My Daytona 116500LN Purchase agreement Contract

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by sensui

Not sure why the AD would even waste time with this.....not at all enforceable and the idea of telling someone what to do with their property after purchase is a bit comical. I do not encourage flipping but I won't deny that's what the market has become after Rolex sets the supply situation as such.....they are not naive enough to see things otherwise either, they know exactly what they're doing with the brand and how it "markets' their products.

i know of a few people who are blacklisted by UK AD's. Not enforceable? tell that to the guy who isnt allowed to buy watches anymore.

[lecorsaire]

Originally Posted by marc12

Very similar to the non-export agreement I signed when purchasing my Range Rover :P

It's a good thing they're making sure the watch is going to someone who will actually wear it and not flip it.

There was also a problem with Hyundai Genesis & Equus being exported to South Korea believe it or not. It was damaging their domestic dealers’ bottom line. Over there these cars carry lots of prestige and a hefty price tag like high-end Toyota/Lexus in Japan and they were being sold for way less in America to make inroads in the crowded $40k-$50k segment.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by marc12

Very similar to the non-export agreement I signed when purchasing my Range Rover :P

It's a good thing they're making sure the watch is going to someone who will actually wear it and not flip it.

yep... its your RR, but you cant do what you want with it. Same thing. Thats been going on for a long time and no one is rioting in the streets

[V25V]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

i know of a few people who are blacklisted by UK AD's. Not enforceable? tell that to the guy who isnt allowed to buy watches anymore.

Yes, the AD can not sell to someone but legally speaking, the AD would be screwed in court with that contract if they wanted to withhold the warranty card associated with the watch you purchased if/when you wanted to sell.

[johnnyjazz]

Don,t know how i would feel if while i was signing this, a guy walked in, bought a pm piece at a knockdown price and walked out without having to sign anything. Is this contract related to every Rolex model they sell ?

[lecorsaire]

Originally Posted by npalacio

Yes, the AD can not sell to someone but legally speaking, the AD would be screwed in court with that contract if they wanted to withhold the warranty card associated with the watch you purchased if/when you wanted to sell.

Unless they refuse to honor warranty service, what would be the grounds for the suit? They will release the card after a year. If you require warranty service in another country as highly unlikely as that is, a quick call to the AD where the watch was purchased will straighten everything out. They can also provide you with a letter with a photocopy of the card for this purpose.

[sensui]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

i know of a few people who are blacklisted by UK AD's. Not enforceable? tell that to the guy who isnt allowed to buy watches anymore.

That's really sad. I know that if one takes this in the court of law I'm sure the AD would sing a very different tune quickly......but hey who does that over a watch I get it.

Situation with supply has given ADs far too much leverage over the consumer....I'm in a situation right now with a local Patek AD that's playing a similar card and I'm not caving in....all the Rolex dealers I have relationships with I always strive for a win win.....I help you and you help me type of relationship.....you want my business? Glad to oblige if you show me you're willing to earn it. Alas, we don't live in a perfect world for a reason....keeps things interesting.

[lecorsaire]

Originally Posted by johnnyjazz

Don,t know how i would feel if while i was signing this, a guy walked in, bought a pm piece at a knockdown price and walked out without having to sign anything. Is this contract related to every Rolex model they sell ?

No, this is strictly for the steel Daytona and probably going to happen for some other steel models with high resale value.

[exador]

Of course as soon as a you get the warranty card back (after 1 year) you’re free to do whatever you want with the watch. The serial number won’t reappear until the next owner needs a service

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by sensui

That's really sad. I know that if one takes this in the court of law I'm sure the AD would sing a very different tune quickly......but hey who does that over a watch I get it.

Situation with supply has given ADs far too much leverage over the consumer....I'm in a situation right now with a local Patek AD that's playing a similar card and I'm not caving in....all the Rolex dealers I have relationships with I always strive for a win win.....I help you and you help me type of relationship.....you want my business? Glad to oblige if you show me you're willing to earn it. Alas, we don't live in a perfect world for a reason....keeps things interesting.

yeah, its a sad state of affairs. However i highly doubt my AD would do that to me. So its also about how strong your relationship is and how much they trust you. AD's are getting a lot of pressure from Rolex to vet customers which really shouldn't be their job in the first place but they are being held accountable for what their clients do with the watch after leaving the AD. Its a mess and the AD's are actually the ones in the worst position. They are stuck between a supply situation they don't control and customers angry abut these rules.

