Interesting WIS conversation, PP Vs Rolex, Name recognition

[TheVTCGuy]

Was with a couple other WISes earlier this week, and we had a very interesting discussion about Rolex and Patek. Actually, the topic was your Grail watch, would you rather have an All Gold Rolex, or a SS Patek, considering similar pricing. One WIS said the AG Rolex, while another chose the PP. Nothin really incredible about that, we all have different goals, but the reasons for the AG Rolex was not what you would think.

My thought was, someone would pick the Gold Rolex because of the Precious metal, this was obvious, but the reason he gave was completely different. He said he would choose the Rolex because the average person (non-WIS) had never heard of Patek, where everyone in the world had heard of Rolex. I agree with his conjecture that a non-watch enthusiast had probably not heard of Patek, and didn’t realize they were arguably the finest watch maker in the world, but asked it the name-recognition was really the reason he chose Rolex over an (arguably) finer timepiece like a PP. Before I get to his answer, let’s jump to the other WIS that chose PP.

He was adamant, that he would much rather own the finest timepiece he could afford, and (in his opinion) the superior quality of a PP outweighed the Precious metal value of an AG Rolex. He expressed the watch was for HIS enjoyment, and the fact that non-WISes would not recognize the name was not only NOT a detriment, but an advantage.

The Rolex choice person, stated (paraphrasing) The Rolex is a fine watch, and what makes it more enjoyable is that it is universally recognized as a fine timepiece, and for him, that made his choice over the PP.

I hope I have explained the conversation clearly, but the bottom line is there were two opposite ends of the spectrum, as I see it anyway. One WIS, although of course appreciated the Rolex quality and being a fine timepiece, weighed the recognition from general population as being a very high asset, SO MUCH SO HE WOULD EVEN TAKE A SS ROLEX OVER A SS PP. The other WIS didn’t care if anyone recognized the name of his watch (again, actually seeing that as an asset), it was the superior quality of the timepiece itself that made the deciding factor.

It really caused me to think. The scenario started as a PM Rolex versus a SS Patek, but veered towards name-brand recognition. It made me question myself actually, for I admit, when non-WISes ask what kind of watch I am wearing, and I answer Rolex, you can see the recognition in their response that I have a fine (expensive) timepiece. If the situation were different, and they asked, and I responded Patek Phillipe, (most likely) they would not have the recognition of it being a superior quality (and again, expensive) timepiece.

I did a little sould-searching…. Is it the name “Rolex” or more importantly, people’s recognition of what I own that fuels my desire for these timepieces? I KNOW for a fact that it is not THE reason, but am trying to come to terms with how much that weighs in to my love for the brand as opposed to say, Omega, or Breitling, or even Tudor.

What do you think? How much does the recognizability of a Rolex, as a fine and expensive timepiece, by a non-WIS, influence your love for the brand and buying decision making?

PS Please don’t say it weighs in at absolutely nothing, I would find that hard to believe. It could be a very very small amount, but I think we are all proud to wear and show what is the most recognized watch brand in world at least a tiny tiny bit. Further more I don’t think there is anything wrong with that.

[HogwldFLTR]

Strangely, I've come close to trading the Platona for a Patek and found that once I got the Patek on my wrist it didn't ring true as a grail. Rolex is so well built and literally could survive a trip to hell and back on my wrist. I don't know of any other luxury watch which is as attractive and robust. That truly make Rolex the number one choice for me.

[Shadow Play]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

Strangely, I've come close to trading the Platona for a Patek and found that once I got the Patek on my wrist it didn't ring true as a grail. Rolex is so well built and literally could survive a trip to hell and back on my wrist. I don't know of any other luxury watch which is as attractive and robust. That truly make Rolex the number one choice for me.

This sums it up for me. I’d also add that although I understand the rich history of PP I would have thought they could have made their ‘sports’ models more waterproof and with a better power reserve.

[joli160]

Admittedly I bought my first Rolex DD for the name only. It was the only higher brand I knew at the time and famous for all the wrong reasons in my circle. I had to have one.

Only afterwards I really started to appreciate the quality and sturdiness.
Considered many times to look at other brands but I always come back to Rolex.
The feeling on the wrist of a typical PP Nautilus and Aquanaut stainless watch do nothing for me.

