Is the SF Rolex store going to close?

[amphr1]

Originally Posted by watchmaniacgollumfox

While the owner of Westfield mall may be stepping back, it doesn't necessarily mean all the stores, like the Rolex boutique, will close shop. Changes in ownership can actually create opportunities, like snagging some sweet inventory deals.

There is going to be a lot of stores closing. There'll be less traffic. Then less sales. The major is already talking about possibly repurposing the real estate.

https://abc7news.com/cinemark-closin...re-9/13380822/

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

[daveo5]

Too bad about the decline and fall of San Francisco. I landed at San Francisco airport in 1965 on a flight from Saigon. Our crew, Marine aviation reservists, flew us under the gate. I remember my US Custom inspector looking at me, my briefcase, which contained my S&W .38 revolver, and my duffle bag. I had a Vietnamese export license and letter from the embassy for the revolver. I had just spent thirty hours in a USAF C 130. The inspector just looked at me and said, whatever I was bringing in, I deserved. Tony Bennett’s, “I left my heart in San Francisco”, was still big.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[Michael T]

Originally Posted by amphora001

With the owner of the Westfield mall pulling out of the property, does that mean all stores, including the Rolex boutique, will close? And does that somehow create an opportunity to buy up inventory?

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

The WSJ said it was simply Westfield walking away on a non-resource loan. Basically, giving the keys to the lenders. Too bad the demographic of the city has changed so badly. Major San Francisco hotels also in default with lenders, tourism way down, when other cities have rebounded from COVID.

MY wife and I used to vacation there from time to time, no mas.

[amphr1]

This is also happening after Nordstrom decided to close.

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

[michaelmclees]

Remember the 90's when everything was awesome? As much as I'd like to think that a once great city like SF is still great and the stories are embellished, I think that if they're even half true, SF has truly fallen.

And my guess is they're all, fundamentally, true.

[amphr1]

Originally Posted by michaelmclees

Remember the 90's when everything was awesome? As much as I'd like to think that a once great city like SF is still great and the stories are embellished, I think that if they're even half true, SF has truly fallen.

And my guess is they're all, fundamentally, true.

I do want to point out the concept of the good old days are not always that good. Partly it's just a person's memory. Partly also depends on where you are in society at the time.

Either way having high speed internet beat dial up any time in history imho

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

[Krash]

Originally Posted by amphora001

This is also happening after Nordstrom decided to close.

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

Yes, and much more businesses than Nordstrom and this mall. They're all leaving because of the shoplifting plague. In most other cities, shoplifting is actually illegal, and people get put in jail for it. But apparently, not in SF.

[amphr1]

Originally Posted by Krash

Yes, and much more businesses than Nordstrom and this mall. They're all leaving because of the shoplifting plague. In most other cities, shoplifting is actually illegal, and people get put in jail for it. But apparently, not in SF.

Also security guards are only allowed to tell them to stop sternly but not actually stop anyone. I say if you are stealing stuff and your are caught red handed they should be allowed to tackle them.

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

[shedlock2000]

Seems like they shouldn’t have retired Dirty Harry!

I was there in 2018, but I’ve nothing to gauge it by. I walked through the Mission district twice when my Land Rover needed a new steady bearing. It seemed like every other big city to me (though I didn’t travel it all).

I bought a watch from Topper’s while I was there. Great service, but the watch was not a good choice (Bremont — rugged and dependable, but too thick to wear).

I enjoyed my trip to the city, toured Alcatraz, hit up the Coit Tower, and the dock thing — we even saw whales under the bridge. It was a good trip all in all, so as a visitor I only have good memories (though our hotel wasn’t the best).


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[MichelleP]

Originally Posted by franklee168

Just curious where all these posters that bad mouth San Francisco live? It must be pretty fantastic.

Agreed. I think most big cities have had issues since the pandemic. SF is still a great city

[MichelleP]

Originally Posted by Jawnz

Shreve is already there? Who could it be?

