Are Rolex Owners Foolish and Immoral?

[Seibei]

Sounds more like envy to me than anything else.

[giorgio.a]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

. The kind of man (...) that if he wanted the shiny thing, then he could have it.

Everybody should be proud to be that kind of men, if they have worked hard to get there.

Also, a rolex AND doing good or investing are not mutually exclusive. He clearly doesn’t understand that some people have money to invest AND to treat themselves. Nothing wrong with it. And if this guy thinks that a mutual fund is a good choice of investment, what a sucker.

He’a clearly a judgemental idiot.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[cascavel]

I feel like he's describing me. And those are my better qualities.

[joli160]

I live in a country filled with such idiots

[GradyPhilpott]

The truth of the matter is that this author is pretty much a hack.

There's a market for "virtue signalling" articles that lean in a certain direction, so he picks an easy target, does a little internet research on Rolex watches, plugs in the buzzwords and bingo, he makes some bucks to pay the rent.

Although, he wants to sound knowledgeable about the subject of watches, his facts are off just enough to indicate that his knowledge is shallow.

I'm certainly not one to bash Seiko, but the comparison an SKX to any Rolex is laughable and virtually every frequent visitor to these boards can cite many examples of why.

Also, although it is an intangible property, there is the feeling that wearing a Rolex gives the owner that only an owner can truly understand and it is my feeling that these emotions are not the product of advertising hype.

The sense of pride coupled with the sense of achievement that comes with the acquistion of a Rolex and other high end watches is reinforced by the sheer quality of the product, as well as of the the designs that give one a sense of history, not to mention the way these design qualities feel on the wrist.

It is a multiplicity of factors that lead people to desire and acquire Rolex watches, or any high-end watch to which one can aspire and most are not as shallow as the author would have us believe.

His article could have been made much better if he'd directed it toward those greedy speculators who have put profit ahead of a sense of pride and accomplishment.

[usling15]

Nick the Socialist hypocrite really got us going there. Are those Walmart sunglasses ??

[002]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

Well, here's a guy who thinks that the very act of buying a Rolex, or I guess, any watch that costs more than $200, makes one both foolish and immoral.

Oh, the ignominy!

The Earth is dying and we Rolex owners are to blame!

Why I Want but Will Never Own the Best Watch Rolex Makes

Novelist Nicholas Mancusi goes to sleep and dreams of having an Explorer 1 on his wrist

...[I]f I had an Explorer, then that would mean that I was the kind of man who could spend $6,550 on a frivolous bauble, an act so foolish that it’s essentially immoral. The kind of man who didn’t waste time considering the amount of real good that could be done with that money, the wiser purchases, the mutual fund, the people who could be made happy, the gifts he could give, the lives he could change, or of the degradations on the planet that this exact desire for conspicuous consumption has wrought. The kind of man who could admit to himself that he was at base not that great of a guy, little more than a captive to his desires, and that if he wanted the shiny thing, then he could have it.

https://www.insidehook.com/article/w...h-rolex-offers

Yeah, I don't think you completely "got" that article.

He obviously lusts after the watch and knows too much about it, including forum based naming irritations, to hate them the way you describe. It sounds more like a critical thinking exercise to me. Maybe a way to validate getting one or accepting not being able to afford it now. Either way, I dont think its a bad people are responding.

"communist vs. capitalist? " I don't think so.

"Killing the earth" I don't think so either. I mean, come on, purchasing an SKX from amazon must be much worse for the environment.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by 002

Yeah, I don't think you completely "got" that article.

He obviously lusts after the watch and knows too much about it, including forum based naming irritations, to hate them the way you describe. It sounds more like a critical thinking exercise to me. Maybe a way to validate getting one or accepting not being able to afford it now. Either way, I dont think its a bad people are responding.

"communist vs. capitalist? " I don't think so.

"Killing the earth" I don't think so either. I mean, come on, purchasing an SKX from amazon must be much worse for the environment.

I would argue that it is you who has failed to fully understand the motivation behind the article, but you are welcome to your opinion.

The comment about the dying planet references this line in the article:

"...the degradations on the planet that this exact desire for conspicuous consumption has wrought."

From Wikipedia:

Environmental degradation is the deterioration of the environment through depletion of resources such as air, water and soil; the destruction of ecosystems; habitat destruction; the extinction of wildlife; and pollution. It is defined as any change or disturbance to the environment perceived to be deleterious or undesirable.[1] As indicated by the I=PAT equation, environmental impact (I) or degradation is caused by the combination of an already very large and increasing human population (P), continually increasing economic growth or per capita affluence (A), and the application of resource-depleting and polluting technology (T).[2][3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_degradation

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

I would argue that it is you who has failed to fully understand the motivation behind the article, but you are welcome to your opinion.