Monetary value aside I would pick a Submariner instead of one of those.
The feel of a Rolex just oozes robustness, hard to beat.
I am hooked.

[MrGoat]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

Rolex is so well built and literally could survive a trip to hell and back on my wrist. I don't know of any other luxury watch which is as attractive and robust. That truly make Rolex the number one choice for me.

Lee hit the nail on the head.

As a side note, the hyped Pateks do absolutely nothing for me. IMO the nautilus looks like it was created on another planet.


Sent from my Apple privacy invasion product

[dannyboy123]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

Strangely, I've come close to trading the Platona for a Patek and found that once I got the Patek on my wrist it didn't ring true as a grail. Rolex is so well built and literally could survive a trip to hell and back on my wrist. I don't know of any other luxury watch which is as attractive and robust. That truly make Rolex the number one choice for me.

I've always wanted a nautilus but having seen my friends no longer do as it was quite underwhelming diminutive and hard to read. Still a great piece but not for me.

[Tim Plains]

It weighs in at absolutely nothing. I wear a Submariner because I like the watch/brand and don't care what others think, nor do I try showing it off, I only wear it out with a long sleeve or jacket. I also don't care about resale value, another main driver for many, and would still wear it if resale was pennies on the dollar.

As for Rolex vs. Patek, PP doesn't interest me in the slightest. Sure, I appreciate their long history but the designs do nothing for me. The Nautilus, and every watch with an integrated bracelet, looks too feminine for my liking and I think "that's a girls watch" any time I see one despite it costing more than many people's homes. lol

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Was with a couple other WISes earlier this week, and we had a very interesting discussion about Rolex and Patek. Actually, the topic was your Grail watch, would you rather have an All Gold Rolex, or a SS Patek, considering similar pricing. One WIS said the AG Rolex, while another chose the PP. Nothin really incredible about that, we all have different goals, but the reasons for the AG Rolex was not what you would think.

My thought was, someone would pick the Gold Rolex because of the Precious metal, this was obvious, but the reason he gave was completely different. He said he would choose the Rolex because the average person (non-WIS) had never heard of Patek, where everyone in the world had heard of Rolex. I agree with his conjecture that a non-watch enthusiast had probably not heard of Patek, and didn’t realize they were arguably the finest watch maker in the world, but asked it the name-recognition was really the reason he chose Rolex over an (arguably) finer timepiece like a PP. Before I get to his answer, let’s jump to the other WIS that chose PP.

He was adamant, that he would much rather own the finest timepiece he could afford, and (in his opinion) the superior quality of a PP outweighed the Precious metal value of an AG Rolex. He expressed the watch was for HIS enjoyment, and the fact that non-WISes would not recognize the name was not only NOT a detriment, but an advantage.

The Rolex choice person, stated (paraphrasing) The Rolex is a fine watch, and what makes it more enjoyable is that it is universally recognized as a fine timepiece, and for him, that made his choice over the PP.

I hope I have explained the conversation clearly, but the bottom line is there were two opposite ends of the spectrum, as I see it anyway. One WIS, although of course appreciated the Rolex quality and being a fine timepiece, weighed the recognition from general population as being a very high asset, SO MUCH SO HE WOULD EVEN TAKE A SS ROLEX OVER A SS PP. The other WIS didn’t care if anyone recognized the name of his watch (again, actually seeing that as an asset), it was the superior quality of the timepiece itself that made the deciding factor.

It really caused me to think. The scenario started as a PM Rolex versus a SS Patek, but veered towards name-brand recognition. It made me question myself actually, for I admit, when non-WISes ask what kind of watch I am wearing, and I answer Rolex, you can see the recognition in their response that I have a fine (expensive) timepiece. If the situation were different, and they asked, and I responded Patek Phillipe, (most likely) they would not have the recognition of it being a superior quality (and again, expensive) timepiece.

I did a little sould-searching…. Is it the name “Rolex” or more importantly, people’s recognition of what I own that fuels my desire for these timepieces? I KNOW for a fact that it is not THE reason, but am trying to come to terms with how much that weighs in to my love for the brand as opposed to say, Omega, or Breitling, or even Tudor.

What do you think? How much does the recognizability of a Rolex, as a fine and expensive timepiece, by a non-WIS, influence your love for the brand and buying decision making?

