The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Forum > Rolex & Tudor Watch Topics > Rolex General Discussion

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 3 March 2019, 02:52 AM   #1
mangoseed
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Everywhere
Posts: 420
The real reason for the SS shortage: No real competition in the SS market

It surprises me that this is never brought up as a factor with regards to the Rolex SS shortage.

Omega does nothing but spam out limited editions while their flagship Seamaster has been outdated since the turn of the millennium.

5-10 years ago Breitling were at least somewhat respectable, but now they have the worst resale value I have ever seen and have completely turned their back on the history of the brand. The new ownership is a complete disaster.

What else is there? IWC maybe, but it is a bit of a specific taste. Other than that there are just niche brands like Zenith, JLC etc. I suppose you could consider Grand Seiko.

Rolex is the only solid choice in the current market, even more so if you want a quality bracelet.
mangoseed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 02:57 AM   #2
Dr Watches
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: NY
Posts: 544
True. Most brands are trash.
Dr Watches is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 02:58 AM   #3
Etschell
"TRF" Member
 
Etschell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: FL
Watch: platinum sub
Posts: 15,884
Hublot big bang crash.
__________________
If you wind it, they will run.

25 or 6 to 4.
Etschell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 03:03 AM   #4
ndls
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Vancouver/Seattle
Posts: 400
I swear the only competition in my mind is Grand Seiko. And I would consider GS as a complimentary to a solid Rolex collection.

I only started this journey 1.5 years ago, and I genuinely wanted to seek other companies. Truthfully, Rolex SS just fit the bill. Can’t stop loving my Sub!
ndls is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 03:17 AM   #5
MTBer
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: USA
Posts: 537
I kinda feel bad for Omega. Ignoring resale value, my biggest point of contention with them is their insistence on continually redesigning product lines every couple years rather than letting designs stick around long enough to become iconic then making gradual, conservative changes as needed. From a strictly horological perspective, what do they need to do in order to compete with Rolex? Their METAS program is industry-leading, and their basic movement is orders of magnitude more resistant to magnetism than Rolex’s purpose built “antimagnetic” watch.

To some people, if it doesn’t say Rolex on the dial it automatically loses regardless of technical merit. How do you compete with that?
MTBer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 03:18 AM   #6
Dr Watches
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: NY
Posts: 544
I started around 2000 and there were so many compelling alternatives. There were nicer watches at similar prices or nearly as nice watches at half the price.
Dr Watches is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 03:19 AM   #7
Dr. Robert
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
Dr. Robert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Real Name: Bob
Location: U.S.A.
Watch: 1655
Posts: 64,297
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Watches View Post
True. Most brands are trash.
a Rolex is a Rolex, the rest are just watches.
__________________
Founder & Card Carrying Member of the Global Association of Retro-Grouch-Curmudgeons
Dr. Robert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 03:46 AM   #8
Wristwatcherboy
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: London, UK
Posts: 233
Breitling have in fact not turned their back on the history of the brand, but rather the complete opposite. They are bringing out re-releases of vintage pieces and if you knew anything about them you would know that their last few tent pole releases have been very closely inspired and related to watches in Breitlings rich history. And it is exactly the “new ownership” which is responsible for this.

For years past Breitling actually had turned their back on their history, preferring instead to churn out massive and garish fully polished watches instead of referencing their rich heritage and back catalogue of beautiful watches. But this has all changed now, under their new management.

Perhaps before you go criticising every other brand apart from Rolex, it would very much help if you were slightly more informed about them than what you appear to be.
Wristwatcherboy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 03:46 AM   #9
csaltphoto
"TRF" Member
 
csaltphoto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: US
Watch: sub
Posts: 2,429
I don't know why it's so hard to find another watch that looks as good. Part of what I like about Rolex is they are (Mostly) classic and non-blingy. They get a lot of design notes right. And a lot of it is very subtle stuff. I would happily sell off my sub if I could find something else that cost less but was as nice and that worked as well. And I'm not talking copies/homages. I'm talking an original design that is different but just as nice. And that has a decent movement.
csaltphoto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 03:52 AM   #10
dtwer
"TRF" Member
 
dtwer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: midwest
Watch: DJ 41
Posts: 1,507
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTBer View Post
I kinda feel bad for Omega. Ignoring resale value, my biggest point of contention with them is their insistence on continually redesigning product lines every couple years rather than letting designs stick around long enough to become iconic then making gradual, conservative changes as needed. From a strictly horological perspective, what do they need to do in order to compete with Rolex? Their METAS program is industry-leading, and their basic movement is orders of magnitude more resistant to magnetism than Rolex’s purpose built “antimagnetic” watch.