Kerns. It will be a Patek and Rolex only store

[Gebbeth]

I've lived and worked in SF (the City, as well as Silicon Valley) combined for the past 23 years. Prior to that, I've lived and worked in a big Asian city (Seoul), in London, England, and in NYC. I even had a short stint in Cleveland, OH of all places. I also grew up and worked briefly in LA.

San Francisco has changed, but the problems they are experiencing are (1) overblown, and (2) no different than any of the other big city I've lived and worked in. It's just that each city has a different flavor of issues and causes.

On (1). Crime in the areas people are focusing on in the press is subject to EXTREME recency bias. The SOMA areas, the areas bordering the Tenderloin, the Mission....these were not originally nice places. Some were worse than others, but these were considered non-desirable places.

What changed was gentrification brought on by the tech bros. When they started moving in, they wanted places to live that matched their salaries. So large areas of SOMA, the Mission, down Market Street, China Basin, Potrero, South City, you name it, they all started sprouting up condos and luxury apartments and office building converted from abandoned warehouses, etc.

That gentrified the area immensely, priced out working class people, and brought in stores like Whole Foods and CVSs and Nordstroms on Market, etc. These were brought in the cater to these tech bros and their money and lifestyle.

Then COVID hit. The free and easy money dried up. And guess what? No one wants to live in the City anymore....let alone in what used to be somewhat sketchy neighborhoods for $1M condos and 1 bedroom, 700 sq ft, apartments that cost $5000 a month.

So what happens when artificial economic dynamics change? Things revert back to what it used to be. And SF used to be a righteously dirty, hard drinking town (to quote a now gone famous celebrity). So it's becoming what it has always been, since 1849.

Only now, you've permanently priced out the residents that used to keep it somewhat real. They are gone, and unless you convert some of these largely abandoned office buildings and other commercial property into affordable, livable spaces for the working class, you won't get even close to what the City was like 10-15 years ago. But of course, affordable housing is personna non grata in the US, so we'll see what happens.

For those complaining about SF, I can say the same thing for large parts of LA, Houston, NYC, London, Seoul, damn...pretty much all of Cleveland, Washington DC, etc. I mean, have you been to Morningside Park just east of Columbia? Have you been there at night?

How about Cleveland, east of downtown, where of all places the Cleveland Clinic is located?

We can go on and on and on, but this whole SF pig sty thing is the pot calling the kettle black. It's a joke.

I would much rather have to deal with the squalor in SF while living near or around some of the most beautiful views in the world, and a stones throw away from some of the best wines in the world, best skiing in the world, the best hiking in the world, the best food in the world, and world renowned national parks and wildlife sanctuaries.

And yes, the economic powerhouse of tech is still here.

Not many cities can offer that combination.

[MichelleP]

Originally Posted by Gebbeth

I've lived and worked in SF (the City, as well as Silicon Valley) combined for the past 23 years. Prior to that, I've lived and worked in a big Asian city (Seoul), in London, England, and in NYC. I even had a short stint in Cleveland, OH of all places. I also grew up and worked briefly in LA.

San Francisco has changed, but the problems they are experiencing are (1) overblown, and (2) no different than any of the other big city I've lived and worked in. It's just that each city has a different flavor of issues and causes.

On (1). Crime in the areas people are focusing on in the press is subject to EXTREME recency bias. The SOMA areas, the areas bordering the Tenderloin, the Mission....these were not originally nice places. Some were worse than others, but these were considered non-desirable places.

What changed was gentrification brought on by the tech bros. When they started moving in, they wanted places to live that matched their salaries. So large areas of SOMA, the Mission, down Market Street, China Basin, Potrero, South City, you name it, they all started sprouting up condos and luxury apartments and office building converted from abandoned warehouses, etc.

That gentrified the area immensely, priced out working class people, and brought in stores like Whole Foods and CVSs and Nordstroms on Market, etc. These were brought in the cater to these tech bros and their money and lifestyle.

