough my job used to take me to Japan, and the watch they all aspired to was a Rolex. If you had one their respect for you as a professional went up a notch. Don’t ask me why it’s just the way it was.
I don’t if it’s still the same I haven’t been over there for a couple of years.
There’s nowt so queer as folk
I don’t if it’s still the same I haven’t been over there for a couple of years.
There’s nowt so queer as folk
No it’s not our Rolex, our Seiko is a Seiko, to be frank about it.
You can get a Rolex on your wrist from £2000 and New for the oyster for just over £4K which is 1-2 months salary with a above average job (needn’t be too much above average).
I wasn’t around in the 80s but I don’t think average or below average salary workers were buying GMTs were they? Maybe someone can chime in with experience of that time.
Rolex has gone up with inflation but so has wages to match, not quite the same rate of inflation for both but a Rolex is hardly unobtainable for someone who is set on getting one.
You can get a Rolex on your wrist from £2000 and New for the oyster for just over £4K which is 1-2 months salary with a above average job (needn’t be too much above average).
I wasn’t around in the 80s but I don’t think average or below average salary workers were buying GMTs were they? Maybe someone can chime in with experience of that time.
Rolex has gone up with inflation but so has wages to match, not quite the same rate of inflation for both but a Rolex is hardly unobtainable for someone who is set on getting one.
EC123 said:
I wasn’t around in the 80s but I don’t think average or below average salary workers were buying GMTs were they? Maybe someone can chime in with experience of that time.
Not the 80s but in 1997 my father bought me my DJ at (IIRC) £1750. Although I can remember the watch I can't recall exactly what I was earning but I'd hazard a guess at probably £1200 a month? I was a plumber back then so not exactly a company director but not on the breadline either. I'd imagine a professional would have been on £1750 a month.LaurasOtherHalf said:
EC123 said:
I wasn’t around in the 80s but I don’t think average or below average salary workers were buying GMTs were they? Maybe someone can chime in with experience of that time.
Not the 80s but in 1997 my father bought me my DJ at (IIRC) £1750. Although I can remember the watch I can't recall exactly what I was earning but I'd hazard a guess at probably £1200 a month? I was a plumber back then so not exactly a company director but not on the breadline either. I'd imagine a professional would have been on £1750 a month.Of course it’s not and never will be a small purchase but I don’t think it ever really was, I’m not that old but I remember when money could stretch a bit but now it’s gone in the blink of an eye due to inflation I assume, so £1750 in 97 was still a good wedge. In my opinion.
I have a serious affection for Seiko. A 5 was my first mechanical watch (a gift when I was 9, didn't wear it until I was a teenager). I'm very sad I no longer have it, and am actively searching for one of the same vintage. I have another 5 now, and am looking for another so I can give them to my sons when they're of age. I don't care if they think the watches are junk or not, it will be the gesture that counts.
In terms of branding, perhaps that is the level of affection/loyalty brands like Rolex seek to foster.
The most expensive watch I think I'll ever buy is a Seiko, maybe a Grand one day.
So for me, although I've never thought of it that way before, I guess Seiko is my Rolex.
In terms of branding, perhaps that is the level of affection/loyalty brands like Rolex seek to foster.
The most expensive watch I think I'll ever buy is a Seiko, maybe a Grand one day.
So for me, although I've never thought of it that way before, I guess Seiko is my Rolex.
EC123 said:
LaurasOtherHalf said:
EC123 said:
I wasn’t around in the 80s but I don’t think average or below average salary workers were buying GMTs were they? Maybe someone can chime in with experience of that time.
Not the 80s but in 1997 my father bought me my DJ at (IIRC) £1750. Although I can remember the watch I can't recall exactly what I was earning but I'd hazard a guess at probably £1200 a month? I was a plumber back then so not exactly a company director but not on the breadline either. I'd imagine a professional would have been on £1750 a month.Of course it’s not and never will be a small purchase but I don’t think it ever really was, I’m not that old but I remember when money could stretch a bit but now it’s gone in the blink of an eye due to inflation I assume, so £1750 in 97 was still a good wedge. In my opinion.
To the original question, GMTs were not being bought by average workers then as they aren't now.
I love Seiko, and think the SKX 007/009 is a great tool watch and more likely to be used by people that require a daily beater that gets bashed about than a Rolex sub.
However I think they are at a price point too low to be considered the millennial rolex, I'd argue that the Apple watch is
Seriously though, I think as mentioned a Tudor or Omega or even an Oris would be the watch of choice for someone who appreciates these things but doesn't have the funds or justification to spend 8k or more on a single watch.
MY favourite watch is a Seiko 5 that my Nanna bought me about 15 years ago, awesome little thing with way more sentimental value than my Omega.
However I think they are at a price point too low to be considered the millennial rolex, I'd argue that the Apple watch is
Seriously though, I think as mentioned a Tudor or Omega or even an Oris would be the watch of choice for someone who appreciates these things but doesn't have the funds or justification to spend 8k or more on a single watch.
MY favourite watch is a Seiko 5 that my Nanna bought me about 15 years ago, awesome little thing with way more sentimental value than my Omega.
Gassing Station | Watches | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff