Do we all have too much faith in Rolex?

[Jimbits76]

Just thinking about the posts...post and pre Basel, are we putting too much faith in our favourite brand? Are we trying to hard to out-think Rolex's designers and executives?

Think about it...we all scoff at rumours of Rolex and Cadillac co-branding. What if it actually true?

Everybody talks about Hans Wildorf and how he would feel about the company today! I doubt there is anybody here who knows his descendants personally or would ever be able to say what Mr Wilsdorf truly wanted!

What about the Pepsi...a thousand or so guys on a watch forum want a new ceramic Pepsi...what if in the grand scheme of thing it was never a great seller for Rolex? Perhaps Rolex discontinuing it is good business sense?

The new DSSD...we all whinge about the rehault engraving etc...maybe Rolex's R&D came back with massive positive figures?????

The truth is none of us here know what Rolex want to make or know what Rolex want to sell. We believe we are the bastion of good taste and we have all of the answers.

Do they care about us? Are they that bothered about the consumer?

The world will keep rotating, time will pass us by whenever we, ourselves stop.

Perhaps that is what is happening.

Maybe Rolex has grown and we haven't?

Feedback?

J

[JJ Irani]

A few good and very valid points there, my friend.

The R&D department of Rolex has obviously done their home-work and then pumped out the new models.

The current existing ones will continue, I guess, for guys like us.....but the new ones bringing one BIG barrier to most of us - AFFORDABILITY!!

Do any of us really want to fork out close to US$10K for the new SD with features so damned professional.....well, what else can I say?

The new 41 mm DDs are superb.....but, once again, price is going to be a very big deterring factor.

I am seriously thinking of becoming a 2-Rolex owner once more.....but, certainly not for now.....and certainly NEVER with those prices.

I guess I'll just have to be content with my beloved Platty for now....sigh!!

[DSJ]

Hmmm

I think its a generational thing. Or maybe a philosophy in thought. Many of us on TRF are more traditional, but many newer Rolex customers want something like the DeepSea. I would rather have a 34mm than a 43mm, which is why watches like Panerai do not do anything for me. I guess I'm more old school. I thiknk Rolex makes calculated decisions based on history, competition, market research, etc. Let's face it, they've had far more "hits" than "misses," and the ones that were originally a miss (i.e. Daytona) are now hits. Most of Rolex success is due to one thing though - marketing/branding.

[Scarface]

Jim you are right; that 's why many of us stated that they intend to stick and buy existing models, GMT-II, SS Sub, etc.
But:
1) as time goes buy we might change our minds..
2) we might just be a fraction of "hardcore" Rolex owners embracing the values that Rolex used to stand for already for decades. We might be "old school"..

Still, they should have a better idea of their customer base, potential customers, new trends and future directions...Plus, they always had the power to "impose" what they want.

Personally, I liked some of 2008 Basel's models and I disliked others.
So far, Rolex was always living in a world of its own without listening to trends and that was their secret of succcess; they created rugged, simple, functional and elegant watches - if from now they follow the trends instead of defining them, I 'll be disappointed

[Scarface]

Notice, we are all saying the same things more or less ..

[funlab]

i'm afraid that might be giving rolex too much credit. we'd like to think they have sophisticated research methods and have carefully employed them.

the fact of the matter is the post that jj just put up, and the others like it, are some of the best data rolex could ever hope to have access to. forums like this represent the best focus group rolex could ever dream of being able to tap into. hundreds of people perfectly fitting their demographic. jj's post captures the exact sentiment, one of great disappointment, rolex should be interested in this real-time feedback.

the question you ask, "do they care"? obviously not. it would take little effort for one of the research interns to lurk around here or any of the other forums to get not only great ideas for future watches the rolex community would like to see, but also feedback on what we don't like. if they did do this, we'd have a ceramic pepsi and we wouldn't have a new dd2 platinum that retails for 50k. btw, if anyone from rolex is watching, i think the new dd2 is gorgeous and the best thing to come out of basel, but not for that kind of money.

[Terry Newton]

I've reached my limit at two. I am priced out of the market.

The other thing for me is that there are so many more interesting watches out there that I never wanted to get stuck with; "Rolex on the Brain" anyway.

I love so many different brands and looks. I love A. Lange & Sohne, Glashutte Original, F.P. Journe, Gerrard Perregaux, Maurice LaCroix, IWC, etc. watches.

I also just purchased an American made RGM that I am very excited about getting soon.