PS Please don’t say it weighs in at absolutely nothing, I would find that hard to believe. It could be a very very small amount, but I think we are all proud to wear and show what is the most recognized watch brand in world at least a tiny tiny bit. Further more I don’t think there is anything wrong with that.

Hi Paul

Here's my take on it.

The individual who chose the Patek is a true WIS because he chose a watch watch because of what it was.

The individual who chose the AG Rolex was not, in fact, a true WIS, because he chose a watch because of what it represented.

I've been into watches and Rolex since the early 80's. Back then basically no one knew, or cared about "Rolex" other than probably National Geographic readers or professional divers.

The fact that now my watches are "insta"ntly recognisable to a far, far larger section of the public is very much a negative for me, but then I don't buy anything to impress others.

So I won't say the recognisability weighs in at nothing - because it does. But its a negative.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Devildog

Hi Paul

Here's my take on it.

The individual who chose the Patek is a true WIS because he chose a watch watch because of what it was.

The individual who chose the AG Rolex was not, in fact, a true WIS, because he chose a watch because of what it represented.

Beat me to it

[Driver8]

Originally Posted by Devildog

The individual who chose the Patek is a true WIS because he chose a watch watch because of what it was.

The individual who chose the AG Rolex was not, in fact, a true WIS, because he chose a watch because of what it represented.

This ^ 100%.

From a personal perspective, I own a number of watches by a number of different brands, and outside of close friends and family, no-one knows how into watches I am - my work colleagues certainly don't.

I don't make a big fanfare about them, I tend to keep them hidden away under my sleeves (which is nice an easy to do here in the icy UK!), and I HONESTLY don't care if people notice them or not. In fact, I'd rather people didn't notice them! I genuinely buy and wear them for my own enjoyment.

[train-time]

Originally Posted by Devildog

Hi Paul

Here's my take on it.

The individual who chose the Patek is a true WIS because he chose a watch watch because of what it was.

The individual who chose the AG Rolex was not, in fact, a true WIS, because he chose a watch because of what it represented.

I've been into watches and Rolex since the early 80's. Back then basically no one knew, or cared about "Rolex" other than probably National Geographic readers or professional divers.

The fact that now my watches are "insta"ntly recognisable to a far, far larger section of the public is very much a negative for me, but then I don't buy anything to impress others.

So I won't say the recognisability weighs in at nothing - because it does. But its a negative.

I have to agree 100%. If I have my choice to obtain a true grail it would be a Patek, although it would not be a SS version, it would be a PM Patek complication.

I came close to selling a SS Daytona and my Pepsi years before the pandemic for a RG Patek 5146R. That was when they could be obtained brand new and for a decent price. I still regret not having made that move and it would have been my only watch going forward.

[jaySL350]

Originally Posted by Devildog

Hi Paul

Here's my take on it.

The individual who chose the Patek is a true WIS because he chose a watch watch because of what it was.

The individual who chose the AG Rolex was not, in fact, a true WIS, because he chose a watch because of what it represented.

I've been into watches and Rolex since the early 80's. Back then basically no one knew, or cared about "Rolex" other than probably National Geographic readers or professional divers.

The fact that now my watches are "insta"ntly recognisable to a far, far larger section of the public is very much a negative for me, but then I don't buy anything to impress others.

So I won't say the recognisability weighs in at nothing - because it does. But its a negative.

This,,,

[Harry-57]

Originally Posted by Devildog

Hi Paul

Here's my take on it.

The individual who chose the Patek is a true WIS because he chose a watch watch because of what it was.

The individual who chose the AG Rolex was not, in fact, a true WIS, because he chose a watch because of what it represented.

Nicely put. Pretty much what I thought.

[sevykor]

Originally Posted by Devildog

Hi Paul

Here's my take on it.

The individual who chose the Patek is a true WIS because he chose a watch watch because of what it was.

The individual who chose the AG Rolex was not, in fact, a true WIS, because he chose a watch because of what it represented.

I've been into watches and Rolex since the early 80's. Back then basically no one knew, or cared about "Rolex" other than probably National Geographic readers or professional divers.

The fact that now my watches are "insta"ntly recognisable to a far, far larger section of the public is very much a negative for me, but then I don't buy anything to impress others.

