Real cost of Rolex ownership

[Blown2CV]

clockworks said:

ZesPak said:

Wait, this sounds very off to me. You buy a watch that's worth 1000's of pounds and then skimp out on another bracelet?
Why not get a replica watch in the first place then? Impossible to distinguish from the outside...

Because I didn't want to take a hacksaw to either the original bracelet or a genuine replacement. With all the removable links taken out the watch fitted, but the clasp was not centring nicely on my wrist. Cutting off the first fixed link on the "6 o'clock" side made it much more comfortable to wear.

None of the non-original parts on my watch carry any Rolex markings, so I don't have a problem with it.

I did actually buy a cheap Chinese fake before I bought the real thing. I had always said that I'd never buy a Rolex, preferring to buy Zenith and Ulyssee Nardin as the less obvious choice. Wearing the fake helped me get over my anti-Rolex prejudice, snd I bought my ND Sub a few weeks later. I also own a Steinhart LV, a Seiko LV lookalike, and an LV sterile dial homage that I put together myself using Chinese and American parts with an ETA 2824.

I have just aquired one of the "perfect" Chinese fakes with a fake Rolex movement at a price too low to resist. It is actually very convincing, even placed side by side with the real thing. Keeps rubbish time though, so I'll probably take it apart one day. The Chinese rarely lubricate the movements properly in my experience. I have a few watches with the Chinese Unitas movement, and they all perform a lot better after a service.

I own well over 100 watches. I appreciate them for what they are, not just for the brand.

why would you need to take a hacksaw to the bracelet to take links out yet get the clasp to line up in the middle?

[clockworks]

With all the removable links taken out, the folding part of the clasp (the bit on the inside) was sitting off centre. It looks right from the outside, but felt uncomfortable on my wrist. Removing a fixed link was the only way I could keep it on a bracelet and be comfortable wearing it. The other option was to use a NATO strap.

Having small wrists is a problem when it comes to getting watches to fit snugly.

[Blown2CV]

clockworks said:

With all the removable links taken out, the folding part of the clasp (the bit on the inside) was sitting off centre. It looks right from the outside, but felt uncomfortable on my wrist. Removing a fixed link was the only way I could keep it on a bracelet and be comfortable wearing it. The other option was to use a NATO strap.

Having small wrists is a problem when it comes to getting watches to fit snugly.

well i dunno about any of that, but if you've looked into it then I will take whatever you're saying... however saying that would have been a lot more credible than saying that a £20 bracelet is equally as good as a rolex genuine one, which is what you started off with.

[Fuzzy69r]

benjijames28 said:

I've been a watch obsessive for nearly 3 years now, going from Casio to Rolex and settled down with my Tudor Pelagos which has been on my wrist nearly 2 years, day in day out.

My life took a drastic change of direction 12 months ago, split with wife, sold house, net girlfriend, girlfriend pregnant, now I've got a son. Luckily my outgoings are low due to my lifestyle and my job is as secure as can be.

I've got some money in bank from my house sale, not a lot but it's there. I have considered buying a watch I've loved for a long time, in fact I owned the old 36mm version, it's the Rolex explorer 1.

Now they are pretty hard to find but I've found one. It will be at my local Rolex ad for me next Saturday.

4800 of your finest British pounds, but what is the real cost of owning such a watch?

That model like a lot of Rolex watches is in high demand. There will be a bit of a dip in value buying new but I rekkon it's worth an easy 4k should you need to sell it in the first few years of ownership.

So the real cost of buying that watch is 800 pound plus a secured deposit of 4000 which you should get back.

I can't afford to buy a house in my own, so the money is either gonna sit there doing nothing, or I'm gonna end up upgrading my car. We all know how much I would lose on a car.

So compared to owning a car or buying say a stty watch like a brietlng, the cost of owning a in demand Rolex is very very low.

My Tudor Pelagos cost me 2400 cash from an ad brand new. I could sell it tomorrow to watch finder for 1600, or private for 2000, it's cost me a few hundred quid a year and given me so much enjoyment. It's my everyday hero and I wouldn't be without it. So really it's cost me as much as a shopping centre citizen watch. Bargain.