To some people, if it doesn’t say Rolex on the dial it automatically loses regardless of technical merit. How do you compete with that?
I agree. Rolex plays the long game and also has the discipline to not get distracted by the short-term market fluctuations.
dtwer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 03:57 AM   #11
~JJ
"TRF" Member
 
~JJ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Chicago
Watch: explorer
Posts: 2,292
Quote:
Originally Posted by mangoseed View Post
It surprises me that this is never brought up as a factor with regards to the Rolex SS shortage.

Omega does nothing but spam out limited editions while their flagship Seamaster has been outdated since the turn of the millennium.

5-10 years ago Breitling were at least somewhat respectable, but now they have the worst resale value I have ever seen and have completely turned their back on the history of the brand. The new ownership is a complete disaster.

What else is there? IWC maybe, but it is a bit of a specific taste. Other than that there are just niche brands like Zenith, JLC etc. I suppose you could consider Grand Seiko.

Rolex is the only solid choice in the current market, even more so if you want a quality bracelet.
Respectfully disagree on the Breitling note. The management is doing a great job releasing new models that are sized under 44mm, classic designs that speak to their heritage, reduced polishing every bit and releasing reliable in-house movements that Tudor is using in their current BB chrono line.
~JJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 04:00 AM   #12
tyler1980
"TRF" Member
 
tyler1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Houston
Posts: 17,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by mangoseed View Post
Rolex is the only solid choice in the current market, even more so if you want a quality bracelet.
i disagree.

I think my Omega is a nicer watch than my Rolex's. Truly i do. They are not Rolex's though so they dont have that same buzz around them which lets be honest, it matters.

Why does it matter? scarcity, brand awareness, marketing, value retention. All of that is enhanced with the current situation making them even more attractive.

Based solely on the watch a Rolex isn't that special
__________________
Instagram: tyler.watches
current collection: Patek 5164A, Patek 5524G, Rolex Platinum Daytona 116506, Rolex Sea Dweller 43 126600, Rolex GMT II 116710LN, AP 15400ST (silver), Panerai 913, Omega Speedmaster moonwatch, Tudor Black Bay (Harrods Edition)
tyler1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 04:00 AM   #13
mbalmz
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
 
mbalmz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Real Name: marc
Location: nyc
Posts: 1,366
Quote:
Originally Posted by mangoseed View Post
It surprises me that this is never brought up as a factor with regards to the Rolex SS shortage.

Omega does nothing but spam out limited editions while their flagship Seamaster has been outdated since the turn of the millennium.

5-10 years ago Breitling were at least somewhat respectable, but now they have the worst resale value I have ever seen and have completely turned their back on the history of the brand. The new ownership is a complete disaster.

What else is there? IWC maybe, but it is a bit of a specific taste. Other than that there are just niche brands like Zenith, JLC etc. I suppose you could consider Grand Seiko.

Rolex is the only solid choice in the current market, even more so if you want a quality bracelet.
I posted this response in the Breitling forum version of this thread but since it looks like this is the right one I'll put the same response here--

I think it's true seamasters don't engender the same kind of crazy excitement that submariners/GMTs do, but they are very, very much not "outdated".

I also think it's weird to refer to brands like Zenith and JLC as "niche"--those are great brands with a ton of history and cache. The fact that you shrug those brands off as "niche" I think betrays the fact that you really just want a stainless steel watch from a brand that's as iconic and has as much history but at the same time is as high-end and universally recognizable a brand as Rolex, without paying an AP/PP pricepoint. Which just means you want a Rolex. Which is obviously a totally fine and wonderful thing to want (I want them too!) but this has very little to do with there not being competition.
mbalmz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 04:01 AM   #14
blown5.0
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 416
Contrary to some thoughts in this thread, there are plenty of other watchmakers who have beautiful pieces worthy of consideration. I think a lot of us are sort of brainwashed into thinking what a watch should look like based on Rolex's brilliant marketing.
blown5.0 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 04:06 AM   #15
TswaneNguni
"TRF" Member
 
TswaneNguni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Real Name: Chris
Location: .
Watch: Daytonas/Subs/GMTs
Posts: 12,609
Quote:
Originally Posted by mangoseed View Post
It surprises me that this is never brought up as a factor with regards to the Rolex SS shortage.

Omega does nothing but spam out limited editions while their flagship Seamaster has been outdated since the turn of the millennium.

5-10 years ago Breitling were at least somewhat respectable, but now they have the worst resale value I have ever seen and have completely turned their back on the history of the brand. The new ownership is a complete disaster.

What else is there? IWC maybe, but it is a bit of a specific taste. Other than that there are just niche brands like Zenith, JLC etc. I suppose you could consider Grand Seiko.

