Interesting WIS conversation, PP Vs Rolex, Name recognition

[TheVTCGuy]

Was with a couple other WISes earlier this week, and we had a very interesting discussion about Rolex and Patek. Actually, the topic was your Grail watch, would you rather have an All Gold Rolex, or a SS Patek, considering similar pricing. One WIS said the AG Rolex, while another chose the PP. Nothin really incredible about that, we all have different goals, but the reasons for the AG Rolex was not what you would think.

My thought was, someone would pick the Gold Rolex because of the Precious metal, this was obvious, but the reason he gave was completely different. He said he would choose the Rolex because the average person (non-WIS) had never heard of Patek, where everyone in the world had heard of Rolex. I agree with his conjecture that a non-watch enthusiast had probably not heard of Patek, and didn’t realize they were arguably the finest watch maker in the world, but asked it the name-recognition was really the reason he chose Rolex over an (arguably) finer timepiece like a PP. Before I get to his answer, let’s jump to the other WIS that chose PP.

He was adamant, that he would much rather own the finest timepiece he could afford, and (in his opinion) the superior quality of a PP outweighed the Precious metal value of an AG Rolex. He expressed the watch was for HIS enjoyment, and the fact that non-WISes would not recognize the name was not only NOT a detriment, but an advantage.

The Rolex choice person, stated (paraphrasing) The Rolex is a fine watch, and what makes it more enjoyable is that it is universally recognized as a fine timepiece, and for him, that made his choice over the PP.

I hope I have explained the conversation clearly, but the bottom line is there were two opposite ends of the spectrum, as I see it anyway. One WIS, although of course appreciated the Rolex quality and being a fine timepiece, weighed the recognition from general population as being a very high asset, SO MUCH SO HE WOULD EVEN TAKE A SS ROLEX OVER A SS PP. The other WIS didn’t care if anyone recognized the name of his watch (again, actually seeing that as an asset), it was the superior quality of the timepiece itself that made the deciding factor.

It really caused me to think. The scenario started as a PM Rolex versus a SS Patek, but veered towards name-brand recognition. It made me question myself actually, for I admit, when non-WISes ask what kind of watch I am wearing, and I answer Rolex, you can see the recognition in their response that I have a fine (expensive) timepiece. If the situation were different, and they asked, and I responded Patek Phillipe, (most likely) they would not have the recognition of it being a superior quality (and again, expensive) timepiece.

I did a little sould-searching…. Is it the name “Rolex” or more importantly, people’s recognition of what I own that fuels my desire for these timepieces? I KNOW for a fact that it is not THE reason, but am trying to come to terms with how much that weighs in to my love for the brand as opposed to say, Omega, or Breitling, or even Tudor.

What do you think? How much does the recognizability of a Rolex, as a fine and expensive timepiece, by a non-WIS, influence your love for the brand and buying decision making?

PS Please don’t say it weighs in at absolutely nothing, I would find that hard to believe. It could be a very very small amount, but I think we are all proud to wear and show what is the most recognized watch brand in world at least a tiny tiny bit. Further more I don’t think there is anything wrong with that.

[HogwldFLTR]

Strangely, I've come close to trading the Platona for a Patek and found that once I got the Patek on my wrist it didn't ring true as a grail. Rolex is so well built and literally could survive a trip to hell and back on my wrist. I don't know of any other luxury watch which is as attractive and robust. That truly make Rolex the number one choice for me.

[Tim Plains]

It weighs in at absolutely nothing. I wear a Submariner because I like the watch/brand and don't care what others think, nor do I try showing it off, I only wear it out with a long sleeve or jacket. I also don't care about resale value, another main driver for many, and would still wear it if resale was pennies on the dollar.

As for Rolex vs. Patek, PP doesn't interest me in the slightest. Sure, I appreciate their long history but the designs do nothing for me. The Nautilus, and every watch with an integrated bracelet, looks too feminine for my liking and I think "that's a girls watch" any time I see one despite it costing more than many people's homes. lol

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

Was with a couple other WISes earlier this week, and we had a very interesting discussion about Rolex and Patek. Actually, the topic was your Grail watch, would you rather have an All Gold Rolex, or a SS Patek, considering similar pricing. One WIS said the AG Rolex, while another chose the PP. Nothin really incredible about that, we all have different goals, but the reasons for the AG Rolex was not what you would think.