[Rsubnodate]

I see both sides but I think it’s a bit ridiculous. You aren’t leasing the watch it’s your purchase. Rolex could help decrease the grey markets insane prices by producing more watches. Instead they are putting it on the AD and consumers.

[RJRJRJ]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

yep... its your RR, but you cant do what you want with it. Same thing. Thats been going on for a long time and no one is rioting in the streets

It's not that they can't draw up an iron clad contract that would prohibit you from doing certain things after purchase, it's that the "contract" OP signed was so poorly written that it would never hold up in court save for the warranty card clause. And even then I would imagine a judge would look at the contract as a whole and just throw it out completely.

I would bet those contract that you have to sign with Ferrari or wherever, are very, very specific about everything you can and can't do. Specific time frames, specific sale-back amounts, probably even detailed provisions to cover something like financial hardship etc.

[lecorsaire]

Originally Posted by Rsubnodate

I see both sides but I think it’s a bit ridiculous. You aren’t leasing the watch it’s your purchase. Rolex could help decrease the grey markets insane prices by producing more watches. Instead they are putting it on the AD and consumers.

Producing more watches means that the SS Daytona is no longer the SS Daytona. The fact is a huge part of the appeal of this watch is its exclusivity. If that aura of unobtainable is gone, it ceases to be special. Look at the TT Daytona. If that were the limited one instead, things would be the other way around.

[Wcdhtwn]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

people sign all kinds of releases in the US. You have to agree not to sue before you go sky diving, you have to agree to arbitration before many companies will hire you, same goes for getting a cell phone or a credit card. All of this you willingly forgo your right to go to court. Purchaser agrees to the terms.

Yes, but a release from liability is very different than an agreement of terms to a buyer from a seller that they must not engage in certain behavior once they are the owner of an item for which they paid full price.

It is uncommon on a percentage basis that you will die if you go skydiving. I don't know but it's got to be 1 in 500K or it wouldn't be legal. But it has happened and the reality is you are choosing to jump from an airplane 1000's of feet above ground. And the company is only protected if the death of a customer is something outside of their control. If the company is negligent, packed the shoots wrong, flew too low, too high, dropped you over a dangerous landing area, etc. their release wouldn't protect them from anything. I bet this is the same for scuba diving, renting a race car to drive on a track, renting an airplane one intends to fly themselves, many other examples surely exist.

I admit I haven't read the fine print on my most recent iPhone purchase but I don't think I'm prohibited from selling it to another private party. There a companies in the US who specifically engage in the purchase of used cell phones to resell them. This isn't a practice Apple or Google, Samsung, LG, etc. are trying to stop. I can't imagine ever wanting to sell my own credit card to someone else. It may be illegal but it would also be epically stupid to do.

Agreeing to arbitration is a fairly common thing. There are advantages to both parties for a swift resolution to disagreements. That's true of employment contracts, real estate contracts, even the agreement I signed to purchase my franchise has an arbitration clause in it. If the agreement the OP signed included an arbitration clause in the event of a dispute of the adherence to the terms in the agreement then I'd see how that example fits here. But what would they arbitrate? There is no financial penalty. The warranty card goes to the OP after a year no matter what, that isn't conditional in the agreement.

Other high end luxury brands may impose similar purchase rules, as mentioned Ferrari, Ford for it's GT. I'd be willing to bet those agreements were written by a lawyer and would be enforceable in a US court, or arbitration. The agreement the OP signed is ridiculous as there is no financial penalty or forfeiture of property. The AD is actually excluding itself from selling to the OP in the future, not many retail businesses I can think of would find that a wise path to follow.

This agreement makes me think the AD is forgetting who the customer is. They are there for customers, not the other way round. I think this is bad business and more people would avoid these requirements and purchase elsewhere than be limited to what they can do with an item they paid for an own. But as this agreement is so poorly thought through it may not discourage anyone as it has no teeth.

[sco]

The year hold on the card is way too much for me.. My watch, my card...

[imageviewer]

The contract can't hold up in court with that type of chosen font.

[jrs146]

I can just visualize it now:

You're in a high-stakes poker game. You look at your cards and low and behold you're staring back at two beautiful Aces. You bet strong and everyone but one guy folds. In fact, he re-raises you all of your chips. Because you're playing at a very exclusive backdoor casino the rules are a little more liberal. So you push all your chips in and call out...
"I call you & re-raise you with my one week old white dial Daytona 116500!"

Your opponent looks at you funny...

"Where did you buy that beautiful watch?"

"I waited three years to have the privilege of buying this watch at XYZ Jewelers!"

"Well before I call your Daytona raise I'm going to need to know if you signed the AD mandatory agreement."

