Rolex quality control

[xyz]

Hello,

I am new to this forum and wanted first to thank everyone for their posts which helped me in my decision to buy a Rolex lately.

I also wanted to share my experience regarding this purchase which did not go as well as I expected. Before I detail the story I may add that I have experience in buying this type of watch, have several ones of the same kind (other brands) and have my share of knowledge in fine watchmaking.

I have just bought a Sub-C a few weeks ago at a Rolex AD, in a Swiss city which counts two in total. The sales person presented the watch with no gloves and the glass had plenty of finger prints which did not give a first good impression. After a quick chat and comparison with the GMT and SDDS, I took the watch, full price, understanding that this new piece is in demand and a discount is impossible. Not a problem, I understand the law of supply and demand. First problem, the sales persons put in the box a Submariner brochure dating back to 1984 relating the benefit of the fliplock bracelet and other features which were nowhere near what I needed to know about the new purchase; but I did not say anything as I know I can find (and actually have) all information on the net.

Second and bigger problem that I noticed in the shop, the cyclop is not aligned with the date window. Taken by the joy of my new purchase, I must admit I did not say anything in the store, even wondering if the issue was rather with me. Once home, my 10x magnifier helped me confirmed this irregularity. Actually the cyclop's low edge is not parallel to the lower limit of the date window. Individuals around me also confirmed this impression with a naked eye. I came back to the store to show it to the watchmaker which first said that this was Rolex's smart trick to fight an otherwise parallax error when reading the date once the watch is on your wrist. Seeing my stupefaction, he later admitted the issue but said this was within the manufacturing tolerance, which I could not believe. I grabbed this occasion to have them notice that the brochure I had been given was outdated, to what they replied that this was the only thing they had.

I decided then to alert the mother company of this jewelry chain (a leading one in Switzerland) together with Rolex headquarters where I have a contact. Rolex replied first by apologizing and offering to send me the current brochure that normally follows the watch in the box; they said they would contact the store as well. The store replied via its local manager to propose an appointment, which I accepted. I was offered apologies, a second brochure (the store manager also admitted an inadequate sales process) and a sort of box with "Rolex" on to put my car keys. No comment. But most important they admitted the cyclop's problem and sent the watch back to Rolex factory for repair. They promised two weeks to get it back (which is unusually fast as we know), which expired today. I called and they asked me to be patient for another two weeks.

All in all this raises the question of quality control of both the watch and the sales process. These people should know that often such purchase is related to an event (promotion, birth, wedding, a collector's decision to increase his collection, etc) and that the experience in the shop plays its part of the feeling of joy or glory. Hence they should be extremely careful not to spoil the party! I am wrong? The second thing is that I do not know how a brand like Rolex for which "what shows" is for some more important than "what's inside" could let go out of the factory such a flawed item. I put it this way since they recognized it themselves.

Final point, which I can only take with a distant smile, the watchmaker told me: "This goes under warranty... (paused). Obviously".

Thanks for reading and apologies for a long message.

[NEW]

I would have returned it.

[chris russell]

any AD in Canada and you will be offered a double-digit discount without even asking. The best-known dealer in Toronto offers 22% with no haggling. This watch is not in such short supply as ADs would love to have you believe, (translation; they are lying to you), and the world is still in a recession.

Second, I run a business making luxury goods, and we have a strict policy: ANY product that arrives at the customer's home with a defect is REPLACED without question. That certainly includes misaligned hardware or built-in cosmetic flaws. Why should the customer accept the delays and inconvenience that go with 'warranty' coverage when the QC dept. did not do its job? The customer is given at least 2 weeks to discover any problems, and the benefit of any doubt is given to the customer. I don't see why a multi-thousand-dollar watch should be treated any differently.

[Idle Swede]

Welcome to the forum and a great introduction.

I'm surprised you walked out the door with the watch in the first place?

[Bigboss]

Sorry to hear that. My LV came with a bezel misalignment,a small dial problem and an annoying second click on the clasp. The store asked if i wanted a new one (4 weeks) or to have it repaired. RSC Sao Paulo fixed all the problems in 4 days

[jrpb]

thanks for letting us see into your deal, i hope it gets better for you. Once you have your watch you will be alot happier im sure and start enjoying a magnificent watch. What one did you get ? (colour type)

[SaddleSC]

Originally Posted by xyz

Second and bigger problem that I noticed in the shop, the cyclop is not aligned with the date window. Taken by the joy of my new purchase, I must admit I did not say anything in the store

I agree that it is frustrating to spend this much on a luxury good that prides itself on quality and have them seem unwilling to make it right.

HOWEVER, the fact that you noticed the defect PRIOR to taking delivery of the watch and still proceeded with the transaction places the true "cause" of your problems squarely on your shoulders.

In no way do I mean to sound harsh, but if something isn't right...don't take delivery of the watch. I know that initial thrill of a new acquisition can certainly cloud my judgement, but you ultimately were in the position to avoid all of this hassle by voicing your concerns at the time of purchase.

[The GMT Master]

I'm also surprised that no-one managed to pick up on the problem before you - this would have been checked at the QC stage, dispatch stage, as well as when it first arrived into the store, not to mention however many times someone handled it. I can understand your disappointment

[xyz]

Thanks all, indeed, for your replies. I agree with each and everyone. I have my share of responsibility in not voicing this early enough. I hope though I will erase this quickly from memory to enjoy it when it's back. I guess it takes a bit of the illusion of perfection which they aim at carrying in their communications, even if it is is fortunately only aesthetics in this case (and sales!).

[Tek]

Originally Posted by Idle Swede

Welcome to the forum and a great introduction.

I'm surprised you walked out the door with the watch in the first place?

Don't mean to be harsh but i agree

[hhh007]

The good part is after you get your watch back from Rolex it should be perfect and you will get many years of enjoyment from it.

[xyz]

I am wondering too! The answer (a tentative explanation) is threefold: 1) that needed a second check, though I could have asked the clerk, 2) I recently bought an IWC 5001 with a very slightly misaligned date (especially single digits for a trained eye) - the issue is known to most owners and can be lived with; I guess I expected the same and 3) I simply thought unconsciously that this was impossible, irrationally convinced that QC at Rolex would not let this go. If I am not mistaken, in psychology this is called bounded rationality.

Now, what does not kill me makes me stronger. Hopefully that works here too.