The real reason for the SS shortage: No real competition in the SS market

[mangoseed]

It surprises me that this is never brought up as a factor with regards to the Rolex SS shortage.

Omega does nothing but spam out limited editions while their flagship Seamaster has been outdated since the turn of the millennium.

5-10 years ago Breitling were at least somewhat respectable, but now they have the worst resale value I have ever seen and have completely turned their back on the history of the brand. The new ownership is a complete disaster.

What else is there? IWC maybe, but it is a bit of a specific taste. Other than that there are just niche brands like Zenith, JLC etc. I suppose you could consider Grand Seiko.

Rolex is the only solid choice in the current market, even more so if you want a quality bracelet.

[Dr Watches]

True. Most brands are trash.

[Etschell]

Hublot big bang crash.

[ndls]

I swear the only competition in my mind is Grand Seiko. And I would consider GS as a complimentary to a solid Rolex collection.

I only started this journey 1.5 years ago, and I genuinely wanted to seek other companies. Truthfully, Rolex SS just fit the bill. Can’t stop loving my Sub!

[MTBer]

I kinda feel bad for Omega. Ignoring resale value, my biggest point of contention with them is their insistence on continually redesigning product lines every couple years rather than letting designs stick around long enough to become iconic then making gradual, conservative changes as needed. From a strictly horological perspective, what do they need to do in order to compete with Rolex? Their METAS program is industry-leading, and their basic movement is orders of magnitude more resistant to magnetism than Rolex’s purpose built “antimagnetic” watch.

To some people, if it doesn’t say Rolex on the dial it automatically loses regardless of technical merit. How do you compete with that?

[Dr Watches]

I started around 2000 and there were so many compelling alternatives. There were nicer watches at similar prices or nearly as nice watches at half the price.

[Dr. Robert]

Originally Posted by Dr Watches

True. Most brands are trash.

a Rolex is a Rolex, the rest are just watches.

[Wristwatcherboy]

Breitling have in fact not turned their back on the history of the brand, but rather the complete opposite. They are bringing out re-releases of vintage pieces and if you knew anything about them you would know that their last few tent pole releases have been very closely inspired and related to watches in Breitlings rich history. And it is exactly the “new ownership” which is responsible for this.

For years past Breitling actually had turned their back on their history, preferring instead to churn out massive and garish fully polished watches instead of referencing their rich heritage and back catalogue of beautiful watches. But this has all changed now, under their new management.

Perhaps before you go criticising every other brand apart from Rolex, it would very much help if you were slightly more informed about them than what you appear to be.

[csaltphoto]

I don't know why it's so hard to find another watch that looks as good. Part of what I like about Rolex is they are (Mostly) classic and non-blingy. They get a lot of design notes right. And a lot of it is very subtle stuff. I would happily sell off my sub if I could find something else that cost less but was as nice and that worked as well. And I'm not talking copies/homages. I'm talking an original design that is different but just as nice. And that has a decent movement.

[dtwer]

Originally Posted by MTBer

I kinda feel bad for Omega. Ignoring resale value, my biggest point of contention with them is their insistence on continually redesigning product lines every couple years rather than letting designs stick around long enough to become iconic then making gradual, conservative changes as needed. From a strictly horological perspective, what do they need to do in order to compete with Rolex? Their METAS program is industry-leading, and their basic movement is orders of magnitude more resistant to magnetism than Rolex’s purpose built “antimagnetic” watch.

To some people, if it doesn’t say Rolex on the dial it automatically loses regardless of technical merit. How do you compete with that?

I agree. Rolex plays the long game and also has the discipline to not get distracted by the short-term market fluctuations.

[~JJ]

Originally Posted by mangoseed

It surprises me that this is never brought up as a factor with regards to the Rolex SS shortage.

Omega does nothing but spam out limited editions while their flagship Seamaster has been outdated since the turn of the millennium.

5-10 years ago Breitling were at least somewhat respectable, but now they have the worst resale value I have ever seen and have completely turned their back on the history of the brand. The new ownership is a complete disaster.

What else is there? IWC maybe, but it is a bit of a specific taste. Other than that there are just niche brands like Zenith, JLC etc. I suppose you could consider Grand Seiko.

Rolex is the only solid choice in the current market, even more so if you want a quality bracelet.

Respectfully disagree on the Breitling note. The management is doing a great job releasing new models that are sized under 44mm, classic designs that speak to their heritage, reduced polishing every bit and releasing reliable in-house movements that Tudor is using in their current BB chrono line.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by mangoseed

Rolex is the only solid choice in the current market, even more so if you want a quality bracelet.

i disagree.

I think my Omega is a nicer watch than my Rolex's. Truly i do. They are not Rolex's though so they dont have that same buzz around them which lets be honest, it matters.

