ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

jm433 · 27 March 2009, 10:27 AM

Man, I thought the watches unveiled by Rolex yesterday were terrible. Bling, bling and more bling. I don't want to be associated with a brand that's all about diamonds and flowers on dials.

One of rolex's great strengths was its commitment to its heritage and its consistency. The appearance of a DJ or a Sub from the 60s and one from the 1990s was pretty much the same. I feel like they are taking things too far now.

The emphasis is on size, precious metals, highly polished bracelets and diamonds. Rolex always had verions of its watches that were a bit flashy, but there were also the tool watches.

I feel like they've gotten away from that.

I had to wear my Omega today.

ippon20 · 27 March 2009, 10:29 AM

I have to agree. But I also think that Tudor is on to something with what they showed. Might have to look into acquiring that SDDS Tudor!

Art 1 · 27 March 2009, 10:30 AM

They still produce some classics.

Yume-sama · 27 March 2009, 10:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Art 1

They still produce some classics.

Yeah, it's not like they can come out with a new DD or Submariner every single year.

What do you expect them to do?

Call me when they discontinue the DD, Sub, Daytona...

Blimms · 27 March 2009, 10:48 AM

Seems as though Rolex is changing it's target market a bit. Those who have the money to spend right now (wealthy/rich) do not desire to cast their dollar vote on tool watches that may be aquired by everyone (everyone meaning us). Just read the threads, the vast majority of us are shopping pre-owned, which means Rolex itself isn't making any $$. With the timepieces we are purchasing new (<$10k), Rolex cannot sustain itself with the tool watches being sold. Only if their numbers were up could they possibly get by on tool watches and right now I think most every watch companies numbers are down.

MrCowboy99 · 27 March 2009, 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yume-sama

Yeah, it's not like they can come out with a new DD or Submariner every single year.

What do you expect them to do?

...

I expect them to come out with a Pepsi / Coke GMT

Art 1 · 27 March 2009, 11:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrCowboy99

I expect them to come out with a Pepsi / Coke GMT

I think they will once they figure a way to make red ceramic.

Trurolexer · 27 March 2009, 11:34 AM

Just wait for another Basel...

gregdolley · 27 March 2009, 11:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jm433

Man, I thought the watches unveiled by Rolex yesterday were terrible. Bling, bling and more bling. I don't want to be associated with a brand that's all about diamonds and flowers on dials.

One of rolex's great strengths was its commitment to its heritage and its consistency. The appearance of a DJ or a Sub from the 60s and one from the 1990s was pretty much the same. I feel like they are taking things too far now.

The emphasis is on size, precious metals, highly polished bracelets and diamonds. Rolex always had verions of its watches that were a bit flashy, but there were also the tool watches.

I feel like they've gotten away from that.

I had to wear my Omega today.

I like the bling, but those dials just look stupid. Don't like the diamond bezels either - they look too exaggerated.

Lion · 27 March 2009, 11:45 AM

I'm sorry so many members and Rolex buyers are disappointed with the new watch styles being displayed this year. I'm sure Rolex does market research and analysis to see what will be in demand and sell before they introduce the new line. And as for tool watches everyone knows that the SS versions are the last ones to come to market. So be patient and wait till next year for the SS Subs!!!

gregdolley · 27 March 2009, 11:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blimms

Seems as though Rolex is changing it's target market a bit. Those who have the money to spend right now (wealthy/rich) do not desire to cast their dollar vote on tool watches that may be aquired by everyone (everyone meaning us). Just read the threads, the vast majority of us are shopping pre-owned, which means Rolex itself isn't making any $$. With the timepieces we are purchasing new (<$10k), Rolex cannot sustain itself with the tool watches being sold. Only if their numbers were up could they possibly get by on tool watches and right now I think most every watch companies numbers are down.

x2.

Personally, I wouldn't buy a tool watch that costs thousands of dollars. But I _would_ spend thousands on a super-blingy, sexy watch.

bodybump · 27 March 2009, 02:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Blimms

Seems as though Rolex is changing it's target market a bit. Those who have the money to spend right now (wealthy/rich) do not desire to cast their dollar vote on tool watches that may be aquired by everyone (everyone meaning us). Just read the threads, the vast majority of us are shopping pre-owned, which means Rolex itself isn't making any $$. With the timepieces we are purchasing new (<$10k), Rolex cannot sustain itself with the tool watches being sold. Only if their numbers were up could they possibly get by on tool watches and right now I think most every watch companies numbers are down.

