AD offers to sell a brand new sport model at the gray market price

[pp4daytona]

I think this is going too far.
I want to buy from an AD because I don’t want to pay premium. All I got is you need to bundle or pay gray market price.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[peterpl]

Nothing new.

The money has to come from somewhere. Why would the AD give you a free $10k say on a Daytona? Either bundle so they make the money off you on other pieces or jewelry or pay up market price.

Just like a house or car. If a Porsche is MSRP $200k but resells on market at $350k - no one is going to give it to you for $200k are they?

[Reinhard in SA]

If you have proof, Rolex might find that very interesting. Even charging over list for the new BB58 has gotten an AD reprimanded. Not sure it applies everywhere though.

[Luke@TRF]

Originally Posted by peterpl

Nothing new.

The money has to come from somewhere. Why would the AD give you a free $10k say on a Daytona? Either bundle so they make the money off you on other pieces or jewelry or pay up market price.

Just like a house or car. If a Porsche is MSRP $200k but resells on market at $350k - no one is going to give it to you for $200k are they?

this is ethically wrong, and the brand should intervene.

what the private owner of the product do does not mean the business owner of the product can do the same.

otherwise Amazon can start charging people double the money for a PS5, latest Intel/AMD CPU & GPU etc which are getting flipped mad.

[teck21]

Originally Posted by Luke@TRF

this is ethically wrong, and the brand should intervene.

what the private owner of the product do does not mean the business owner of the product can do the same.

otherwise Amazon can start charging people double the money for a PS5, latest Intel/AMD CPU & GPU etc which are getting flipped mad.

If you wanna talk ethics, is it ethical for customers to buy any watch they want just to flip it, thereby depriving somebody else the chance to buy the watch at MSRP to enjoy?

Simple yes or no.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hambone1983]

Originally Posted by teck21

If you wanna talk ethics, is it ethical for customers to buy any watch they want just to flip it, thereby depriving somebody else the chance to buy the watch at MSRP to enjoy?

Simple yes or no.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

yes. Nothing remotely unethical about it.

[fwhawk]

Originally Posted by teck21

If you wanna talk ethics, is it ethical for customers to buy any watch they want just to flip it, thereby depriving somebody else the chance to buy the watch at MSRP to enjoy?

Simple yes or no.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes that's ethical. Once you own the piece you can do what you want with it.

[teck21]

Originally Posted by fwhawk

Yes that's ethical. Once you own the piece you can do what you want with it.

ADs own the watches they sell....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Singslinger]

Originally Posted by fwhawk

Yes that's ethical. Once you own the piece you can do what you want with it.

Yes I agree.

The only thing that ADs can do is try and allocate the desirable models to customers who genuinely want those watches and will probably not flip, the operative word being "probably''.

[peterpl]

Originally Posted by Luke@TRF

this is ethically wrong, and the brand should intervene.

what the private owner of the product do does not mean the business owner of the product can do the same.

otherwise Amazon can start charging people double the money for a PS5, latest Intel/AMD CPU & GPU etc which are getting flipped mad.

In the developed world its called free trade and the ADs are individually owned so they can pretty much set the price on anything they want.

Car dealers are doing the same thing with Porsche etc....does Porsche care? Nope.
My local tech stores are doing the same thing as you say with PS5 and AMD CPUs.....does AMD or Intel care? Nope.
Local Shoe shops are doing the same thing with Jordan/Yeezy shoes.....does Nike or Adidas care? Nope.

this is nothing but capitalism at its finest.

[teck21]

Originally Posted by peterpl

The developed world its called free trade and the ADs are individually owned so they can pretty much set the price on anything they want.

Car dealers are doing the same thing with Porsche etc....does Porsche care? Nope.
My local tech stores are doing the same thing as you say with PS5 and AMD CPUs.....does AMD or Intel care? Nope.
Local Shoe shops are doing the same thing with Jordan/Yeezy shoes.....does Nike or Adidas care? Nope.

this is nothing but capitalism at its finest.

