Tudor being positioned as "budget" brand?

[bruinmd]

Originally Posted by dmash

I could weigh in, but I’m not U.K. so I guess I can’t.

lol, sorry my man. I should have said our European friends could weigh in.
Fixed it

[Teetime71]

Entry level segment in the luxury range as others have stated. Built quite differently today vs. the past when they were assembled using the leftover bits of Rolex and were powered by ETA movements. Currently they are more of a standalone with in-house production. Yet their Wildorf DNA is clearly evident and echo Rolex form factors, however today they do push the design envelope as opposed to the more conservative Rolex lineage.

BTW - this thread needs some pics. I own a couple - old and new (1969 7019/3 and 2015 79220N)



I think they represent a very good value - high quality and finishing at this price point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[spurwar]

[QUOTE=Old Expat Beast;8548470]Tudors can be displayed with their prices because the prices are attractive, rather than off-putting. The salesman doesn't need to engage you and lather you up before telling the price, as with some other brands

This makes the most logical sense, especially if there is low brand awareness as others are stating.

[Case61]

Originally Posted by WJGESQ

Tudors look goofy.


If you can't or won't buy a Rolex, preserve your dignity and go Omega.

Jeez, I never realized how goofy my Big Block looked. Thanks for the heads-up!

[CRM114]

Originally Posted by LINVS

I don't recall seeing Tudor marketed much in the USA.

I seem to remember seeing quite a bit of Tudor marketing in the U.S. sometime back in the '80s. Then it sorta disappeared.

[Syed117]

I'm not a big fan of the modern Tudor designs, but they are solid watches at a decent price point.

Being called the "budget" Rolex brand isn't really a bad thing.

Rolex needs to throw some of their marketing muscle behind Tudor. Everyone knows Rolex. A lot of people know omega, Breitling, tag and some others. Very few people outside of wis circles know what Tudor is.

[srleadjb]

Originally Posted by Case61

Jeez, I never realized how goofy my Big Block looked. Thanks for the heads-up!

Yep, my Small Block is so goofy, I just can’t take it off!




Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Fabrice M]

I don’t see Tudor positioning themselves as a budget watch or a budget Rolex. I think Tudor is attractive for people that want a quality watch And to be low-key, or don’t like / want the Rolex “stigma” that comes with owning a Rolex. A Tudor is a little more subtle and probably appeal to younger people or anybdy that just want a solid quality watch. It’s also appealing for,people who like the “vintage” look but would never spend 15k for a vintage Rolex...

[liuk3]

Originally Posted by Syed117

.Very few people outside of wis circles know what Tudor is.

I think that is one of the appeals to me. My friends and colleagues have Rolex watches. None of them seem to have a Tudor or are aware of the brand.

[American Jedi]

Some may call Tudor a budget brand, and I thought so too. I own several Rolexes and recently made the decision that I wanted a '' beater '',but still Rolex blood. So it was between the explorer 2, and the Tudor Pelagos. With the explorer pushing 7K now, I decided to give the Palangos a try.

I no longer have the misconception that Tudor is budget or sub par. Now I think of it as a sleeper. Comparing it to my Sub C it has a longer power reserve wears more comfortably (since it is titanium), and is more accurate. To a half seconds a day actually! What's more, it has better lume, and is waterproof to 500m instead of only 300m. Don't get me wrong I still think the sub is the most iconic tool Watch of all time. But at its price ,it is hard to treat it like one, and the Tudor does everything the sub will do a little bit better.

I could go on but I think it is suffice to say that I cannot think of another brand that packs this much quality into a watch, at this low of a price. I think of it this way... If a person is just looking for a truly quality watch at a price that isn't hyped on brand, then Tudor
Has ''bang for buck'' in spades . If you are looking for that one special watch as a collectors piece, or a fan of the brand, then the Rolex will always be a great choice.

Just don't feel like you have compromised if you buy the Tudor. I think they are building a watch more like the one Rolex once produced. A quality Watch that is slightly more expensive than others, but is still attainable for most hard-working people.


It's always good to add pics to a thread

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by American Jedi

Some may call Tudor a budget brand, and I thought so too. I own several Rolexes and recently made the decision that I wanted a '' beater '',but still Rolex blood. So it was between the explorer 2, and the Tudor Pelagos. With the explorer pushing 7K now, I decided to give the Palangos a try.