Very well said mike!!!!

bagel · 27 March 2009, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ippon20

I have to agree. But I also think that Tudor is on to something with what they showed. Might have to look into acquiring that SDDS Tudor!

I think the new tudor is looking nice esp the grandtour chrono, hydro 1200, and the hydronaut II chrono .....

harvey · 27 March 2009, 03:52 PM

personally i think rolex did me a favour! in these recession/depression times... they bought out nothing i fancy... so my money will remain in my pocket.

Lol-x · 27 March 2009, 03:58 PM

Well I was just in Taiwan, and couldn't find a Milgauss GV. So as much as they may need other models (not tool/sports models) Sports models, or at least some of them are still in short supply.

Although disappointing with the new releases this year from a sports/tool watch perspective, it is not entirely unexpected. Perhaps that is why there was not a stack of rumours on new models being released this year.
2007 saw the introduction of the Milgauss and YMII, 2008 saw the introduction of the DSSD and the DDII. This year we see the DJII, which will probably be a big seller.
So although this year has a lot of bling and not a lot of the sports/tool model releases except the TTSub, if we take it over a few years, I don't think one can really say Rolex has abandoned it traditional tool watch history and identity.

Just have to wait until next year.

topcat30093 · 27 March 2009, 03:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by harvey

personally i think rolex did me a favour! in these recession/depression times... they bought out nothing i fancy... so my money will remain in my pocket.

Harvey
Thats a good way of putting it.

I too felt no excitement when I looked at their new releases.

But I also have to agree with a number of other members, when they say that Rolex can't continue to bring out new models.

IMO they are not the only watch brand to be very quite on the "New Watch Model Front" this year.

Lets hope that they something in mind for 2010

Singslinger · 27 March 2009, 04:05 PM

Not too keen on the bling but I think the TT Subs look pretty nifty.

JJ Irani · 27 March 2009, 04:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by harvey

personally i think rolex did me a favour! in these recession/depression times... they bought out nothing i fancy... so my money will remain in my pocket.

Now that makes a lot of sense.

Even the new 41 mm DJ which I was so eagerly looking forward to, is very disappointing.

I was never interested in seeing that watch once more on the Oyster bracelet, but that's the only option available.

Hopefully, they come up with an attractive dial on the Super Jubilee bracelet.

Truth be told, the current 36 mm DJs are far better in every way, except for the size.....as far as my personal preference goes.

JJ

007Sub · 27 March 2009, 04:47 PM

I completely agree with JM43...since when did Rolex decide they needed to cater to 50 cent?

emmagee · 27 March 2009, 04:57 PM

That may be the strategy, but just how many folks out there want to buy a watch, any watch, encrusted with diamonds, etc? To me, it wouldn't matter how big my bank account might happen to be, I would never, I mean never, wear one a watch that looks like it belongs in a rap video.

As I've said before, IMO, even one diamond on a mans watch is one too many. I know some here like them and have diamond markers, bezels, etc, but I just can't see that many people that want over the top diamonds, which Rolex seems to be pushing.

ral · 27 March 2009, 06:01 PM

They build for everybody... some want bling. The fact that nothing new is interesting is not that big a deal. They have plenty of "older" models on their line-up that I don't have (hell I only have one).

In reality I will probably never own all the Rolex's I want (a millie, a Daytona, a Day-Date...). I wont worry about the new ones I don't want. I am still busy figuring out how to get the old ones I want.

cody p · 27 March 2009, 06:08 PM

after seeing what they did do, i'm more happy with what they didn't do, which is leave well enough alone with the rest of the models! imo.

SLS · 27 March 2009, 06:45 PM

Several of my friends want nothing to do with Rolex, they like Tag, Breitling, Panerai because they are trendy, I think Rolex is trying to appeal to a new & different demographic than in the past.
~Scott

gone-rolex-mad · 27 March 2009, 06:49 PM

Whatever happened to the understated look, the supersized DJ is another DDII bloated and ugly IMHO.

G.J · 27 March 2009, 07:02 PM

Hmm, I am also not very excited with the new models that Rolex showed the World in Basel...

But...maybe we could give it some time...perhaps it's all a matter of getting used to the new ones..

