DSSD Dial -- Some truth is missing

[rolexsubdate]

ok folks,

I read something today that totally pissed me off about Rolex.
It shows nothing but this desire to appear more desirable at
the expense of truth.

Look at the image I attached. It says that the dial of the DSSD
was supposed to have 4000m on it but because the #4 is conisdered
unlucky in the asian world, they stamped it as 3900m.

So now the rest of the other world has to live with a 3900m stamp
because one part of the world is supertitious about it? You wanna cater
to the asian market then stamp the dial especially for them at 3900m, but
for the rest of the diving afficianados, leave the stamp at 4000m

Put the stamp on the dial that it deserves, not what would make people
happy. That's some serious ASS kissing and bending over on Rolex's behalf ..
I did not think Role would stoop this low.

[sleddog]

Rolex Always stamps their dial at 25% lower than actual rated depth...

So what if they cater to the asian market??

[Tools]

I would find it unlikely that Rolex would have ever released such a marketing decision..

That, and for more than 30 years the SD has had 4000ft on the dial......

I think that it's more likely that since the major oceans average a depth of around 3900meters, Rolex thought it was good marketing that they had a watch that showed it could cruise along the bottom of any ocean you cared to go into..... (if you could actually go that deep, that is)

[rolexsubdate]

Originally Posted by Tools

.....That, and for more than 30 years the SD has had 4000ft on the dial......

....

Well you definitely have a point there. If 4 was that bad, why would the SD say 4000ft.

Well when the SD did come out, maybe the Asian market was not as big as it is now, in terms of revenue stream, plus there was not as much cultural sensitivity issues as there are now..

[gkanga]

That is pretty ridiculous (if it's true). They should have made it 3999.

[padi56]

Originally Posted by Tools

I would find it unlikely that Rolex would have ever released such a marketing decision..

That, and for more than 30 years the SD has had 4000ft on the dial......

I think that it's more likely that since the major oceans average a depth of around 3900meters, Rolex thought it was good marketing that they had a watch that showed it could cruise along the bottom of any ocean you cared to go into..... (if you could actually go that deep, that is)

Have to agree Larry.

[rolexsubdate]

Originally Posted by sleddog

Rolex Always stamps their dial at 25% lower than actual rated depth...

So what if they cater to the asian market??

ok, i did not know that about them stamping 25% lower.

If your product is that good, you shouldn't be catering to
any market. If you cater to the truth, your product will sell.

[dddrees]

Originally Posted by sleddog

rolex always stamps their dial at 25% lower than actual rated depth...

So what if they cater to the asian market??

x2

[ecsub44]

I'm assuming you're kidding.

Right?

[Paracentesis]

Who cares? You'd be just as dead at 4000m as you would at 3900m, or 2467m. They may as well put ∞ metres!

[CashGap]

Originally Posted by Paracentesis

Who cares? You'd be just as dead at 4000m as you would at 3900m, or 2467m. They may as well put ∞ metres!

^^^^^^^^ This!!!

[sleddog]

It's all about marketing, which Rolex does so well.
As Larry said above, it is more about a choice than actual fact.

[rolexsubdate]

Ok, here is what I feel. so much scientific research goes into devleoping these watches and experimentation too that once the watch passes, it deserves the highest medal ...
well if Rolex removed the 4 because of cultural sensitivity issues, then they are doing a disservice to all that research and the watch itself -- kind of like falsifying lab results in the name of $$$.

I just hope this wasn't the reason for the 4 missing.

[Paracentesis]

The DS isn't the king of the deep in any case. There are even more extreme, and pointless, watches available for your delectation.

[tgoose1]

Rolex obviously needs to start dredging the major ocean floors to get that extra 100m designation.

[esm]

Originally Posted by rolexsubdate

ok, i did not know that about them stamping 25% lower.

If your product is that good, you shouldn't be catering to
any market. If you cater to the truth, your product will sell.

Wasn't the CX 20,000FT good for 7500m, but it is marketed at 6000m? So... What happened there?

[usbzoso]

they should just make it better and mark it 5000ft

[Rollie2011]

The really bothers you?

Would you rather have them put 4235 ft 9 inches and 3 centimeters?

And besides, if you were a business owner, would you not cater to your largest audience???

[ecsub44]

Originally Posted by rolexsubdate

Ok, here is what I feel. so much scientific research goes into devleoping these watches and experimentation too that once the watch passes, it deserves the highest medal ...
well if Rolex removed the 4 because of cultural sensitivity issues, then they are doing a disservice to all that research and the watch itself -- kind of like falsifying lab results in the name of $$$.

I just hope this wasn't the reason for the 4 missing.

No. That which is printed on the dial cannot in anyway do any disservice to the research. What the public thinks/knows is pointless in this case.

There is some artistic merit to it too. Why not 3999m? Because it would look weird

As we know, it's really tested to closer to 5000m. So they backoff a bit for warranty purposes. The point is none of the numbers that have been proposed are " real" numbers. They would really need to print, to be official and not insult the scientists, something like "tested and verified to a depth of 5013.4578m". Since ALL of these depths are physical impossibilities...the while thing become moot.

[cgjane]

this thread = splitting hairs

[Michael M.]

This doesn't sound right! When I saw some pics of a DSSD bought in asia it did not have this dial variation.

[The Waddler]

Most unintentionally hilarious thread of the day

[mike]

You didn't like the watch so you sold it. That's fine.

If you don't care for the way Rolex does things that's fine as well.

All these posts about how negative Rolex is is getting a bit long in the tooth.

Some people (at least a few) really seem to like the brand and that reference in particular.

[moviefreak]

So no Playstation 4 in the near future????

[paddy_crow]

What is the source for the anecdote about the depth rating? My first reaction is to question its veracity.

[mike]

Originally Posted by paddy_crow

What is the source for the anecdote about the depth rating? My first reaction is to question its veracity.

That Rolex is conservative in it's depth ratings has long been known (in fact reported in several watch mags.)

The DS was tested by COMEX to much deeper than it's stated depth.

[paddy_crow]

Originally Posted by mike

That Rolex is conservative in it's depth ratings has long been known (in fact reported in several watch mags.)

The DS was tested by COMEX to much deeper than it's stated depth.

I was curious what the source was for the depth rating being changed for the Asian market.

[mike]

Originally Posted by paddy_crow

I was curious what the source was for the depth rating being changed for the Asian market.

Ah! My mistake. I have no idea there.

[Hodog16]

In Asian languages the number 4 sounds very similar to the word for death, thus why it is considered an unlucky number.

Tetraphobia

An interesting concept is the fact that other companies avoid the number 4. Canon went from the G3 to the G5, and Nokia often skips the number 4 in their cell phone lines.

[Paulie 50]

Is this a belated April fool thread? ( oh by the way! why didn't Rolex do the same on the 16600 SD, 4000ft. )