Rolex buying "experience" has left me kinda sour

[scooba]

Originally Posted by KatGirl

The ADs control who gets their inventory. Each AD owns their stock. When you try on any exhibition piece, that watch is owned by the AD, and after it’s finished its duty, will be allocated to a customer. Rolex’s control goes only so far. Yes, the ADs have guidelines to follow, that Rolex put in place, but they don’t pertain to who should get allocations. That is completely within the AD’s purview.

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I have this in writing from Rolex Uk 🇬🇧. I requested a special off catalogue piece , Rolex London sent me a email stating exactly the above and even commented my AD had requested the item at Watches and Wonders , but it is such a rare piece ,I needed to manage my expectations, I was grateful my ADs MD had actually tried to obtain it for me. The rest is a secret 🤫

[Kevin of Larchmont]

Originally Posted by rolexpatek363

As far as quality goes, there's no comparison. GS is superior to Rolex in every metric, and it isn't close.

Can you quote these metrics and their objective measurements, specifically the ones that aren’t close. I’m very curious to see how you will attempt to support this blanket unsubstantiated statement.

My objective measurement of Grand Seiko is that they don’t make anything that I want to wear, and it isn’t close.

[mickyd329]

AD'S and boutiques for most popular brands have definitely misbehaved the past few years and turned off a sizable contingent of collectors. As the market cools, hopefully things will get back to normal levels.

Fortunately, my relationships with the brands I collect have been great and I've been able to acquire what I wanted in very reasonable time. However, I have heard horror stories and empathize with their experiences.

Like many have said, AD'S are a business. They will do whatever it takes to maximize their profitability. We can't blame them for it. For those that say, AD'S can get their status taken away if they get caught selling to Grey's? That rule has been in place for as long as I can remember, but AD's did it anyways. I remember the days I was able to get Rolex through grey dealers BNIB at a discount with my name on the warranty directly from the
AD.

Everything is a cycle and I'm sure we'll get back to those days somewhere in the future


For those who doubt Rolex AD's sold ss pieces out the back door to Grey's are kidding themselves. Waiting lists ? I'm sure many AD'S have true waiting lists, but I never believed in them. All my ss Rolex pieces were acquired without much wait. Some I've been able to get on short notice. Yes, I have a long history with my AD and what do you think happens to those folks on the waitlist when I ask for a GMT for example? Heck, I've even gotten hot SS pieces for friends and family with short waits. How about all those people on the wailist for those? I'm sure every AD operates differently, but that has been my experience.

[Ursusarctos]

My experience with 3 different AD have all been very positive here in Canada. I've made my requests and all have been professional. I've been offered 2 watches on my list, 1 not on my list, and I purchased 1 (one didn't work for me as I'd hoped). I was, however, patient and kept in touch. I wasn't going to the secondary market or auctions for fear of what might arrive (too many stories of things going sideways). It was a 3 year process but a Rolex was something I wanted and not a need. The other benefit was that my tastes shifted a bit over the years. I'll rejoin AD waiting lists when I figure my next watch might be but I'll be patient as I'm over the moon with my new Sub TT (black dial).

[KatGirl]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

Can you quote these metrics and their objective measurements, specifically the ones that aren’t close. I’m very curious to see how you will attempt to support this blanket unsubstantiated statement.

My objective measurement of Grand Seiko is that they don’t make anything that I want to wear, and it isn’t close.

LOL! Well said, Kevin. Grand Seiko has some interesting dials, and their Spring drive movement, but …..it ain’t no Rolex! Having said that, there are some lovely midrange regular Seiko divers that I like a lot. I have several. However, Grand Seiko never interested me.

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[rolexpatek363]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

Can you quote these metrics and their objective measurements, specifically the ones that aren’t close. I’m very curious to see how you will attempt to support this blanket unsubstantiated statement.

Fair question, and well said, Kevin.

It's very obvious if you handle the pieces and examine them with a loupe. Rolex finish is very rough in comparison to Grand Seiko. Look at the dials, dial markers, hands and case. Then there is movement finish: Rolex don't generally do exhibition casebacks for a very good reason.

GS watches are hand-finished, Rolex are made by machine. GS have far more variation throughout their range, Rolexes tend to look very similar to one another, and do very little in the way of complications.

GS technology and variety of movement options eclipses Rolex, and there's no other watch manufacture who has been able to make a Spring Drive movement. GS can sell you a watch with a 5Hz movement and 80 hr power reserve, Rolex can't do this (currently).

Rolex sell you a 5k watch for 10k, GS vice-versa.

However, YMMV and I've come across tribal people on this forum who will swear blind that Rolex make a better watch than Patek!

