Which Rolex model increases most on an annual basis?

[SpeakWithMichael]

Not bad at all, Seabreeze. Of course, buying stock in Microsoft, eBay, Apple, Amazon, or Facebook in those 25 years would have done a lot better.

[2JHead]

Originally Posted by CGarza9655

16610v AKA Kermit

Without a doubt.

+1, it's happening as we speak. And the funny thing is that numerous posts on this forum have concluded that the Kermit can never be a collectors item/sought after vintage as it was produced in far to great numbers

[dnpina]

Watch money should be play money. It's not money one should be using for kids education. It's not retirement money. These incessant watch "investment" threads are bringing me down. Where are all the people enjoying their watches ( especially tool watches/divers putting their watch to task and enjoying their watch)?? Anyone buying up Pepsi GMT sd4k and Kermit dropping them in a safe is just fooling themself. Yes Yes. That one tired YouTube video of the old veteran with a clean Pepsi and all box and papers did great. But that was him. That watch wasn't pristine. Go wear your watch. Dive or at least snorkel in your Sub. Go take a hike at big bend with your Explorer. For me sitting around with a box of pristine watches hoping they'll be worth something one day is a poor man's deal. I hope I don't sound harsh. But when my kids get these watches ( that they probably won't want anyway) , my watches will have scars and dings and stories. I could care less if they are worth 10x or .005x what I paid for them.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

[seabreeze60]

Originally Posted by dnpina

Watch money should be play money. It's not money one should be using for kids education. It's not retirement money. These incessant watch "investment" threads are bringing me down. Where are all the people enjoying their watches ( especially tool watches/divers putting their watch to task and enjoying their watch)?? Anyone buying up Pepsi GMT sd4k and Kermit dropping them in a safe is just fooling themself. Yes Yes. That one tired YouTube video of the old veteran with a clean Pepsi and all box and papers did great. But that was him. That watch wasn't pristine. Go wear your watch. Dive or at least snorkel in your Sub. Go take a hike at big bend with your Explorer. For me sitting around with a box of pristine watches hoping they'll be worth something one day is a poor man's deal. I hope I don't sound harsh. But when my kids get these watches ( that they probably won't want anyway) , my watches will have scars and dings and stories. I could care less if they are worth 10x or .005x what I paid for them.




Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Correct! Rolex is for people that have money to play with.

However, I have purchased watches that had literally no value one year later. You can see them on eBay for $100 or less. I sold several of my original Swiss Army and other watches for 10% of what I paid on eBay. I have given my other non-Rolex watches to my sons who wear them, i.e., Modavo. At least with Rolex we have evidence that if you take care of them you'll probably get your money back after years of enjoyment.

[springer]

Relegated to sapphire models, since vintage is a whole different realm, I'd have to say the 16710 GMTs and 16700s seem to appreciate close to 10% to 12% a year. The original anniversary Submariners, model 16610LV, are doing quite well also.

[springer]

Originally Posted by WatchingAustin

As others have pointed out gaining 8% annually since 1991 on $5,000 would put you at $21,000, so not sure how you calculate an 8% price increase annually.

Also $5,000.00 in 1991 has the same buying power as $9,022.12 in 2017, which is more than a new SubC

The only watches 'appreciating' are vintage references and even those I wouldn't build an investment portfolio around.

You might keep your eye on the GMT 16710s and 16610LV Subs - they aren't vintage and appreciate yearly.

[Jack T]

Pre-owned prices go up only if new retail prices go up, and that hasn't happened in the US market for several years.

[kamonjj]

I love how these threads liken Rolexes to investments. Similar parallels can be drawn to certain cars. We have all seen the large auctions at times bringing serious coin for certain models. These results are intangible and unable to reasonably predict or replicate. I buy watches to enjoy because it's something I love not for potential earnings. Potential earnings are derived from other forms of investments (real estate, stocks, bonds, etfs, etc).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[oldman2005]

Nice calculation! But forgotten is the service cost, the watch needs to be serviced over a 25 years span.

