Why is the Daytona so expensive?

[Strut99GT]

I was thinking about the price of the Sub Date the other day vs. the Daytona - both all stainless, and nominally, the Daytona is about twice the cost. I know chronographs are always more expensive than non-chronos, but I feel like I'm missing something. Is there something specific about the Daytona movement that commands the premium? And I'm not talking about the whole supply/demand thing - I'm comparing MSRP to MSRP here.

[mikefrmnj]

It seems to be the must have watch for whatever reason. I like the watch but much prefer the gold model. Different strokes for different folks.

[BigHat]

Originally Posted by Strut99GT

I was thinking about the price of the Sub Date the other day vs. the Daytona - both all stainless, and nominally, the Daytona is about twice the cost. I know chronographs are always more expensive than non-chronos, but I feel like I'm missing something. Is there something specific about the Daytona movement that commands the premium? And I'm not talking about the whole supply/demand thing - I'm comparing MSRP to MSRP here.

How can you dismiss the "supply/demand thing"? It's what it's ALL about. You think it costs Ferrari 90% of the retail price to make a 430 like the 90% Toyota spends to build a Camry? No, Ferrari spends 30% of the retail cost.

So is the movement price "delta" $3K+ for the Daytona over the Sub? Of course not. It's popular so they can get the extra cash.

[Enzo thecat]

Originally Posted by BigHat

How can you dismiss the "supply/demand thing"? It's what it's ALL about. You think it costs Ferrari 90% of the retail price to make a 430 like the 90% Toyota spends to build a Camry? No, Ferrari spends 30% of the retail cost.

Totally ignorant statement of which I am surprised to find on a watch forum of all places (timex vs Rolex argument). Ferrari might have a higher profit margin but that is probably due to not having the marketing expenses that Toyota does. How do I know? I am an owner and have been for quite some time. I've visited the Factory and have been involved with Ferrari for 20+ years.

e

[The GMT Master]

Interesting question. If you're comparing a Daytona to a Sub, there are a few things I can think of that might explain the high price difference:

1) Movement: The Sub has a bog standard 3135 movement in, probably the most used movement in all of the Rolex line up - you can find it in the Date, Datejust, Sub, Sea Dweller, Deep Sea and the Yachtmaster. As well as this, you'll find variants of that movement in every full sized Oyster watch apart from the Yachtmaster II and the Daytona, both of which are effectively standalone movements. So immediately, they're going to be produced in lower numbers, and hence prices can't necessarily be brought down as much. As well as that, the Daytona movement is inherently more complicated, with more individual components for the chronograph features, all of which contributes to higher costs.

2) Bracelet: the Sub uses the old hollow-link style Oyster bracelet with a folded metal clasp, whilst the Daytona uses the latest solid link Oyster with GMT IIc-style clasp, which makes for a far more substantial and solid bracelet. Again, Rolex puts a higher price on this.

3) The Daytona factor: If I'm honest, despite there being a greater deal of complexity in the Daytona, and it having higher grade components, it doesn't justify a £2000 premium. The fact remains that the Daytona (at least in the Steel variant) is the most sought after watch in the world, with many places having waiting lists that would take years to clear - Rolex can charge pretty much what they want for it. If you looked at the Daytona as just a steel chronograph, it is by no means worth £6170. I'd take an Omega Speedmaster any day for a fraction of the price, and get an equally iconic, if slightly more unrefined, watch. Which brings me to the conclusion that the Daytona is a triumph of hype - a fine watch, yes, but not a justifiable £6170 in my eyes.

[Strut99GT]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

I'd take an Omega Speedmaster any day for a fraction of the price, and get an equally iconic, if slightly more unrefined, watch. Which brings me to the conclusion that the Daytona is a triumph of hype - a fine watch, yes, but not a justifiable £6170 in my eyes.

Well, I actually have a Speedy and couldn't agree more. But since this is a Rolex forum I am trying to think of this in a "Rolex only" environment. And the replies so far have been somewhat interesting. Sounds like perception thus far is that the price is based more on supply/demand than any other reason. I thought I was missing something, that there was something that made the chronograph in the Daytona special. Otherwise, yes, I'm surprised that people would pay four times the cost delta for a Daytona over a Speedmaster. Exclusivity is the name of the game, I suppose.

[snow_rocks]

Originally Posted by The GMT Master

Daytona is a triumph of hype - a fine watch, yes, but not a justifiable £6170 in my eyes.

If the Daytona price can't be justified, neither can the Sub price be justified, ergo, both are overpriced!

[Art 1]

It's not really that expensive.

[Strut99GT]

Originally Posted by Art 1

It's not really that expensive.

er, if it's not that expensive to you, can you toss me one of your used, even cheaper rolexes, like maybe a sub? haha

[TheVTCGuy]

Excellent question, and I have to throw in my opinion that it's the demand thing. The Daytona is at least one of, if not THE, most sought-after watch in the world, ergo, the price is higher. You may not understand or agree with the Daytona being so desired, and I don't blame you, but the fact remains, it is.