Then COVID hit. The free and easy money dried up. And guess what? No one wants to live in the City anymore....let alone in what used to be somewhat sketchy neighborhoods for $1M condos and 1 bedroom, 700 sq ft, apartments that cost $5000 a month.

So what happens when artificial economic dynamics change? Things revert back to what it used to be. And SF used to be a righteously dirty, hard drinking town (to quote a now gone famous celebrity). So it's becoming what it has always been, since 1849.

Only now, you've permanently priced out the residents that used to keep it somewhat real. They are gone, and unless you convert some of these largely abandoned office buildings and other commercial property into affordable, livable spaces for the working class, you won't get even close to what the City was like 10-15 years ago. But of course, affordable housing is personna non grata in the US, so we'll see what happens.

For those complaining about SF, I can say the same thing for large parts of LA, Houston, NYC, London, Seoul, damn...pretty much all of Cleveland, Washington DC, etc. I mean, have you been to Morningside Park just east of Columbia? Have you been there at night?

How about Cleveland, east of downtown, where of all places the Cleveland Clinic is located?

We can go on and on and on, but this whole SF pig sty thing is the pot calling the kettle black. It's a joke.

I would much rather have to deal with the squalor in SF while living near or around some of the most beautiful views in the world, and a stones throw away from some of the best wines in the world, best skiing in the world, the best hiking in the world, the best food in the world, and world renowned national parks and wildlife sanctuaries.

And yes, the economic powerhouse of tech is still here.

Not many cities can offer that combination.

[Cassian739]

Originally Posted by Gebbeth

I've lived and worked in SF (the City, as well as Silicon Valley) combined for the past 23 years. Prior to that, I've lived and worked in a big Asian city (Seoul), in London, England, and in NYC. I even had a short stint in Cleveland, OH of all places. I also grew up and worked briefly in LA.

San Francisco has changed, but the problems they are experiencing are (1) overblown, and (2) no different than any of the other big city I've lived and worked in. It's just that each city has a different flavor of issues and causes.

On (1). Crime in the areas people are focusing on in the press is subject to EXTREME recency bias. The SOMA areas, the areas bordering the Tenderloin, the Mission....these were not originally nice places. Some were worse than others, but these were considered non-desirable places.

What changed was gentrification brought on by the tech bros. When they started moving in, they wanted places to live that matched their salaries. So large areas of SOMA, the Mission, down Market Street, China Basin, Potrero, South City, you name it, they all started sprouting up condos and luxury apartments and office building converted from abandoned warehouses, etc.

That gentrified the area immensely, priced out working class people, and brought in stores like Whole Foods and CVSs and Nordstroms on Market, etc. These were brought in the cater to these tech bros and their money and lifestyle.

Then COVID hit. The free and easy money dried up. And guess what? No one wants to live in the City anymore....let alone in what used to be somewhat sketchy neighborhoods for $1M condos and 1 bedroom, 700 sq ft, apartments that cost $5000 a month.

So what happens when artificial economic dynamics change? Things revert back to what it used to be. And SF used to be a righteously dirty, hard drinking town (to quote a now gone famous celebrity). So it's becoming what it has always been, since 1849.

Only now, you've permanently priced out the residents that used to keep it somewhat real. They are gone, and unless you convert some of these largely abandoned office buildings and other commercial property into affordable, livable spaces for the working class, you won't get even close to what the City was like 10-15 years ago. But of course, affordable housing is personna non grata in the US, so we'll see what happens.

For those complaining about SF, I can say the same thing for large parts of LA, Houston, NYC, London, Seoul, damn...pretty much all of Cleveland, Washington DC, etc. I mean, have you been to Morningside Park just east of Columbia? Have you been there at night?

How about Cleveland, east of downtown, where of all places the Cleveland Clinic is located?

We can go on and on and on, but this whole SF pig sty thing is the pot calling the kettle black. It's a joke.

I would much rather have to deal with the squalor in SF while living near or around some of the most beautiful views in the world, and a stones throw away from some of the best wines in the world, best skiing in the world, the best hiking in the world, the best food in the world, and world renowned national parks and wildlife sanctuaries.

