Tudor being positioned as "budget" brand?

[HogwldFLTR]

The most expensive watch I see on their site it a diamond set 38mm watch for $7250.00; doesn't seem like that much of a bargain!!! I must admit to owning four Tudors so certainly I can't say I've turned up my nose at them.

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by 007_Omega

Tudor was always meant to be a budget alternative/gateway drug into Rolex. It has high quality features of the Rolex but it will always fall short and purposely so. 200m water resistance *cough* on a 14+mm case in 2018 *cough*.

I am liking Tudor more and more lately. I actually really want to get one of their watches eventually. I think they had a problem stage when they were essentially Rolex clones that were inferior. Now they have their own distinct character. People can buy a Tudor simply because they liked the Tudor not because it was cheaper than the Rolex.

Not always. The Tudor Heritage Ranger is rated to 150m, but the Rolex Explorers I and II are only rated to 100m. All of the Tudor chronos are also rated to 150m, while the Daytona is only 100m.

[Bladeshot]

Originally Posted by Case61

Jeez, I never realized how goofy my Big Block looked. Thanks for the heads-up!

Chrono with a date! Love it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[unknown]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

Not always. The Tudor Heritage Ranger is rated to 150m, but the Rolex Explorers I and II are only rated to 100m. All of the Tudor chronos are also rated to 150m, while the Daytona is only 100m.

And the so hot new GMT’s
Rolex 100 and Tudor 200 😁

I’m getting both watches within a few weeks and I’ll probably wear the Tudor more often

[Krash]

I think a good analogy is Gibson guitars vs Epiphone guitars. Epiphone is a subsidiary of Gibson. All you have to do is look at the price tags. It’s very obvious that Gibson is the premium brand and Epiphone is the more affordable brand.

Same goes for Rolex and Tudor. I’m not exactly sure of the price points but I think the most expensive Tudor is about the same price as the cheapest Rolex. There is very little pricing overlap. As far as I know, Tudor doesn’t sell anything that costs more than $6k US, and that’s about the point where Rolex starts, and of course Rolex sells watches for significantly higher than that.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Timelover]

To be honest, if i am in a position to buy a Rolex i would just do that. Tudor is of course a great brand by itself but the fact that they actually want to be a "cheaper rolex" is what is turning me off

[unknown]

Originally Posted by Timelover

To be honest, if i am in a position to buy a Rolex i would just do that. Tudor is of course a great brand by itself but the fact that they actually want to be a "cheaper rolex" is what is turning me off

That’s exactly what a lot of people don’t understand
Tudor does not want to be the cheaper Rolex

They belong to the same group but that’s it

Lange and JLC belong to richemont, I never heard JLC wants to be the cheaper Lange

I own a few Tudor and Rolex and other brands
I enjoy wearing my Tudors sometimes even more than rolexes.

[Twisted Vicar]

I'm not sure which level of goofiness I now fall into???

[storm66]

Great trio.......
Personally I would wear left first....right would take 2nd place and the beaut in the middle would get the least wrist time!
How do you choose

[tudorbaja27]

Originally Posted by unknown

That’s exactly what a lot of people don’t understand
Tudor does not want to be the cheaper Rolex

They belong to the same group but that’s it

Lange and JLC belong to richemont, I never heard JLC wants to be the cheaper Lange

I own a few Tudor and Rolex and other brands
I enjoy wearing my Tudors sometimes even more than rolexes.

Great points! I enjoy every second of my Tudor on the wrist

[Jakx]

Tool watch personality of Tudor (and vintage feel) is appealing to a lot of people. It doesn't mean those of us with this viewpoint consider Tudor as a stepping stone to Rolex. The watch stands on its own (not a 'budget' brand at all). If anything Tudor seems more the trend setter (neo-vintage) since the release of the first BB red. Nothing goofy there. :)

[Scholar]

I think what people are missing about the pricing is that modern Tudors are in the price bracket that Rolex was in not so long ago.

When you factor the original price ($1,625 in 1988) of the 16710 GMT Master II for inflation, you get $3,400 in today's dollars. The Black Bay GMT is priced at $3,700.

A no-date Rolex Submariner in 1988 ran $1,450, which is $3,120 in today's dollars. The Black Bay 58 has an MSRP of $3,575.

[bdex75]

Originally Posted by Case61

Really. So goofy. Do you wear a paper bag over your head when you go out with that?

Yes. The embarrassment is more than any one man can handle.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[jtpopper]

Hmmm I’m not sure I understand. If we’re talking about old epiphones before they were bought by Gibson then sure I agree. Epiphones are made in China and usually aren’t great. Gibson’s made today are having qc issues and btw they’re bankrupt. A better anology would be Fender custom shop vs Fender American made. That could create an argument in itself so not sure if the guitar realm can be brought into the world of watches.