My thought was, someone would pick the Gold Rolex because of the Precious metal, this was obvious, but the reason he gave was completely different. He said he would choose the Rolex because the average person (non-WIS) had never heard of Patek, where everyone in the world had heard of Rolex. I agree with his conjecture that a non-watch enthusiast had probably not heard of Patek, and didn’t realize they were arguably the finest watch maker in the world, but asked it the name-recognition was really the reason he chose Rolex over an (arguably) finer timepiece like a PP. Before I get to his answer, let’s jump to the other WIS that chose PP.

He was adamant, that he would much rather own the finest timepiece he could afford, and (in his opinion) the superior quality of a PP outweighed the Precious metal value of an AG Rolex. He expressed the watch was for HIS enjoyment, and the fact that non-WISes would not recognize the name was not only NOT a detriment, but an advantage.

The Rolex choice person, stated (paraphrasing) The Rolex is a fine watch, and what makes it more enjoyable is that it is universally recognized as a fine timepiece, and for him, that made his choice over the PP.

I hope I have explained the conversation clearly, but the bottom line is there were two opposite ends of the spectrum, as I see it anyway. One WIS, although of course appreciated the Rolex quality and being a fine timepiece, weighed the recognition from general population as being a very high asset, SO MUCH SO HE WOULD EVEN TAKE A SS ROLEX OVER A SS PP. The other WIS didn’t care if anyone recognized the name of his watch (again, actually seeing that as an asset), it was the superior quality of the timepiece itself that made the deciding factor.

It really caused me to think. The scenario started as a PM Rolex versus a SS Patek, but veered towards name-brand recognition. It made me question myself actually, for I admit, when non-WISes ask what kind of watch I am wearing, and I answer Rolex, you can see the recognition in their response that I have a fine (expensive) timepiece. If the situation were different, and they asked, and I responded Patek Phillipe, (most likely) they would not have the recognition of it being a superior quality (and again, expensive) timepiece.

I did a little sould-searching…. Is it the name “Rolex” or more importantly, people’s recognition of what I own that fuels my desire for these timepieces? I KNOW for a fact that it is not THE reason, but am trying to come to terms with how much that weighs in to my love for the brand as opposed to say, Omega, or Breitling, or even Tudor.

What do you think? How much does the recognizability of a Rolex, as a fine and expensive timepiece, by a non-WIS, influence your love for the brand and buying decision making?

PS Please don’t say it weighs in at absolutely nothing, I would find that hard to believe. It could be a very very small amount, but I think we are all proud to wear and show what is the most recognized watch brand in world at least a tiny tiny bit. Further more I don’t think there is anything wrong with that.

Hi Paul

Here's my take on it.

The individual who chose the Patek is a true WIS because he chose a watch watch because of what it was.

The individual who chose the AG Rolex was not, in fact, a true WIS, because he chose a watch because of what it represented.

I've been into watches and Rolex since the early 80's. Back then basically no one knew, or cared about "Rolex" other than probably National Geographic readers or professional divers.

The fact that now my watches are "insta"ntly recognisable to a far, far larger section of the public is very much a negative for me, but then I don't buy anything to impress others.

So I won't say the recognisability weighs in at nothing - because it does. But its a negative.

[brandrea]

Rolex is known the world wide by just about everyone, have to give them that. Patek is lesser known by comparison.

You can argue the pros and cons of either brand.

In my humble opinion Patek is more of a connoisseurs brand, so I agree with the first friend

[alphadweller]

Like many members of this forum, I have a multibrand collection, hence recognizability plays no part in the buying process. People around me are not into watches, doesn't matter what I wear. My last acquisition was a VC.

[Shadow Play]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

Strangely, I've come close to trading the Platona for a Patek and found that once I got the Patek on my wrist it didn't ring true as a grail. Rolex is so well built and literally could survive a trip to hell and back on my wrist. I don't know of any other luxury watch which is as attractive and robust. That truly make Rolex the number one choice for me.

This sums it up for me. I’d also add that although I understand the rich history of PP I would have thought they could have made their ‘sports’ models more waterproof and with a better power reserve.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Devildog

Hi Paul

Here's my take on it.