And yes, the economic powerhouse of tech is still here.

Not many cities can offer that combination.

Well said!

[codecow]

Meh… I mean south beach was just starting to flip when I got there… true there were always junkies under 80 on 3rd and such but the entire Caltrain depot area wasn’t full of schizophrenic psychos, and why are they on the street anyway?

[goodolejr]

Originally Posted by Gebbeth

I've lived and worked in SF (the City, as well as Silicon Valley) combined for the past 23 years. Prior to that, I've lived and worked in a big Asian city (Seoul), in London, England, and in NYC. I even had a short stint in Cleveland, OH of all places. I also grew up and worked briefly in LA.

San Francisco has changed, but the problems they are experiencing are (1) overblown, and (2) no different than any of the other big city I've lived and worked in. It's just that each city has a different flavor of issues and causes.

On (1). Crime in the areas people are focusing on in the press is subject to EXTREME recency bias. The SOMA areas, the areas bordering the Tenderloin, the Mission....these were not originally nice places. Some were worse than others, but these were considered non-desirable places.

What changed was gentrification brought on by the tech bros. When they started moving in, they wanted places to live that matched their salaries. So large areas of SOMA, the Mission, down Market Street, China Basin, Potrero, South City, you name it, they all started sprouting up condos and luxury apartments and office building converted from abandoned warehouses, etc.

That gentrified the area immensely, priced out working class people, and brought in stores like Whole Foods and CVSs and Nordstroms on Market, etc. These were brought in the cater to these tech bros and their money and lifestyle.

Then COVID hit. The free and easy money dried up. And guess what? No one wants to live in the City anymore....let alone in what used to be somewhat sketchy neighborhoods for $1M condos and 1 bedroom, 700 sq ft, apartments that cost $5000 a month.

So what happens when artificial economic dynamics change? Things revert back to what it used to be. And SF used to be a righteously dirty, hard drinking town (to quote a now gone famous celebrity). So it's becoming what it has always been, since 1849.

Only now, you've permanently priced out the residents that used to keep it somewhat real. They are gone, and unless you convert some of these largely abandoned office buildings and other commercial property into affordable, livable spaces for the working class, you won't get even close to what the City was like 10-15 years ago. But of course, affordable housing is personna non grata in the US, so we'll see what happens.

For those complaining about SF, I can say the same thing for large parts of LA, Houston, NYC, London, Seoul, damn...pretty much all of Cleveland, Washington DC, etc. I mean, have you been to Morningside Park just east of Columbia? Have you been there at night?

How about Cleveland, east of downtown, where of all places the Cleveland Clinic is located?

We can go on and on and on, but this whole SF pig sty thing is the pot calling the kettle black. It's a joke.

I would much rather have to deal with the squalor in SF while living near or around some of the most beautiful views in the world, and a stones throw away from some of the best wines in the world, best skiing in the world, the best hiking in the world, the best food in the world, and world renowned national parks and wildlife sanctuaries.

And yes, the economic powerhouse of tech is still here.

Not many cities can offer that combination.

Scapegoat much?

[norcalgt3]

Originally Posted by Gebbeth

I've lived and worked in SF (the City, as well as Silicon Valley) combined for the past 23 years. Prior to that, I've lived and worked in a big Asian city (Seoul), in London, England, and in NYC. I even had a short stint in Cleveland, OH of all places. I also grew up and worked briefly in LA.

San Francisco has changed, but the problems they are experiencing are (1) overblown, and (2) no different than any of the other big city I've lived and worked in. It's just that each city has a different flavor of issues and causes.

On (1). Crime in the areas people are focusing on in the press is subject to EXTREME recency bias. The SOMA areas, the areas bordering the Tenderloin, the Mission....these were not originally nice places. Some were worse than others, but these were considered non-desirable places.

