Selling, service first?

[scottjal]

edited

Should I get it serviced first or as is? I know it's due but do you think a buyer would value it higher as being just serviced or like the lower price and have it serviced themselves?


p.s.; I think it's neat you guys are all still here.

[ExplorerChris]

I purchased my pre owned Explorer II in April and one of the deciding factors was that it had just been serviced by Rolex Canada in January so I have the service papers and 2 year Waranty which for me meant a lot as far as piece of mind goes.

I know a dealer in pre owned Rolex that will increase his pricing by $500 if he has a pre owned watch that has been serviced by Rolex and comes with the service papers.

[andromeda160]

personally i'd rather save the service money, if the watch works, just sell it and adjust the price accordingly, if you want it gone it will be much less hassle for you, and you might end up further ahead in the end. no sense in waiting a few months to have it serviced, just to sell it to recoup service costs afterward.

[The Libertine]

For me, knowing the service history is important when purchasing used. So, it would certainly be a plus if the Rolex I was interested in buying was recently serviced and, of course, would understand that premium to be calculated into the offering price.

[mike]

I think if I were to service I'd do it through Rolex. Having the RSC paper might put a buyer at ease as to the extent and who did the service.

Nothing wrong with selling as is disclosing the fact and adjusting the price. The buyer then has the option of doing it himself.

[14060m]

Sell it as is
If I were buying it I would rather take care of the service

[scottjal]

Chris & Mike I certainly understand and appreciate the peace of mind angle but do you think this would reflect in the price or not?

I'd definitely send it to an RSC, probably TX.

[Coubs]

I would prefer to buy a used watch and send in for servicing after I purchased it.

[The Libertine]

Originally Posted by mike

I think if I were to service I'd do it through Rolex. Having the RSC paper might put a buyer at ease as to the extent and who did the service.

:

Especially if the original warranty card/papers are no longer available or lost.

[scottjal]

Originally Posted by The Libertine

Especially if the original warranty card/papers are no longer available or lost.

That's a good point but in my case I have box and papers with sales receipts going all the way back to new, I'm the 3rd and longest owner of it.

[mike]

Originally Posted by scottjal

Chris & Mike I certainly understand and appreciate the peace of mind angle but do you think this would reflect in the price or not?

I'd definitely send it to an RSC, probably TX.

Yeah. I'd say given two identical watches the one with recent service and documentation and warranty pulls more than one without.

[ExplorerChris]

Originally Posted by scottjal

Chris & Mike I certainly understand and appreciate the peace of mind angle but do you think this would reflect in the price or not?

I'd definitely send it to an RSC, probably TX.

For me I think so yes.
I would be more than willing to pay a little extra for a Rolex that I know has just been serviced and has a Waranty with Rolex.

To me it's like buying a car that has a Waranty and cones with service records.

When I bought my Explorer II I knew it was authentic that there were no aftermarket parts on it and that I won't have to worry about having to send it away I put it on, wear it everyday, swim and shower with it on and I'm worry free for at least five years. Totally worth it

[scottjal]

I think I'm coming up with a third option, offer to have it serviced at RSC and share a little of the service cost.

My willingness to do so should vouch for authenticity etc but I'm acknowledging this is an expensive proposition that would of course add to the value to the right buyer that wants that.

[FTX I]

A recently serviced watch fs is much more interesting than one with unknown service history.

[jamesbondOO7]

Have it serviced at an RSC.
I bought my 16710 on the French forum because it had just been serviced. That was the absolute deciding factor.

[bbressler]

If buying from a trusted seller I'd rather pay a little less and have it serviced down the line. If buying from a less well known member I'd rather pay a little more to get one just serviced by RSC

[jack81]

The service cost probably cost more than 500 dollar, so i say just sell it without servicing first.

[1995akcoop]

i wouldnt pay upfront to service a watch i was letting go...... if a person really wants it they have it serviced themselves if they choose to


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Tools]

Originally Posted by ExplorerChris

For me I think so yes.
I would be more than willing to pay a little extra for a Rolex that I know has just been serviced and has a Waranty with Rolex.

. . .

I wouldn't pay a seller the cost of an RSC service, over and above the market price, of a similar top-condition watch just because he got it serviced first; I can get a service myself.

Market price is market price. I do believe that a properly serviced and documented watch will generate more interest and will likely sell sooner, but an 800 dollar service isn't going to generate an 800 dollar price bump.

[ExplorerChris]

Originally Posted by Tools

I wouldn't pay a seller the cost of an RSC service, over and above the market price, of a similar top-condition watch just because he got it serviced first; I can get a service myself.

Market price is market price. I do believe that a properly serviced and documented watch will generate more interest and will likely sell sooner, but an 800 dollar service isn't going to generate an 800 dollar price bump.

I agree a recently serviced watch won't generate an $800 price bump but as I said I'd be willing to pay a little more for a recently Rolex serviced watch vs the exact same watch not or serviced or due for a scheduled service and only if the watch came with the service papers.
I have a service paper trail on my Exp II including the Waranty and receipts from a crystal and hands replacement

[belk7]

Originally Posted by Tools

I wouldn't pay a seller the cost of an RSC service, over and above the market price, of a similar top-condition watch just because he got it serviced first; I can get a service myself.

Market price is market price. I do believe that a properly serviced and documented watch will generate more interest and will likely sell sooner, but an 800 dollar service isn't going to generate an 800 dollar price bump.

I agree with Larry about a direct dollar for dollar bump not being realistic. I will say that I figure the cost for a service from an independent like Rikki into my decision about how much my max budget is. If the watch has a documented service, then I'm willing to spend a good bit of that "reserved" money on the watch. Knowing its in good shape and that I won't have to immediately send it off for a few weeks makes it a more desirable purchase.

[Old Expat Beast]

I would service before selling, and add the cost onto the sale price, but RSC service here costs less than half what it does in the US/UK/Aus, etc, so I think most overseas buyers would see that as a good deal.

[scottjal]

Thank you, I believe we have come to the heart of the matter. RSC isn't cheap and likely won't add to the value. Still when the time comes I believe I'll offer the seller the choice anyway.