I'm a Rolex fan, owning four, but I'm under no illusions about their position in the quality pecking order. Take the branding off and strip away the marketing, and GS are way ahead.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVXT...tchfinder%26Co.

A guide to why some people wear a Sub with a suit (it's marketing):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwMY...asebackWatches

'only great marketing is needed to make a company successful' -- Hans Wilsdorf

[1259]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

Can you quote these metrics and their objective measurements, specifically the ones that aren’t close. I’m very curious to see how you will attempt to support this blanket unsubstantiated statement.

My objective measurement of Grand Seiko is that they don’t make anything that I want to wear, and it isn’t close.

It’s objectively better in every metric because he said so. Can’t you read?

[Belinus]

I quite like Grand Seiko and have considered a few but from my point of view they seem a lower quality than Rolex. It’s subjective but for me the Rolex SS options just seem a more premium product.

As for the AD experience (Rolex v the rest), it’s two completely different situations. For a Rolex AD, the hardest part must be constantly telling people they can’t get a piece whilst for most other watch retailers it’s a sales job when they have the time, incentive and the stock to give customers more of an experience

[rolexpatek363]

Originally Posted by Belinus

they seem a lower quality than Rolex ... the Rolex SS options just seem a more premium product.

Have you seen a Grand Seiko? Most of these remarks come from people who have only seen pictures.

I was talking to a watch dealer this morning, and he compared his own £35k Patek Philippe Calatrava movement finish to a GS which was passing through his stock.

He said the Grand Seiko has superior movement finishing to Patek Philippe. Not the same, better. Philippe Dufour visited the manufacture in Japan some years ago and advised GS re: movement finishing. He even helped them source the right type of wood to use on the bevels.

[Belinus]

Originally Posted by rolexpatek363

Have you seen a Grand Seiko? Most of these remarks come from people who have only seen pictures.

I was talking to a watch dealer this morning, and he compared his own £35k Patek Philippe Calatrava movement finish to a GS which was passing through his stock.

He said the Grand Seiko has superior movement finishing to Patek Philippe. Not the same, better. Philippe Dufour visited the manufacture in Japan some years ago and advised GS re: movement finishing. He even helped them source the right type of wood to use on the bevels.

I’ve tried on several of them and have seriously considered buying one (white birch). Some of the dials are stunning but I didn’t like the bracelets. I’m still thinking about one of their GMTs or even one of their Quartz GMTs but based on look and feel, I prefer Rolex

[rolexpatek363]

I agree that Rolex do make better bracelets than GS.

My solution was to buy a GS on a strap (the Omiwatari).

[BraveBold]

Understand the OP’s frustration. That said, as others have stated, these are luxury goods, not necessities. Rolex’s approach is savvy and sound - and I prefer it over flooding the market, then cutting back, then flooding, and so on. Or, raising prices severely and then having to (aggressively!) discount.

The milestone angle is a challenge but also rings a bit hollow. Many people have different milestones of varying degrees of personal importance. I don’t see how it changes market dynamics or should elicit favors due to personal dependency on a particular “material product” outcome.

Having flexibility as a buyer returns the power to the individual. Other brands make great watches. There are also vintage pieces.

As for grey market dealers. They absolutely distort the market in good times. Flippers too - and those distortions and windfalls also tend to have associated risks. Nothing is “free” - at least nothing people want. Personally, I DO think Rolex could do better managing this aspect but there are many limitations on their ability to do so.

I guess for me it comes down to patience, understanding and personal context. My dad wore a cheap Seiko and could never afford a Rolex. I have never felt entitled to any luxury item - and that includes due to a combination of availability AND price, because clearly anything is available at market price. If that market price looks distorted or is outside my range of value, I simply look elsewhere.

My AD relationship (another part of context) is reasonably positive. I have a good professional relationship with the manager and a friendly one with my SA. Respectful in both directions and with no expectations beyond what is communicated. Perhaps that is also key here - the Rolex reputation is heavily decentralized and reliant on its AD network. The couple ADs I’ve dealt with (NYC and where I am today) have been professional.

[garyk]

Originally Posted by 1259

It’s objectively better in every metric because he said so. Can’t you read?

[rolexpatek363]

Originally Posted by garyk

It was an awesome joke, I will admit!

[Kinnakeet]

Originally Posted by Belinus

I’ve tried on several of them and have seriously considered buying one (white birch). Some of the dials are stunning but I didn’t like the bracelets. I’m still thinking about one of their GMTs or even one of their Quartz GMTs but based on look and feel, I prefer Rolex

The bracelets are very comfortable, more so than Rolex, just saying that since Rolex is what other brands seem to be compared to. But yes, GS doesn’t have a comfort link, but they will soon.