What changed was gentrification brought on by the tech bros. When they started moving in, they wanted places to live that matched their salaries. So large areas of SOMA, the Mission, down Market Street, China Basin, Potrero, South City, you name it, they all started sprouting up condos and luxury apartments and office building converted from abandoned warehouses, etc.

That gentrified the area immensely, priced out working class people, and brought in stores like Whole Foods and CVSs and Nordstroms on Market, etc. These were brought in the cater to these tech bros and their money and lifestyle.

Then COVID hit. The free and easy money dried up. And guess what? No one wants to live in the City anymore....let alone in what used to be somewhat sketchy neighborhoods for $1M condos and 1 bedroom, 700 sq ft, apartments that cost $5000 a month.

So what happens when artificial economic dynamics change? Things revert back to what it used to be. And SF used to be a righteously dirty, hard drinking town (to quote a now gone famous celebrity). So it's becoming what it has always been, since 1849.

Only now, you've permanently priced out the residents that used to keep it somewhat real. They are gone, and unless you convert some of these largely abandoned office buildings and other commercial property into affordable, livable spaces for the working class, you won't get even close to what the City was like 10-15 years ago. But of course, affordable housing is personna non grata in the US, so we'll see what happens.

For those complaining about SF, I can say the same thing for large parts of LA, Houston, NYC, London, Seoul, damn...pretty much all of Cleveland, Washington DC, etc. I mean, have you been to Morningside Park just east of Columbia? Have you been there at night?

How about Cleveland, east of downtown, where of all places the Cleveland Clinic is located?

We can go on and on and on, but this whole SF pig sty thing is the pot calling the kettle black. It's a joke.

I would much rather have to deal with the squalor in SF while living near or around some of the most beautiful views in the world, and a stones throw away from some of the best wines in the world, best skiing in the world, the best hiking in the world, the best food in the world, and world renowned national parks and wildlife sanctuaries.

And yes, the economic powerhouse of tech is still here.

Not many cities can offer that combination.

No other cities you've cited above has the same volume of human shit on the streets. Having worked in the city for a while and in tech, I'll never do it again. The area around twitter makes the area around Columbia's campus look upscale.

[the dark knight]

Originally Posted by Gebbeth

I've lived and worked in SF (the City, as well as Silicon Valley) combined for the past 23 years. Prior to that, I've lived and worked in a big Asian city (Seoul), in London, England, and in NYC. I even had a short stint in Cleveland, OH of all places. I also grew up and worked briefly in LA.

San Francisco has changed, but the problems they are experiencing are (1) overblown, and (2) no different than any of the other big city I've lived and worked in. It's just that each city has a different flavor of issues and causes.

On (1). Crime in the areas people are focusing on in the press is subject to EXTREME recency bias. The SOMA areas, the areas bordering the Tenderloin, the Mission....these were not originally nice places. Some were worse than others, but these were considered non-desirable places.

What changed was gentrification brought on by the tech bros. When they started moving in, they wanted places to live that matched their salaries. So large areas of SOMA, the Mission, down Market Street, China Basin, Potrero, South City, you name it, they all started sprouting up condos and luxury apartments and office building converted from abandoned warehouses, etc.

That gentrified the area immensely, priced out working class people, and brought in stores like Whole Foods and CVSs and Nordstroms on Market, etc. These were brought in the cater to these tech bros and their money and lifestyle.

Then COVID hit. The free and easy money dried up. And guess what? No one wants to live in the City anymore....let alone in what used to be somewhat sketchy neighborhoods for $1M condos and 1 bedroom, 700 sq ft, apartments that cost $5000 a month.

So what happens when artificial economic dynamics change? Things revert back to what it used to be. And SF used to be a righteously dirty, hard drinking town (to quote a now gone famous celebrity). So it's becoming what it has always been, since 1849.

Only now, you've permanently priced out the residents that used to keep it somewhat real. They are gone, and unless you convert some of these largely abandoned office buildings and other commercial property into affordable, livable spaces for the working class, you won't get even close to what the City was like 10-15 years ago. But of course, affordable housing is personna non grata in the US, so we'll see what happens.