Man maths at its finest.

Of course after 5 years the Tudor will need a 300 pound visit to Rolex servicing, and after 10 years the Rolex will need a 1000? Pound service. But we don't need to think about that.

You claim to be a watch obsessive but come out with a sweeping statement that Breitling is a stty watch ? , so can I ask how you have come to that great conclusion or is this the typical soon to be Rolex owner snobbery.

I love my superocean2 just in the same way I am dying to get that call from my AD on a D-blue , my taste is varied on a lot of different brands inc g-shock , seiko skx , Cvstos , Cyrus etc , but I certainly don’t describe brands I don’t like as stty , just not for my taste.

[ZesPak]

benjijames28 said:

My Tudor Pelagos cost me 2400 cash from an ad brand new. I could sell it tomorrow to watch finder for 1600, or private for 2000, it's cost me a few hundred quid a year and given me so much enjoyment. It's my everyday hero and I wouldn't be without it. So really it's cost me as much as a shopping centre citizen watch. Bargain.

I bought a shopping centre Pulsar about seven years ago.
Recently sold it as I wasn't wearing it as much. It looked very used but still worked fine.
It was about €120 new, sold it for €30. Cost me €90 over 7 years.

You can say what you want as long as it isn't quantifiable, but please don't spout that kind of nonsense that some easy number crunching can disprove.
Any higher end watch will cost you more in just servicing.
Just stick to the unquantifiable "the feel of it" or "workmanship", or my favorite: "luxury watch" to justify the extra cost of a higher end watch with a relatively simple movement.

[lowdrag]

ZesPak said:

You can say what you want as long as it isn't quantifiable, but please don't spout that kind of nonsense that some easy number crunching can disprove.
Any higher end watch will cost you more in just servicing.
Just stick to the unquantifiable "the feel of it" or "workmanship", or my favorite: "luxury watch" to justify the extra cost of a higher end watch with a relatively simple movement.

+1 I've had a Rolex, a Tudor, several Breitlings and now wear a Spitfire Chrono, not because of the make but because it has such big luminous hands I can read the thing at night without reaching for my specs. It cost £2,750 ten years ago and is worth not a lot today. But is is a damned good watch, and that's all there is to say about it. Now my cars have proved to be a sound investment, one of them bought over thirty years ago. Well, that is, if I don't quantify the hours working on it, the cost of oil, petrol and parts (I reckon an average of £1 a litre at 13 litres per 100 kms = £15,000) and the four ring binders of bills staring me in the face in my office..........

[clockworks]

Blown2CV said:

well i dunno about any of that, but if you've looked into it then I will take whatever you're saying... however saying that would have been a lot more credible than saying that a £20 bracelet is equally as good as a rolex genuine one, which is what you started off with.

My original post on this thread was in response to someone asking about getting a stretched bracelet fixed. I suggested buying a replica bracelet at a tiny fraction of the cost. I figured that it was relevant on a thread discussing the cost of ownership, a means of keeping the cost down. The replica links are very good copies, the clasp (fake, because many include the Rolex logo) not so good.

[Blown2CV]

clockworks said:

Blown2CV said:

well i dunno about any of that, but if you've looked into it then I will take whatever you're saying... however saying that would have been a lot more credible than saying that a £20 bracelet is equally as good as a rolex genuine one, which is what you started off with.

My original post on this thread was in response to someone asking about getting a stretched bracelet fixed. I suggested buying a replica bracelet at a tiny fraction of the cost. I figured that it was relevant on a thread discussing the cost of ownership, a means of keeping the cost down. The replica links are very good copies, the clasp (fake, because many include the Rolex logo) not so good.

I think that if it was me wanting to know about the real cost of ownership i think I'd be more interested to know the cost of replacing with genuine parts. Useful info however, if someone was subsequently scared of the 'real cost'.

