What makes a Rolex a Rolex?

[seabreeze60]

Today’s ad in WSJ?

Clearly Rolex is trying to define themselves in their own way

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by seabreeze60

Today’s ad in WSJ?

Clearly Rolex is trying to define themselves in their own way

I read somewhere that Rolex ditched its longtime ad agency and started doing its own advertising/hyperbole a couple of years ago.

[EzraPound]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

I read somewhere that Rolex ditched its longtime ad agency and started doing its own advertising/hyperbole a couple of years ago.

Business Insider, November 24, 2020...

[PenDelicate]

[QUOTE=EzraPound;12766279]Business Insider, November 24, 2020...


"A Rolex spokeswoman said the privately-held company does not comment on its business decisions."

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by EzraPound

Business Insider, November 24, 2020...

I'm guessing the majority of that spend was on media buying, no? Difficult to imagine even Rolex spending $30m on creative alone. Either way, what would be the point of a big agency: Software will do the buying and and placements, and creative can't be that hard for them (given they name they have to trade on and the fact that it's a single-product company).

[ELLimon]

Smart. The reason for price is ephemeral.

[omar-rye]

Is that a crown winder in the image?

[alphadweller]

Superlative and Perpetual refer to the time it takes to be allocated one, nothing else.

[brandrea]

I have to admit, I’ve always liked their adverts … to each their own

[amh]

Seems to imply they make 100% of their parts - not sure if that's true. Could have sworn they outsource their hands for example.

Regardless I think the brand has a lot going for it aside from the "hunk of metal":
- Long history
- Good value retention
- Excellent accuracy with the modern movements
- Good standard warranty
- Excellent support even after warranty
- Broad dealer network
- Sufficiently innovative to remain competitive (They're not the best)

Is it all mere marketing? That certainly plays a part but Rolex is definitely a very 'safe' choice when buying a watch.

[Kreyzhorse]

Originally Posted by amh

Seems to imply they make 100% of their parts - not sure if that's true. Could have sworn they outsource their hands for example.

Regardless I think the brand has a lot going for it aside from the "hunk of metal":
- Long history
- Good value retention
- Excellent accuracy with the modern movements
- Good standard warranty
- Excellent support even after warranty
- Broad dealer network
- Sufficiently innovative to remain competitive (They're not the best)

Is it all mere marketing? That certainly plays a part but Rolex is definitely a very 'safe' choice when buying a watch.

This ^

[wuyeah]

When you stop care what other people think.

[Jack T]

Originally Posted by wuyeah

When you stop care what other people think.

That’s only part of it.

There’s also the arrogance of thinking they know what people think; or that they can determine what people think.

Not the same company as when I got in to this hobby almost 20 years ago, not the same watches, either.

[zengineer]

Originally Posted by Jack T

That’s only part of it.



There’s also the arrogance of thinking they know what people think; or that they can determine what people think.



Not the same company as when I got in to this hobby almost 20 years ago, not the same watches, either.

Yes... hopefully this will turn them around and save the downward financial spiral they're in.

[wuyeah]

Originally Posted by Jack T

That’s only part of it.

There’s also the arrogance of thinking they know what people think; or that they can determine what people think.

Not the same company as when I got in to this hobby almost 20 years ago, not the same watches, either.

Yeah. But not gonna care what they think. They never care about what we think or what we want is the proof lol. it is just the Rolex way.

[Henrimontgomery]

Ask any Rolex employee (high enough in the corporate chain).

They don’t make watches, they make Rolexes.

[Calatrava r]

I wonder why they feel the need to advertise incessantly when they have no ability to meet the current demand for their product. Under that dynamic, advertising sort of rubs in it to those unable to buy.

[2thdock]

Originally Posted by Calatrava r

I wonder why they feel the need to advertise incessantly when they have no ability to meet the current demand for their product. Under that dynamic, advertising sort of rubs in it to those unable to buy.

I wonder this as well. I got super busy in my own business some time ago and stopped advertising. I am no business genius though. I imagine they have smarter people then me working. I would like to hear why

[OG1982]

Originally Posted by Calatrava r

I wonder why they feel the need to advertise incessantly when they have no ability to meet the current demand for their product. Under that dynamic, advertising sort of rubs in it to those unable to buy.

