Attraction or Value?

[Harry-57]

Originally Posted by Mr Ben

Interesting. Which Heuer is the one that grabs you over the Rolexes?

Not the best quality photo but it's the only picture I can find of my one.

As well as the visual design, it's horologically significant. I can't remember what it cost although I do remember that I got about 25% off. I don't know what it is worth.

[travisb]

Value retention wasn't even a thought when I started collecting. It still isn't.

[omar-rye]

If Rolex didn't hold its value, increase in value right out the door, I'd opt to purchase it in the secondary market at its depreciated price. Or I would ask the AD for a discount. This is what a lot of us already do with brands such as Omega, , Grand Seiko, IWC, JLC, etc. Regardless, I don't think there's much out there that looks better than Rolex within its price range, whether it's lower or higher. No watch is perfect but Rolex comes close in my opinion

[chronocapsoul]

Attraction, I get my watches because I like them and want to wear them.

[Jim_GMT]

Originally Posted by CarlOver

I understand the OPs point. There are plenty of good looking watches. If purchased to make the owner happy, then great. If you don’t like it and have to sell at 50% of MSRP, then you take the bath. If you don’t go into the purchase thinking about selling it at some point and keeping it for the long run, then it’s not an issue.

Agreed. For some people, they have what's known as more money than sense and they can buy new stuff and sell it after a few months if they don't like it or change their minds. I know people who continue to lose a fortune on cars, £20k - 30k after 6 or 12 months. But for those of us who don't have unlimited funds, it makes sense to buy things, the bigger purchases, that you like or love that you also won't lose a load of money on if your situation changes.

A Rolex is a safe purchase unless you are one of the money than sense people who were buying on the grey market in the last 12 months and paying 30-50% over list. It's also a purchase you can enjoy and look at on a daily basis!

[Ruud Van Driver]

If I was in any way concerned about resale value, I wouldn't wear Panerai; I've bought my watches because I love the look of them with one exception.* I've just been fortunate that my Rolex watches happen to hold their value.


*I bought a BLNR a few years ago but bought into the hype instead of love of the watch.

[Watch-Geek]

Since I own about 20+ watches including Basic Casio, G-shocks, Vostok, Sturmanskie, Sea-gull, Seiko 5's, vintage King Seiko, Moonwatch, JLC Reverso, a couple of microbrands and two Rolex watches, I'll say I'm in the 100% attraction section .

But I would lie if I said it didn't make me feel happy knowing i can always get my money back with Rolex and actually make a profit if life takes a turn for the worse.

You realize you get to wear them for free, and there's a sense of serenity in it.

Sent from my SM-A415F using Tapatalk

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by dlddrrr

50-50. Let’s be honest here, who amongst us wouldn’t see Rolexes in a different light if their price dropped 50% when you walked out of the store with it? Maybe a small section of the population wouldn’t care - but if you’re a logical buyer and not an emotional buyer, the resale value / price appreciation has got to come into the buying decision.

There’s an element of truth to that for me, I can admit it.

I’d phrase it like this …

I don’t buy watches with a view to sell them ever really. That said, from time to time you make a gaff, and if one doesn’t work out it’s nice knowing you didn’t throw a lot of money away

[dmash]

100% aesthetic

Most of the guys who say value plays any role other than some added bonus to ownership are likely new to horology as a whole.

[Snowballs]

I enjoy my collection.

IMHO - The value is how it makes you feel.

I care not if anyone else notices I have a Rolex.

My answer is 'Attraction'

[mmbiker]

My SMP is definitely not for value as they drop in price when you buy them new. But love wearing it

My Rolex, past and present, the value retention is 70% of the reason I buy them and I love wearing them. If my Rolex were not as exclusive or retent value as good as expected from a Rolex, I doubt I would spend so much on a Rolex. Just being honest :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Dave O]

Originally Posted by dlddrrr

50-50. Let’s be honest here, who amongst us wouldn’t see Rolexes in a different light if their price dropped 50% when you walked out of the store with it? Maybe a small section of the population wouldn’t care - but if you’re a logical buyer and not an emotional buyer, the resale value / price appreciation has got to come into the buying decision.

I wouldn't. I buy them for the love of the watch, not what it's worth. I couldn't care less if the value was 0 the second I walked out of the AD. Again, it's for the love of the watch and the smile it puts on my face. To me, it's no different than an expensive vacation. Many of us take them. But the second you come home all money is lost but the memories. For me, it's no different with a watch.

Originally Posted by dmash

100% aesthetic

Most of the guys who say value plays any role other than some added bonus to ownership are likely new to horology as a whole.

Agree. As I have said in another thread, some of us are just watch lovers. We love the watch for what it is - a superlative watch. We could care less if it loses value the second we walk out the door of the AD. We buy them because we love them, not because we intend to make money on them down the road.

When someone thinks of it as an investment, we end up in the situation we are in now. That is, more demand than supply and forever wait lists for a Rolex. It will be a happy day in my book when the Rolex watch market crashes and we can go into a Rolex AD and get whatever we want. I know, wishful thinking, but maybe, someday.

[ts3]

100% looks, which is why I have never gotten a Rolex in the first place, sorry.

[Soulo]

Originally Posted by dlddrrr

50-50. Let’s be honest here, who amongst us wouldn’t see Rolexes in a different light if their price dropped 50% when you walked out of the store with it? Maybe a small section of the population wouldn’t care - but if you’re a logical buyer and not an emotional buyer, the resale value / price appreciation has got to come into the buying decision.

I agree and respect your honesty. Rolex watches are great and beautiful peices which is why I own two myself. For those saying that they would still pay $10K plus for a Rolex even if it was worth nothing after walking out of the store makes me question thier financial decisions...but thats just me. I'm a businessman so I approach every large transaction from a business point of view even when it involves things that I lust for such as a watch. I guess others may approach transactions with a consumer mindset.

[hambone1983]

Originally Posted by amphora001

You've never regret buying a watch that you thought was the right one but turns out not to be?

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

not really. Certainly no regret from a financial consideration since that status would be the same whether I loved the watch or not.

[alphadweller]

Attraction 70%
Value 30%

I bought some Rolex models because they were my favourite ones, in spite of many people considering them to be dogs, like the YM pt dial and SD43. Hype turns me off.

[WilsdorfNDavis]

Originally Posted by boltz

90% of value and 60% of what i like.

60% of the time it works every time!

[JJGreen]

Good topic, discussion!

I'll go with 1/3 attraction, 1/3 utility, 1/3 value. The Rolex watches I have are attractive and fairly priced. I would agree there are other options out there, but for $8-15K a SS Rolex is a good watch. They are comfortable, legible, water proof. And knowing I can enjoy them and not lose money, or lose a little, is pretty important to me.

[Dave O]

Originally Posted by Soulo

I agree and respect your honesty. Rolex watches are great and beautiful peices which is why I own two myself. For those saying that they would still pay $10K plus for a Rolex even if it was worth nothing after walking out of the store makes me question thier financial decisions...but thats just me. I'm a businessman so I approach every large transaction from a business point of view even when it involves things that I lust for such as a watch. I guess others may approach transactions with a consumer mindset.

No need to question my financial decisions. They are sound.

With your mindset I don't understand how you and many others go on vacation from time to time. Why? You don't gain any financial returns from going on vacation. So why go on a vacation? You do it to enjoy it. Which is the reason I buy watches - to enjoy them. They are my hobby. Many spend money on hobbies with no return on investment, and watches are my hobby, and I love it. But that's just me.

[amphr1]

Originally Posted by Dave O

No need to question my financial decisions. They are sound.

With your mindset I don't understand how you and many others go on vacation from time to time. Why? You don't gain any financial returns from going on vacation. So why go on a vacation? You do it to enjoy it. Which is the reason I buy watches - to enjoy them. They are my hobby. Many spend money on hobbies with no return on investment, and watches are my hobby, and I love it. But that's just me.

I think the difference is you'd still buy the watch but you'd buy it pre-owned so the depreciation already happened just as you would with a car.

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

[Robf52]

Originally Posted by VictorGMT

70% attraction 30% value.

But the value retention potential allows me to indulge my attraction.

Ditto. I'm a lifetime fan of Rolex and love all the Rolex pieces I've bought; that being said, it's reassuring to know the value retention is phenomenal and the value retention part of it allows me to indulge to my heart's content without major objections from the wife.

[Laostuh]

I'd say about 60% attraction, 40% value. I wouldn't spend thousands on something I did not like, I also wouldn't spend thousands on it if it immediately loses its value.

[Soulo]

Originally Posted by JJGreen

Good topic, discussion!

I'll go with 1/3 attraction, 1/3 utility, 1/3 value. The Rolex watches I have are attractive and fairly priced. I would agree there are other options out there, but for $8-15K a SS Rolex is a good watch. They are comfortable, legible, water proof. And knowing I can enjoy them and not lose money, or lose a little, is pretty important to me.

Thanks, my aim was to provide an interesting conversation amongst my Rolex brethren.

[Soulo]

Originally Posted by Dave O

No need to question my financial decisions. They are sound.

With your mindset I don't understand how you and many others go on vacation from time to time. Why? You don't gain any financial returns from going on vacation. So why go on a vacation? You do it to enjoy it. Which is the reason I buy watches - to enjoy them. They are my hobby. Many spend money on hobbies with no return on investment, and watches are my hobby, and I love it. But that's just me.

Once again, its kind of strange to compare Rolex purchases to vacations and car purchases, it veers off topic somewhat. I'm sensing a little temper and not sure why, I already acknowledged the kind of purchaser that you are and I said that its a beautiful thing.

[INC]

100% because these are Rolexes. That alone gives 100% attraction and 100% value. Well, except for the Cellini line, of course, since in this case the answers can lead to interesting results even for a Rolex. And especially in the case of the Tudors.

However, I think it would be more interesting to ask OP's questions about other brands such as Omega, Cartier, JLC, Panerai, Grand Seiko and so on. I think for these brands the answers could lead to a very interesting result in the investment/enjoyment/retention of value trinity.

[Old Geezer]

I purchase my timepieces to wear for the long term. If I like something enough for its appearance or features, I'll generally go ahead with the purchase even if the value proposition if I ever sold was not the best.
Rolex = 100% Appearance and features ( I only purchase at AD @ MSRP or discount)
Other Brands = I'll say 75% appearance / 25% value. I'll find the best price to avoid taking a total bath if I decide to sell.

[Dave O]

Originally Posted by amphora001

I think the difference is you'd still buy the watch but you'd buy it pre-owned so the depreciation already happened just as you would with a car.

Sent from my SM-G973U1 using Tapatalk

All of my watches are new and from an AD. So for my Breitling and Omega I've already taken a hit which does not bother me in the least.

[biza]

both for me, more on the attraction side though

[HogwldFLTR]

So perhaps it's reaction formation but whenever everyone is heads over heals for a watch and they become unobtainable I pretty much lose interest. I've ended up choosing watches that I really like and some aren't the most popular on the forum here. I for example really like the Milgauss which certainly isn't the crowd favorite. The Bluesy is pretty popular but not as much as the Sub Date stainless. I really like my steel dial Daytona more that my prior black dialed SS ceramic Daytona. I like my WG better than the YG DD41. Oh and the Rhodium YM40 is in my opinion just a beautiful watch. The AK40 is for me a very perfect three hander and quirky much like the Milgauss. So is it coincidence that my choice aren't the most popular but the best for me. How is value gauged at any rate. Is it by a watches potential appreciation or is it by our appreciation of the watch?

[Dave O]

Originally Posted by Soulo

Once again, its kind of strange to compare Rolex purchases to vacations and car purchases, it veers off topic somewhat. I'm sensing a little temper and not sure why, I already acknowledged the kind of purchaser that you are and I said that its a beautiful thing.

No temper implied. It's a good debate. And in the end it's to each their own. But as much as you think it's strange to include vacations and cars in the debate, I think it's strange that you do not. There are thousands of people that don't think twice of leasing a high class car for $500 to $1000 a month for 36 months and have nothing to show for it once the lease is up (that being said, I only purchase my cars, never lease ). Or spending $10k on a vacation and have nothing to show for it when the vacation is over. But these same people are worried about losing money when purchasing a watch? It simply makes no sense to me, as much as my argument makes no sense to you. To me a Rolex is a watch, a life style, not an investment.