[Twisted Vicar]

Originally Posted by storm66

Great trio.......
Personally I would wear left first....right would take 2nd place and the beaut in the middle would get the least wrist time!
How do you choose

Thanks. I posted these three as the original comment was regarding these three brands.

Amongst the ones in the photo, the Speedmaster gets the most wrist time, then the Tudor and then the Rolex.

[DylanFox]

Surprised TUDOR doesn’t have its own sub forum

[Dj_masse]

Originally Posted by dave023

or the opposite....I first got a Rolex and got interested in the Tudor brand after that...

Amen. I have three rolexes but now looking at Tudor also.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[supersam80]

Originally Posted by unknown

That’s exactly what a lot of people don’t understand
Tudor does not want to be the cheaper Rolex

They belong to the same group but that’s it

Lange and JLC belong to richemont, I never heard JLC wants to be the cheaper Lange.

I'm not a Tudor hater at all but I'm sure if jlc started pumping out watches that looked a lot like a lange 1 or 1815 then people would start saying jlc wants to be als

[Ruud Van Driver]

Originally Posted by WJGESQ

Tudors look goofy.


If you can't or won't buy a Rolex, preserve your dignity and go Omega.

I've read some dumb posts in my short time as a member here (I've written one or two myself), but the sheer ignorance in this one is absolutely staggering

[goldcoastci]

consider the Tudor watch as the journey to buying upward to a Rolex.

[bp1000]

If you buy because of the brand you are not a “watch guy”

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by goldcoastci

consider the Tudor watch as the journey to buying upward to a Rolex.

It was the other way around for me. I have bought several Tudors since I last bought a Rolex (and I own quite a few of those).

[jaySL350]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

It was the other way around for me. I have bought several Tudors since I last bought a Rolex (and I own quite a few of those).

Yes,,,owning Rolex brought me to Tudor,,,
Loving Tudor and 76200 will join us in the future and the S and G with champagne dial on leather another,,,
Rolex for the future,,,poss a turnagraph and the new blue dial OP is a very nice piece,,


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[padi56]

Originally Posted by MSJMJ

Last weekend I was at the Wynn in Las Vegas and took a look at the Watches of Switzerland store. I noticed that all of the Tudor watches had price placards next to them, but did not see such evident pricing on any of the other watch brands. I didn't look exhaustively, as I meant to go back for a closer look but didn't make it. Similarly, I didn't get photos. It certainly appeared that they were promoting Tudor as a budget brand by prominently displaying the prices. Also, it gave the impression that they were having a hard time moving the Tudor watches. This store carries brands on the high end such as Patek, and on the lower end such as Breitling, but it really seemed like they were pushing the Tudors by displaying the pricing. Is there that little demand for Tudor? Is a price decrease coming?

Seems to me perhaps you wear the brand or price instead of the watch,and would hardly call any Tudor watch a budget brand, no matter how you think they are being promoted.

[BlakeA]

Originally Posted by dmash

Could be! I’m just not a fan of the whole ‘faux patina’ thing, however I think most people really like that piece.

I just bought a subC no date and was considering a BB 58 before I bought it. I still like the Tudor though, and would probably buy it if I had the $!
I don’t really look at the 58 as fauxtina, I just like the colors.

[BlakeA]

Originally Posted by No SUBctitute

How do you think a BB58 might compliment your 114060?

"I think your shiny ceramic bezel is beautiful, I hope I get one someday."

Agreed. I think the BB58 will go with your 114060 quite well. Its like getting a vintage Sub for a better price with a better movement and without the care required for a 50+ year old watch.

If Tudor had drilled the lugs on the 58, I would definitely be all over it.

[douglasf13]

As others have mentioned, there's nothing "budget" about Tudor. They're simply filling in the price point that Rolex used to occupy, back when people actually bought Rolex watches to be largely used in rough and tumble ways.

After wearing a DateJust for years, and then getting into Rolex professional models, I realized that I preferred the 36mm size, especially during activities, and I loved that Tudor made a 36mm Date+Day model in steel, because I'd never buy a heavy gold watch, and I really like have a day complication. So, now I wear a Tudor everyday for quite literally everything, and I love it.

In terms of brand recognition, while it's rare anyone would even notice a watch these days, I must admit I've soured from the Rolex brand a little bit, likely do to this forum , and I prefer the Tudor vibe. Last week I had a rare run-in with a guy wearing an early '80s SubDate, and we traded watches for a few minutes to talk about them. I felt no jealousy at all, and, if anything, I felt like my little Tudor was a little more unique and cool, although, being from his uncle, his SubDate had a fantastic story to go along with it. It's all good. Both companies make great watches.