Why the AD hate?

[teck21]

There appears plenty of dissatisfaction towards ADs for their ‘shenanigans’, and to be honest I don’t understand why they should be blamed for woes not of their doing.

For one thing, they are profit maximising entities. They aim to make as much money as they can, no different from any other business at all. Yet they seem hated in a way other businesses are not, and I find that incredibly unfair to them.

Firstly, they are unable to determine what they receive from Rolex in every shipment. They receive what they receive, and do what they can with it. All of them wished they could satisfy the demands of every customer that walked in, but the scarcity of supply simply means they cannot.

They are also not allowed to sell above MSRP, and every idiot knows that the popular pieces can currently command prices well beyond MSRP.

I therefore put it to you AD haters, why should they sacrifice their own profit (by way of bundling or relationship building) in order for you to enjoy a watch from which they all know they will be ‘losing’ money from by selling it to you purely at MSRP?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Calatrava r]

[QUOTE=teck21;9644769]TI therefore put it to you AD haters, why should they sacrifice their own profit (by way of bundling or relationship building) in order for you to enjoy a watch from which they all know they will be ‘losing’ money from by selling it to you purely at MSRP?


How exactly are they losing money selling at MSRP? What about all the watches sold at MSRP that drop 50 percent out the door. Who should bear that loss. Hard to understand your reasoning.

[teck21]

[QUOTE=Calatrava r;9644789]

Originally Posted by teck21

TI therefore put it to you AD haters, why should they sacrifice their own profit (by way of bundling or relationship building) in order for you to enjoy a watch from which they all know they will be ‘losing’ money from by selling it to you purely at MSRP?





How exactly are they losing money selling at MSRP? What about all the watches sold at MSRP that drop 50 percent out the door. Who should bear that loss. Hard to understand your reasoning.

It’s very simple. They are forced to sell all their sports models at prices well below what the market is currently willing to pay.

This is a fact.

If you cannot see how this is losing money, you should not even engage in this conversation.

Those other watches you speak of, they lose no money on each sale at all, which is pretty much what any retail business is about. The buyer buys the loss.

All of this is very rational behaviour by a business. Again if you cannot grasp this concept, please stay away.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RobearH]

[QUOTE=teck21;9644807]

Originally Posted by Teck21

It’s very simple. They are forced to sell all their sports models at prices well below what the market is currently willing to pay.

This is a fact.

If you cannot see how this is losing money, you should not even engage in this conversation.

Those other watches you speak of, they lose no money on each sale at all, which is pretty much what any retail business is about. The buyer buys the loss.

All of this is very rational behaviour by a business. Again if you cannot grasp this concept, please stay away.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Problem with your argument is they are working both ends and feeding the grey market by selling to them at MSRP bet.

[teck21]

[QUOTE=RobearH;9644829]

Originally Posted by teck21

Problem with your argument is they are working both ends and feeding the grey market by selling to them at MSRP bet.

Yes, and for the AD’s who do so, why do they do that?

To maximise profit, and which business does not wish to maximise profit?

They aren’t allowed to charge more than MSRP, so they do it via a roundabout way of dealing with greys, or bundling, or forcing customers to build relationships with them.

My point is very simple, they are merely trying to maximise profit in whatever they can given the supply and pricing constraints they face.

Profit maximising is why every business exists.

Why should they take the fall for regular customers being unable to purchase any piece they want?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[exador]

Originally Posted by teck21

the scarcity of supply simply means they cannot.

Originally Posted by teck21

the supply and pricing constraints they face.

There is no supply issue; it’s unprecedented demand for the umpteenth time.

[dtwer]

Originally Posted by teck21

It’s very simple. They are forced to sell all their sports models at prices well below what the market is currently willing to pay.

This is a fact.

If you cannot see how this is losing money, you should not even engage in this conversation.

You are confusing opportunity cost with real profit/loss.

When you sell something for $100 msrp, and your COGS is $80, you are not losing money; you are making money.

As to whether you could have sold it for $200 or $300 instead of $100, that's the question of opportunity cost; it has nothing to do with real profit or loss.

Taking into consideration that Rolex is actively enforcing the AD pricing rule with a big stick, the opportunity cost of not selling at inflated prices is justifiably mitigated.

[Calatrava r]

[QUOTE=teck21;9644807]

Originally Posted by Calatrava r

It’s very simple. They are forced to sell all their sports models at prices well below what the market is currently willing to pay.