The GMT Master · 27 March 2009, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gone-rolex-mad

Whatever happened to the understated look, the supersized DJ is another DDII bloated and ugly IMHO.

I can't agree with you there, I'm afraid, the DJ II with the black baton dial is a thoroughly modern interpretation of the classic Rolex look. 41mm is an accepted size these days, and Rolex has to compete with the likes of Panerai, or fade into obscurity. Take Omega, for example, their model most comparable to the DJ is the Seamaster Aqua Terra, and that comes in a variety of sizes, their mid size being 36mm and their large size being over 40mm. I think we've been looking at the situation in the wrong way - the DJ II is there to be a large size DJ, whilst the classic 36mm Datejust is taking over the reigns as the mid size. What's wrong with offering more choice? That was the beauty of the DJ in the first place, to have a watch you could specify just how you want it, and now, you have a more substantial size to choose. The 36mm Datejust isn't going anywhere, and if I'm honest, Rolex have been dropping hints about making classic man sized watches unisex - are you telling me that the pink baton dial for the AK is for a man?

In conclusion, I think this is a very smart move for Rolex. They're opening up their market, tempting the fans of the oversize watch whilst still keeping a classic going. Hate it or love it, you have to admit it's a wise business decision.

nylawbiz · 27 March 2009, 08:55 PM

Don't you think they would rather sell one $100,000 watch, than a dozen $8,000 wacthes? Their margins are much, much bigger on precious metal and diamond watches; less units to support, cheaper to produce one watch than 12. It seems Rolex is always pushing the precious metal and/or diamond watches over the SS models. I guess this is not news and it is not a big surprise.

Kinda like many things in this economy: The mid-range market is dead, those who buy $100K watches are still able to buy them, but a lot less people who used to be able to afford a $8,000 watch, can still buy one. Same thing with homes, the high end is still selling around here, while the middle market is dead; and same thing with other collectibles: the truly rare and desirable collectibles are still selling for record prices, while the average stuff isn't fetching big numbers. For example,, the four stamp block that make up my avitar is worth around $5 million, and would sell it a heartbeat, if it went on the market today. $100 stamps are languishing in the market.

Psmith · 27 March 2009, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

I can't agree with you there, I'm afraid, the DJ II with the black baton dial is a thoroughly modern interpretation of the classic Rolex look. 41mm is an accepted size these days, and Rolex has to compete with the likes of Panerai, or fade into obscurity. Take Omega, for example, their model most comparable to the DJ is the Seamaster Aqua Terra, and that comes in a variety of sizes, their mid size being 36mm and their large size being over 40mm. I think we've been looking at the situation in the wrong way - the DJ II is there to be a large size DJ, whilst the classic 36mm Datejust is taking over the reigns as the mid size. What's wrong with offering more choice? That was the beauty of the DJ in the first place, to have a watch you could specify just how you want it, and now, you have a more substantial size to choose. The 36mm Datejust isn't going anywhere, and if I'm honest, Rolex have been dropping hints about making classic man sized watches unisex - are you telling me that the pink baton dial for the AK is for a man?

In conclusion, I think this is a very smart move for Rolex. They're opening up their market, tempting the fans of the oversize watch whilst still keeping a classic going. Hate it or love it, you have to admit it's a wise business decision.

Spot on, Chris

Cheers

Quicksilver · 27 March 2009, 10:01 PM

A pretty dissapointing show but I can't say I am surprised.

The DJ II is a bloated monster - hardly a DJ at all. But so long as Rolex continue to offer the far more elegant and classy 36mm then I have no objection to the DJ II as an option to those misguided souls (JJ excepted) that want a bigger DJ.

The maxi cased Subs are also pretty ugly. I like the way the bracelet gently tapers into the case on the classic Sub - that elegant look is totally obliterated with the maxi case.

I won't be buying any of these. Vintage is the way to go.

gregdolley · 27 March 2009, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 007Sub

I completely agree with JM43...since when did Rolex decide they needed to cater to 50 cent?

