Have you bought one of those great looking Rolex/Omega fakes

[Gixer968CS]

I have an interest in watches and as a result I seem to get A LOT of websites advertising fake premium brand watches to me on Instagram. Pushing Rolex, Omega etc and I have to say the watches look fantastic and it's pretty tempting to dive in. They advertise as Swiss Watches etc but seem to be based in Asia (Hong Kong). Watches range from £300-£800. Would I just kiss goodbye to several hundred quid and have my identity stolen or would I actually end up with a replica watch that no one could tell apart from the original?

[Gixer968CS]

The Dictator said:

If you have an interest in watches, I am surprised that you would entertain a fake, as surely the image you would be projecting is different from the reality.

Who are you trying to impress with a fake Rolex or Omega, why are you trying to impress them more importantly?

A homage would be achievable will within your budget, Steinhart for example if Rolex is your thing, then at least you are buying a genuine product rather than some bit of tat.

Oh man. Actually I've owned a Submariner for 28 years and recently had it refurbished/restored. I'm on a wait list for a Daytona which may or may not ever come. My problem is that I now rarely wear my Sub as I don't want to scuff it up again (used to wear it all day every day no matter what I was doing but now want to cherish it as I've had it so long). I usually wear a Apple Watch now. I really like the 50th Anniversery Moon watch but buying one used is not an option and why not just wear something you like, real or not without being judged??

[Gixer968CS]

Barchettaman said:

So to the questions asked:

1) Dunno, you might
2) It is extremely unlikely that the casual acquaintance will clock it’s a fake. But you’ll know. Perhaps that says something about you - that you’re the kind of person that likes to deceive. I don’t know, I don’t care.

What I would say is that £300 to £800 buys you a LOT of ‘real’ watch that will bring you years of enjoyment, reliability and will be legal to sell on. Enjoy the journey of looking for real watches, new and used, in your chosen budget.

Best wishes.

Maybe read my second post above??

[Gixer968CS]

OK, so what I'm getting is that no one has bought one of these watches but that there are plenty of opinions on why others would and how that reflects upon them. Really helpful. Thanks all!

[Gixer968CS]

Tyrell Corp said:

Gixer968CS said:

OK, so what I'm getting is that no one has bought one of these watches but that there are plenty of opinions on why others would and how that reflects upon them. Really helpful. Thanks all!

You're welcome, and what exactly is your personal experiences to contribute here ...?

Well, if you'd read my original opening post and my subsequent one you'd know wouldn't you. Honestly, the attitudes of people on here. Open your eyes and read before you type as then you may actually come up with something relevant to contribute. It's a chat room, I was starting a chat about something I was interested in and thought some other people might be too.

Edited by Gixer968CS on Wednesday 31st January 15:20

[Gixer968CS]

Goldman Sachs said:

Hard-Drive said:

Just no. I'd be staggered if what arrived was actually what was pictured anyway.

Prepare to be amazed then.

Any of the good quality fakes from factories such as Clean or Noob are, as already pointed out by other posters, indistinguishable from the real thing, even when held side by side and examined closely. You would have to be a jeweller, with a loupe, and to know what to look for to tell the difference. Even then, some jewellers will tell you that they have to remove the caseback to properly inspect these. Even then you have to know what to look for, as the movement is usually fully cloned as well.

These watches look the same, feel the same, are fully waterproof. Same 904L steel used for case and bracelet as Rolex.. Same type of ceramic for the bezel as Rolex use.

Previously when removing the caseback you would see some minor differences, but now, they are really close.

So close that real parts from Rolex movements can be exchanged into the fake, and vice versa.

From a UK supplier a good fake will be about £450 or so.

Which brings me onto my last point: Some people will probably try to order their fakes off websites and hope that they aren't scammed, and then hope that they arrive in the UK without issue, or without customs seizing them. This is NOT the way to do it. There are plenty of UK dealers with UK stock if you know where to look.

Someone mentioned servicing. This is not a problem either. Lots of competent UK watchmakers are happy to work on the fakes now as they are so good. Rebuilding or serving a movement on a superclone is no different to working on a genuine Rolex or Omega.

Ask anything else as I'm happy to answer. I know a bit about this topic.

Edited by Goldman Sachs on Wednesday 31st January 16:03

So where would one look for a UK supplier?