Many Rolex buyers wants to enjoy the money they make thanks to capitalism because it suits them, but want a socialist method of distribution because it suits them.

Gotta take the good with the bad, the bad being luxury goods go to those who can and will pay the most.

As you put it, capitalism working as intended in this case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[alphasports]

Originally Posted by teck21

Many Rolex buyers wants to enjoy the money they make thanks to capitalism because it suits them, but want a socialist method of distribution because it suits them.

Gotta take the good with the bad, the bad being luxury goods go to those who can and will pay the most.

As you put it, capitalism working as intended in this case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Gotta agree with you here

[Robf52]

Originally Posted by teck21

Many Rolex buyers wants to enjoy the money they make thanks to capitalism because it suits them, but want a socialist method of distribution because it suits them.

Gotta take the good with the bad, the bad being luxury goods go to those who can and will pay the most.

As you put it, capitalism working as intended in this case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

This. Given the ongoing supply/demand imbalance, you've got to pay to play.

[shapiroeric]

Originally Posted by teck21

Many Rolex buyers wants to enjoy the money they make thanks to capitalism because it suits them, but want a socialist method of distribution because it suits them.

Gotta take the good with the bad, the bad being luxury goods go to those who can and will pay the most.

As you put it, capitalism working as intended in this case.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Gotta say this is spot on....good post

[Luke@TRF]

Originally Posted by peterpl

In the developed world its called free trade and the ADs are individually owned so they can pretty much set the price on anything they want.

Car dealers are doing the same thing with Porsche etc....does Porsche care? Nope.
My local tech stores are doing the same thing as you say with PS5 and AMD CPUs.....does AMD or Intel care? Nope.
Local Shoe shops are doing the same thing with Jordan/Yeezy shoes.....does Nike or Adidas care? Nope.

this is nothing but capitalism at its finest.

don't own an 911 so can't comment on Porsche but I am aware the dealership do ask customers to have a purchase history for the hotter models.

far as i know i dont see Amazon, Ebuyer, Currys and other retailers charging over retail for PS5, PC components that are bought with bots and sold at double the price. Intel and AMD already said they are doing all they can to ensure the products go to the end user, not flippers, but they can't ID the flippers as effective as the watch ADs who conduct their business face to face with the customers.

I also failed to see Addidas or Footlocker selling any sneakers over retail.

Maybe things work differently across the pond, good for you i guess.

[strafer_kid]

Originally Posted by peterpl

In the developed world its called free trade and the ADs are individually owned so they can pretty much set the price on anything they want.

Car dealers are doing the same thing with Porsche etc....does Porsche care? Nope.
My local tech stores are doing the same thing as you say with PS5 and AMD CPUs.....does AMD or Intel care? Nope.
Local Shoe shops are doing the same thing with Jordan/Yeezy shoes.....does Nike or Adidas care? Nope.

this is nothing but capitalism at its finest.

Pretty well sums it up! None of this price drama appears to be having any real adverse impact or negative effect upon Rolex factory output or sales. Rolex appear happy enough!

[jimmytamp]

Originally Posted by Luke@TRF

this is ethically wrong, and the brand should intervene.

what the private owner of the product do does not mean the business owner of the product can do the same.

otherwise Amazon can start charging people double the money for a PS5, latest Intel/AMD CPU & GPU etc which are getting flipped mad.

You might be right, but hey..it is what it is (sad but true)


https://www.instagram.com/fliegerb777/

[Goin2drt]

Originally Posted by Luke@TRF

this is ethically wrong, and the brand should intervene.

what the private owner of the product do does not mean the business owner of the product can do the same.

otherwise Amazon can start charging people double the money for a PS5, latest Intel/AMD CPU & GPU etc which are getting flipped mad.

This is unethical but the well supported grays here it is cool and capitalism. You guys are hilarious. Is it capitalism or not plain and simple.

I say great for the AD sell it for what someone is willing to pay.

[powerfunk]

Originally Posted by Luke@TRF

this is ethically wrong, and the brand should intervene.

what the private owner of the product do does not mean the business owner of the product can do the same.

otherwise Amazon can start charging people double the money for a PS5, latest Intel/AMD CPU & GPU etc which are getting flipped mad.