This is a fact.

If you cannot see how this is losing money, you should not even engage in this conversation.

Those other watches you speak of, they lose no money on each sale at all, which is pretty much what any retail business is about. The buyer buys the loss.

All of this is very rational behaviour by a business. Again if you cannot grasp this concept, please stay away.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So the buyer cannot buy the gain only the loss in your view. Again I respectfully do not see your point.

[Wahlberg]

Originally Posted by teck21

If you cannot see how this is losing money, you should not even engage in this conversation.

I love how clueless you are.

[SamP]

Quote from OP.

“If you cannot see how this is losing money, you should not even engage in this conversation.”


Hey bud, I think this issue arose due to a lacking in being precise with your thoughts. It’s fair enough for a reader to take your words as they are.
The AD is not loosing money. They buy low and sell higher - thus making a profit.
Did you mean the AD is loosing the potential to make more money?
If so, yes of course they are. That’s life.
BTW, I agree the AD owes allegiance to their regulars. That’ good business.
Regards

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk[/QUOTE]

[Runfar]

oh man teck.....really???

[teck21]

Originally Posted by Runfar

oh man teck.....really???

What’s your point?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[EddyG]

Because of 'the list'

[18●20●22●▼●2●4●6]

Originally Posted by EddyG

Because of 'the list'

so true...

I am on "the list" for about 1 year coming up this June with a major AD that has multiple doors. I put down a deposit too and was told in-writing that my spot is #7, then now I am at #15 or so with the reason that was so annoying that I don't want to relive.

The last word is that 1-1.5 year. So, by this Christmas, I may be lucky....

[enjoythemusic]

Originally Posted by EddyG

Because of 'the list'

List.... ????

Bwaaaaaaaaaaa-hahahahahahah.

PS: 100% agree with you.

Joking aside, heard a guy sent his wife to get watch.... not sure what she did with manager but she did leave with the watch.

[peterp]

In monopoly when there is more demand you increase the price without inreasing production. They do not increase substantialy the price nor output and clients money are not going into other watch brands. Strange balance continous.

[Brew]

Rolex and the ADs have a false advertising crossed with a bait and switch enterprise going on, "Come buy this new GMT." You go to the store, "Sorry, no GMTs if you don't buy this bauble too. But there's a list for you, if you'd like." Etc.

Not that I really care, as you can see by the watch list to the left.

[teck21]

Originally Posted by Brew

Rolex and the ADs have a false advertising crossed with a bait and switch enterprise going on, "Come buy this new GMT." You go to the store, "Sorry, no GMTs if you don't buy this bauble too. But there's a list for you, if you'd like." Etc.

Not that I really care, as you can see by the watch list to the left.

But you have noticed Rolex advertisements never specifically and actually tell you what’s available at any given time.

They just show models in their line up, and describe them.

There is no law that says only readily or
presently available pieces can be advertised.

These ads are about creating desire, not promising availability. Sure it can be damaging to customer goodwill, but it certainly is not illegal. One can argue it crosses some ethical line, but even that may be tenuous.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Brew]

Originally Posted by teck21

But you have noticed Rolex advertisements never specifically and actually tell you what’s available at any given time.

They just show models in their line up, and describe them.

There is no law that says only readily or
presently available pieces can be advertised.

These ads are about creating desire, not promising availability. Sure it can be damaging to customer goodwill, but it certainly is not illegal. One can argue it crosses some ethical line, but even that may be tenuous.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You asked why the hate. Some don't draw the line at the law to get their hate mojo cooking.

[teck21]

Originally Posted by Brew

You asked why the hate. Some don't draw the line at the law to get their hate mojo cooking.

Yes, I can understand the indignation people feel when they can’t get the pieces they desire at an AD.

The only point to my post is that ADs face severe constraints beyond their control. I just think they have come in for very unfair criticism for their behaviour, which is quite frankly normal for any business.

But yes, not being able to purchase something one ‘deserves’ can really smart!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jonesy2099]

Originally Posted by teck21

But you have noticed Rolex advertisements never specifically and actually tell you what’s available at any given time.

They just show models in their line up, and describe them.

There is no law that says only readily or
presently available pieces can be advertised.