I love posting here and love the two Rolex watches I have and am content. What more can one ask for? It is interesting to look at new creations but Rolex will evolve no matter what any of us will think or believe. There will always be the classics that will pass on down from generation to generation. We will preserve those for the future. Way down the line people will look at the Old Subs and the Old GMT-Master II c and wonder about them just like we look at the old, old vintage Rolex models out there now.

Terry Newton

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by Terry Newton

I've reached my limit at two. I am priced out of the market.

The other thing for me is that there are so many more interesting watches out there that I never wanted to get stuck with; "Rolex on the Brain" anyway.

I love so many different brands and looks. I love A. Lange & Sohne, Glashutte Original, F.P. Journe, Gerrard Perregaux, Maurice LaCroix, IWC, etc. watches.

I also just purchased an American made RGM that I am very excited about getting soon.

I love posting here and love the two Rolex watches I have and am content. What more can one ask for? It is interesting to look at new creations but Rolex will evolve no matter what any of us will think or believe. There will always be the classics that will pass on down from generation to generation. We will preserve those for the future. Way down the line people will look at the Old Subs and the Old GMT-Master II c and wonder about them just like we look at the old, old vintage Rolex models out there now.

Terry Newton

With a 16610 and the new TT GMT-IIC under your belt, that's an awesome twosome to have, Terry. Well done!!

[Bobareno]

Guess I'm just "old school", I will leave all the new stuff for the "new school peeps"

[Dan Pierce]

David's point about the "generational" thing rings true to me. In years past, when we were all younger, a Rolex was something to strive for. And for years, sometime decades, the models didn't change. The Rolex of your dreams was in your sights for a long time. The downside to the classic design manifests itself in decriptions like "old man's watch".
Now, the changes are coming fast and furiuos, ala Tag Heuer. So it seems Rolex is changing with the times rather than leading by example. For some that's good. For others, it ain't so good.
There are however, millions of Rolex models, of a variety of ages to choose from if the new style don't frost yo' flakes.
dP

[Jimbits76]

Good points guys!

Do you think it's us? From the comments I think it's fair to say that we all seem pretty wistful about the days of the tool watch (even though I would still maintain a Rolex is a luxury jewellry item).

How about this, this may shake a few feathers...I grew up thinking Rolex was a brand for real men...engineers, macho movie stars, sports stars, deep sea divers and ermmm secret agents. Although the new Dipsy is a real piece of engineering work and probably about as macho as it gets, do you think the watches for real red blooded men, the watches of our heroes or fathers have been diluted with glitz, flash and diamond encrusted doodahs???? I've seen comments on here about the 'Paris Hilton' special...is this Rolex's market now?

J

[Incurable]

Rolex seems to adhere to the philosophy of, "If we build it, they will come" more than "Tell me what you want and we'll meet your needs". You see this in the car industry as well. (Japanese vs German) I, personally, don't think Rolex wastes a lot of resources polling the public or doing market research, etc. If we build it, they will come...

[Scarface]

They will sell anyway, we all know this.
I make a living from Marketing and it is the only time when I can admit that, for Rolex, market research is almost unecessary ...

But let's see if this is going to last for another 100 years...

Let's get back to this in the 200th year Anniversary, good health and long-living to everyone here

[Norm]

Originally Posted by Incurable

Rolex seems to adhere to the philosophy of, "If we build it, they will come" more than "Tell me what you want and we'll meet your needs". You see this in the car industry as well. (Japanese vs German) I, personally, don't think Rolex wastes a lot of resources polling the public or doing market research, etc. If we build it, they will come...

+1

[daveathall]

I am neither rich nor poor but I feel that Rolex is pricing me out of the market, the ( and I say this warily) "Entry level" sports watches that could be justified as an everyday wear and therefore worn by people who could afford 1 special watch for work and for socialising has now gone well over the £3000 mark ($6000) which to many will just be that bridge too far.

I belong to another non watch related British forum, the owner of an American company is a member, and often visits asking advice on the UK market, and producing goods specifically with the UK in mind after consultation with the forum. I think Rolex could learn a thing or two from the Gentleman Sal Glasser.

[DJF881]

Originally Posted by Jimbits76

Good points guys!

Do you think it's us? From the comments I think it's fair to say that we all seem pretty wistful about the days of the tool watch (even though I would still maintain a Rolex is a luxury jewellry item).

How about this, this may shake a few feathers...I grew up thinking Rolex was a brand for real men...engineers, macho movie stars, sports stars, deep sea divers and ermmm secret agents. Although the new Dipsy is a real piece of engineering work and probably about as macho as it gets, do you think the watches for real red blooded men, the watches of our heroes or fathers have been diluted with glitz, flash and diamond encrusted doodahs???? I've seen comments on here about the 'Paris Hilton' special...is this Rolex's market now?

J

If you define your "tool" as a moderately priced watch, that's been a shrinking market, across the category for a long time. A mechanical watch under $1000 is going to be worse than quartz, and with cell phones and clocks in cars and on computers, nobody wears a watch just to know what time it is; it's always a fashion accessory.

Tough guys don't really need tough watches anymore, and in addition to the market erosion from diminishing need, there's a tremendous amount of encroachment from cheap, accurate watches that can be treated as more or less disposable, and are therefore appealing to people who engage in activities where a watch could get broken, lost or damaged.

I disagree that Rolex has abandoned the tool watch aesthetic, but that idea has been turned into a fashion statement. The current watches are no less functional than the vintage, in fact, the improvements make the watches functionally better. But the current prices exclude old market segments (who may not have been interested anyway), and that's the real objection. The new SD doesn't encrust a functional watch with bling; the function itself is the adornment.

[mike]

Truth be known Rolex watches were always expensive relative to the era. What some today call "tool" some of us that used and remember the "old" days of the matt/tritium dials call "luxury".
Rolex made the move into the luxury arena back in the 80s when WG surrounds were placed on little indices. That they have begun the march back to a dial that is easier to read in all conditions is a BIG plus in my view.

Rolex professional watches have steadily become bigger and heavier over the years. That Rolex has done this while maintaining a clear heritage to the past is remarkable and to their everlasting credit unlike some other brands that seemed to have lost their way over the years.

Truth be known Rolex pricing and size compares quite favorably to other marques they are constantly compared to. Their ruggedness and ability to keep working where other "expensive" brands would have given up the ghost is the real thing that separates them.

My views on how Rolex treats their own vintage pieces is well know, but as far as the modern versions of the GMT and the DSSD--GOOD FOR YOU ROLEX!! Back to the future!!

[JJ Irani]

Originally Posted by DJF881

A mechanical watch under $1000 is going to be worse than quartz...

WHAT??? Say again!!

Some of the finest mechanical watches like ORIS, SEIKO, CITIZEN, MIDO, HAMILTON, even some OMEGAs and quite a few others are priced under a grand.....and are top notch value for money....in every damn department.

You need to do some homework, pal....before making such blatant statements.

JJ

[feudallordcult]

Originally Posted by JJ Irani

WHAT??? Say again!!

Some of the finest mechanical watches like ORIS, SEIKO, CITIZEN, MIDO, HAMILTON, even some OMEGAs and quite a few others are priced under a grand.....and are top notch value for money....in every damn department.

You need to do some homework, pal....before making such blatant statements.

JJ

JJ-Sir, you forgot abt orient star!

back to the topic, two words to answer the question: HELL YES.

[Letsgodiving]

One of the things that I always liked about Rolex was the fact that you could look at a Sub or SD from 40 or 50 years ago ago and they were basically the same as one today. How many watches can say that. There is a reason for that! They have had subtle changes over the years but always maintained their integrity and I hope that continues.

Any watch that can continue the same basic design over 50+ years and still sell like it does speaks for itself. Radical changes are not needed and I would hope Rolex realizes that.

[CPCC]

Rolex is Rolex, nuff said

[mldaytona]

Yes Jim, I guess most of us are not growing in tandem with the world like Rolex is. That's why Rolex is comfortable and confident producing watches like the Leopard Daytona while we are sitting here still trying to figure out why and closing our eyes at the picture.

[Trurolexer]

Originally Posted by cpcc

Rolex is Rolex, nuff said

X2!!!

[timackerman]

Originally Posted by Incurable

Rolex seems to adhere to the philosophy of, "If we build it, they will come" more than "Tell me what you want and we'll meet your needs". You see this in the car industry as well. (Japanese vs German) I, personally, don't think Rolex wastes a lot of resources polling the public or doing market research, etc. If we build it, they will come...

I couldn't have said it better myself!

[ezmoney46]

well as the old saying goes, nobody is twisting your arm to buy them. Personally I like the older pre-2008 stuff. However, if you don't like the new there are PLENTY of older models still out there for sale. And as always there will be more new models to look at next year as well.......