The individual who chose the Patek is a true WIS because he chose a watch watch because of what it was.

The individual who chose the AG Rolex was not, in fact, a true WIS, because he chose a watch because of what it represented.

Beat me to it

[joli160]

Admittedly I bought my first Rolex DD for the name only. It was the only higher brand I knew at the time and famous for all the wrong reasons in my circle. I had to have one.

Only afterwards I really started to appreciate the quality and sturdiness.
Considered many times to look at other brands but I always come back to Rolex.
The feeling on the wrist of a typical PP Nautilus and Aquanaut stainless watch do nothing for me.

Monetary value aside I would pick a Submariner instead of one of those.
The feel of a Rolex just oozes robustness, hard to beat.
I am hooked.

[MrGoat]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

Rolex is so well built and literally could survive a trip to hell and back on my wrist. I don't know of any other luxury watch which is as attractive and robust. That truly make Rolex the number one choice for me.

Lee hit the nail on the head.

As a side note, the hyped Pateks do absolutely nothing for me. IMO the nautilus looks like it was created on another planet.


Sent from my Apple privacy invasion product

[brandrea]

True story … I went to a wedding in Biel Switzerland back in the day.

Relatively new to watches I wore my SD16600. It was my only good watch, and I figured I’d fit right in with the Swiss watch crowd. One evening the groom and his wedding party took a group of us out for fondue and he was presented with a WG Patek Calatrava … no idea the reference.

The talk at the table amoung the group was how lovely and classic the time piece was in comparison to those “garish” Rolex that wear like a “tank”.

Awkward moment

[Driver8]

Originally Posted by Devildog

The individual who chose the Patek is a true WIS because he chose a watch watch because of what it was.

The individual who chose the AG Rolex was not, in fact, a true WIS, because he chose a watch because of what it represented.

This ^ 100%.

From a personal perspective, I own a number of watches by a number of different brands, and outside of close friends and family, no-one knows how into watches I am - my work colleagues certainly don't.

I don't make a big fanfare about them, I tend to keep them hidden away under my sleeves (which is nice an easy to do here in the icy UK!), and I HONESTLY don't care if people notice them or not. In fact, I'd rather people didn't notice them! I genuinely buy and wear them for my own enjoyment.

[beshannon]

Originally Posted by TheVTCGuy

He was adamant, that he would much rather own the finest timepiece he could afford, and (in his opinion) the superior quality of a PP outweighed the Precious metal value of an AG Rolex. He expressed the watch was for HIS enjoyment, and the fact that non-WISes would not recognize the name was not only NOT a detriment, but an advantage.

This is exactly where I am.

[JC316]

People used to buy Rolex because the watches were well-made and symbolized achievement. Usually at the end of a long career.

The WIS and Rolex owner in the past is very different from today's WIS/ "collector."

Rolex is still well made but I wonder what it symbolizes now. Especially when I see people share their large Rolex collections.

It is true, the average person has no idea what PP is and there is no argument that Rolex is king when it comes to brand recognization. So if what other people think is important to you, get the Rolex.

Me personally, there isn't anything in the PP catalog, past or present that appeals to me. So Id probably choose a Rolex over any PP offering.

Best, perfect, all very subjective.

[ijpx]

One is obviously part of the investor crowd, while the other is a snob “collector”.

[ROlesorusLEX]

With regards to what a watch IS vs what a watch REPRESENTS:

I'd make the claim that most Rolex watches represent some aspiration that most of us don't fulfill at any point in our lives.

I own a Pepsi, but I don't fly jets across timezones. It represents the aspiration to do so.

I own a Sea Dweller, but I've never been diving in my life. The depth numbers represent for me a cool capability that I'll never chase.

My DD is a remarkably beautiful timepiece that, like it or not, represents success and wealth to 99% of the world, just like it does for the guy in the OP's anecdote. But I'm not the President or CEO.

I'd caution against placing a value judgement on what defines a WIS. People enjoy watches for reasons other than their true intended capabilities. If those reasons are aspirational instead of functional, so be it.

Rolex marketing, even in the "tool watch" era decades ago, leveraged aspiration quite frequently.