Rolex got themselves to be the most recognised brand in the world by clever marketing. Why stop now?

Their business model is a major success, they sell every watch they make. Advertising is what keeps people without a Rolex, hungry for one.

[train-time]

Interesting last line in the WSJ ad: "So that, in time, you can make it your own."

Are they acknowledging that you may have to wait to get one or perhaps, celebrating it?

[77T]

Originally Posted by train-time

Interesting last line in the WSJ ad: "So that, in time, you can make it your own."

Are they acknowledging that you may have to wait to get one or perhaps, celebrating it?

…the difference between marketing and advertising…

I would say “subliminally rationalizing” rather than acknowledging or celebrating the wait.

The message was aimed at explaining their insane focus on quality along with a silent side story of empty cases and long waits to buy (without directly addressing the issue). It supports the retail ADs who have to explain why nothing is for sale.

#Perpetual is tagged to avoid any model specific positioning.

The part of their marketing that’s missing is the 4th “P”: Place. Note that they don’t aim to drive readers to any AD - it’s not co-op advertising. The major “miss” in their strategy to push exhibition inventory to the ADs is a failure to push ordering power to those same ADs. Any AD investing in exhibition models should have been given a method to enter orders.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by 77T

…the difference between marketing and advertising…

I would say “subliminally rationalizing” rather than acknowledging or celebrating the wait.

The message was aimed at explaining their insane focus on quality along with a silent side story of empty cases and long waits to buy (without directly addressing the issue). It supports the retail ADs who have to explain why nothing is for sale.

#Perpetual is tagged to avoid any model specific positioning.

The part of their marketing that’s missing is the 4th “P”: Place. Note that they don’t aim to drive readers to any AD - it’s not co-op advertising. The major “miss” in their strategy to push exhibition inventory to the ADs is a failure to push ordering power to those same ADs. Any AD investing in exhibition models should have been given a method to enter orders.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

See, I saw the "in time make it your own" as a ripoff/lazy variation of Patek's "you never really own a Patek" language.

The "Place" piece is interesting, though, because all of the out of home advertising Rolex does has an AD listed. Assuming that ADs are the ones in fact paying for those placements, though (or at least a big percentage).

[train-time]

Originally Posted by 77T

…the difference between marketing and advertising…

I would say “subliminally rationalizing” rather than acknowledging or celebrating the wait.

The message was aimed at explaining their insane focus on quality along with a silent side story of empty cases and long waits to buy (without directly addressing the issue). It supports the retail ADs who have to explain why nothing is for sale.

#Perpetual is tagged to avoid any model specific positioning.

The part of their marketing that’s missing is the 4th “P”: Place. Note that they don’t aim to drive readers to any AD - it’s not co-op advertising. The major “miss” in their strategy to push exhibition inventory to the ADs is a failure to push ordering power to those same ADs. Any AD investing in exhibition models should have been given a method to enter orders.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Originally Posted by dannyp

See, I saw the "in time make it your own" as a ripoff/lazy variation of Patek's "you never really own a Patek" language.

The "Place" piece is interesting, though, because all of the out of home advertising Rolex does has an AD listed. Assuming that ADs are the ones in fact paying for those placements, though (or at least a big percentage).

It also seemed to me to ring familiar to Patek's marketing of exclusivity, but when you really think about it, come on.... a million pieces a year vs. 60,000... really. Patek is the definition of exclusivity. I don't recall ever seeing one on anyone out in the wild... ever, and nobody that I personally know has one, but with a million Rolexes hitting the market every year, everybody and their uncle has one.

Rolex is really pushing the image to be on the same plane as Patek. Rolex is way too common and are everywhere, it's that not exclusive. I'm amazed at the continual stream of posts from people that feel so fortunate to have "gotten the call" from their AD to be the chosen one, what for one of a million watches produced during the year and to be awarded the opportunity to fork out outrageous amounts of money and feel privileged to get the chance to do so. I lost the excitement not too long after the AD's started playing the all the availability games.

It's a nice Ad in the WSJ and I hope for them that they can continue to string it along, but with a million pieces a year, it's got to end at some time. Perception is everything!