Rolex is the only solid choice in the current market, even more so if you want a quality bracelet.
The reason for the shortage is the low MRSP .Up the price and things will settle.
TswaneNguni is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 04:13 AM   #16
oldman2005
"TRF" Member
 
oldman2005's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: norcal
Posts: 3,031
Lots of competition for SS sport. Rolex is stronger in the +$12k watch but probably can't compete with other in the lower price SS steel sport, maybe that's why they're concentrating on their higher profit margin DJ/TT/PM products. I once worked for a big company which only enter a market if they were the top 3, if their market share is smaller than that they won't compete. Look around you, companies usually shred the unprofitable/low-profit product lines, ie Ford is exiting the sedan market concentrating on SUV, trucks,...
oldman2005 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 04:18 AM   #17
Paul_I
"TRF" Member
 
Paul_I's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,448
I posted in the previous identical thread in the Breitling section but I don't believe Op is very informed or the ones calling thousand dollar watches "trash." This is why the Rolex crowd gets a bad reputation.
__________________

Paul_I is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 04:21 AM   #18
Dr Watches
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: NY
Posts: 544
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Robert View Post
a Rolex is a Rolex, the rest are just watches.
in 2000'ish, there were so many compelling alternatives to Rolex. The IWC 3536 from back then has better case and dial work than any modern Rolex. It also had vastly more WR than a Sea Dweller at the time.

Now, IWC's update is much crappier while Rolex today is nicer than Rolex in 2000.

The OP's point is really well made, and now that I've thought about it I'm not sure why it didn't occur to me

Watches today are sillier, larger, more expensive, and generally less desirable than they were even 10 years ago. While Rolex is just rolling on not sucking (though they have some goofy new models too).
Dr Watches is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 04:21 AM   #19
Roleplay
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Asia
Posts: 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTBer View Post
I kinda feel bad for Omega. Ignoring resale value, my biggest point of contention with them is their insistence on continually redesigning product lines every couple years rather than letting designs stick around long enough to become iconic then making gradual, conservative changes as needed.
This is the very reason why I personally think Rolex should slow down on their novelties. Since 2015, they've been churning out so many new things, it's got to take its toll eventually. I think if they release a Coke only one year after Pepsi, it's a wrong move in my opinion. How many variations of the GMT can the market take before it becomes ridiculous?
Roleplay is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 04:21 AM   #20
tyler1980
"TRF" Member
 
tyler1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Houston
Posts: 17,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul_I View Post
I posted in the previous identical thread in the Breitling section but I don't believe Op is very informed or the ones calling thousand dollar watches "trash." This is why the Rolex crowd gets a bad reputation.
OP seems to be looking at brands with money as the only criteria. If thats the criteria, he isn't wrong.

I dont think its a valid argument as its quite a narrow focus
__________________
Instagram: tyler.watches
current collection: Patek 5164A, Patek 5524G, Rolex Platinum Daytona 116506, Rolex Sea Dweller 43 126600, Rolex GMT II 116710LN, AP 15400ST (silver), Panerai 913, Omega Speedmaster moonwatch, Tudor Black Bay (Harrods Edition)
tyler1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 04:23 AM   #21
Dr Watches
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: NY
Posts: 544
Quote:
Originally Posted by tyler1980 View Post
i disagree.

I think my Omega is a nicer watch than my Rolex's. Truly i do. They are not Rolex's though so they dont have that same buzz around them which lets be honest, it matters.

Why does it matter? scarcity, brand awareness, marketing, value retention. All of that is enhanced with the current situation making them even more attractive.

Based solely on the watch a Rolex isn't that special
Most Omega are about 20% too thick/large. The classic Speedmaster Pro being one exception. There's a reason why 2500D POs trade at prices as high (or higher) than their replacements in similar condition.
Dr Watches is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 04:25 AM   #22
brian89
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: qc
Posts: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTBer View Post
I kinda feel bad for Omega. Ignoring resale value, my biggest point of contention with them is their insistence on continually redesigning product lines every couple years rather than letting designs stick around long enough to become iconic then making gradual, conservative changes as needed. From a strictly horological perspective, what do they need to do in order to compete with Rolex? Their METAS program is industry-leading, and their basic movement is orders of magnitude more resistant to magnetism than Rolex’s purpose built “antimagnetic” watch.