27 March 2009, 10:27 AM	#1
jm433 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Real Name: James Location: California Posts: 312	Basel disappointment Man, I thought the watches unveiled by Rolex yesterday were terrible. Bling, bling and more bling. I don't want to be associated with a brand that's all about diamonds and flowers on dials. One of rolex's great strengths was its commitment to its heritage and its consistency. The appearance of a DJ or a Sub from the 60s and one from the 1990s was pretty much the same. I feel like they are taking things too far now. The emphasis is on size, precious metals, highly polished bracelets and diamonds. Rolex always had verions of its watches that were a bit flashy, but there were also the tool watches. I feel like they've gotten away from that. I had to wear my Omega today.

27 March 2009, 10:29 AM	#2
ippon20 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Real Name: Dan Location: Orlando/NSB, FL Watch: 16710 (3186) Posts: 1,629	I have to agree. But I also think that Tudor is on to something with what they showed. Might have to look into acquiring that SDDS Tudor! __________________ Official Member "Perpetual 30" Las Vegas International GTG 2016 Official Member "WIS-CON" Las Vegas International GTG 2017 Official Member "WIS-CON" Las Vegas International GTG 2018 Instagram @pivot_and_spine

27 March 2009, 11:45 AM	#10
Lion "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Leo Location: Midwest Watch: GMT-II 16710 PEPSI Posts: 21,461	I'm sorry so many members and Rolex buyers are disappointed with the new watch styles being displayed this year. I'm sure Rolex does market research and analysis to see what will be in demand and sell before they introduce the new line. And as for tool watches everyone knows that the SS versions are the last ones to come to market. So be patient and wait till next year for the SS Subs!!! __________________ SS GMT-II 16710 PEPSI(Z-serial#) THE ONLY DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MEN AND BOYS IS THE PRICE OF THE TOYS!!! MontBlanc Meisterstuck Doue Silver Barley MontBlanc Meisterstuck Solitaire Doue Signum Proud Card Carrying Member of the Curmudgeons.....Yikes!!!

27 March 2009, 03:52 PM	#14
harvey "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: rolexforums.com Posts: 5,437	personally i think rolex did me a favour! in these recession/depression times... they bought out nothing i fancy... so my money will remain in my pocket. __________________ And ever has it been that love knows not its own depth until the hour of separation.

27 March 2009, 03:58 PM	#15
Lol-x Facilitator Join Date: Nov 2005 Real Name: Steve Location: Omnipresent Posts: 33,589	Well I was just in Taiwan, and couldn't find a Milgauss GV. So as much as they may need other models (not tool/sports models) Sports models, or at least some of them are still in short supply. Although disappointing with the new releases this year from a sports/tool watch perspective, it is not entirely unexpected. Perhaps that is why there was not a stack of rumours on new models being released this year. 2007 saw the introduction of the Milgauss and YMII, 2008 saw the introduction of the DSSD and the DDII. This year we see the DJII, which will probably be a big seller. So although this year has a lot of bling and not a lot of the sports/tool model releases except the TTSub, if we take it over a few years, I don't think one can really say Rolex has abandoned it traditional tool watch history and identity. Just have to wait until next year. __________________ *Most folks are about as happy as they make up their minds to be.* ~Abraham Lincoln Nothing compares to the simple pleasure of a bike ride. ~John F. Kennedy ROLEXploitation - yeah I'm a victim

27 March 2009, 10:30 AM	#3
Art 1 Banned Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Florida, Canada Watch: Rol/Seik/Tud/Omega Posts: 30,244	They still produce some classics.

27 March 2009, 10:48 AM	#5
Blimms Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Real Name: Mike Location: Florida Watch: Rolex/Breitling/BR Posts: 200	Seems as though Rolex is changing it's target market a bit. Those who have the money to spend right now (wealthy/rich) do not desire to cast their dollar vote on tool watches that may be aquired by everyone (everyone meaning us). Just read the threads, the vast majority of us are shopping pre-owned, which means Rolex itself isn't making any $$. With the timepieces we are purchasing new (<$10k), Rolex cannot sustain itself with the tool watches being sold. Only if their numbers were up could they possibly get by on tool watches and right now I think most every watch companies numbers are down.

27 March 2009, 11:34 AM	#8
Trurolexer Banned Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: USA Watch: 5513MaxiI+PreComex Posts: 18,421	Just wait for another Basel...

27 March 2009, 04:05 PM	#17
Singslinger "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: singapore Posts: 6,424	Not too keen on the bling but I think the TT Subs look pretty nifty.

