|
|
ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
13 August 2015, 04:20 AM
|
#1 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Middle
Posts: 878
|
How did Rolex do in this test from 1968
|
|
|
|
13 August 2015, 04:24 AM
|
#2 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Middle
Posts: 878
|
60 £ for a Rolex
|
|
|
|
|
13 August 2015, 04:30 AM
|
#3 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2009
Real Name: Larry
Location: Kentucky
Watch: Yes
Posts: 35,044
|
Only 78% completely satisfied...wow. I bet the numbers would be higher today.
|
|
|
|
|
13 August 2015, 04:31 AM
|
#4 |
|
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2015
Real Name: John
Location: Texas
Posts: 377
|
Newsflash: Prices cheaper in 1968.
(Now, it is true that the price of a Rolex has increased far faster than inflation. That 1968 60 quid is now worth about 950 pounds, or $1600. That can be partially explained by Rolex's status as a Veblen good.) It looks like Seiko and Rolex were the watches most likely to give satisfaction. |
|
|
|
|
13 August 2015, 08:00 AM
|
#5 |
|
2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: PaulG
Location: Georgia
Posts: 42,013
|
Another angle is look at how many brands didn't survive the test of time - they're not around anymore.
Poor customer sat = failure in market. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
Does anyone really know what time it is? |
|
|
|
 |
| Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.
Linear Mode