[Armitage.Shanks]

ClaphamGT3 said:

You have a wife and young child, you can't afford to buy a home but you'll drop £4k on a watch?

The world's gone mad.....

I think you've nailed it chum.

[Blown2CV]

Armitage.Shanks said:

ClaphamGT3 said:

You have a wife and young child, you can't afford to buy a home but you'll drop £4k on a watch?

The world's gone mad.....

I think you've nailed it chum.

£4k on finance

[Fuzzy69r]

Still waiting on the explanation as why Breitling is st ?

[Blown2CV]

Fuzzy69r said:

Still waiting on the explanation as why Breitling is st ?

well they aren't as premium as a rolex are they, you can't be arguing that surely? have you never tried them on back to back?

[Fuzzy69r]

yes I have and I am currently on the seemingly never ever waiting list for a deepsea D-blue , the op never mentioned anything about the price of Breitling vrs Rolex and never have I .

Plus I tried on a gmt last year and if anything I preferred the feel of my chunky superocean2 on my wrist

[vincenz]

Fuzzy69r said:

yes I have and I am currently on the seemingly never ever waiting list for a deepsea D-blue , the op never mentioned anything about the price of Breitling vrs Rolex and never have I .

Plus I tried on a gmt last year and if anything I preferred the feel of my chunky superocean2 on my wrist

I've had pretty much all the mainstream 'prestige' brands over the years, Rolex, Panerai, IWC, Omega, Breitling and I think they all do different things really well.

My Navitimer always got comments and I really liked it on my wrist, but next to a Rolex the fit and finish, attention to detail and movement operation (no screwdown crown etc). was enough for me to percieve it as lower quality.

It all comes back to personal preference, and if you look at the quality of the CN fakes (rightly or wrongly) it does make you wonder why people pay so much for a steel watch with an auto movement, but then we're back to square one as its a personal preference to spend so much in the first place.

All i'll say is that I lost money on every one of the above brands (apart from Rolex) when I moved them on every 2/3 years.....

[ZesPak]

vincenz said:

All i'll say is that I lost money on every one of the above brands (apart from Rolex) when I moved them on every 2/3 years.....

This comes up every time, and unfortunately has nothing to do with quality (I'm not saying they don't provide quality, they do).
It's amazing the way Rolex have managed this upwards trend for decades without taking a breath.
There's always people that say they can't keep that marketing machine going and I'm inclined to agree but history proves us wrong.
It's also staggering what they can ask for a simple auto movement in a stainless steel watch.
And subsequently throttle the supply, hype the product and make it rise in price over the years.

Really a very interesting brand to follow.

[Blown2CV]

ZesPak said:

vincenz said:

All i'll say is that I lost money on every one of the above brands (apart from Rolex) when I moved them on every 2/3 years.....

This comes up every time, and unfortunately has nothing to do with quality (I'm not saying they don't provide quality, they do).
It's amazing the way Rolex have managed this upwards trend for decades without taking a breath.
There's always people that say they can't keep that marketing machine going and I'm inclined to agree but history proves us wrong.
It's also staggering what they can ask for a simple auto movement in a stainless steel watch.
And subsequently throttle the supply, hype the product and make it rise in price over the years.

Really a very interesting brand to follow.

indeed but the thread is more about the real costs rather than how individual people might feel about that (as a proxy probably for how they feel about the brand in general). If they don't depreciate then this is a big deal when it comes to 'real costs'.

[z4RRSchris]

Rolex is the only one i have owned to have paid money.

i have a rolex 14060 - got it for c2k i suspect i could get c3.5k for it tomorrow.

i have a AP RO Chrono, somone paid nearly 20k for and i got it for 12k - 8 hit

[vincenz]

ZesPak said:

vincenz said:

All i'll say is that I lost money on every one of the above brands (apart from Rolex) when I moved them on every 2/3 years.....

This comes up every time, and unfortunately has nothing to do with quality (I'm not saying they don't provide quality, they do).

Agreed mate, it was more in relation to the question in the OP. Obviously the precious metal Rolexes are a different story.......