"Oh crud, I did! Can you hold on while I run over to the AD and sell them my watch back? I guess you're right, I'm unable to wager my watch as per our agreement. Hold the cards, I'll be back in an hour"

:

[Rsubnodate]

Originally Posted by lecorsaire

Producing more watches means that the SS Daytona is no longer the SS Daytona. The fact is a huge part of the appeal of this watch is its exclusivity. If that aura of unobtainable is gone, it ceases to be special. Look at the TT Daytona. If that were the limited one instead, things would be the other way around.

I have a SS Daytona so I agree with the lure of the Daytona. I think they can increase production enough to keep it exclusive while reducing grey market prices. Never going to eliminate these issue but it would help.

[lecorsaire]

Originally Posted by sco

The year hold on the card is way too much for me.. My watch, my card...

So you would never buy a vintage or used Rolex then? You won’t get the papers or card at all in most cases. In this situation the card will be released. It’s not like you’ll be looking at the card. You’ll be wearing the watch. B&P just get stored away.

[lecorsaire]

Originally Posted by Rsubnodate

I have a SS Daytona so I agree with the lure of the Daytona. I think they can increase production enough to keep it exclusive while reducing grey market prices.

I agree that they should ship more of them. I think a 2 year wait is enough time. I don’t think they should ever produce them in LVc or BLNR numbers.

[Cru Jones]

I'd be okay signing that if it meant getting the warch in a reasonable timeframe (under 3 months), not 3 years....

But, more importantly, congrats on an awesome watch!

[GSBC]

If someone's willing to be on a wait list for years to get one, I would imagine that someone would be happy to sign such an agreement.
Alternatively, would people on this good forum rather that AD do "market adjustments"?
If this piece is being sold at MSRP, and the demand is as strong as the Daytona is at the moment, this agreement should be no big deal.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by GSBC

If someone's willing to be on a wait list for years to get one, I would imagine that someone would be happy to sign such an agreement.
Alternatively, would people on this good forum rather that AD do "market adjustments"?
If this piece is being sold at MSRP, and the demand is as strong as the Daytona is at the moment, this agreement should be no big deal.

exactly. If you don't want hoops and rules and waiting, pay secondary prices. Simple.

[904VT]

Originally Posted by npalacio

But its not really that special..... and look at 911 GT3's these days selling way over retail. It happens and will continue to do so in the market. You do not really see Porsche (or dealers) doing much to change that, besides publicly saying they do not like it.

I have just about had it with AD's these days. I got a call from one locally this weekend while trying to source a SD43. Tells me I need to "start a relationship with them in order to get access to their list". That is a crock of shit. So I need to buy something else that I do not really want in order to buy something I do want? I might as well just buy from a reputable gray dealer and pay the premium!

Oh and who do the reputable gray dealers buy from? AD's who do not have the same position that these other AD's do on who they sell to and what they can/cannot do with it after purchase. If they want to do this sort of thing, then Rolex needs to get on board and make it that way across the board with all dealers. This way, the secondary market will not get access to pieces the average consumer cannot and they become accessible to us peons.

I agree it's a pain. Try getting in touch with some other ADs. Especially, those in smaller towns. You'll certainly come across an AD that wants your business for a SD43, but may take a while longer than in the past. Rather than a premium you could always see if the AD would give you a SD43 with purchase of OP39. Wouldn't costs much more than premium piece second hand.

Don't ever get into limited Pateks, because that will drive you insane with purchase applications etc. Rolex doesn't have to produce more watches, which is why we don't have Swatch type model of endless variations. No corporate profit goals for Rolex.

[Speed]

Some might even sign a non disclosure agreement.

Oh, I kid

[A.I.]

I'm 90% sure I know who this AD is and can assure others that not all AD's in Scotland value their customers like this. This has been their MO since new model Daytona was launched.

However a warning - these agreements might be uneforceable in law but good luck buying another Rolex if you do dispose of your watch within the first 12mo..

They will likely do the same with SS Pepsi

[MinMay]

Where do I pay and sign?

[Rsubnodate]

Originally Posted by lecorsaire

I agree that they should ship more of them. I think a 2 year wait is enough time. I don’t think they should ever produce them in LVc or BLNR numbers.

Agreed, I don’t want to see one in the case any given day.

[Vaxe]

This is great, I hope ALL ADs run this run. More to actual people who want them and 0 to the resellers

[Al1969]

Not sure I’d be okay signing this.
OP, So what reference does your soul get you?

Congrats on a great addition!