Which Rolex model increases most on an annual basis?

[seabreeze60]

My 1991 Submariner seems to increase 5-8% annually based on tracking internet pricing for this model. What are your thoughts?

[Uhtred59]

Not sure I would bet the kids college fund on it, if history has taught us anything.

[GB-man]

Rolex was moving the prices upmarket regularly. They stopped that for now. I think you should be pleased with your appreciation but don't bank on any more, at least with respect to inflation and opportunity cost.

[dmash]

Originally Posted by GB-man

Rolex was moving the prices upmarket regularly. They stopped that for now. I think you should be pleased with your appreciation but don't bank on any more, at least with respect to inflation and opportunity cost.

x2. This has all been happening as Rolex was establishing itself further, becoming a marketing machine, etc. Not to mention luxury watches as a whole became more popular. In present time, for the Sub date, you're at an $8500 price point for a basic SS, mass produced watch. I think it's pretty much peaked, and the price will only go up from here in line with inflation. Rolex not having a price increase (for what, almost 5 years now?) agrees with this. It's out of its price bracket otherwise (with the current dollar purchasing power).

The people who are buying a Sub in 2017 and thinking 'wow, just look at the values of the Sub from 25 years ago, mine will increase in value proportionally the same!' are super far from the truth IMO. This whole 'Rolex will always be worth the same or more!' is starting to fizzle out. The price increases aren't going to come like they did previously.

Also, as a side note, if you paid $2250 for a brand new Sub date in 1990, and its worth $5000 now, you have not 'profited' $2750. You've profited more along the lines of $700 (and of course got to wear the watch the entire time). Definitely a great purchase, anything that holds its value over time is great......but there's a lot of misinformed posting about the true 'profit' amount on older watches.

[beshannon]

I do not know how there is anyway to accurately calculate this.

[Smarties]

Paul Newman Daytona!

[seabreeze60]

Originally Posted by Smarties

Paul Newman Daytona!

That would be my guess based on today's prices.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by seabreeze60

My 1991 Submariner seems to increase 5-8% annually based on tracking internet pricing for this model. What are your thoughts?

what was the retail in 1991 adjusted for inflation to todays dollars? Then compare it to what you would sell it for today.

that seems like a high return if you are calculating it in real terms.

[Melchizedek]

Originally Posted by seabreeze60

My 1991 Submariner seems to increase 5-8% annually based on tracking internet pricing for this model. What are your thoughts?

Nope... Not even close.

You can't get more than ~$5800 for that today.

8% would mean you can get $21k for that today.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Mick P]

What goes up nearly always comes down just to go back up again and a Rolex is no different.

Just keep your fingers crossed that 40mm does not go way out of fashion.

Would you buy a 34mm watch, they were once fashionable and trendy but today very unpopular and hard to shift.

Nothing is assured.

[ny_yeti]

Originally Posted by Mick P

What goes up nearly always comes down just to go back up again and a Rolex is no different.

Just keep your fingers crossed that 40mm does not go way out of fashion.

Would you buy a 34mm watch, they were once fashionable and trendy but today very unpopular and hard to shift.

Nothing is assured.

Good point, well said!

[seabreeze60]

Originally Posted by Melchizedek

Nope... Not even close.

You can't get more than ~$5800 for that today.

8% would mean you can get $21k for that today.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I bought the 1991 two years ago from an AD for $5K. A small sample, but means something to me!

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by seabreeze60

I bought the 1991 two years ago from an AD for $5K. A small sample, but means something to me!

thats good then. i wouldn't expect significant large gains from that though for quite some time.

[WatchingAustin]

Originally Posted by seabreeze60

I bought the 1991 two years ago from an AD for $5K. A small sample, but means something to me!

As others have pointed out gaining 8% annually since 1991 on $5,000 would put you at $21,000, so not sure how you calculate an 8% price increase annually.

Also $5,000.00 in 1991 has the same buying power as $9,022.12 in 2017, which is more than a new SubC

The only watches 'appreciating' are vintage references and even those I wouldn't build an investment portfolio around.

[beshannon]

Originally Posted by WatchingAustin

As others have pointed out gaining 8% annually since 1991 on $5,000 would put you at $21,000, so not sure how you calculate an 8% price increase annually.

Also $5,000.00 in 1991 has the same buying power as $9,022.12 in 2017, which is more than a new SubC

The only watches 'appreciating' are vintage references and even those I wouldn't build an investment portfolio around.

Exactly but that does not allow some to justify buying luxury jewelry.

[springer]

Originally Posted by WatchingAustin

As others have pointed out gaining 8% annually since 1991 on $5,000 would put you at $21,000, so not sure how you calculate an 8% price increase annually.

Also $5,000.00 in 1991 has the same buying power as $9,022.12 in 2017, which is more than a new SubC

The only watches 'appreciating' are vintage references and even those I wouldn't build an investment portfolio around.

You might keep your eye on the GMT 16710s and 16610LV Subs - they aren't vintage and appreciate yearly.

[seabreeze60]

Originally Posted by Melchizedek

Nope... Not even close.

You can't get more than ~$5800 for that today.

8% would mean you can get $21k for that today.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Thanks for the challenge. The actual compounded growth rate is 4.3%!

https://www.minus4plus6.com/PriceEvolution.php

A Submariner cost $2000 in 1992. If we all agree that a Submariner would sell for $5800, then the annual compounded growth is 4.3%.

I did this for a living at one point.

[MGWT]

Certain Milgauss will be interesting

[CGarza9655]

16610v AKA Kermit

Without a doubt.

[2JHead]

Originally Posted by CGarza9655

16610v AKA Kermit

Without a doubt.

+1, it's happening as we speak. And the funny thing is that numerous posts on this forum have concluded that the Kermit can never be a collectors item/sought after vintage as it was produced in far to great numbers

[Speed]

Originally Posted by 2JHead

+1, it's happening as we speak. And the funny thing is that numerous posts on this forum have concluded that the Kermit can never be a collectors item/sought after vintage as it was produced in far to great numbers

You can collect anything you want. Shrunken heads, belly button lint, nice watches. That doesn't mean that others will pay way beyond original price for them.

[Simon_e]

Originally Posted by 2JHead

+1, it's happening as we speak. And the funny thing is that numerous posts on this forum have concluded that the Kermit can never be a collectors item/sought after vintage as it was produced in far to great numbers

I think the Kermit is over priced now and due a fall. I sold one 2 weeks ago due to this.
Lovely watches but not rare at all. Look at how many are for sale......

[rcwatches]

Originally Posted by MGWT

Certain Milgauss will be interesting

Not sure about that one my friend

[R G]

Originally Posted by MGWT

Certain Milgauss will be interesting

Yep. It is the next collectable.

[brandrea]

The one you buy at the right price

[Tony64]

Originally Posted by brandrea

The one you buy at the right price

^^^This.
You make your money when you buy.

[sager]

Originally Posted by brandrea

The one you buy at the right price

This

[Mystro]

If you break even after 20 years of ownership you did fine. I played the 20 year ownership investment game from new. I broke even. Honestly, I could care less. These are luxury toys/hobbie and not a investment.

[seabreeze60]

Originally Posted by Mystro

If you break even after 20 years of ownership you did fine. I played the 20 year ownership investment game from new. I broke even. Honestly, I could care less. These are luxury toys/hobbie and not a investment.

I believe this is the answer. 20 years of luxury on your arm and get your money back. Kind of like investing in CD's but get to enjoy wearing a Rolex.

[landroverking]

Most of the increase in used Rolex price the last 20 years has to do with Rolex increasing prices on new models, and some small improvements to try to justify the price increase.