[DJ2020]

Originally Posted by train-time

It also seemed to me to ring familiar to Patek's marketing of exclusivity, but when you really think about it, come on.... a million pieces a year vs. 60,000... really. Patek is the definition of exclusivity. I don't recall ever seeing one on anyone out in the wild... ever, and nobody that I personally know has one, but with a million Rolexes hitting the market every year, everybody and their uncle has one.

Rolex is really pushing the image to be on the same plane as Patek. Rolex is way too common and are everywhere, it's that not exclusive. I'm amazed at the continual stream of posts from people that feel so fortunate to have "gotten the call" from their AD to be the chosen one, what for one of a million watches produced during the year and to be awarded the opportunity to fork out outrageous amounts of money and feel privileged to get the chance to do so. I lost the excitement not too long after the AD's started playing the all the availability games.

It's a nice Ad in the WSJ and I hope for them that they can continue to string it along, but with a million pieces a year, it's got to end at some time. Perception is everything!

Ah, the truth has finally been written!

[seabreeze60]

Originally Posted by train-time

It also seemed to me to ring familiar to Patek's marketing of exclusivity, but when you really think about it, come on.... a million pieces a year vs. 60,000... really. Patek is the definition of exclusivity. I don't recall ever seeing one on anyone out in the wild... ever, and nobody that I personally know has one, but with a million Rolexes hitting the market every year, everybody and their uncle has one.

Rolex is really pushing the image to be on the same plane as Patek. Rolex is way too common and are everywhere, it's that not exclusive. I'm amazed at the continual stream of posts from people that feel so fortunate to have "gotten the call" from their AD to be the chosen one, what for one of a million watches produced during the year and to be awarded the opportunity to fork out outrageous amounts of money and feel privileged to get the chance to do so. I lost the excitement not too long after the AD's started playing the all the availability games.

It's a nice Ad in the WSJ and I hope for them that they can continue to string it along, but with a million pieces a year, it's got to end at some time. Perception is everything!

Thanks for the post!

My guess is that the global demand for Rolex is probably 20-40 times the size of Patek. Therefore the pricing

Patek is a great watch but no better than a Rolex, technically

[dannyp]

Originally Posted by train-time

It also seemed to me to ring familiar to Patek's marketing of exclusivity, but when you really think about it, come on.... a million pieces a year vs. 60,000... really. Patek is the definition of exclusivity. I don't recall ever seeing one on anyone out in the wild... ever, and nobody that I personally know has one, but with a million Rolexes hitting the market every year, everybody and their uncle has one.

Rolex is really pushing the image to be on the same plane as Patek. Rolex is way too common and are everywhere, it's that not exclusive. I'm amazed at the continual stream of posts from people that feel so fortunate to have "gotten the call" from their AD to be the chosen one, what for one of a million watches produced during the year and to be awarded the opportunity to fork out outrageous amounts of money and feel privileged to get the chance to do so. I lost the excitement not too long after the AD's started playing the all the availability games.

It's a nice Ad in the WSJ and I hope for them that they can continue to string it along, but with a million pieces a year, it's got to end at some time. Perception is everything!

Actually, the more I think about it, the more I think it's a subtle opposite of Patek. Patek's marketing is all about the watch. The watch is what endures, and each successive owner is merely its guardian. Rolex is all about the owner (and their ego): the watch becomes an extension of them. And if something as impressive as a Rolex can become an extension of them, then they, too, must be super impressive.

[INC]

Originally Posted by train-time

but with a million Rolexes hitting the market every year, everybody and their uncle has one.

Just a note: As far as I know, the one million watches produced doesn't just mean Rolexes, but mostly Tudors. In addition, only a fraction of this number is produced from the rarer Rolex versions. So in my opininon it may be really true, that for example, a Platona is indeed more difficult to get than an "ordinary" Patek.

[Cwillis0001]

Didn't even know full page ads in print newspapers were still a thing.

[Robf52]

I've always found Rolex adverts interesting, effective and fun. They continually try to maintain their painstakingly earned image as a brand associated with high achievement, quality and exclusivity....exactly what they should be doing. Wait time and availability (or lack thereof) are part of their success.

[Rori]

What makes Rolex a Rolex is the history they managed to embed in each and every model they make. Nothing comes close to that.