I'd argue it's only unethical if they contractually agreed that they wouldn't do that. Amazon does start charging double the money for products when their demand increases all the time. Remember that cheap $35 watch roll on Amazon that shot up to $60 in a couple days?

I have no problem with any reseller selling their products for market price. And...that's what happens unless they have some obligation not to. What if there was no MSRP at all? Then what price would be "ethical" to you? There's nothing inherently "morally just" about the MSRP's that companies set imho.

[teck21]

You are 100% sure they said you could get it if you outright paid above MSRP?

If they were willing to do that, why would they try to get you to bundle in the first place?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Rado63]

Why not share some details. What did you go in search of? What watches did the AD offer in this bundle? Did they ask for payment in Cash or part cash, or all credit card was okay? When they said "pay gray market" did they ask you to spend gray market price in the store? or did they tell you that if you don't have spend history, or don't bundle then you should purchase on the secondary market? More details please.

[pp4daytona]

Originally Posted by Rado63

Why not share some details. What did you go in search of? What watches did the AD offer in this bundle? Did they ask for payment in Cash or part cash, or all credit card was okay? When they said "pay gray market" did they ask you to spend gray market price in the store? or did they tell you that if you don't have spend history, or don't bundle then you should purchase on the secondary market? More details please.

It's for GMT. It didn't go to the payment part. The deal was buying 2 Tudor watches and get the GMT at MSRP or pay around $16,000 to just the GMT. I said no.

[Hollie_Rollie]

Originally Posted by pp4daytona

It's for GMT. It didn't go to the payment part. The deal was buying 2 Tudor watches and get the GMT at MSRP or pay around $16,000 to just the GMT. I said no.

TBH Tudor makes some nice pieces, I would rather buy 2 Tudor watches to get the Pepsi than buy diamond jewelry.

DSW would’ve taken them up on this deal. This is how the greys get some of their inventory. And then he’ll turn around and sell the Pepsi for 20k and take a 1k hit on the Tudors

[jimmytamp]

Originally Posted by pp4daytona

It's for GMT. It didn't go to the payment part. The deal was buying 2 Tudor watches and get the GMT at MSRP or pay around $16,000 to just the GMT. I said no.

If I were you, I would have bought those bundled.

You can always sell the Tudor and keep the GMT.


Cheers...


https://www.instagram.com/fliegerb777/

[Benzsiam]

Originally Posted by jimmytamp

If I were you, I would have bought those bundled.

You can always sell the Tudor and keep the GMT.


Cheers...


https://www.instagram.com/fliegerb777/

I agree, actually it is not a bad deal at all.

[Bigblu10]

Originally Posted by pp4daytona

It's for GMT. It didn't go to the payment part. The deal was buying 2 Tudor watches and get the GMT at MSRP or pay around $16,000 to just the GMT. I said no.

Worst case scenario you could have flipped the two Tudor watches to one of the resellers here on the forum. Especially if they were two of the more in demand like the black bay blue dial blue bezel. Ultimately you can always find another AD in your area to do business with, depending on your locale.

[TankTom]

Watches of Switzerland here in the UK are selling a hulk for £16k odd (inclusive of VAT) which implies it is a brand new watch.

[Nairn1980]

Originally Posted by TankTom

Watches of Switzerland here in the UK are selling a hulk for £16k odd (inclusive of VAT) which implies it is a brand new watch.

Their prices just say (inclusive of VAT). It’s a used watch

[Daveclock]

Originally Posted by TankTom

Watches of Switzerland here in the UK are selling a hulk for £16k odd (inclusive of VAT) which implies it is a brand new watch.

VAT is due on new and second hand items sadly.

Mind you it is always whimsical as to how "second hand" a watch is! ;)

[Nairn1980]

Originally Posted by Daveclock

VAT is due on new and second hand items sadly.

Mind you it is always whimsical as to how "second hand" a watch is! ;)

On second hand watches VAT is only paid (by the retailer) on the margin.