[Gixer968CS]

fasimew said:

Mont Blanc said:

fasimew said:

This is exactly why I'm not spending 5k on a real one. Because I can achieve the same thing for minimal outlay.
I'm not a Rolex person at all. I don't get the hype. I can get the same quality for a lot less. Why would I want to spend all that money to be seen wearing the same thing as every other aspirational mug? But if I could climb the social ladder for peanuts in comparison... then I'll take it.

I wasn’t sure earlier, but now I know you are absolutely just trolling.

“Climb the social ladder”

I'm deadly serious. Why else would anyone wear a Rolex when there are other brands available? The number one reason is to look flash. Put it in whatever words you want.

I imagine that's true of some people but certainly not all. My scenario; my "cool" uncle wore a Rolex Submariner and when I was little boy. I had no idea what it was but I knew I liked it. Later I watched Diamonds Forever and Live and Let Die and I realised what a Rolex Submariner was and I knew I wanted one. When I was 28 I got a one off bonus for some work I'd done and what I did was go out and buy a Submariner. Waited about 9 months for it. That was 28 years ago and I love it today as much as I did then. In my eyes it is an effortlessly stylish item, well made and a design that has stood the test of time. A classic. As to quality, mine went 25 years without a service, worn every day, all day no matter what I was doing. I only got it done as it was looking pretty beaten up by then, still kept good time. I really don't care what anyone else thinks about my watch. It brings me joy and it reminds me of my childhood. And James Bond.

The other thing of course, I paid £1680 for it in 1996 and its probably worth c£7-8000 now. The service at 25 years cost c£700 and I also have had the bracelet restored which cost about £800. So aside from being a lovely thing that I enjoy wearing it's also not been a bad investment.

BTW the cool uncle also drove an Escort RS1600i and I also had one of those for while as well

[Gixer968CS]

BOR said:

wong said:

If these superclones are virtually identical with interchangeable parts with the real thing, how much must Rolex spend on advertising and profit?

Yes, I think this is what winds the muggles up most of all.

The sickening realisation that the cost to manufacture their Rolex is a small fraction of what it cost them to buy. What a rip off.

Veblen Goods 101

Same true of a Porsche 993? Well designed, well engineered item, worth more now than when new. Could it be that people just want to drive a Porsche 993 but in order to do so they are competing for limited inventory and so the price goes up. Just like Porsche Rolex deliberately limit supply of new watches in order to protect resale values and make their watches appear to be exclusive. Any valuable commodity behaves this way and a great many (pretty much all) goods purchased are sold at multiples of their input/manufacturing/growing cost aren't they??

[Gixer968CS]

RSTurboPaul said:

gregs656 said:

RSTurboPaul said:

That is an entirely different situation to someone just wearing a copy on the wrist.

The vast majority of the replica/copy/homage/fake community in no way endorses the selling of such watches as genuine.

Perhaps ironically, it could be argued that they are the most likely to have detailed knowledge of what differentiates a copy from the original, information that can be used to help others from unknowingly purchasing a copy.

Edited by RSTurboPaul on Friday 2nd February 02:55

No it isn’t. They are built to deceive people. People do different things with that but all those things are connected.

What is the deception?


That person X had Y amount of money to spend on an overpriced bit of shiny metal item of 'Brand Z'/'label' jewellery? When in fact they didn't?

How would the casual observer know how much credit money a person has? The very wealthy are often the least ostentatious about it, whereas those aspiring to a 'lifestyle' often need to extend substantial lines of credit to attain the visual cues that apparently indicate wealth to some.


Or is the argument that only people with certain 'qualities' buy 'brand Z' (qualities that are extremely carefully tailored by marketing departments), therefore to 'cheat' and (apparently) obtain and broadcast those 'qualities' when one hasn't paid the full price of admission to the club is simply not cricket?

How does that work in the earlier example, when someone is maxed out on credit to let them buy shiny things? Are they displaying the correct 'qualities'?


It is all just marketing BS, designed to infer that expensive things bring with them some mysterious aura of special properties only obtainable by the few who can afford them, and the peasants who can't stump up the cash are somehow worse people different to the wealthy.

When said peasants obtain the means to seemingly acquire said mysterious aura for less than others have paid for it, I imagine those paying the higher price are going to get defensive about those upstart peasants encroaching on their special properties they were told only the wealthy could have.

Wow.