ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

tattooedfagin · 10 October 2012, 08:38 PM

Why have Satin when you can have Silk

thewatchguy93 · 10 October 2012, 08:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by superdog

I'm not all that put off by the prices. I'm not loaded, but for an extra couple of bucks, I don't mind the premium.

I've looked at, handled and even owned many different brands. I realize I may be a simpleton, but I don't feel such a quality difference on the upper level brands, but I do on the lower.

I think the quality is top notch and I love the styling of Rolex.

Its good you have your own view on the situation.. I agree about the quality.. It can only go "so far"..

Roger1079 · 10 October 2012, 11:01 PM

Plain and simple, because it is Rolex and they can. In 2008 my equivalent SS Sub Date (16610) cost $5850. The SubC (116610LN) that I got about a month ago was $8550. A new clasp, thicker lugs, and ceramic bezel hardly justify a $2700 price increase. So again, quite simply because it is Rolex and they can. Omega, Tag, Breitling, IWC, etc. all have offerings that offer more features for in some cases a lot less money, But they don't have the crown or the word rolex on the dial.

tom2517 · 11 October 2012, 12:29 AM

There is no watch brand with Rolex's combination of mass appeal and prestige. They are also probably by far the most profitable.

With their money they can easily make any complications, it's actually more difficult for brands like PP (not saying they want to) to scale up like Rolex. The equipment, technologies, and capitals required to produce 45,000 watches vs 800,000+ high quality watches are totally different. And which is why even Theirry Stern of PP wishes a chance to visit Rolex factory because he is curious how they do it.

Rolex is in a very unique position, how long can they stay there that I don't know, but its going to take a special company to take the throne away from them.

10 October 2012, 08:38 PM	#31
tattooedfagin "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2010 Real Name: Chad Location: the neighbourhood Watch: 1680 Red Posts: 2,262	Why have Satin when you can have Silk __________________ SS Sub Date (F) DSSD (V) Red Sub (Mk4) TRF Hall of Fame

10 October 2012, 11:01 PM	#33
Roger1079 "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Location: South FL Posts: 444	Plain and simple, because it is Rolex and they can. In 2008 my equivalent SS Sub Date (16610) cost $5850. The SubC (116610LN) that I got about a month ago was $8550. A new clasp, thicker lugs, and ceramic bezel hardly justify a $2700 price increase. So again, quite simply because it is Rolex and they can. Omega, Tag, Breitling, IWC, etc. all have offerings that offer more features for in some cases a lot less money, But they don't have the crown or the word rolex on the dial.

11 October 2012, 12:29 AM	#34
tom2517 "TRF" Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Location: Asia & US Posts: 1,551	There is no watch brand with Rolex's combination of mass appeal and prestige. They are also probably by far the most profitable. With their money they can easily make any complications, it's actually more difficult for brands like PP (not saying they want to) to scale up like Rolex. The equipment, technologies, and capitals required to produce 45,000 watches vs 800,000+ high quality watches are totally different. And which is why even Theirry Stern of PP wishes a chance to visit Rolex factory because he is curious how they do it. Rolex is in a very unique position, how long can they stay there that I don't know, but its going to take a special company to take the throne away from them.

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