[Kinnakeet]

Originally Posted by rolexpatek363

Have you seen a Grand Seiko? Most of these remarks come from people who have only seen pictures.

I was talking to a watch dealer this morning, and he compared his own £35k Patek Philippe Calatrava movement finish to a GS which was passing through his stock.

He said the Grand Seiko has superior movement finishing to Patek Philippe. Not the same, better. Philippe Dufour visited the manufacture in Japan some years ago and advised GS re: movement finishing. He even helped them source the right type of wood to use on the bevels.

I agree with you. I have quite a bit of experience with both brands. GS is so much better it’s not fair to compare Rolex to them. My husband has commented that if the GS watches had Patek Philippe on the dial they could add $30,000 to the price.

My one GS regret is I had a very rare WG Snowflake. I sold it. Big regret. I hope to find another.

[Marcjvr]

The best part about this thread is that it has gotten me really interested in Grand Seiko

Watching some YT reviews of their watches the quality does seem exceptional compared to Rolex

[Neil McCauley]

Recommending other brands or saying to go vintage, etc, is all kind of disingenuous advice in this case because, ultimately, the OP is right; he wants a modern Rolex reference, and as it stands, they can be notoriously difficult to get hold of. Saying to get something else is one thing, but it still won't necessarily truly scratch that itch if that's what they want. Same for many other people. Buying a Grand Seiko might scratch that itch for some people, but let's face it, it's still the consolation prize, no matter what you tell yourself. It's very common to see the discussion to go like this: "I bought this because screw Rolex, you can't get one anyway, have you seen the dial? Look at that texture, it's so much better, and the zaratsu polishing is exquisite, and look at that second hand sweeping!". Still not a Rolex, though, is it? Ok, ok, I'm being facetious there, but you get what I mean.

ADs have a tough job on their hands. They have more people coming through the door with a high level of desire than they have products to sell. This is an unusual dynamic to have in retail, especially in a time where we, the consumers, all want everything and expect it NOW.
Allocating the pieces they do get in stock to customers is obviously a slow process, and yes, while I'm sure some favouritism and unfair practices take place, I think, on the whole, it's probably a lot more "honest" than people think.

Basic supply and demand dynamics are at play. There are more people that want specific references than there are specific references available. That divide is growing too; despite economic challenges, more and more people are in a position to buy wristwatches like GMTs, Daytonas, etc, and Rolex, no matter how many they try to make within their quality control constraints, cannot keep up with demand.
This means that ADs have a difficult job with distribution because, of course, those with a higher level of commitment and loyalty to the store, SA, are more likely to get better treatment. Is that fair on the person who just walks in off the street and demands a BLNR? From a commercial perspective, no, I'm sure that AD would LOVE to take their £10k off them right there and then. However, the reality is that they simply cannot facilitate that, and pieces tend to find their way to people who have shown more loyalty. Because equally, if you're a big spender, for example, and you found that someone walked off the street and grabbed a BLRO instead of them calling you, and you've been waiting for three years... is that not equally as unfair?

What needs to change?
I would argue that really, not that much needs to change, because no matter what, this problem will always be there. Certain watches will continue to be in high demand, and Rolex, if they're sensible from their perspective, will continue to make these difficult-to-get watches a challenge to obtain because, for them, it's good business. If you want to be able to pick one up at the AD, then you have to toe the line and play the waiting game, get involved and become a true client of that SA. If you're just wandering into every AD and asking what the wait is like on a BLRO, then I'm afraid that you're going to walk away disappointed and likely never receive the call. 20 other people had done that very thing just before you walked in, and 20 more will do it after you've left. SAs must be sick of it. I saw some figures thrown around from some AD recently in NYC that mentioned that around 200 per day were enquiring about SS Daytonas even today. Those kinds of numbers will never be allocated. Also for some perspective, right now there are around 59 million millionaires in the world. Granted not all of them want a Rolex, but even if 1% of them do, that's 590,000 people, and growing. Not even accounting for those of us who are NOT millionaires and still want and can afford a Rolex watch. The maths simply do not stack up - there will ALWAYS be a supply/demand imbalance.

It really is that simple. To explain with an analogy:
If a lion shares territory with other predators and to some degree they share their meals, are they likely to want to share with a new predator that's just arrived and offered nothing in terms of other meals and protection? No, they'll give them a warning and tell them to sling their hook, lucky to not get their asses kicked.
The same applies here. Contribute and be rewarded.