So I won't say the recognisability weighs in at nothing - because it does. But its a negative.

I couldn’t agree more! I’m proud to say that I too am in this camp too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brandrea]

Rolex is known the world wide by just about everyone, have to give them that. Patek is lesser known by comparison.

You can argue the pros and cons of either brand.

In my humble opinion Patek is more of a connoisseurs brand, so I agree with the first friend

[alphadweller]

Like many members of this forum, I have a multibrand collection, hence recognizability plays no part in the buying process. People around me are not into watches, doesn't matter what I wear. My last acquisition was a VC.

[brandrea]

True story … I went to a wedding in Biel Switzerland back in the day.

Relatively new to watches I wore my SD16600. It was my only good watch, and I figured I’d fit right in with the Swiss watch crowd. One evening the groom and his wedding party took a group of us out for fondue and he was presented with a WG Patek Calatrava … no idea the reference.

The talk at the table amoung the group was how lovely and classic the time piece was in comparison to those “garish” Rolex that wear like a “tank”.

Awkward moment

[Rollieo]

Originally Posted by brandrea

True story … I went to a wedding in Biel Switzerland back in the day.

Relatively new to watches I wore my SD16600. It was my only good watch, and I figured I’d fit right in with the Swiss watch crowd. One evening the groom and his wedding party took a group of us out for fondue and he was presented with a WG Patek Calatrava … no idea the reference.

The talk at the table amoung the group was how lovely and classic the time piece was in comparison to those “garish” Rolex that wear like a “tank”.

Awkward moment

This is a good story that on “brand recognition”.

It’s very relative on who you’re talking about recognizing your watch. It seems like most of the wealthy are into watches. If you have a lot of money and you’re a man, there isn’t much jewelry to buy other than a watch. So while Rolex is nothing to look down too, when you’re sitting around the table and everyone has a Patek on and you have a Rolex, brand recognition sways in the direction of Patek. For the average joe, of course Rolex is much more well known than Patek. But like most said, I don't see that as a good thing.

Personally, both are amazing watches. It’s really hard to choose. I have both in my collection. I think the brand recognition is negative is all contexts, including the above. I like Rolex for the reliable tank like quality (but still in what I consider a very reasonable (I would actually call it excellent) size at 12mm. Patek I appreciate for the craftsmanship and beauty.

[beshannon]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

He was adamant, that he would much rather own the finest timepiece he could afford, and (in his opinion) the superior quality of a PP outweighed the Precious metal value of an AG Rolex. He expressed the watch was for HIS enjoyment, and the fact that non-WISes would not recognize the name was not only NOT a detriment, but an advantage.

This is exactly where I am.

[JC316]

People used to buy Rolex because the watches were well-made and symbolized achievement. Usually at the end of a long career.

The WIS and Rolex owner in the past is very different from today's WIS/ "collector."

Rolex is still well made but I wonder what it symbolizes now. Especially when I see people share their large Rolex collections.

It is true, the average person has no idea what PP is and there is no argument that Rolex is king when it comes to brand recognization. So if what other people think is important to you, get the Rolex.

Me personally, there isn't anything in the PP catalog, past or present that appeals to me. So Id probably choose a Rolex over any PP offering.

Best, perfect, all very subjective.

[ijpx]

One is obviously part of the investor crowd, while the other is a snob “collector”.

[ROlesorusLEX]

With regards to what a watch IS vs what a watch REPRESENTS:

I'd make the claim that most Rolex watches represent some aspiration that most of us don't fulfill at any point in our lives.

I own a Pepsi, but I don't fly jets across timezones. It represents the aspiration to do so.

I own a Sea Dweller, but I've never been diving in my life. The depth numbers represent for me a cool capability that I'll never chase.

My DD is a remarkably beautiful timepiece that, like it or not, represents success and wealth to 99% of the world, just like it does for the guy in the OP's anecdote. But I'm not the President or CEO.

I'd caution against placing a value judgement on what defines a WIS. People enjoy watches for reasons other than their true intended capabilities. If those reasons are aspirational instead of functional, so be it.

Rolex marketing, even in the "tool watch" era decades ago, leveraged aspiration quite frequently.