Why does it matter? scarcity, brand awareness, marketing, value retention. All of that is enhanced with the current situation making them even more attractive.

Based solely on the watch a Rolex isn't that special

[mbalmz]

Originally Posted by mangoseed

It surprises me that this is never brought up as a factor with regards to the Rolex SS shortage.

Omega does nothing but spam out limited editions while their flagship Seamaster has been outdated since the turn of the millennium.

5-10 years ago Breitling were at least somewhat respectable, but now they have the worst resale value I have ever seen and have completely turned their back on the history of the brand. The new ownership is a complete disaster.

What else is there? IWC maybe, but it is a bit of a specific taste. Other than that there are just niche brands like Zenith, JLC etc. I suppose you could consider Grand Seiko.

Rolex is the only solid choice in the current market, even more so if you want a quality bracelet.

I posted this response in the Breitling forum version of this thread but since it looks like this is the right one I'll put the same response here--

I think it's true seamasters don't engender the same kind of crazy excitement that submariners/GMTs do, but they are very, very much not "outdated".

I also think it's weird to refer to brands like Zenith and JLC as "niche"--those are great brands with a ton of history and cache. The fact that you shrug those brands off as "niche" I think betrays the fact that you really just want a stainless steel watch from a brand that's as iconic and has as much history but at the same time is as high-end and universally recognizable a brand as Rolex, without paying an AP/PP pricepoint. Which just means you want a Rolex. Which is obviously a totally fine and wonderful thing to want (I want them too!) but this has very little to do with there not being competition.

[blown5.0]

Contrary to some thoughts in this thread, there are plenty of other watchmakers who have beautiful pieces worthy of consideration. I think a lot of us are sort of brainwashed into thinking what a watch should look like based on Rolex's brilliant marketing.

[TswaneNguni]

Originally Posted by mangoseed

It surprises me that this is never brought up as a factor with regards to the Rolex SS shortage.

Omega does nothing but spam out limited editions while their flagship Seamaster has been outdated since the turn of the millennium.

5-10 years ago Breitling were at least somewhat respectable, but now they have the worst resale value I have ever seen and have completely turned their back on the history of the brand. The new ownership is a complete disaster.

What else is there? IWC maybe, but it is a bit of a specific taste. Other than that there are just niche brands like Zenith, JLC etc. I suppose you could consider Grand Seiko.

Rolex is the only solid choice in the current market, even more so if you want a quality bracelet.

The reason for the shortage is the low MRSP .Up the price and things will settle.

[oldman2005]

Lots of competition for SS sport. Rolex is stronger in the +$12k watch but probably can't compete with other in the lower price SS steel sport, maybe that's why they're concentrating on their higher profit margin DJ/TT/PM products. I once worked for a big company which only enter a market if they were the top 3, if their market share is smaller than that they won't compete. Look around you, companies usually shred the unprofitable/low-profit product lines, ie Ford is exiting the sedan market concentrating on SUV, trucks,...

[Paul_I]

I posted in the previous identical thread in the Breitling section but I don't believe Op is very informed or the ones calling thousand dollar watches "trash." This is why the Rolex crowd gets a bad reputation.

[Dr Watches]

Originally Posted by Dr. Robert

a Rolex is a Rolex, the rest are just watches.

in 2000'ish, there were so many compelling alternatives to Rolex. The IWC 3536 from back then has better case and dial work than any modern Rolex. It also had vastly more WR than a Sea Dweller at the time.

Now, IWC's update is much crappier while Rolex today is nicer than Rolex in 2000.

The OP's point is really well made, and now that I've thought about it I'm not sure why it didn't occur to me

Watches today are sillier, larger, more expensive, and generally less desirable than they were even 10 years ago. While Rolex is just rolling on not sucking (though they have some goofy new models too).

[Roleplay]

Originally Posted by MTBer

I kinda feel bad for Omega. Ignoring resale value, my biggest point of contention with them is their insistence on continually redesigning product lines every couple years rather than letting designs stick around long enough to become iconic then making gradual, conservative changes as needed.

This is the very reason why I personally think Rolex should slow down on their novelties. Since 2015, they've been churning out so many new things, it's got to take its toll eventually. I think if they release a Coke only one year after Pepsi, it's a wrong move in my opinion. How many variations of the GMT can the market take before it becomes ridiculous?

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by Paul_I

I posted in the previous identical thread in the Breitling section but I don't believe Op is very informed or the ones calling thousand dollar watches "trash." This is why the Rolex crowd gets a bad reputation.

OP seems to be looking at brands with money as the only criteria. If thats the criteria, he isn't wrong.

I dont think its a valid argument as its quite a narrow focus

[Dr Watches]

Originally Posted by tyler1980

i disagree.

