Sub 16610 - overpriced? Fad?

[RAZZELL]

Originally Posted by kanger

A classic that has had a run for more than 15 years is a fad? Are you being serious right now?

Not the popularity of the watch...But is the current high price for used examples a reflection on people's attitudes to the "new" Submariner LN?

A lot of people who perhaps don't like the new model may have bought the old style sub, hence second-hand prices have risen.

In time will new buyers go back to buying the "new" LN rather than than preferring to buy the old sub?

That is what I mean my using the word "fad"....perhaps I should have said "Temporarily overpriced"?

Less demand = lower price?


RAZZ

[capote]

I seriously doubt that the people who doesn't like the maxi case and ceramics would change their minds.

[moby33]

Originally Posted by RAZZELL

Been looking to buy a new watch...

I've always wanted an old Sub 16610...but here in the UK dealers are wanting about £4k for them now...

Considering there must be 100's of thousands of them out there I think they're taking the pi$$ a bit...

For that sort of money I'd rather pay the extra and get a new Rolex Submariner Date 116610LN from an AD in the UK, or order one at Geneva Airport and fly there and save a few quid...

So do you guys think the 16610 is overpriced? Will prices "drop" when people get a bit more accustomed to the new shape?

RAZZ

I agree if your #'s are true...if that's the case I would gladly pay a little more for the SubC. Then again, I owned a few 16610's prior to my SubC and (for me), there's no debate...I'm a SubC fan all the way. So the only way I would buy a 16610 again would be at a significant discount to the SubC (and I certainly wouldn't abandon my SubC).

I'm one of those guys that LOVES the bigger, chunkier case (looks more sporty & less dressy to me), love the maxi-dial for the great night visibility, the ceramic is bullet-proof (not to mention I think the recessed numerals on the ceramic bezel are a thing of beauty) and what's not to like about the Glidelock...on the fly adjustments for any temp/activity level! Yep...no way I'm going back to a 16610, no matter what the price.

But I do know there are still TONS of loyal 16610 fans out there that wouldn't touch a SubC with a 10' pole...so maybe that's what the ADs are still holding out for.

In the end it really just comes down to which watch you like more...regardless of price, if you buy the "cheaper" one only because it saves a little money in the short term, you'll just end up not being satisfied and eventually buy the more expense watch in the future. And if you really love the 16610 over the SubC, then price shouldn't matter...who cares if it's only a little less than the new version...at least it's less AND it's the one you want...win-win!

[moby33]

Originally Posted by Dr. Robert

The Rolex sub is a great watch.......after you buy one, used or new...you don't care about the cost anymore......

Most accurate post I've read in a long time.

[tattooedfagin]

Originally Posted by RAZZELL

Been looking to buy a new watch...

I've always wanted an old Sub 16610...but here in the UK dealers are wanting about £4k for them now...

Considering there must be 100's of thousands of them out there I think they're taking the pi$$ a bit...

For that sort of money I'd rather pay the extra and get a new Rolex Submariner Date 116610LN from an AD in the UK, or order one at Geneva Airport and fly there and save a few quid...

So do you guys think the 16610 is overpriced? Will prices "drop" when people get a bit more accustomed to the new shape?


RAZZ

5 years from now & prices will still be higher, no xmas sales & very little discounts on such a popular model plus the more or less guaranteed price increase every year of 8 - 10% make the sub a worthwhile purchase...buy now, pretty sure you won't regret it in 5 years time

[Andad]

It's disco'd now so You need to do what You need to do.

I have mine.

[RAZZELL]

A few examples:

Was £4200

http://www.dream-watches.co.uk/rolex...k_example.html

Was £4250

http://www.blowers-jewellers.co.uk/R...ate_S14196.htm


Second-hand LN £4700

http://www.blowers-jewellers.co.uk/R...0LN_S14155.htm

I have seen a LN for as low as £4450.

My point about the LN becoming more popular is that in 5 to 10 years time a new generation of guys in their 20's and 30's will be buying...they will have little knowledge of the 11610 and won't be saying "I prefer the old model".


RAZZ

[nowzen]

In 1946, Hans Wilsdorf launched a new brand so he could offer Rolex quality at an affordable price (Tudor). Tudor are now selling just slightly less than Rolex.

Maybe Rolex should launch a new Tudor line for the rest of us... (Threedor?).

[Puffy]

it's a discontinued classic, what do you expect??

in some cases they sell for £4.5k in london!

[garyfromleeds]

So you think that 4K is a little steep !
How can you you put a price on possibly the best selling watch of all time ?
and possibly one of the more desirable watches ever made ?
And to top it off its a Rolex !
Im now thinking that 4K for all that doesnt look high to me !

I suppose its all relative to what you have ! IMHO

[RAZZELL]

It's steep because I've got the receipt for my brothers one in my cupboard...

Brand new £2610 on 25.02.06.