The comment about the dying planet references this line in the article:

"...the degradations on the planet that this exact desire for conspicuous consumption has wrought."

From Wikipedia:

Environmental degradation is the deterioration of the environment through depletion of resources such as air, water and soil; the destruction of ecosystems; habitat destruction; the extinction of wildlife; and pollution. It is defined as any change or disturbance to the environment perceived to be deleterious or undesirable.[1] As indicated by the I=PAT equation, environmental impact (I) or degradation is caused by the combination of an already very large and increasing human population (P), continually increasing economic growth or per capita affluence (A), and the application of resource-depleting and polluting technology (T).[2][3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_degradation

[Onikage]

There are a handful of bs homage brands that make an explorer lookalike for about £60. The cheap bearded £#%&.

[002]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

I would argue that it is you who has failed to fully understand the motivation behind the article, but you are welcome to your opinion.

The comment about the dying planet references this line in the article:

"...the degradations on the planet that this exact desire for conspicuous consumption has wrought."

From Wikipedia:

Environmental degradation is the deterioration of the environment through depletion of resources such as air, water and soil; the destruction of ecosystems; habitat destruction; the extinction of wildlife; and pollution. It is defined as any change or disturbance to the environment perceived to be deleterious or undesirable.[1] As indicated by the I=PAT equation, environmental impact (I) or degradation is caused by the combination of an already very large and increasing human population (P), continually increasing economic growth or per capita affluence (A), and the application of resource-depleting and polluting technology (T).[2][3]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Environmental_degradation

I guess there’s a fine line between Semantics and definitions.

No hate towards your comment btw.

[grimps]

You could also say that the purchase of that Rolex has put food on the table of the researchers that helped develop it , the watch makers that helped make it , the advertisers , the logistics guys , van drivers , the AD sales assistants , even the Grey market dealers plus however much tax and VAT helps the rest of society ect ect ect .
If people stopped buying stuff with their money the world would be in a lot worse place

[Devildog]

I'm wondering how many that have commented on here actually read the article?

Of course he's going to be facing a tough crowd on what is arguably an elitist forum.

He does have a point. We are spending $000's on frivolous baubles. As we do when we buy anything just because we can, or because we want to. But to do so is neither foolish nor immoral. It is simply selfish - in the truest sense of the word

He's also writing to provoke thought, discussion and opinion. Which he's done quite successfully I'd say

[002]

Originally Posted by Devildog

I'm wondering how many that have commented on here actually read the article?

Of course he's going to be facing a tough crowd on what is arguably an elitist forum.

He does have a point. We are spending $000's on frivolous baubles. As we do when we buy anything just because we can, or because we want to. But to do so is neither foolish nor immoral. It is simply selfish - in the truest sense of the word

He's also writing to provoke thought, discussion and opinion. Which he's done quite successfully I'd say

[Andad]

I will say to dori now.

As for the insidehook article that I didn’t bother opening.

[jaySL350]

I hazard a guess that what he spends at his stylist for looking after that tache,
would buy an explorer in a short time,,,

[Brew]

Interesting, thought provoking article. I'm sorry so many here are threatened by the author's perspective. I wonder, though, how he feels about wedding rings?

[Gary Busey]

mostly pricks, from what ive seen.
like new millionaires buying lambos....not everyone, but alot

[avalvo]

First, someone should get the author a cry closet and be done with it.

Articles like this point out how poorly informed some folks are and the internet gives them a platform to spew their ignorance. Free speech, like all good things, is often a double edge sword.

Yes, a luxury watch costs $6k, but that does not mean it's wasteful. That watch will hold its value over time, so the purchaser is making a prudent decision. It will run for many, many years - let's say 25 years with no need for a battery and no further cost to the environment. Some would argue its much better than replacing an Apple watch every few years and far less costly over the long haul and, again, better for the environment. That watch will be made once and serviced 2x over its life, with little to no raw material needed, waste or energy used in manufacturing. And, let's not forget that this luxury purchase and subsequent service intervals will help to make some skilled folks a decent to very good living. Folks who have worked hard to learn a craft. Last, it supports a company that has a philanthropic tilt, and sets an example for other Corp players, many of which are coming to value social good and governance.