To some people, if it doesn’t say Rolex on the dial it automatically loses regardless of technical merit. How do you compete with that?
THIS!

omega has so much potential
brian89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 04:25 AM   #23
iamorlando
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: NYC
Posts: 47
Recently bought a DSSD in my home country. The ad there, who has been selling Rolex for 30 years, asked me if it was true that the DSSD was in short supply. I told him yes, in London and ny nobody would even put me in a list. As far as this ad knew, Rolex didn’t want discounts on ss pieces. Beside that everything was same as before, supply was tighter but not nearly as tight as the bigger markets. I got a 1k discount on my James Cameron and took it home about a month later :-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
iamorlando is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 04:25 AM   #24
Paul_I
"TRF" Member
 
Paul_I's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA
Posts: 1,448
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Watches View Post
Most Omega are about 20% too thick/large. The classic Speedmaster Pro being one exception. There's a reason why 2500D POs trade at prices as high (or higher) than their replacements in similar condition.
Regarding thickness, that's a subjective opinion.
__________________

Paul_I is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 04:26 AM   #25
brian89
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: qc
Posts: 240
Patek is a solid brand but very expensive
Unless your very rich or dont have a family to support good luck
brian89 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 04:28 AM   #26
Dr Watches
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2019
Location: NY
Posts: 544
Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul_I View Post
I posted in the previous identical thread in the Breitling section but I don't believe Op is very informed or the ones calling thousand dollar watches "trash." This is why the Rolex crowd gets a bad reputation.
I have had a huge number of non-Rolex watches pass through my collection.
Current Richemont IWC is most definitely trash compared to pre-Richemont IWC. Their quality, service, and designs are so vastly inferior.

Take a look at Omega's product offerings today versus 2005. The quality is there but so many of the designs are just... trash. Even Omega fans admit it.

Rolex
Grand Seiko
Tudor for cheap stuff
AP
Patek

Most of the other brands have been mismanaged into a shallow image of their past selves. Do feel free to inform me though. I'd love to hear from another pre internet collector.
Dr Watches is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 04:28 AM   #27
MTBer
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: USA
Posts: 537
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roleplay View Post
How many variations of the GMT can the market take before it becomes ridiculous?
All of them, if they can’t be purchased anyway
MTBer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 04:34 AM   #28
Turnaround
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 186
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndls View Post
I swear the only competition in my mind is Grand Seiko. And I would consider GS as a complimentary to a solid Rolex collection.


I would have said the same thing until I got one. Everything that was posted as wrong with the Snowflake, my example had. Misaligned hands, the GS were off center and not in line with each other and a few other less noticeable problem. Hugely disappointed on QC, what Rolex is famous for and GS was supposed to be.

But I do agree this the thread topic. Rolex wears the crown for a reason.
Turnaround is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 04:38 AM   #29
123Blueface
"TRF" Member
 
123Blueface's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: USA
Watch: All
Posts: 5,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wristwatcherboy View Post
Breitling have in fact not turned their back on the history of the brand, but rather the complete opposite. They are bringing out re-releases of vintage pieces and if you knew anything about them you would know that their last few tent pole releases have been very closely inspired and related to watches in Breitlings rich history. And it is exactly the “new ownership” which is responsible for this.

For years past Breitling actually had turned their back on their history, preferring instead to churn out massive and garish fully polished watches instead of referencing their rich heritage and back catalogue of beautiful watches. But this has all changed now, under their new management.

Perhaps before you go criticising every other brand apart from Rolex, it would very much help if you were slightly more informed about them than what you appear to be.
+1

Also,
Too much emphasis by too many on “resale”. Ponder it well before you buy it, enjoy it, keep it is my motto.
Other than Rolex, all other mass produced watches will depreciate.
__________________
Rolex 228235 DD40 Olive, 126710BLRO, 116710BLNR, 116613LB, 116500LN White, 126610LN, 116500LN Black, 126610LV, 116610LV, 126334 Blue Diamond
Breitling Navitimer 01, Cartier Santos Large
123Blueface is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 3 March 2019, 04:41 AM   #30
tyler1980
"TRF" Member
 
tyler1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Houston
Posts: 17,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Turnaround View Post
I would have said the same thing until I got one. Everything that was posted as wrong with the Snowflake, my example had. Misaligned hands, the GS were off center and not in line with each other and a few other less noticeable problem. Hugely disappointed on QC, what Rolex is famous for and GS was supposed to be.

But I do agree this the thread topic. Rolex wears the crown for a reason.
a sample set of 1 is most likely a fluke. Plenty of one off Rolex purchasers who would have the same story. Because its their only one they would think the QC is exceedingly bad.

By almost all accounts GS is on an entirely different level than Rolex as far as finishing and details.
__________________
Instagram: tyler.watches
current collection: Patek 5164A, Patek 5524G, Rolex Platinum Daytona 116506, Rolex Sea Dweller 43 126600, Rolex GMT II 116710LN, AP 15400ST (silver), Panerai 913, Omega Speedmaster moonwatch, Tudor Black Bay (Harrods Edition)
tyler1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

OCWatches

Wrist Aficionado

My Watch LLC

WatchesOff5th

DavidSW Watches

Takuya Watches


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.