These ads are about creating desire, not promising availability. Sure it can be damaging to customer goodwill, but it certainly is not illegal. One can argue it crosses some ethical line, but even that may be tenuous.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think you’ve answered your own question. I think “hate” is too strong a word but certainly the current situation is damaging to customer goodwill. Some of the practices that ADs are currently utilising to maximise profit is actually damaging their relationship with customers. I also disagree that every business tries to maximise profit at the expense of the customer. Some will understand that in the long term making a customer feel valued is more important than a short term gain in profit. ADs are currently enjoying a situation where they have more potential customers than they can supply. I think customer service standards have slipped as a result. People don’t appreciate greed and a lack of respect which numerous stories on this forum have reported are happening.

[teck21]

Originally Posted by Jonesy2099

I think you’ve answered your own question. I think “hate” is too strong a word but certainly the current situation is damaging to customer goodwill. Some of the practices that ADs are currently utilising to maximise profit is actually damaging their relationship with customers. I also disagree that every business tries to maximise profit at the expense of the customer. Some will understand that in the long term making a customer feel valued is more important than a short term gain in profit. ADs are currently enjoying a situation where they have more potential customers than they can supply. I think customer service standards have slipped as a result. People don’t appreciate greed and a lack of respect which numerous stories on this forum have reported are happening.

You do make good points. Every single business’ strategy for profit maximisation may be different, which explains why there seem many stories of people being able to provide coveted pieces by simply being on a list, compared to others whose dealers expect instant bundling.

Again my only point is that all ADs work under severe constraints presently, and blaming them exclusively for not being able to obtain any given model is frankly, self entitlement.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[imperio]

Originally Posted by teck21

blaming them exclusively for not being able to obtain any given model is frankly, self entitlement.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Who exclusively blames ADs? Example please. Direct quote if possible

[pepsiretail]

You make valid point, especially if the AD is having a tough time with their other brands.

They know the score. I was in an AD with my Pepsi and the salesman, who is a very charming guy, asked me to show my watch to a couple. When I obliged he said

“Whoever sold him that watch gave him ten thousand dollars »

So the question has become, why should they be so generous to you and not someone else?

[NavalFlight]

I’ve got no problem with ADs. They are a business and if they can sell 12 watches at a time, good for them.

I’d never pay over MSRP for a watch, but don’t have a problem if someone else does. I don’t think it’s particularly smart to buy watches over MSRP, but if someone has money to burn, great.

Anyone with a problem with the ADs is mad at the wrong entity. Rolex could easily kill the grey market, but they’d have to increase supply to match demand which would also weaken the “exclusivity” of the brand.

But an AD making a profit? Good for them.

[bondtoys]

Well, first of all, ADs are not allowed (by their contract with Rolex) to sell to resellers.

So, those who break that contract by selling to greys are unfailry competing with those honest ADs that play by the rules.

Additionally by drying out the market for ‚normal‘ buyers, they fuel the hype and exaggerations in the grey market and that means they contribute to the insane prices which many pay on that market.

[123Blueface]

Originally Posted by bondtoys

Well, first of all, ADs are not allowed (by their contract with Rolex) to sell to resellers.

So, those who break that contract by selling to greys are unfailry competing with those honest ADs that play by the rules.

Additionally by drying out the market for ‚normal‘ buyers, they fuel the hype and exaggerations in the grey market and that means they contribute to the insane prices which many pay on that market.

This!
.......and, those AD’s are helping to create the artificially inflated prices in the grey market by providing the supply to an alternate source than the intended end user per their agreement with Rolex.

[NavalFlight]

Originally Posted by 123Blueface

This!

.......and, those AD’s are helping to create the artificially inflated prices in the grey market by providing the supply to an alternate source than the intended end user per their agreement with Rolex.

If it weren’t for the ADs and Greys, your “investment” wouldn’t be increasing in value.

[johnjm]

Originally Posted by 123Blueface

This!

.......and, those AD’s are helping to create the artificially inflated prices in the grey market by providing the supply to an alternate source than the intended end user per their agreement with Rolex.

Who is that?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[teck21]

Originally Posted by 123Blueface

This!

.......and, those AD’s are helping to create the artificially inflated prices in the grey market by providing the supply to an alternate source than the intended end user per their agreement with Rolex.

Exactly, my point is that they will lose money by selling to the intended end user rather than to greys. Why would you expect them to not want to lose money? Would you want to lose money?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk