Rolex policies 2023

[inadeje]

Some interesting wording on the US website

“The sale of Rolex watches above the suggested retail price, as well as any tie-in sale, is not permitted”.

Then this ambiguous disclaimer seems to nullify the prior “However, the distribution of Rolex watches worldwide is entrusted to independent Official Jewelers and Rolex is not authorized to intervene in the relationship between them and the end customer.”

So the none permissible “tie-in sale” is the associated sale of say jewelry to have a watch adjudicated?

[BraveBold]

The AD can discriminate to sell to preferred customers. Explicit tie-ins seem out of bounds per policy. But it seems, as you point out, a weak clause in terms of actual impact…

[WatchTimes]

Most ADs have not tried to sell above retail in some time, instead allocating the watches to clients with bigger overall spends at their stores.
I think most ADs don't want to risk losing the Rolex line.

[Bartolo]

Whilst it's "not permitted," it's clear from their words that Rolex will NOT intervene.

Thus -- perhaps a philosophical question -- what does "not permitted" mean in this context? It could mean any of a number of things, if we had more facts.

It COULD mean that an above-MSRP sale or a tied-sale (you can only buy this Rolex if you also buy this other jewelry) by an AD violates their contract with Rolex, such that if Rolex finds out about it Rolex can perhaps terminate the contract. Without seeing the contract we'll never know.

But it's possible that while Rolex won't step in, if they find out about it they could take action consistent with the terms of their agreement with the AD.

[77T]

That language has been on the website for a while before this year.

The first sentence you cited is clear, the second one does add ambiguity regarding “relationships”.

But how could anyone be confused about any retailer catering to their best customers?

Rolex isn’t involved with end-customers in the sales process - that is, until they decide to go direct somehow.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[KatGirl]

Originally Posted by 77T

That language has been on the website for a while before this year.

The first sentence you cited is clear, the second one does add ambiguity regarding “relationships”.

But how could anyone be confused about any retailer catering to their best customers?

Rolex isn’t involved with end-customers in the sales process - that is, until they decide to go direct somehow.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I came right out and asked my SA, at my AD, if buying my diamond wedding rings at their store, would help me get my new OP faster. He answered, “Absolutely not!”, but after we went ahead and bought them there anyway, I got the call 3 months later. I’m sure that Rolex doesn’t like ADs tying jewelry spends to allocations, but I am also sure, that it’s done ALL the time!

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Saoirse32]

Seems completely (and purposely) ambiguous. I’d bet IF Rolex somehow discovered a “violation” there would be consequences but most ADs likely don’t care…


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mystro]

This is Rolex way of saying take the AD’s games or leave but keep us out of it. Basically nothing will change nor does Rolex want it to.

[inadeje]

Originally Posted by Mystro

This is Rolex way of saying take the AD’s games or leave but keep us out of it. Basically nothing will change nor does Rolex want it to.

[Sigmak]

Originally Posted by Mystro

This is Rolex way of saying take the AD’s games or leave but keep us out of it. Basically nothing will change nor does Rolex want it to.

Exactly!

[acouey252]

Clear enough to me. You can't be forced or tied to another sale. However any other issues and they can't intervene on your behalf?

So many people get upset about ADs taking care of their best customers... But don't all businesses do that???

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

[Barada7]

They’re selling 100% of their watches in record time. Nothing will change until it has to.

[dlddrrr]

“We don’t do tied-selling. Unless the AD chooses to. By the way you can only get it from the AD”

[RollingInTheDeep]

If I am not mistaken this rule against tie in has always existed.

Basically, AD's wont say "in order to get the sub you need to buy X." But instead rely on the reality that news travels fast regarding how one can have a watch allocated to them.

So while the sales rep won't say - "if you buy X I can get you Y," that BLRO you have your eye on may magically appear once you commit to an a ~$30-40k engagement ring.

[Phlippe]

Over the years I’ve had a one particular Rolex AD tell me on two separate occasions, (so I know it was no accident,) “we won’t put your name on any Rolex list unless you buy at least $200,000 in diamonds from us.” This AD’s practice is common knowledge among watch enthusiasts and even other AD’s. I’ve heard the same story so many times from others I have hard time believing Rolex doesn’t know this practice is going on at this particular AD. Until Rolex un-networks the unscrupulous AD’s they won’t be able to stop the flippers or protect their brand.

[subtona]

It’s too late.
I will enjoy those Rolex I own but the chance of me walking into an AD and ever having a conversation around “may I buy a watch from you?” Is a dead issue.

[10klakes]

Originally Posted by subtona

it’s too late.
I will enjoy those rolex i own but the chance of me walking into an ad and ever having a conversation around “may i buy a watch from you?” is a dead issue.

+1

[joli160]

Originally Posted by subtona

It’s too late.
I will enjoy those Rolex I own but the chance of me walking into an AD and ever having a conversation around “may I buy a watch from you?” Is a dead issue.

Yes, this

[Moondoggy]

Originally Posted by joli160

Yes, this

^^^^^^

[Podmornica]

Originally Posted by subtona

It’s too late.
I will enjoy those Rolex I own but the chance of me walking into an AD and ever having a conversation around “may I buy a watch from you?” Is a dead issue.

Well said. Most of the buyers developed a Rolex AD fatigue anyway.

[TickTockChuck]

Originally Posted by subtona

It’s too late.
I will enjoy those Rolex I own but the chance of me walking into an AD and ever having a conversation around “may I buy a watch from you?” Is a dead issue.

I'm at that point too and can't be bothered with "building a relationship" after my prior 12 year AD relationship ended when Rolex pulled the plug on them, thus a dead end. It was more fun when they actually had watches on display which you could try on and compare. So it goes.

[Rickkk]

This is not the case in the uk. I have proof of Bucherer bundling £200k of crap onto a rainbow Daytona but when I called Rolex, they didn’t want to know

[Calatrava r]

Now that used prices have declined on most models it is much easier just to buy one used and forget the ADs.

[TickTockChuck]

Originally Posted by Calatrava r

Now that used prices have declined on most models it is much easier just to buy one used and forget the ADs.

So true!

[77T]

Originally Posted by Rickkk

This is not the case in the uk. I have proof of Bucherer bundling £200k of crap onto a rainbow Daytona but when I called Rolex, they didn’t want to know

In the UK, is there a fair trade regulation?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[thenewguy2023]

IMO the way policy is written, it gives Rolex enough room to enforce it against an AD if it so chooses while staying clear of mediating specific transactions with the end customer. It’s there to protect their interests not ours.

[slide13]

Originally Posted by thenewguy2023

IMO the way policy is written, it gives Rolex enough room to enforce it against an AD if it so chooses while staying clear of mediating specific transactions with the end customer. It’s there to protect their interests not ours.

That is exactly how I read it to. AD's shouldn't partake in the forbidden practices....but if yours is, don't go calling Rolex because they're not going to get into it with the AD over your particular issue. If they notice a pattern of an AD doing it then they may, at their discretion, choose to act.

[sfwatchfellow]

So, if (virtually) nobody can buy one retail at an AD, then there is another route from Rolex to AD to available new online for thousands over retail. Someone does get, say, a $10K Rolex by buying it (behind the scenes) for say $12K from the AD, who has just made $4K profit, having gotten it from Rolex for $6K, plus the extra $2K. Then it appears online with no name on the card for $16K.