Sent from my NE2215 using Tapatalk

[Chester01]

We live in a world where people feel they need recognition, likes if you will to feel alive. That is why social media has become so big. Recognition these days tops almost anything. Rolex has become almost a calling card or signal to others that hey look at me I have money. It’s become synonymous with conspicuous consumption sadly and people crave that attention. The meaning or symbol of the watch especially on todays age where very few wear these for the time has become even more important which is why Rolex dominates.

[S.Explorer]

Not all Rolex watches are obvious, it's part of what makes an Explorer or GMT LN appealing to me and likely others. Not keen on PP designs.

[rolexandlange]

I've waffled on adding a Nautilus or Royal Oak to the collection, but the deeper I dive the more overrated I feel they are. Throughout their 50 years or so of existence they have mostly lived on the periphery, niche products that often times were poor sellers. And the nail in the coffin for me is how smug I find the brands. Every time I read about the Stern fella or the AP family it leaves me wanting less.

Contrast this to Rolex. Absolutely great timepieces and what an accomplishment as a brand; desired the world over from the Sultan of Brunei to the accountant in Idaho. And the cherry on top is their robustness, accurate timekeeping, and comprehensive after sales service network. I get so much pleasure out of looking at my watch's timekeeping after a week of wear and seeing how accurate it remains. And if not, a service takes 8 weeks, not many months to a year.

Lastly, I live in a poor backwater town called San Francisco without a lot of money being thrown around, so the brands Patek and AP have ignored it and do not really sell in this place, other than a small closet at Tiffany's where one might find 3 ladies Pateks.

[Bladeshot]

I wear Rolex because I prefer the designs, although I do also have PP and AP.

Your question reminds me of brand value. Apple was the most valuable brand in the world, during 2021, at $263B. That represents the dollar value advantage Apple has when selling against competitors. Apple has a huge leap ahead of others. And so does Rolex, for most people. Branding… that’s where your friend finds a lot of value.


Just another WIS who loves to trade.
IG @bladeandwatch1

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by ROlesorusLEX

I'd caution against placing a value judgement on what defines a WIS.

And yet you've just made a judgement yourself about what aspirations a particular reference represents, based entirely on your personal viewpoint.

I too have a GMT Master - a CHNR. I have no aspiration to fly jets across time zones. I have no need for a watch to track different timezones. I have a smartphone that does that in a more legible fashion. I just really like the aesthetics of the watch and I love rose gold.

I have a Sea Dweller - and whilst I have done some diving, I have no aspiration to be be a commercial saturation diver. I just really like the aesthetics of the watch.

I have a BB58 Blue. Not because I "aspired" to owning a sub (I've had two and traded them both) but, yep, you guessed it, because I just really like the aesthetics of the watch.

I have a few Seikos and a number of G Shocks. All for exactly the same reason.

My purchase decisions are made entirely on what I like or what I need. Not because of some aspiration or association. Which probably makes me the stuff of marketing department nightmares.

[rolexpatek363]

I own three steel Rolexes (114300; 16610; 5513) and a PP 5712 1/A, and the Patek is on a completely different level. I also have an FPJ, which makes the PP look a bit ordinary, but that's another story. I used to own a platinum DD as well, but sold it after a couple of years because it wasn't getting worn.

If the question is gold Rolex vs my 5712, then I'd far sooner take the Patek, they are better watches. In fact, I think I prefer steel Rolexes to gold ones.

[OG1982]

So is the WIS that chose a Rolex purely because of what it means to others, really a WIS? In my opinion, absolutely not.

He/she is into watches for all of the wrong reasons! 'Look everyone, see how wealthy I am'... This sums up an increasing part of the watch buying public, people buy these watches to flex and the perceived kudos to others, not because they truly appreciate them.

[train-time]

Originally Posted by Devildog

Hi Paul

Here's my take on it.

The individual who chose the Patek is a true WIS because he chose a watch watch because of what it was.

The individual who chose the AG Rolex was not, in fact, a true WIS, because he chose a watch because of what it represented.

I've been into watches and Rolex since the early 80's. Back then basically no one knew, or cared about "Rolex" other than probably National Geographic readers or professional divers.

The fact that now my watches are "insta"ntly recognisable to a far, far larger section of the public is very much a negative for me, but then I don't buy anything to impress others.

So I won't say the recognisability weighs in at nothing - because it does. But its a negative.

