Would you lose interest in Rolex if it was easily available?

[Driver8]

No. I've been into watches for a long time - close on 30 years - and I've owned and enjoyed many brands during that time, the vast majority of which have been, and are, readily available. Did that availability change how I felt about those watches? Not in the slightest. I buy watches because I like them, not because of how "hard to get" or "exclusive" they're perceived to be.

The same goes for Rolex. Until around 2017, the longest I'd ever had to wait for a Rolex was around 3 months for a 16610LV back in 2005. And that 3 months was absolutely unheard of at the time.

Personally I'd absolutely love it if Rolexes were more readily available. I like watches for what they are, not for how much they're worth, or how much they increase in value, or how exclusive they are, or how many "likes" they're worth. If anything, the lack of availability and all the hype nonsense puts me off.

[Avs Fan]

No. I bought my first (16600) when it available everywhere at MSRP. i bought it because I liked it. Scarcity had nothing to do with my decision in 2008. Things have obviously changed, but I more recently purchased my 126660 JC and LVc for the same reason.

[HogwldFLTR]

Whenever I started in this forum most Rolex were easily available; I was interested in the watches and their history. Now I'm almost disinterested due to all the hype and unavailability. Way too much BS for me.

[daveswordfish]

Originally Posted by BrazenC5

Quite the opposite. I'm losing interest because they are not readily available at an AD.

Sent from my SM-G781U1 using Tapatalk

Same


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WestCoastS]

Nope I would still prefer the brand

[Harry-57]

Originally Posted by Polar Bear

Most people would say "no" but that begs a deeper question

Why are you interested in Rolex in the first place?

The amount of people who come here claiming to be "watch collectors" but only buy Rolex shows there seems to be a delta between people who like watches and people who like Rolex

Design aesthetic, ease of use, reliability, and above all, wearing comfort.

Value retention doesn't factor in because it shouldn't for watches. It's nice if it happens but it's not something you can depend on in the medium to long term for any brand.

The majority of watches my wife and I own are worth fractions of what we bought them for, even after some generous AD discounts. It doesn't matter. We love them just the same and after all, they're only watches. We're not watch collectors. We just like nice things and we own some watches.

[PleaseStandBack]

If they were easier to get I may start buying them from an AD. As it stands I’ve bought six in the last two years but none were from Rolex ADs because I don’t have the patience to wait by my phone. I don’t understand why Rolex doesn’t allow ADs to sell over MSRP like the car industry.

[brandrea]

I’ve been interested in the brand since I started collecting in 1992. I’ve seen everything from significant discounts for popular SS professional references to the insanity that is today.

Still interested, but other brands now pique my interest more

[thenewrick]

Originally Posted by Polar Bear

Most people would say "no" but that begs a deeper question

Why are you interested in Rolex in the first place?

The amount of people who come here claiming to be "watch collectors" but only buy Rolex shows there seems to be a delta between people who like watches and people who like Rolex

If you want a well made, accurate watch that you can hand down to your kids, there are a thousand options out there.

The value retention and investment angle seems to be an underlying drive for a lot of new Rolex buyers, I feel like this speaks more to their financial position than anything else. People say they want to "hand it down", but if your planning to never sell it, why does it matter what its worth in 10 years time?
If you cant afford to take a small loss on a watch, you shouldnt be buying it. IMO

In 2022, mechanical watches are superfluous luxury goods.
I'm all for buying smart but the paradox of "I'll never sell it, but do you think it will hold value" is a strange one to me

The easiest way to never loose money on a watch is to never actually sell it

For me as a new collector I wanted a good benchmark and reliable 1st option with very limited funds. I wanted something versatile and long lasting. Once I get 3-4 Rolex that I'm interested in I'll start buying other brands. While I do like the Cellini line, I wouldn't buy one for my first dress watch.

I wanted something classic, something sporting, something fun, something vintage, a dress watch from another brand.. then after that I have no plans. It'll take me 10+ years just to get the stuff I'm currently after. Availability and prices don't really matter to me much. I only buy new except for vintage. Don't plan to sell anything ever really. But you never know when you hit a dry spell or anything can happen.

[Mystro]

Been with the brand over 30 years so…….

[JTL31]

Originally Posted by brandrea

still interested, but other brands now pique my interest more

+2.

[911991]

Originally Posted by OYptL

Mine were purchased without knowing forums and hype existed. Bought them cuz I Loved the brand.

Me too, I still cant believe the current situation with buying a Rolex

[edisonstar23]

Originally Posted by Polar Bear

Most people would say "no" but that begs a deeper question

Why are you interested in Rolex in the first place?

The amount of people who come here claiming to be "watch collectors" but only buy Rolex shows there seems to be a delta between people who like watches and people who like Rolex

If you want a well made, accurate watch that you can hand down to your kids, there are a thousand options out there.