[77T]

Still off-topic re: GS...
My opinion is the brand suffers from one marketing gaffe.
As grand as it may be, GS still ends with the word Seiko.

Imagine if Toyota had simply put the word "Grand" in front of the word Toyota when they wisely chose to launch Lexus.

GS has earned their chops in horology.
But Marketing has not been "grand".


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Belinus]

Totally agree re the marketing of the name. I am at the stage of my watch collecting life where I don’t want to only buy Rolex. I’ve bought watches from other brands (JLC and Omega) plus a few Rolex. Where it becomes frustrating for me with Rolex is that some of my money has to be held back just in case I get a call from m6 Rolex AD. That money could go to Grand Seiko or elsewhere if I had an idea how long the wait is for my next (and possibly final) Rolex. I understand the difficulty for a Rolex AD to give an indication of timelines but this is where I feel Rolex as a company could help.

[Kevin of Larchmont]

Originally Posted by rolexpatek363

Fair question, and well said, Kevin.

It's very obvious if you handle the pieces and examine them with a loupe. Rolex finish is very rough in comparison to Grand Seiko. Look at the dials, dial markers, hands and case. Then there is movement finish: Rolex don't generally do exhibition casebacks for a very good reason.

GS watches are hand-finished, Rolex are made by machine. GS have far more variation throughout their range, Rolexes tend to look very similar to one another, and do very little in the way of complications.

GS technology and variety of movement options eclipses Rolex, and there's no other watch manufacture who has been able to make a Spring Drive movement. GS can sell you a watch with a 5Hz movement and 80 hr power reserve, Rolex can't do this (currently).

Rolex sell you a 5k watch for 10k, GS vice-versa.

However, YMMV and I've come across tribal people on this forum who will swear blind that Rolex make a better watch than Patek!

I'm a Rolex fan, owning four, but I'm under no illusions about their position in the quality pecking order. Take the branding off and strip away the marketing, and GS are way ahead.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVXT...tchfinder%26Co.

A guide to why some people wear a Sub with a suit (it's marketing):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwMY...asebackWatches

'only great marketing is needed to make a company successful' -- Hans Wilsdorf

So far I see a list of intentional differences in execution with value judgment placed on what’s more important to you. What about resale value and overall market demand? Doesn’t the marketplace have a say in establishing what is better? Why is an exhibition caseback better? Why isn’t continuity of design better? Why is a quartz assisted mechanical movement better? Why does GS lose $5K per watch (per your example) and how is that better? And what about those bracelets?

You’ve made it clear that you think GS is ”better” but the marketplace doesn’t agree. More to the point you still haven’t made me want one. By that measure GS isn’t better and if your metrics actually defined better we’d all be over on the GS forum. So far you’ve just established that GS and Rolex are different.

[N0trub]

I am in Boston with my family and would love to visit longs jewelry on Boylston rumor is its the biggest storefront in North America for rolex but. Its about 50/50 if they are going to be welcoming. Staying at a hotel right around the corner and I was going to visit when they opened. Even considered making an appointment however seems the dont do this any more. Duocerer on worth ave in west palm beach my wifes home town traumatized me…first words out of the SA mouth after I walked in and said hello. “We have nothing for sale for you”.

[rolexpatek363]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

So far I see a list of intentional differences in execution with value judgment placed on what’s more important to you. What about resale value and overall market demand? Doesn’t the marketplace have a say in establishing what is better? Why is an exhibition caseback better? Why isn’t continuity of design better? Why is a quartz assisted mechanical movement better? Why does GS lose $5K per watch (per your example) and how is that better? And what about those bracelets?

You’ve made it clear that you think GS is ”better” but the marketplace doesn’t agree. More to the point you still haven’t made me want one. By that measure GS isn’t better and if your metrics actually defined better we’d all be over on the GS forum. So far you’ve just established that GS and Rolex are different.

"Why does GS lose $5K per watch (per your example) and how is that better?"

Resale value and market demand are frankly irrelevant to me, because I don't view watches as investments. The only reason why Rolex is dominant is marketing.

"Why is an exhibition caseback better?"

Because it allows you to look at the exquisite finishing of the movement. If you're not interested in the movement, it's not compulsory to look. Why do some high-end Ferraris etc. have glass covers on their engines?

"Why isn’t continuity of design better?" GS are reissuing some of their classic designs from the 1960s, and have strong design roots in their "Heritage" range.

"Why is a quartz assisted mechanical movement better?" Because of the smooth sweep of the second hand, and timekeeping accuracy. If you don't want a Spring Drive, you can choose from either 4Hz or 5Hz mechanical movements, either autos or manual wind with very long power reserves.