I have to agree 100%. If I have my choice to obtain a true grail it would be a Patek, although it would not be a SS version, it would be a PM Patek complication.

I came close to selling a SS Daytona and my Pepsi years before the pandemic for a RG Patek 5146R. That was when they could be obtained brand new and for a decent price. I still regret not having made that move and it would have been my only watch going forward.

[macrowatch]

How great of a time is it to be a watch lover with so many robust choices of who we choose to impress? (I mean this sincerely)

Whatever floats your boat choice - pick your brand here.

PP for the WIS crowd.

FPJ for the even more WIS crowd.

JN Shapiro for independent crowd.

And space panda meteorite Daytona for everyone.

So many great choices right now. More philosophical, I think it’s a journey and process, not a static decision. If money is limited, most tries one thing like PM Rolex and then another like Sport Patel before understanding in themselves what they really like. And then they get older and tastes change for them again.

[1William]

Interesting fact scenario and just taking it for what was presented I would say both parties are WIS. It depends on what type of person you are and what your individual tastes are. The value you place on recognition of your timepiece to others and the manner that you wear watches. I admire PP and have been close on some purchases over the years but have never been there. Same with AP but I have owned a VC before. I drank the Rolex Kool-Aid more than 30 years ago and I am still a huge fan of the brand. When I first bought one, a Submariner, it was about look at what I got and I took a lot of pride in ownership and wear. I was a much younger person and still trying to find my way in the world and saw the Rolex as a mark of my success. This went on for a long time and I walked up to PM and everything in between. Funny thing happened along the way, I guess I grew up/found my way/got over myself, how ever you would like to label it. And just focused on what I like in watches. Style, performance, design, value and some others I am sure but it still left me with Rolex. Using a metric that is unique to me I find the Rolex models as a whole to work better for me.

As an older person now I also don't make a lot of judgements and I try to appreciate what is mine and also what other have and prefer. When the right PP comes along I will buy it. But that can also be said for most other brands. To me, both of the people in the OP's story are WIS, just for different reasons and for different brands. It is all about the watches and having fun, at least for me.

[JRell]

I am sorry, I am sure there are those that could care less if a non-watch person doesn’t know what Patek is. But let’s be real, name recognition matters, and Rolex is the king of branding. For me I just like the look of Rolex better. I do like the nautilus, but they are unobtainable and SS watches north of 50/100k is just plain stupid.

[duquephart]

Only one of your friends is WIS.

[watchwatcher]

My head starts to spin in these type threads where people discuss ad nauseam for pages why one thing is better than another. Or why it's better to have one thing than another...or what category you fall into if you like one thing over another...you get the gist.

As for me, I wear the watch(es) I like, regardless of what name is on the dial or what metal it's made from.

I know, crazy, right?

[the_natural]

This is a fun topic, in part because of the sorts of responses it would bring out (particularly in the "no effect whatsoever" crowd).

I find myself thinking along these lines, though perhaps a little tangentially, right now in fact, but in an intra-Rolex way. I'm three days into owning my new BLRO, which I think is my favorite model of them all, but still I'm on the list for a Daytona, and keep telling myself I want one, though I suspect it's because it can't be had.

Back to the original topic, when I bought my first Rolex in 2017 (Explorer), the name recognition mattered to me a lot more than it does now. I sold that watch to help fund a business I bought (mistake!), but now have a Sub and this GMT.

As has been said already in this thread, I also like the design of Rolex more than so much else on the market, but I also feel like they're good value (ignoring any resale or value retention aspects). The fitment of the bracelets is superb, the overall feel is great, they're of course durable, and they're generally really accurate as well.

It's easy to talk about the Rolex brand and how they're just good at marketing (which they are); but to focus so much on that, or to dismiss the brand because of it, unjustly ignores the actual benefits Rolex has to offer: tech improvements made over the years, the general usefulness of the watches, and all the other attributes I just mentioned above. I think this is what makes Rolex hard for people (or maybe just WIS in particular); on one hand, everyone knows Rolex: so that's a demerit. On the other hand: they're freaking good watches: well who wouldn't want that?

If you're in the "the Rolex brand didn't factor in" camp, I think there's an argument to be made that you could be wearing a modern Tudor instead. Tudor of today is at least 80% of their Rolex cousins. And I don't mean this in a judgmental way -- spend your money however you like.