Simple fact is 100's of thousands of them were made. I like Rolex's but modern one's are not rare, or different, they're the best £1000 watch you can buy for £5k!...I know Rolex might be considered a "veblen good" but P-L-E-A-S-E...don't sound such a fanboy!


RAZZ

[Maxfli]

While it's been said here a thousand times that watches shouldn't be viewed as investments, I take comfort in the fact that should I ever be forced to sell my P-series Sub, I'll likely get more than I paid for it two years ago.

So respectfully to the OP, you may be over-analyzing this. If you want a Sub, buy a Sub — any Sub. Regardless of the exact amount you spend now, you're not likely to be disappointed down the road.

[tattooedfagin]

well given today's prices your brothers made a nice little raise on his Sub should he decide to sell, i bought mine pre-owned around that time, paid around 20% less than the new price which for many was still too much but 5 years on i've a great watch which keeps perfect time & has nigh on doubled in value.....a result as far as i'm concerned plus, today i'm wearing a 1680 Red Sub from 1973, back then it would have cost around £800 new perhaps (give or take) now, 40 years on & you wouldn't get much change out of 8 grand for a decent one... buy now, cry just once & get the enjoyment out of it & chances are a few quid on top in years to come

[RAZZELL]

Originally Posted by tattooedfagin

well given today's prices your brothers made a nice little raise on his Sub should he decide to sell, i bought mine pre-owned around that time, paid around 20% less than the new price which for many was still too much but 5 years on i've a great watch which keeps perfect time & has nigh on doubled in value.....a result as far as i'm concerned plus, today i'm wearing a 1680 Red Sub from 1973, back then it would have cost around £800 new perhaps (give or take) now, 40 years on & you wouldn't get much change out of 8 grand for a decent one... buy now, cry just once & get the enjoyment out of it & chances are a few quid on top in years to come

I totally agree...it isn't about the money. It is about understanding the market and trying to get a good deal. IMHO 16610 subs are about £750-£1k overpriced in the UK and I'm "guessing" the second-hand price might lower (a little) when new buyers get a little bit more used to the "LN" sub and more of these enter the second-hand market.

I'll buy a sub within the next three or four months...Maybe a new 16610 without papers from Miltons for £3899? Or a jaunt to Geneva for an LN?


RAZZ

[Maxfli]

Originally Posted by RAZZELL

...it isn't about the money. It is about understanding the market and trying to get a good deal.

The best "deal" by far is buying pre-owned from one of the trusted sellers on this forum.

[bhenchodmodska]

yes, Iam in the market for one also and I am going the preowned route.

[rolepam312]

Originally Posted by Auto16610

You say "I know it's better" and I would have to disagree! In your opinion the new sub is better.(even though you own the 16610) I personaly like the 16610 better. I think that when Rolex made the case bigger they should have made the bracelet bigger. (In my opinion)

I agree that our 16610 is better...didnt want to offend the the owners of the new sub...i agree that rolex is getting lazy and too content that while they increase the case the straps size stays the same...it looks out of proportion and it appears they already have the straps so why go through a design change and actually come up with straps that are case appropriate? Reckon this would affect the parts and assembly line and would cost too much ...rolex figures they can charge nearly double and get away with it so why not? I cite the dssd as an example...strap is way too skinny for that watch...

[tkerrmd]

if you have the price delta I would go with the new watch. all the recent upgrades really do (in my mind) make it a "better" version. the ceramic bezel, maxi dial, lume, spring, and especially the bracelet really do make a classic even better.

OTOH if you want vintage I am sure you can get for alot less than new!

[mtasquared]

Don't buy a watch as an investment for money's sake alone. I am eyeing a Lange 1 as my ultimate watch, but I am cognizant of the fact that it is a LOUSY investment. Same with a Mercedes C63 AMG that I'm dreaming about. A lot of fun, both of these things, but enormously poor investments.

[joejitsu]

Got the new subc today. After discount it comes out less than the 16610. I held both at AD and loved the newer model. And AD won't give any off the older mod.

[Leeemjack]

Yeh get the new SubC, seriously you will look at the second hand scratched watch you have just paid 4k for....and think I should have added the extra 1k and got a BRAND NEW, bang up to date and overall just much better watch

And seriously the strap does not look to small at all. And all this horse s##t about rolex not changing it to save money, well why change the case at all then!! Why use much more expensive steel!! Why bother with ceramics!! They were selling loads of subs anyway, so why bother with any of it!

[MoBe]

I think the fad has been around long enough now to be able to call it a trend.

Investing in the trend may be ok as an equity investment strategy but when it comes to watches it could be risky.A trend can be reversed at any time and for no apparent reason.

Many antique collectors have been dissapointed over the years when their favorite collectibles have fallen in value as the trend has moved away from historic timespans or geographic regions as buyer appetites changed over time.

Rolex does not have a monopoly on collector sentiment.If interset rates were to sharply increase in the coming months it would be fairly easy to predict a surplus in preowned watches from people in need of income investment cash.This may seem unlikely at the moment but stranger things have happened and there are unimagined possibilities yet to be seen in the world economy and this year may reveal some of the coming attractions.