Finally, who is this person to opine on my motivation, questions my dignity, or past judgement on my life or purpose because of a single purchase?

I leave that for you to decide.



Sent from my LYA-L29 using Tapatalk

[FATO]

The guy almost makes me want to just be lazy and not work hard....wait a minute....not work at all. I can sit on my behind and extend my hands out for free handouts, free college education, free healthcare. I won’t need a watch because I am not going to work so no need to be on time.......oh wait, I need the time to know when my favorite shows are on so I can sit on my free recliner and watch my free flat screen TV. If I am hungry I can go buy steak and lobsters with my food stamps. This is all going to be funded by all you Rolex owners on this forum. Sounds like a fair deal?

[SS Oyster]

Actually, according to this crazy new world order, money is bad. So, offloading $$$ for something that lasts and won’t ever be put into a landfill is as good as it gets. Therefore, Rolex owners are saints, bound to pass effortlessly through the pearly gates.

See how I used their logic against them?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[schoolboy]

Originally Posted by SS Oyster

Actually, according to this crazy new world order, money is bad. So, offloading $$$ for something that lasts and won’t ever be put into a landfill is as good as it gets. Therefore, Rolex owners are saints, bound to pass effortlessly through the pearly gates.

See how I used their logic against them?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You have a point.

Instead of buying the new iPhone every year or so, buy one sub and you already did better than the techy people


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mystro]

Originally Posted by SS Oyster

Actually, according to this crazy new world order, money is bad. So, offloading $$$ for something that lasts and won’t ever be put into a landfill is as good as it gets. Therefore, Rolex owners are saints, bound to pass effortlessly through the pearly gates.

See how I used their logic against them?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We think alike.

[schoolboy]

Dang. Gotta sell my watch now, he’s right!

Now I hope this dude doesn’t own any home bigger than a “tiny home” because all that we really need.

And he better not drive anywhere, because a bike is sufficient.

Also, he best be vegan, because consuming animals is not necessary and is destroying the planet.

If all the above are true, then I might listen to a talk by him. Seriously.

If not, then we just have different hobbies.

[Macnavara]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

Well, here's a guy who thinks that the very act of buying a Rolex, or I guess, any watch that costs more than $200, makes one both foolish and immoral.

Oh, the ignominy!

The Earth is dying and we Rolex owners are to blame!

Why I Want but Will Never Own the Best Watch Rolex Makes

Novelist Nicholas Mancusi goes to sleep and dreams of having an Explorer 1 on his wrist

...[I]f I had an Explorer, then that would mean that I was the kind of man who could spend $6,550 on a frivolous bauble, an act so foolish that it’s essentially immoral. The kind of man who didn’t waste time considering the amount of real good that could be done with that money, the wiser purchases, the mutual fund, the people who could be made happy, the gifts he could give, the lives he could change, or of the degradations on the planet that this exact desire for conspicuous consumption has wrought. The kind of man who could admit to himself that he was at base not that great of a guy, little more than a captive to his desires, and that if he wanted the shiny thing, then he could have it.

https://www.insidehook.com/article/w...h-rolex-offers

Thats it im selling everything i own

[ganagati]

Originally Posted by Macnavara

Thats it im selling everything i own

Sounds awfully capitalistic and profit-motivated of you. Have you learned nothing?

You’ll need to tap into your altruistic side. For practice, why don’t you try donating your watches. As a true friend, I will help you out by taking your BLNR.

[Macnavara]

Originally Posted by ganagati

Sounds awfully capitalistic and profit-motivated of you. Have you learned nothing?

You’ll need to tap into your altruistic side. For practice, why don’t you try donating your watches. As a true friend, I will help you out by taking your BLNR.

Lol...thanks for the kind offer....its in the mail for delivery tomorrow....enjoy

[GONZO2LR]

i started to read it....but i can't read nonsense..my brain won't let me...i couldn't get past 20 words...total trash....

[Gold Crown]

Foolish maybe. But if you have more money than a God then why not?

[Brny11]

Spending money is relative. Some people will never understand that. If I was worth 100 million and donated 1+ mill to charity along with time and effort, owned a nice watch and car combined worth 200k, am I immoral?

I get what he is saying. That 7000 can change a life and we wear it on our wrists. However, that doesn’t account for the rest of what we do.

He has a point. However, it is incomplete, narrow sighted and incredibly biased. I am also perfectly confident we can dig a bit and find hypocracy in his own lifestyle choices.