Why the AD hate?

[teck21]

There appears plenty of dissatisfaction towards ADs for their ‘shenanigans’, and to be honest I don’t understand why they should be blamed for woes not of their doing.

For one thing, they are profit maximising entities. They aim to make as much money as they can, no different from any other business at all. Yet they seem hated in a way other businesses are not, and I find that incredibly unfair to them.

Firstly, they are unable to determine what they receive from Rolex in every shipment. They receive what they receive, and do what they can with it. All of them wished they could satisfy the demands of every customer that walked in, but the scarcity of supply simply means they cannot.

They are also not allowed to sell above MSRP, and every idiot knows that the popular pieces can currently command prices well beyond MSRP.

I therefore put it to you AD haters, why should they sacrifice their own profit (by way of bundling or relationship building) in order for you to enjoy a watch from which they all know they will be ‘losing’ money from by selling it to you purely at MSRP?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Calatrava r]

[QUOTE=teck21;9644769]TI therefore put it to you AD haters, why should they sacrifice their own profit (by way of bundling or relationship building) in order for you to enjoy a watch from which they all know they will be ‘losing’ money from by selling it to you purely at MSRP?


How exactly are they losing money selling at MSRP? What about all the watches sold at MSRP that drop 50 percent out the door. Who should bear that loss. Hard to understand your reasoning.

[teck21]

[QUOTE=Calatrava r;9644789]

Originally Posted by teck21

TI therefore put it to you AD haters, why should they sacrifice their own profit (by way of bundling or relationship building) in order for you to enjoy a watch from which they all know they will be ‘losing’ money from by selling it to you purely at MSRP?





How exactly are they losing money selling at MSRP? What about all the watches sold at MSRP that drop 50 percent out the door. Who should bear that loss. Hard to understand your reasoning.

It’s very simple. They are forced to sell all their sports models at prices well below what the market is currently willing to pay.

This is a fact.

If you cannot see how this is losing money, you should not even engage in this conversation.

Those other watches you speak of, they lose no money on each sale at all, which is pretty much what any retail business is about. The buyer buys the loss.

All of this is very rational behaviour by a business. Again if you cannot grasp this concept, please stay away.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Runfar]

oh man teck.....really???

[teck21]

Originally Posted by Runfar

oh man teck.....really???

What’s your point?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[RobearH]

[QUOTE=teck21;9644807]

Originally Posted by Teck21

It’s very simple. They are forced to sell all their sports models at prices well below what the market is currently willing to pay.

This is a fact.

If you cannot see how this is losing money, you should not even engage in this conversation.

Those other watches you speak of, they lose no money on each sale at all, which is pretty much what any retail business is about. The buyer buys the loss.

All of this is very rational behaviour by a business. Again if you cannot grasp this concept, please stay away.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Problem with your argument is they are working both ends and feeding the grey market by selling to them at MSRP bet.

[EddyG]

Because of 'the list'

[peterp]

In monopoly when there is more demand you increase the price without inreasing production. They do not increase substantialy the price nor output and clients money are not going into other watch brands. Strange balance continous.

[Brew]

Rolex and the ADs have a false advertising crossed with a bait and switch enterprise going on, "Come buy this new GMT." You go to the store, "Sorry, no GMTs if you don't buy this bauble too. But there's a list for you, if you'd like." Etc.

Not that I really care, as you can see by the watch list to the left.

[teck21]

[QUOTE=RobearH;9644829]

Originally Posted by teck21

Problem with your argument is they are working both ends and feeding the grey market by selling to them at MSRP bet.

Yes, and for the AD’s who do so, why do they do that?

To maximise profit, and which business does not wish to maximise profit?

They aren’t allowed to charge more than MSRP, so they do it via a roundabout way of dealing with greys, or bundling, or forcing customers to build relationships with them.

My point is very simple, they are merely trying to maximise profit in whatever they can given the supply and pricing constraints they face.

Profit maximising is why every business exists.

Why should they take the fall for regular customers being unable to purchase any piece they want?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[teck21]

Originally Posted by Brew

Rolex and the ADs have a false advertising crossed with a bait and switch enterprise going on, "Come buy this new GMT." You go to the store, "Sorry, no GMTs if you don't buy this bauble too. But there's a list for you, if you'd like." Etc.

Not that I really care, as you can see by the watch list to the left.

But you have noticed Rolex advertisements never specifically and actually tell you what’s available at any given time.

They just show models in their line up, and describe them.

There is no law that says only readily or
presently available pieces can be advertised.

These ads are about creating desire, not promising availability. Sure it can be damaging to customer goodwill, but it certainly is not illegal. One can argue it crosses some ethical line, but even that may be tenuous.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Brew]

Originally Posted by teck21

But you have noticed Rolex advertisements never specifically and actually tell you what’s available at any given time.