"the marketplace doesn’t agree" The marketplace thinks Rolex is better than JLC. McDonalds dominates the restaurant industry...

[rolexpatek363]

Originally Posted by Belinus

Totally agree re the marketing of the name. I am at the stage of my watch collecting life where I don’t want to only buy Rolex. I’ve bought watches from other brands (JLC and Omega) plus a few Rolex. Where it becomes frustrating for me with Rolex is that some of my money has to be held back just in case I get a call from m6 Rolex AD. That money could go to Grand Seiko or elsewhere if I had an idea how long the wait is for my next (and possibly final) Rolex. I understand the difficulty for a Rolex AD to give an indication of timelines but this is where I feel Rolex as a company could help.

I agree. I already have four Rolexes, and I'm not interested in acquiring any more. I have other watches from IWC, JLC, Eterna, Patek Philippe, FP Journe, Grand Seiko, Seiko and Zenith.

My intention is to buy another FP Journe, and possibly another Grand Seiko.

[Neil McCauley]

Originally Posted by rolexpatek363

"Why does GS lose $5K per watch (per your example) and how is that better?"

Resale value and market demand are frankly irrelevant to me, because I don't view watches as investments.

Irrelevant to you. For many people, the fact that they retain value is a valid reason to find something attractive, even if you don't "invest" in watches. I don't see my watches as investments at all, but admittedly, I don't like losing money either. So it's a nice by-product for me.

Originally Posted by rolexpatek363

The only reason why Rolex is dominant is marketing.

This is objectively a very unfair statement. Nobody makes Rolex watches in the quantity they do with the same quality levels. Marketing plays a part, but as someone rightly pointed out the other day in another thread, marketing is nothing if you don't have a great product behind it to back it up.

[Kevin of Larchmont]

Originally Posted by rolexpatek363

"Why does GS lose $5K per watch (per your example) and how is that better?"

Resale value and market demand are frankly irrelevant to me, because I don't view watches as investments. The only reason why Rolex is dominant is marketing.

"Why is an exhibition caseback better?"

Because it allows you to look at the exquisite finishing of the movement. If you're not interested in the movement, it's not compulsory to look. Why do some high-end Ferraris etc. have glass covers on their engines?

"Why isn’t continuity of design better?" GS are reissuing some of their classic designs from the 1960s, and have strong design roots in their "Heritage" range.

"Why is a quartz assisted mechanical movement better?" Because of the smooth sweep of the second hand, and timekeeping accuracy. If you don't want a Spring Drive, you can choose from either 4Hz or 5Hz mechanical movements, either autos or manual wind with very long power reserves.

"the marketplace doesn’t agree" The marketplace thinks Rolex is better than JLC. McDonalds dominates the restaurant industry...

Another list of your subjective preferences. But here’s something we agree on, it sure sounds like we’re both chumps for succumbing to their marketing and owning Rolex. We both have four!

See you around Chumptown!

[rolexpatek363]

Originally Posted by Neil McCauley

This is objectively a very unfair statement.

Leaving GS to one side, JLC make objectively better watches than Rolex do. Their marketing isn't as good, so the demand is lower and the watches lose value. Remember what Hans Wilsdorf said?

[Bozzie1982]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

Can you quote these metrics and their objective measurements, specifically the ones that aren’t close. I’m very curious to see how you will attempt to support this blanket unsubstantiated statement.

My objective measurement of Grand Seiko is that they don’t make anything that I want to wear, and it isn’t close.

Have to agree. Whilst they are very well made I wouldn't say the quality was better in any way. I've owned several GS pieces and they've always disappointed.

[Neil McCauley]

Originally Posted by rolexpatek363

Leaving GS to one side, JLC make objectively better watches than Rolex do. Their marketing isn't as good, so the demand is lower and the watches lose value. Remember what Hans Wilsdorf said?

That wasn't really the point though, the statement was that Rolex is only dominant because of their marketing. Which is completely false. Nod to their marketing though, as I've said in previous posts on the thread, it's incredibly unique and exceptional in many ways.

[rolexpatek363]

Originally Posted by Kevin of Larchmont

Another list of your subjective preferences. But here’s something we agree on, it sure sounds like we’re both chumps for succumbing to their marketing and owning Rolex. We both have four!

See you around Chumptown!

You remind me of certain car enthusiasts who only like, say, BMW cars and will not tolerate any criticism of BMW whatsoever.

I'm obviously a Rolex fan, otherwise I wouldn't own any. I'm able to step outside the Rolex bubble, and look at other brands as well. Every brand has its strengths and weaknesses. Try it, if you like. If you don't, then don't. Why should I care?