27 March 2009, 04:47 PM	#19
007Sub "TRF" Member Join Date: Feb 2009 Real Name: Greg Location: USA Watch: Milsub Posts: 1,635	I completely agree with JM43...since when did Rolex decide they needed to cater to 50 cent? __________________ @true_patina @true.dome

27 March 2009, 04:57 PM	#20
emmagee Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Texas Posts: 237	That may be the strategy, but just how many folks out there want to buy a watch, any watch, encrusted with diamonds, etc? To me, it wouldn't matter how big my bank account might happen to be, I would never, I mean never, wear one a watch that looks like it belongs in a rap video. As I've said before, IMO, even one diamond on a mans watch is one too many. I know some here like them and have diamond markers, bezels, etc, but I just can't see that many people that want over the top diamonds, which Rolex seems to be pushing.

27 March 2009, 06:01 PM	#21
ral Member Join Date: May 2008 Location: Philippines Posts: 650	They build for everybody... some want bling. The fact that nothing new is interesting is not that big a deal. They have plenty of "older" models on their line-up that I don't have (hell I only have one). In reality I will probably never own all the Rolex's I want (a millie, a Daytona, a Day-Date...). I wont worry about the new ones I don't want. I am still busy figuring out how to get the old ones I want.

27 March 2009, 06:08 PM	#22
cody p "TRF" Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Canada Watch: Air-King 114200 Posts: 2,878	after seeing what they did do, i'm more happy with what they didn't do, which is leave well enough alone with the rest of the models! imo.

27 March 2009, 06:45 PM	#23
SLS "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2006 Real Name: Scott Location: GMT -7 Watch: GMT's & Sub's Posts: 10,401	Several of my friends want nothing to do with Rolex, they like Tag, Breitling, Panerai because they are trendy, I think Rolex is trying to appeal to a new & different demographic than in the past. ~Scott __________________ "The bitterness of poor quality remains long after the sweetness of lower price is forgotten." -Benjamin Franklin Member No. 922

27 March 2009, 06:49 PM	#24
gone-rolex-mad "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Location: Andalucia Spain Watch: WG daydate-Daytona Posts: 1,338	Whatever happened to the understated look, the supersized DJ is another DDII bloated and ugly IMHO. __________________ Choose to allocate your time to imbeciles at your peril!

27 March 2009, 07:02 PM	#25
G.J "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Planet Earth Posts: 2,094	Hmm, I am also not very excited with the new models that Rolex showed the World in Basel... But...maybe we could give it some time...perhaps it's all a matter of getting used to the new ones.. __________________ In Memory of JJ Irani

27 March 2009, 08:55 PM	#27
nylawbiz Member Join Date: May 2008 Real Name: Brian Location: New York Watch: too many Posts: 705	Don't you think they would rather sell one $100,000 watch, than a dozen $8,000 wacthes? Their margins are much, much bigger on precious metal and diamond watches; less units to support, cheaper to produce one watch than 12. It seems Rolex is always pushing the precious metal and/or diamond watches over the SS models. I guess this is not news and it is not a big surprise. Kinda like many things in this economy: The mid-range market is dead, those who buy $100K watches are still able to buy them, but a lot less people who used to be able to afford a $8,000 watch, can still buy one. Same thing with homes, the high end is still selling around here, while the middle market is dead; and same thing with other collectibles: the truly rare and desirable collectibles are still selling for record prices, while the average stuff isn't fetching big numbers. For example,, the four stamp block that make up my avitar is worth around $5 million, and would sell it a heartbeat, if it went on the market today. $100 stamps are languishing in the market.

27 March 2009, 10:01 PM	#29
Quicksilver "TRF" Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Real Name: David Location: London+Guangzhou Watch: ing watches Posts: 2,603	A pretty dissapointing show but I can't say I am surprised. The DJ II is a bloated monster - hardly a DJ at all. But so long as Rolex continue to offer the far more elegant and classy 36mm then I have no objection to the DJ II as an option to those misguided souls (JJ excepted) that want a bigger DJ. The maxi cased Subs are also pretty ugly. I like the way the bracelet gently tapers into the case on the classic Sub - that elegant look is totally obliterated with the maxi case. I won't be buying any of these. Vintage is the way to go. __________________ Rolex Sea Dweller 116600, GMT Master II 16710 (Pepsi) and 116710 BLNR, Daytona 116500LN, Submariner 14060M.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)