They just show models in their line up, and describe them.

There is no law that says only readily or
presently available pieces can be advertised.

These ads are about creating desire, not promising availability. Sure it can be damaging to customer goodwill, but it certainly is not illegal. One can argue it crosses some ethical line, but even that may be tenuous.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You asked why the hate. Some don't draw the line at the law to get their hate mojo cooking.

[teck21]

Originally Posted by Brew

You asked why the hate. Some don't draw the line at the law to get their hate mojo cooking.

Yes, I can understand the indignation people feel when they can’t get the pieces they desire at an AD.

The only point to my post is that ADs face severe constraints beyond their control. I just think they have come in for very unfair criticism for their behaviour, which is quite frankly normal for any business.

But yes, not being able to purchase something one ‘deserves’ can really smart!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[18●20●22●▼●2●4●6]

Originally Posted by EddyG

Because of 'the list'

so true...

I am on "the list" for about 1 year coming up this June with a major AD that has multiple doors. I put down a deposit too and was told in-writing that my spot is #7, then now I am at #15 or so with the reason that was so annoying that I don't want to relive.

The last word is that 1-1.5 year. So, by this Christmas, I may be lucky....

[pepsiretail]

You make valid point, especially if the AD is having a tough time with their other brands.

They know the score. I was in an AD with my Pepsi and the salesman, who is a very charming guy, asked me to show my watch to a couple. When I obliged he said

“Whoever sold him that watch gave him ten thousand dollars »

So the question has become, why should they be so generous to you and not someone else?

[NavalFlight]

I’ve got no problem with ADs. They are a business and if they can sell 12 watches at a time, good for them.

I’d never pay over MSRP for a watch, but don’t have a problem if someone else does. I don’t think it’s particularly smart to buy watches over MSRP, but if someone has money to burn, great.

Anyone with a problem with the ADs is mad at the wrong entity. Rolex could easily kill the grey market, but they’d have to increase supply to match demand which would also weaken the “exclusivity” of the brand.

But an AD making a profit? Good for them.

[bondtoys]

Well, first of all, ADs are not allowed (by their contract with Rolex) to sell to resellers.

So, those who break that contract by selling to greys are unfailry competing with those honest ADs that play by the rules.

Additionally by drying out the market for ‚normal‘ buyers, they fuel the hype and exaggerations in the grey market and that means they contribute to the insane prices which many pay on that market.

[ROLEXster]

I don't hate the players ...
I hate the game.

[RobearH]

Originally Posted by ROLEXster

I don't hate the players ...
I hate the game.

This fits.

[123Blueface]

Originally Posted by bondtoys

Well, first of all, ADs are not allowed (by their contract with Rolex) to sell to resellers.

So, those who break that contract by selling to greys are unfailry competing with those honest ADs that play by the rules.

Additionally by drying out the market for ‚normal‘ buyers, they fuel the hype and exaggerations in the grey market and that means they contribute to the insane prices which many pay on that market.

This!
.......and, those AD’s are helping to create the artificially inflated prices in the grey market by providing the supply to an alternate source than the intended end user per their agreement with Rolex.

[RHIII]

First of all - I am not an ‘AD Hater’ and have wonderful relationships with a few ADs across a few major brands I collect.

I think framing people as AD ‘haters’ is a bit of an embellishment as well as somewhat harsh and unfounded - I believe that it is more frustration - on the customer - as well as the retailer. As it was not all that long ago that just about ANY watch anyone wanted was available around MSRP.

Also - what is your representative sample of ADs - in terms of business models? What I’m asking here is bundling requirements, blind ordering, the ‘lists’. Not all ADs are created equal for sure. We can all blame social media, the Internet forums etc for all the hype for certain models. To me alternative ‘practices’ at retail establishments simply turn them more into grey market dealers. If I walk into a BMW dealership and want to buy a 5 series - I don’t get told - well- we’ll sell you a 5 series but you have to buy an I8 first....same principle. This doesn’t mean the AD (or dealership) is losing $$ at all. Secondary market prices do not have any real pedigree - and MSRP is established for a reason. With ordering watches just don’t ‘show up’ at ADs. Watches are ORDERED, and by the way - if there’s already one in stock, on the books - the probability of an AD getting a second right now is VERY LOW, if at all - and furthermore when watches are ordered - there is an expected wait time. Every watch I’ve ordered from one of the three ADs I deal with (and know the owners) has come in at or before what they initially quoted. My AD would love to sell everyone who comes in and asks for a Daytona one, or a 5167, or 5711 - but until previous orders are filled - no sense in taking a deposit or quoting someone a 3-5 year wait time.

At the end of the day - ADs are retail establishments, that are (yes) in business to make money - however they should all treat customers with respect regardless of ANYTHING. And we all know how that goes....