For those complaining about SF, I can say the same thing for large parts of LA, Houston, NYC, London, Seoul, damn...pretty much all of Cleveland, Washington DC, etc. I mean, have you been to Morningside Park just east of Columbia? Have you been there at night?

How about Cleveland, east of downtown, where of all places the Cleveland Clinic is located?

We can go on and on and on, but this whole SF pig sty thing is the pot calling the kettle black. It's a joke.

I would much rather have to deal with the squalor in SF while living near or around some of the most beautiful views in the world, and a stones throw away from some of the best wines in the world, best skiing in the world, the best hiking in the world, the best food in the world, and world renowned national parks and wildlife sanctuaries.

And yes, the economic powerhouse of tech is still here.

Not many cities can offer that combination.

Large parts of SEOUL have the same issues plaguing SF? Human feces on the streets, homeless and the mentally ill everywhere, and a fentanyl epidemic? I'd love to have whatever you're smoking, it must be real good.

[Apheaven]

Originally Posted by amphora001

Also security guards are only allowed to tell them to stop sternly but not actually stop anyone. I say if you are stealing stuff and your are caught red handed they should be allowed to tackle them.

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

Not true anymore…the security guard at Walgreeens who shot and killed a person shoplifting will not face homicide charges (and was never going to per the new DA). Things are changing quickly here in some respects.

The police department, Sherrif’s department, FBI and District attorney’s office are dropping the hammer on crime and drugs in the city. This includes security guards ‘defending themselves’ when preventing shoplifting. Huge amounts of pressure are on all of the city leaders. The mayor knows she has one shot to redirect this ship before the 2024 elections or she is gone…along with many other leaders in the city.

I am seeing this play out in most large cities right now. It’s been an interesting few years for everyone.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[amphr1]

Originally Posted by Apheaven

Not true anymore…the security guard at Walgreeens who shot and killed a person shoplifting will not face homicide charges (and was never going to per the new DA). Things are changing quickly here in some respects.

The police department, Sherifs department, FBI and District attorney’s office are dropping the hammer on crime and drugs in the city. This includes security guards ‘defending themselves’ when preventing shoplifting. Huge amounts of pressure are on all of the city leaders. The mayor knows she has one shot to redirect this ship before the 2024 elections or she is gone…along with many other leaders in the city.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That's going in the right direction

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

[wgdaytona]

Unknown, but… if he is closing only 1 store, any potential inventory just gets shuffled to other stores. If they are shutting down for real, most likely the few models they had on hand are already sold off. A few months to wind down a retail store is plenty of time to sell the mere few they may have had. If Rolex yanked their permit, they probably sold those last few gray market to capture max dollars. Anyway, No Soup For You!

[bayareapanerai]

If SF is such a dump, what is LA? Have you seen Seattle or Portland? SF is 47 square miles so you can’t ignore and avoid problem areas. Every west coast city has declined significantly in the past 3-4 years.

The area where the Rolex store is opening is not a dump. Graff, Harry Winston, Patek(to be opened), Burberry flagship and Nike are on the same block. If the Westfield mall closes, the only thing I’d miss is the food court and maybe Bloomingdale’s

[Krash]

Originally Posted by bayareapanerai

If SF is such a dump, what is LA? Have you seen Seattle or Portland? SF is 47 square miles so you can’t ignore and avoid problem areas. Every west coast city has declined significantly in the past 3-4 years.