Originally Posted by seabreeze60

Woops! I picked the wrong Submariner. A 16610 Submariner in 1992 sold for $2850. So, the correct compounded calculation is 2.9% annual growth.

https://www.minus4plus6.com/PriceEvolution.php

A Submariner cost $2850 in 1992. If we all agree that a Submariner would sell for $5800, then the annual compounded growth is 2.9%.

So, in reality, 25 years of wearing a cool watch and making 2.9% annual growth. Not bad!

[Mick P]

Chaps

If you buy a Rolex as an investment then you have excellent taste in watches but a totally useless understanding of investments. Stocks and shares outstrip nearly every other form of investment.

Regards

Mick

[sager]

Originally Posted by brandrea

The one you buy at the right price

This

[ny_yeti]

Originally Posted by Mick P

What goes up nearly always comes down just to go back up again and a Rolex is no different.

Just keep your fingers crossed that 40mm does not go way out of fashion.

Would you buy a 34mm watch, they were once fashionable and trendy but today very unpopular and hard to shift.

Nothing is assured.

Good point, well said!

[Speed]

Originally Posted by 2JHead

+1, it's happening as we speak. And the funny thing is that numerous posts on this forum have concluded that the Kermit can never be a collectors item/sought after vintage as it was produced in far to great numbers

You can collect anything you want. Shrunken heads, belly button lint, nice watches. That doesn't mean that others will pay way beyond original price for them.

[uncleluck]

Originally Posted by Fleetlord

The 5 digit Rolex Subs and GMT in SS are as rock solid as it gets on the market.

They are seemingly immune to the downward forces that are ruining the secondary market...

It seems to defy logic as there are large qtys of these references out there, but the prices continue to rise and rise...

These references combined with the SS Daytona are THE hottest watches in an ice cold market.

While I'm not disagreeing with your 5 digit Rolex point, can you tell me about the other brands that are making up the rest of the 'ice cold market'

All I see is every vintage watch selling for massively over what they were even a few years ago. Heuer, Tudor, Omega, Breitling, you name it! I'd say the entire vintage market is hot, ice cold? We'd still be able to pick up a Tudor sub for £900 etc.

[zengineer]

You should sell it...you'd make enough money to immediately replace it.

[seabreeze60]

Originally Posted by Mick P

Chaps

If you buy a Rolex as an investment then you have excellent taste in watches but a totally useless understanding of investments. Stocks and shares outstrip nearly every other form of investment.

Regards

Mick

Correct. Over time the S&P 500 is a better investment. However, there are a large number of companies on the SPY that have gone bankrupt in the past 20 years and took everyone's money with them. Let's not forget the stock market crashes of 2002, 2009 and 2011. Investing is a balance of cash, bonds, stock, real estate, etc. A Rolex can be considered a part of your assets. So look at a Rolex as an asset that you can wear that will keep up with inflation. It is a luxury, not part of your portfolio. Don't take a loan out to buy a Rolex. Make your money and use a small part of it, buy a Rolex and wear it as an example of your success!

[Simon_e]

Originally Posted by 2JHead

+1, it's happening as we speak. And the funny thing is that numerous posts on this forum have concluded that the Kermit can never be a collectors item/sought after vintage as it was produced in far to great numbers

I think the Kermit is over priced now and due a fall. I sold one 2 weeks ago due to this.
Lovely watches but not rare at all. Look at how many are for sale......

[seabreeze60]

Originally Posted by seabreeze60

Woops! I picked the wrong Submariner. A 16610 Submariner in 1992 sold for $2850. So, the correct compounded calculation is 2.9% annual growth.

https://www.minus4plus6.com/PriceEvolution.php

A Submariner cost $2850 in 1992. If we all agree that a Submariner would sell for $5800, then the annual compounded growth is 2.9%.

So, in reality, 25 years of wearing a cool watch and making 2.9% annual growth. Not bad!

2 year old thread. Times have changed.