Sent from my NE2215 using Tapatalk

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by ROlesorusLEX

I'd caution against placing a value judgement on what defines a WIS.

And yet you've just made a judgement yourself about what aspirations a particular reference represents, based entirely on your personal viewpoint.

I too have a GMT Master - a CHNR. I have no aspiration to fly jets across time zones. I have no need for a watch to track different timezones. I have a smartphone that does that in a more legible fashion. I just really like the aesthetics of the watch and I love rose gold.

I have a Sea Dweller - and whilst I have done some diving, I have no aspiration to be be a commercial saturation diver. I just really like the aesthetics of the watch.

I have a BB58 Blue. Not because I "aspired" to owning a sub (I've had two and traded them both) but, yep, you guessed it, because I just really like the aesthetics of the watch.

I have a few Seikos and a number of G Shocks. All for exactly the same reason.

My purchase decisions are made entirely on what I like or what I need. Not because of some aspiration or association. Which probably makes me the stuff of marketing department nightmares.

[macrowatch]

How great of a time is it to be a watch lover with so many robust choices of who we choose to impress? (I mean this sincerely)

Whatever floats your boat choice - pick your brand here.

PP for the WIS crowd.

FPJ for the even more WIS crowd.

JN Shapiro for independent crowd.

And space panda meteorite Daytona for everyone.

So many great choices right now. More philosophical, I think it’s a journey and process, not a static decision. If money is limited, most tries one thing like PM Rolex and then another like Sport Patel before understanding in themselves what they really like. And then they get older and tastes change for them again.

[Chester01]

We live in a world where people feel they need recognition, likes if you will to feel alive. That is why social media has become so big. Recognition these days tops almost anything. Rolex has become almost a calling card or signal to others that hey look at me I have money. It’s become synonymous with conspicuous consumption sadly and people crave that attention. The meaning or symbol of the watch especially on todays age where very few wear these for the time has become even more important which is why Rolex dominates.

[S.Explorer]

Not all Rolex watches are obvious, it's part of what makes an Explorer or GMT LN appealing to me and likely others. Not keen on PP designs.

[rolexandlange]

I've waffled on adding a Nautilus or Royal Oak to the collection, but the deeper I dive the more overrated I feel they are. Throughout their 50 years or so of existence they have mostly lived on the periphery, niche products that often times were poor sellers. And the nail in the coffin for me is how smug I find the brands. Every time I read about the Stern fella or the AP family it leaves me wanting less.

Contrast this to Rolex. Absolutely great timepieces and what an accomplishment as a brand; desired the world over from the Sultan of Brunei to the accountant in Idaho. And the cherry on top is their robustness, accurate timekeeping, and comprehensive after sales service network. I get so much pleasure out of looking at my watch's timekeeping after a week of wear and seeing how accurate it remains. And if not, a service takes 8 weeks, not many months to a year.

Lastly, I live in a poor backwater town called San Francisco without a lot of money being thrown around, so the brands Patek and AP have ignored it and do not really sell in this place, other than a small closet at Tiffany's where one might find 3 ladies Pateks.

[Bladeshot]

I wear Rolex because I prefer the designs, although I do also have PP and AP.

Your question reminds me of brand value. Apple was the most valuable brand in the world, during 2021, at $263B. That represents the dollar value advantage Apple has when selling against competitors. Apple has a huge leap ahead of others. And so does Rolex, for most people. Branding… that’s where your friend finds a lot of value.


Just another WIS who loves to trade.
IG @bladeandwatch1

[rolexpatek363]

I own three steel Rolexes (114300; 16610; 5513) and a PP 5712 1/A, and the Patek is on a completely different level. I also have an FPJ, which makes the PP look a bit ordinary, but that's another story. I used to own a platinum DD as well, but sold it after a couple of years because it wasn't getting worn.

If the question is gold Rolex vs my 5712, then I'd far sooner take the Patek, they are better watches. In fact, I think I prefer steel Rolexes to gold ones.

[OG1982]

So is the WIS that chose a Rolex purely because of what it means to others, really a WIS? In my opinion, absolutely not.

He/she is into watches for all of the wrong reasons! 'Look everyone, see how wealthy I am'... This sums up an increasing part of the watch buying public, people buy these watches to flex and the perceived kudos to others, not because they truly appreciate them.