I think my Omega is a nicer watch than my Rolex's. Truly i do. They are not Rolex's though so they dont have that same buzz around them which lets be honest, it matters.

Why does it matter? scarcity, brand awareness, marketing, value retention. All of that is enhanced with the current situation making them even more attractive.

Based solely on the watch a Rolex isn't that special

Most Omega are about 20% too thick/large. The classic Speedmaster Pro being one exception. There's a reason why 2500D POs trade at prices as high (or higher) than their replacements in similar condition.

[brian89]

Originally Posted by MTBer

I kinda feel bad for Omega. Ignoring resale value, my biggest point of contention with them is their insistence on continually redesigning product lines every couple years rather than letting designs stick around long enough to become iconic then making gradual, conservative changes as needed. From a strictly horological perspective, what do they need to do in order to compete with Rolex? Their METAS program is industry-leading, and their basic movement is orders of magnitude more resistant to magnetism than Rolex’s purpose built “antimagnetic” watch.

To some people, if it doesn’t say Rolex on the dial it automatically loses regardless of technical merit. How do you compete with that?

THIS!

omega has so much potential

[iamorlando]

Recently bought a DSSD in my home country. The ad there, who has been selling Rolex for 30 years, asked me if it was true that the DSSD was in short supply. I told him yes, in London and ny nobody would even put me in a list. As far as this ad knew, Rolex didn’t want discounts on ss pieces. Beside that everything was same as before, supply was tighter but not nearly as tight as the bigger markets. I got a 1k discount on my James Cameron and took it home about a month later :-)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Paul_I]

Originally Posted by Dr Watches

Most Omega are about 20% too thick/large. The classic Speedmaster Pro being one exception. There's a reason why 2500D POs trade at prices as high (or higher) than their replacements in similar condition.

Regarding thickness, that's a subjective opinion.

[brian89]

Patek is a solid brand but very expensive
Unless your very rich or dont have a family to support good luck

[Dr Watches]

Originally Posted by Paul_I

I posted in the previous identical thread in the Breitling section but I don't believe Op is very informed or the ones calling thousand dollar watches "trash." This is why the Rolex crowd gets a bad reputation.

I have had a huge number of non-Rolex watches pass through my collection.
Current Richemont IWC is most definitely trash compared to pre-Richemont IWC. Their quality, service, and designs are so vastly inferior.

Take a look at Omega's product offerings today versus 2005. The quality is there but so many of the designs are just... trash. Even Omega fans admit it.

Rolex
Grand Seiko
Tudor for cheap stuff
AP
Patek

Most of the other brands have been mismanaged into a shallow image of their past selves. Do feel free to inform me though. I'd love to hear from another pre internet collector.

[MTBer]

Originally Posted by Roleplay

How many variations of the GMT can the market take before it becomes ridiculous?

All of them, if they can’t be purchased anyway

[Turnaround]

Originally Posted by ndls

I swear the only competition in my mind is Grand Seiko. And I would consider GS as a complimentary to a solid Rolex collection.

I would have said the same thing until I got one. Everything that was posted as wrong with the Snowflake, my example had. Misaligned hands, the GS were off center and not in line with each other and a few other less noticeable problem. Hugely disappointed on QC, what Rolex is famous for and GS was supposed to be.

But I do agree this the thread topic. Rolex wears the crown for a reason.

[123Blueface]

Originally Posted by Wristwatcherboy

Breitling have in fact not turned their back on the history of the brand, but rather the complete opposite. They are bringing out re-releases of vintage pieces and if you knew anything about them you would know that their last few tent pole releases have been very closely inspired and related to watches in Breitlings rich history. And it is exactly the “new ownership” which is responsible for this.

For years past Breitling actually had turned their back on their history, preferring instead to churn out massive and garish fully polished watches instead of referencing their rich heritage and back catalogue of beautiful watches. But this has all changed now, under their new management.

Perhaps before you go criticising every other brand apart from Rolex, it would very much help if you were slightly more informed about them than what you appear to be.

+1

Also,
Too much emphasis by too many on “resale”. Ponder it well before you buy it, enjoy it, keep it is my motto.
Other than Rolex, all other mass produced watches will depreciate.

[tyler1980]

Originally Posted by Turnaround

I would have said the same thing until I got one. Everything that was posted as wrong with the Snowflake, my example had. Misaligned hands, the GS were off center and not in line with each other and a few other less noticeable problem. Hugely disappointed on QC, what Rolex is famous for and GS was supposed to be.

But I do agree this the thread topic. Rolex wears the crown for a reason.

a sample set of 1 is most likely a fluke. Plenty of one off Rolex purchasers who would have the same story. Because its their only one they would think the QC is exceedingly bad.

By almost all accounts GS is on an entirely different level than Rolex as far as finishing and details.