[moby33]

Originally Posted by rolepam312

I agree that our 16610 is better...didnt want to offend the the owners of the new sub...i agree that rolex is getting lazy and too content that while they increase the case the straps size stays the same...it looks out of proportion...

Anyone that gets "offended" by your comment is pretty insecure in their opinion of their own watch IMO. I don't take offense, I just disagree. As a previous owner of two 16610s, one 16610LV and the 'old' SD, and now a 2+ yr owner of the SubC, I wouldn't dream of going back to a 16610 because for me, the case/bracelet looks better on the SubC (not to mention the overall feel of the clasp...come on, anyone that thinks the 16610 tin-like feel of those clasps is better vs the Glidelock is smoking something IMO...as a happy owner of Omega watches for years...I always was disappointed when I felt the 16610 clasps because I never (nor will I ever) believed that clasp design was on par with the rest of the watch...something I no longer have to worry about with the SubC). So for me, the SubC is no doubt 'better' than the 16610.

At one point in time I thought the same way as you, but I now realize that thinking was simply because I was just accustomed to the old design. But the more I wear the SubC, the more I see the genius in Rolex's design.

My belief is the new Super Case with the 'old' band thickness was designed for a reason - that reason being all about optical illusions. No doubt the SubC was developed for the current trend of larger sport watches. I use to think 40mm was a tad too small, but I respected the fact it was a pretty good compromise on size for both sport & dress. The Super Case is still a 40mm watch, but it wears much bigger. The "wears bigger" reality IMO is caused by the illusion of the case-to-band relationship. If they would have made the proportions equal to the 16610, I think it may have blended and therefore (ironically enough) made the case look smaller. Rolex was genius in designing a case that looks larger on the wrist, but in reality still wears like the extremely comfortable 40mm package.

And as I stated in an early post, I like the chunkier (less dressy) look of the new case vs. bracelet. I wear my Subs as a true sports watch...to me the 16610 looks very dressy in that the taper is smoother and more refined...but that's not a look I necessarily want in a dive watch.

"Rolex getting lazy?"...I doubt it...more like an extremely well thought out plan. Spend some serious time with a SubC and you might surprise yourself...I know I did.

Originally Posted by Leeemjack

And seriously the strap does not look to small at all.

That's what I'm talking about.

[Leeemjack]

Agree with absolutely everything you just said there moby33

Even down to the Omega stuff, I was exactly the same. Bought the smp instead of the old sub

[Mickey®]

I think I posted already on this one but I"m too lazy to check to see if I am going to contradict myself

I think $8000 MSRP for a New (soon to be more expensive) Submariner is high.
I might have to end up a vintage guy...

[Welshwatchman]

Originally Posted by RAZZELL

It's steep because I've got the receipt for my brothers one in my cupboard...

Brand new £2610 on 25.02.06.

Simple fact is 100's of thousands of them were made. I like Rolex's but modern one's are not rare, or different, they're the best £1000 watch you can buy for £5k!...I know Rolex might be considered a "veblen good" but P-L-E-A-S-E...don't sound such a fanboy!


RAZZ

Ahh, good old 2006/7. This was the year that I collected most of my current crop.

Fact is, you don't know how many 16610s are "out there".

Reasonable assumption is, 20 years at 30,000 per year, that's 600,000 ish worldwide, perhaps 30,000 of which are in the UK.

A lot of watches, yes. Also a FINITE amount of watches and an increasing population.

Out of the UK 30k, 29,900 are keepers and the other 100 owners are asking £3,800-4500.

Those 100 16610s are being ogled by perhaps 200 people, including you. The emerging markets are contributing to this level of interest.

If that changes to a lot less than 100, the market price will drop.

Whether you'll be able to get your £1,000 16610?

My guess ..... no.

[venton]

16610 is beautiful and 116610 is ugly! There I've said it.
16610 prices will go up and up 'cos they're a design classic.
Shame 'cos I want one...

[RAZZELL]

Some interesting opinions

Like I said, I could buy one from Miltons (from the VAT auction lot) - an unused, still in stickers, non-engraved rehaut, no paperwork, for £3899.

Or new for £5320(?)


RAZZ

[mrbill2mrbill2]

Originally Posted by capote

I seriously doubt that the people who doesn't like the maxi case and ceramics would change their minds.

I won't!

[mrbill2mrbill2]

Originally Posted by RAZZELL

It's steep because I've got the receipt for my brothers one in my cupboard...

Brand new £2610 on 25.02.06.

Simple fact is 100's of thousands of them were made. I like Rolex's but modern one's are not rare, or different, they're the best £1000 watch you can buy for £5k!...I know Rolex might be considered a "veblen good" but P-L-E-A-S-E...don't sound such a fanboy!


RAZZ

"Fanboy" is not a term appreciated here.

If you don't care for Rolex or the 16610 Sub please go elsewhere.

No cheers.