I no longer have the misconception that Tudor is budget or sub par. Now I think of it as a sleeper. Comparing it to my Sub C it has a longer power reserve wears more comfortably, since it is titanium, and is more accurate. To a half seconds a day actually! Also it has better lume and it is waterproof to 500 m instead of only 300m. Don't get me wrong I still think the sub is the most iconic tool Watch of all time. But at its price. It is hard to treat it like one, and the Tudor does everything the sub will do a little bit better.

I could go on but I think it is suffice to say that I cannot think of another brand that packs this much quality into a watch, at this low of a price. I think of it this way... If a person is just looking for a truly quality watch at a price that isn't hyped on brand, then Tudor
Has ''bang for buck'' in spades . If you are looking for that one special watch as a collectors piece, or a fan of the brand, then the Rolex will always be a great choice.

Just don't feel like you have compromised if you buy the Tudor. I think they are building a watch more like the one Rolex once produced. A quality Watch that is slightly more expensive than others, but is still attainable for most hard-working people.

Very true

[mrs_LA]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

Here's an ad from a 1950s trade mag, explaining Rolex's original intentions with Tudor to dealers.

Oh my! That says it all...

“For those of your customers who look longingly at a Rolex Perpetual, but lack the means to buy one, show them the Tudor Oyster Prince.”




In all seriousness, Tudor has the prestige without the heavy price tag. It is by no means "budget" - when I hear the word "budget" on a luxury item, it has a negative connotation to it.

[dave023]

Originally Posted by DPE

look at the Tudor watch as a journey to buying up to a Rolex. Sometimes you invest in getting a future group of buyers !

or the opposite....I first got a Rolex and got interested in the Tudor brand after that...

[oldman2005]

Rolex-Tudor is like Grand Seiko-Seiko, or Lexus -Toyota. It is what it is, I don't buy a Toyota thinking I actually get a Lexus. One is a luxury status symbol one is not. But Tudor does make nice watches

[Roger Lococco]

Pasting my thoughts from another thread...

Gut feel. I think that Rolex brought in a management consulting firm during the 2015 downturn and has changed their strategy. Part of the recommendations being based on a view of current and future product mix demand in China. Over time, cede the stainless steel tool watch market to Tudor. In parallel, move more "upmarket" and fill in a void that is the combination of expensive + durable + PM watches at a price point lower than PP, VC, ALS, AP - at the same time leveraging the Rolex scale and mass-production cost advantages, along with the Rolex brand and sales distribution network.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[dmash]

Originally Posted by Syed117

I'm not a big fan of the modern Tudor designs, but they are solid watches at a decent price point.

Being called the "budget" Rolex brand isn't really a bad thing.

Rolex needs to throw some of their marketing muscle behind Tudor. Everyone knows Rolex. A lot of people know omega, Breitling, tag and some others. Very few people outside of wis circles know what Tudor is.

What do you call making Gaga and Beckham ambassadors? They're throwing plenty of money into marketing.....and if anything that illustrates exactly the market segment they're going after. People who know and follow them.

[koolkas]

Tudor attack the big gap segment price between 3500 usd - rolex entry price..which are very big market.. and current strong competition in thise segment are only omega.. the interesting are how swatch react? Omega keep go up chasing rolex, and who will chasing the tudor?

[dmash]

Originally Posted by bruinmd

lol, sorry my man. I should have said our European friends could weigh in.
Fixed it

Haha, only poking fun. FWIW, I honestly always see my local AD's case full of Tudor models.....ALWAYS.

Originally Posted by koolkas

Tudor attack the big gap segment price between 3500 usd - rolex entry price..which are very big market.. and current strong competition in thise segment are only omega.. the interesting are how swatch react? Omega keep go up chasing rolex, and who will chasing the tudor?

Either way, Rolex company as a whole wins

[jaisonline]

Originally Posted by dmash

Once you start considering a $4000 watch ‘budget’, you need to step out of WIS world for a sec. 90% of ‘regular’ people would consider that absolutely loony It’s not a budget brand, they’re just going after a different market segment.

Take bow sir.

[Wedders]

Originally Posted by WJGESQ

Tudors look goofy.


If you can't or won't buy a Rolex, preserve your dignity and go Omega.

There is too much snobbery around watch buying like “look at me I’ve got a Rolex” rather than wearing what you like. I know people who don’t like Rolex style, just go on the Omega forum if it’s not beneath you and you will find plenty.
Yes I like Tudor.

[MJ8]

I had never heard of patek, tudor, grand seiko, AP, zenith, JLC or most other brands before I bought my rolex and started getting into watches. I was always under the following impression Rolex > Brietling > Omega > Tag > Rado > Apple Watch > Designer Brands Gucci, Boss, Amarni, Seiko, Citizen > Sekonda, Casio. Little did I know.....