The area where the Rolex store is opening is not a dump. Graff, Harry Winston, Patek(to be opened), Burberry flagship and Nike are on the same block. If the Westfield mall closes, the only thing I’d miss is the food court and maybe Bloomingdale’s

They’re all 3rd World disaster areas. Especially Portland.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Krash]

Originally Posted by Apheaven

The mayor knows she has one shot to redirect this ship before the 2024 elections or she is gone…along with many other leaders in the city.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Not sure that matters. The next Mayor will be just as bad or worse.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TheVTCGuy]

I had fond memories of SF, from way back in the 90s, but now, I don’t mind if I ever visit it again. My company had an event there a year or so ago, i was put up at the same hotel I have been in several times downtown, let’s leave the name and area out of it but just say I felt comfortable in the hotel and would spend free time just walking around town close to it. The last time, I UBERed up to it, and immediately got back in the car. There were people sleeping on the street in front of the lobby, needles on the sidewalk, it was a crackhouse. A major disappointment to see what that area had become. This is only my experience, and as many have pointed out you can find scenes like this in every American city, but for me personally, to see the despicable decline of this once safe and fun hotel/area… I am not surprised Rolex and other companies are leaving.

[schuverde]

Originally Posted by amphora001

With the owner of the Westfield mall pulling out of the property, does that mean all stores, including the Rolex boutique, will close? And does that somehow create an opportunity to buy up inventory?

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

I understand that it will be Kerns. Heard this from a downtown Omega store employee. Kern's has a store in Burlingame currently.

[darius359]

Originally Posted by VerticalClutch

It never ceases to amaze me that folks think AD's have a safe stuffed full of Rolex's. If you ran a business, you'd understand things like cash flow...

Having worked for various retailers over the years, including Tourneau, I can confirm that they ALL have or had safes full of various watch brands, primarily extra stock of Rolex watches. Maybe it's different today compared to decades past but there has always been a need to hold stock back for VIPs and special circumstances.

Related story of an experience with overstock:
I managed a Tourneau boutique many years ago, before any of the buy-outs, when it was still run by the Wexler family. One December, right before Xmas, the VP of sales called to tell me that, "We have too many Daytonas in stock and need to move them to make room for a fresh shipment. The courier is on his way, so tell your staff to start making calls and get them sold.". Five white dial and six black dial 116520's were sold in 24 hours. I should've purchased one but they wouldn't let me apply my employee discount to Rolex Professional models and I was just an idiot for not paying retail when I had the chance. Instead, I let some random guy who walked in off the street, visiting our boutique for the very first time, leave with his dream watch.

Sent from my KB2005 using Tapatalk

[amphr1]

Originally Posted by darius359

Having worked for various retailers over the years, including Tourneau, I can confirm that they ALL have or had safes full of various watch brands, primarily extra stock of Rolex watches. Maybe it's different today compared to decades past but there has always been a need to hold stock back for VIPs and special circumstances.

Related story of an experience with overstock:
I managed a Tourneau boutique many years ago, before any of the buy-outs, when it was still run by the Wexler family. One December, right before Xmas, the VP of sales called to tell me that, "We have too many Daytonas in stock and need to move them to make room for a fresh shipment. The courier is on his way, so tell your staff to start making calls and get them sold.". Five white dial and six black dial 116520's were sold in 24 hours. I should've purchased one but they wouldn't let me apply my employee discount to Rolex Professional models and I was just an idiot for not paying retail when I had the chance. Instead, I let some random guy who walked in off the street, visiting our boutique for the very first time, leave with his dream watch.

Sent from my KB2005 using Tapatalk

Wow just wow

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

[Laostuh]

Originally Posted by bayareapanerai

If SF is such a dump, what is LA? Have you seen Seattle or Portland? SF is 47 square miles so you can’t ignore and avoid problem areas. Every west coast city has declined significantly in the past 3-4 years.

The area where the Rolex store is opening is not a dump. Graff, Harry Winston, Patek(to be opened), Burberry flagship and Nike are on the same block. If the Westfield mall closes, the only thing I’d miss is the food court and maybe Bloomingdale’s

LA is a dump too. More or less same policies as SF.

[bay_area_kid]

As a couple of people have already mentioned, there will be another Rolex boutique opening on Post St. close to Union Square. It will be next to the new Patek Philippe boutique. Both will be operated by Kerns.

Kerns made the announcements awhile ago: https://www.kernjewelers.com/blog/ca...kerns-jewelers