Very ‘popular’ topic - not the best approach.

Just my .02




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[youngfromNY]

not seeing your point, Teck.
If ADs are not allowed to sell over MSRP, how much are they selling to greys?

if its MSRP like theyre supposed to, how are they maximizing profits?
if its over MSRP, theyre doing something theyre not supposed to and im sure Rolex would have an opinion on that.

so are you saying that i shouldnt have a view on them doing something theyre not supposed to do?

[NavalFlight]

Originally Posted by 123Blueface

This!

.......and, those AD’s are helping to create the artificially inflated prices in the grey market by providing the supply to an alternate source than the intended end user per their agreement with Rolex.

If it weren’t for the ADs and Greys, your “investment” wouldn’t be increasing in value.

[Bigblu10]

Originally Posted by teck21

There appears plenty of dissatisfaction towards ADs for their ‘shenanigans’, and to be honest I don’t understand why they should be blamed for woes not of their doing.

For one thing, they are profit maximising entities. They aim to make as much money as they can, no different from any other business at all. Yet they seem hated in a way other businesses are not, and I find that incredibly unfair to them.

Firstly, they are unable to determine what they receive from Rolex in every shipment. They receive what they receive, and do what they can with it. All of them wished they could satisfy the demands of every customer that walked in, but the scarcity of supply simply means they cannot.

They are also not allowed to sell above MSRP, and every idiot knows that the popular pieces can currently command prices well beyond MSRP.

I therefore put it to you AD haters, why should they sacrifice their own profit (by way of bundling or relationship building) in order for you to enjoy a watch from which they all know they will be ‘losing’ money from by selling it to you purely at MSRP?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

"Losing" money at MSRP? Give me a break. They pay 62% of MSRP for the watch. Do the math and figure out their profit percentage. They are making plenty of money. And AD's outside the USA can/do sell above MSRP. Whether that is permitted or not is not my concern.

[johnjm]

Originally Posted by 123Blueface

This!

.......and, those AD’s are helping to create the artificially inflated prices in the grey market by providing the supply to an alternate source than the intended end user per their agreement with Rolex.

Who is that?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[teck21]

Originally Posted by 123Blueface

This!

.......and, those AD’s are helping to create the artificially inflated prices in the grey market by providing the supply to an alternate source than the intended end user per their agreement with Rolex.

Exactly, my point is that they will lose money by selling to the intended end user rather than to greys. Why would you expect them to not want to lose money? Would you want to lose money?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[teck21]

Originally Posted by Bigblu10

"Losing" money at MSRP? Give me a break. They pay 62% of MSRP for the watch. Do the math and figure out their profit percentage. They are making plenty of money. And AD's outside the USA can/do sell above MSRP. Whether that is permitted or not is not my concern.

Plenty of money is not the same as maximum money. Every business tries to make maximum money.

Why should ADs be held to a higher standard?

And ADs anywhere cannot sell above MSRP if they wish to keep their dealership if Rolex’ finds out. Please do not embarrass yourself by trying to dispute this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[NavalFlight]

Originally Posted by youngfromNY

not seeing your point, Teck.
If ADs are not allowed to sell over MSRP, how much are they selling to greys?

if its MSRP like theyre supposed to, how are they maximizing profits?
if its over MSRP, theyre doing something theyre not supposed to and im sure Rolex would have an opinion on that.

so are you saying that i shouldnt have a view on them doing something theyre not supposed to do?

ADs sell bundles, so like 3 sports models plus 8-10 non-sport models. So while a DJ may sit in the store for months before being sold, the ADs still need to buy more DJ from Rolex even when they haven’t sold the old models.

A grey will be required to buy non-hot models if they want to get a few hot models.

So for ADs, it’s about volume sales.

[RobearH]

Originally Posted by teck21

Plenty of money is not the same as maximum money. Every business tries to make maximum money.

Why should ADs be held to a higher standard?

And ADs anywhere cannot sell above MSRP if they wish to keep their dealership if Rolex’ finds out. Please do not embarrass yourself by trying to dispute this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So by your logic Rolex should sell directly to Gray to cut out the middleman...the AD that’s dealer agreement is to sell to consumers!

[youngfromNY]

Originally Posted by teck21

Plenty of money is not the same as maximum money. Every business tries to make maximum money.

Why should ADs be held to a higher standard?

And ADs anywhere cannot sell above MSRP if they wish to keep their dealership if Rolex’ finds out. Please do not embarrass yourself by trying to dispute this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That’s what being an AD is though.
Rolex supplies you with their watches so you can represent their brand to consumers.
You have a history of being reputable and scrupulous

If rolex finds out you sell over MSRP , they take away tour dealership

what if they find out you sell to greys to “maximize profits”?