[HogwldFLTR]

Originally Posted by dmash

Once you start considering a $4000 watch ‘budget’, you need to step out of WIS world for a sec. 90% of ‘regular’ people would consider that absolutely loony It’s not a budget brand, they’re just going after a different market segment.

Pretty much what I was about to write. Many consider $100 a luxury to spend on a watch. Personally I wonder if Rolex is creating a new opportunity for people to own the Rolex brand; "Let them wear Tudors," as they place their "Rolex brand" in the "Patek rarefied air."

[1William]

I have been in the watch collecting/flipping game for more than 25 years and have probably owned at least 50 Rolex watches during that time frame. I have owned modern Platinum, YG, RG, WG, TT and SS. Rolex is what got me into the game and will probably always be my favorite. Depending on your outlook and watch knowledge Tudor is a great brand and value for the money. In it's own right Tudor makes its way in the watch world. Great value, good wear, good time keeping, sturdy and stylish. I currently own 7 Tudors and have the new GMT and TT on order. I can buy any watch I want under 100k and yet I consistently add Tudors. I get a good laugh at some of our newer members who match their lack of knowledge with being very forceful in opinions. Watch collecting for me is personal and not a competition. Other people can like things I don't and I don't need to put people down or judge them based on choices. Just my thoughts.

[dmash]

Originally Posted by Roger Lococco

Pasting my thoughts from another thread...

Gut feel. I think that Rolex brought in a management consulting firm during the 2015 downturn and has changed their strategy. Part of the recommendations being based on a view of current and future product mix demand in China. Over time, cede the stainless steel tool watch market to Tudor. In parallel, move more "upmarket" and fill in a void that is the combination of expensive + durable + PM watches at a price point lower than PP, VC, ALS, AP - at the same time leveraging the Rolex scale and mass-production cost advantages, along with the Rolex brand and sales distribution network.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I see what you’re saying and could agree to a point. However, I could never in a million years see Rolex getting rid of the Explorer, Daytona and Submariner, which all have a bit of historic significance. Therefore, exactly how far could Tudor ‘take over’ Rolex’s SS market?

[tmo8320]

Originally Posted by dmash

I see what you’re saying and could agree to a point. However, I could never in a million years see Rolex getting rid of the Explorer, Daytona and Submariner, which all have a bit of historic significance. Therefore, exactly how far could Tudor ‘take over’ Rolex’s SS market?

+1 on that point, dmash. In business school, we studied industry and competitor analysis in some depth. I agree that the SS models within Rolex are iconic to the point of being central to Rolex’s brand DNA.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ap1]

Something for everyone

[codecow]

Some models are certainly seem like a budget version of their big brother, but others are not. With that said, is there a world where someone with easy disposable income to get a sub or Pelagos chooses the Tudor, probably.

[brian15876]

Originally Posted by MSJMJ

Last weekend I was at the Wynn in Las Vegas and took a look at the Watches of Switzerland store. I noticed that all of the Tudor watches had price placards next to them, but did not see such evident pricing on any of the other watch brands. I didn't look exhaustively, as I meant to go back for a closer look but didn't make it. Similarly, I didn't get photos. It certainly appeared that they were promoting Tudor as a budget brand by prominently displaying the prices. Also, it gave the impression that they were having a hard time moving the Tudor watches. This store carries brands on the high end such as Patek, and on the lower end such as Breitling, but it really seemed like they were pushing the Tudors by displaying the pricing. Is there that little demand for Tudor? Is a price decrease coming?

Breitling is lower end now? Most of their popular models are in the same price range as the roles stainless models.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by brian15876

Breitling is lower end now? Most of their popular models are in the same price range as the roles stainless models.

IMO its the same misconception with IWC and it drives me nuts. They have a wide range of products and price points yet the perception is lower end because of the entry level pieces.

In house movement watches Big Pilot, Portugieser etc are absolutely at Rolex level. Their high complications are way above.

Breitling makes quartz and ETA movement watches along with more complicated in house stuff, so its wrong to classify the entire brand that low even if most of the offerings are not to my taste.

[eco8gator]

Tudor is the soul crushing realization to other Brands that Rolex is king of the ring!

Their newest GMT at 3.9k is still puzzling to me, I'd say it's worth more than they are asking and they are just maintaining the price to pull busniss from other brands.

Tudor is a luxury watch at a very good price, it's no compromise.