The value retention and investment angle seems to be an underlying drive for a lot of new Rolex buyers, I feel like this speaks more to their financial position than anything else. People say they want to "hand it down", but if your planning to never sell it, why does it matter what its worth in 10 years time?
If you cant afford to take a small loss on a watch, you shouldnt be buying it. IMO

In 2022, mechanical watches are superfluous luxury goods.
I'm all for buying smart but the paradox of "I'll never sell it, but do you think it will hold value" is a strange one to me

The easiest way to never loose money on a watch is to never actually sell it

I agree with 100% - Most people will claim they love the brand, this that. But one thing that makes Rolex ROLEX is the value retention. Not that you want to turn around and sell it for the same price you paid or for higher. But is nice to know that if sh** hits the fan, you can liquidate and have some or most of the money back.

Would people buy Rolex if they depreciated over the years like a car does? Sure! Will it make this hobby less appealing, imo YES.

[Zyfon]

Don't believe I would since I was interested in them long before the shortage. I still remember a time when you could walk into most ADs and pick up pretty much any model you want.

[Ichiran]

I buy what I like regardless of market value.

[amanbra]

Personally no, there is a specific reason of size that draws me to Rolex over other competitors. For a lot of people though yes i think it will be a turn off. And that's just great =)

[Tools]

Until recently, just like trying to find a new car on the lot, Rolex has always been relatively easy to find and buy. What else is "hard to get" that one would feel is a must-have for that reason alone?

I don't understand the point of the perspective of this "poll"

[kieselguhr]

I personally wouldn’t. My attachment to the brand is sentimental though so maybe that helps.

[AF_Rob]

Like others have said, I have lost interest because of the "shortage". I was interested when I was able to walk in and have my pick.

Its scarcity, value retention, investment potential means nothing to me. When I first bought my Rolexes, I assumed I would either never sell them, or take a loss when I did. Is it nice they have doubled in value over the years? Yes. However, that was never the objective.

Ideally, I would love if everyone who could afford one, could go out and get the one they desire.

It baffles me that folks here love their watch more because they know it's "exclusive" and not everyone can get one because its market value has ballooned. It's equally confusing that others lose interest because of all the fakes that are out there.

Maybe it's because I liked them from the Nat Geo days, before social media. I remember seeing the ads between articles usually about the Amazon, Africa, and the Soviet Union. Everyone has different motivations, I guess.

[john333]

I guess if you are only in it for the perceived exclusivity of owning a Rolex because they are difficult to buy at msrp, or if you are only buying because you expect them to appreciate significantly in value…then I could see how you would lose interest if they became easier to purchase at an AD.

In own (and have owned ) many different brands…mostly not Rolex. I buy what I fall in love with, wear them until I fall out of love, then sell to fund more watches. Sometimes I only keep for 1 year, sometimes 10+ years. That won’t change regardless of availability or appreciation. I personally wish the availability was like it was 10 years ago where I could pick up pretty much any Rolex model I wanted without waiting and a 10-15% discount.

[awu]

I would certainly have more watches.

[beshannon]

Lost interest long ago

[Unframed]

Definitely not. I’d buy more.

[MAINEZX10]

When I first got into Rolex, every sports model, except the SS Daytona, was readily available. Many people got them with a discount. So availability has nothing to do with why I like or got into Rolex

[JSCP]

Originally Posted by Seddyspaghetti

Would you lose interest in Rolex if every model was easily available at the AD for msrp?

I probably would. As amazing as they look, the difficulty to get certain pieces is a big part of the attraction for me. I get bored with instant gratification.

I have liked rolex since I was 9yo or so and my dad brought a new Dayjust SS, white dial sticks, Oyster, classic in 1967 for Xmas for himself and a Gold dressy one for my mom. Son why would I not? They have been available for most of my life and I still get a good share of desirable ones.

[ltmgeller]

I started collecting Rolex when they were easily available, why would I stop if it happened again? I'd just be able to get more watches. The one who dies with the most at the end wins.

[NachoNeal]

Unavailability makes me much less interested.
No time for gamesmanship. It's just a watch.

[bugimas]

Will still be interested, but definitely will not have the urgency to pull the trigger ASAP as I have my own sweet time to choose my favorite models.

[Traveling]

No, needs to be more readily available. Things have been ridiculous for years now.

[Kelvin Knight]

Originally Posted by vh2k

Global demand would plummet because secondary prices would nosedive. Thank God Rolex doesn’t listen to “watch enthusiasts” on forums.

Rolex’ artificial, inflated demand and value would nosedive, yes…

Historically, they’ve always been popular and have held their value, even second hand…

Too bad they’ve been cannibalized by hype culture and have found themselves on the frontline of the bio-psych-social nightmare that is zombie-consumerism…

My 2¢… If they held the same history and were made to the same standards and somehow lost value I’d still wear one - pound for pound, best watches money can buy.