[Tools]

Originally Posted by Strut99GT

er, if it's not that expensive to you, can you toss me one of your used, even cheaper rolexes, like maybe a sub? haha

No, no............. it's a true statement...

Comparatively speaking, the Sub is dirt cheap in the luxury watch market, and the Daytona is a bargain..

The Blancpain Fifty Fathoms costs double the Sub cost........ A Zenith chrono costs 4 times what a Daytona costs..

Ulysse Nardin and IWC or Vacheron.......... they all have a price point well above their Rolex counterparts, and they usually do what Rolex did 100 years ago...buy the parts from somebody else and shine and polish, etch a new name and "presto".... a top line watch......

.....................

[DARK_KNIGHT]

Interesting vantage point TOOLS.

[Watchdog]

Originally Posted by Tools

No, no............. it's a true statement...

Comparatively speaking, the Sub is dirt cheap in the luxury watch market, and the Daytona is a bargain..

The Blancpain Fifty Fathoms costs double the Sub cost........ A Zenith chrono costs 4 times what a Daytona costs..

Ulysse Nardin and IWC or Vacheron.......... they all have a price point well above their Rolex counterparts, and they usually do what Rolex did 100 years ago...buy the parts from somebody else and shine and polish, etch a new name and "presto".... a top line watch......

.....................

Very, very interesting information.

Now I feel much better about my purchases!

[boa2]

Originally Posted by Art 1

It's not really that expensive.

Agreed.

Ulysse Nardin and IWC or Vacheron.......... they all have a price point well above their Rolex counterparts, and they usually do what Rolex did 100 years ago...buy the parts from somebody else and shine and polish, etch a new name and "presto".... a top line watch......

There's quite a bit more than a shine and a polish given to the VC Overseas Chronograph, which can be had for not much more than the price of the Daytona. The F. Piguet 1185 base movement has been used for over 20 years in numerous high-end watches. As to UN and IWC, only the precious metal versions of their chronographs cost more than the Daytona. And more than 60% of the source ETA movement is replaced.

I love Rolex as much as anyone else on this site, but the fervent defense of the brand seems to foster a lot of misinformation about the competition.

[frank gama]

Originally Posted by Tools

No, no............. it's a true statement...

Comparatively speaking, the Sub is dirt cheap in the luxury watch market, and the Daytona is a bargain..

The Blancpain Fifty Fathoms costs double the Sub cost........ A Zenith chrono costs 4 times what a Daytona costs..

Ulysse Nardin and IWC or Vacheron.......... they all have a price point well above their Rolex counterparts, and they usually do what Rolex did 100 years ago...buy the parts from somebody else and shine and polish, etch a new name and "presto".... a top line watch......

.....................

very true

[jdc]

Originally Posted by Tools

No, no............. it's a true statement...

Comparatively speaking, the Sub is dirt cheap in the luxury watch market, and the Daytona is a bargain..

The Blancpain Fifty Fathoms costs double the Sub cost........ A Zenith chrono costs 4 times what a Daytona costs..

Ulysse Nardin and IWC or Vacheron.......... they all have a price point well above their Rolex counterparts, and they usually do what Rolex did 100 years ago...buy the parts from somebody else and shine and polish, etch a new name and "presto".... a top line watch......

.....................

well if that is the case then they are all over priced and overhyped. Rolex's are massed produced their production costs must be less than the other marques. The price increases during the last few years that have seen a doubling of the price of a daytona cannot be related to increase in material costs. Which brings me to the conclusion that Rolex increase it cause they can and by limiting supply create a cult watch which some must have.

[redshirt1957]

Something is worth what someone will pay for it.

[jdc]

Originally Posted by redshirt1957

Something is worth what someone will pay for it.

thats the credit crunch in a nutshell

[BigHat]

Originally Posted by Enzo thecat

Totally ignorant statement of which I am surprised to find on a watch forum of all places (timex vs Rolex argument). Ferrari might have a higher profit margin but that is probably due to not having the marketing expenses that Toyota does. How do I know? I am an owner and have been for quite some time. I've visited the Factory and have been involved with Ferrari for 20+ years.

e

You miss my point entirely. It was NOT a Timex vs Rolex agrument in the slightest. I'm surprised you own a Ferrari and think that their profit margin stems from less advertising expenses. I mean are you kidding me or something? If not, you know a LOT less than you think. But enough about the cars.

I'm to blame for introducing the car analogy as it does tend to cloud the mind of some and generally adds nothing to the discussion as evidenced above. Sorry about that, I should know better by now.

My point was precisely Padi's. You create an environment where you generate demand and the cost of goods sold has less and less impact on the price you can ask. The better you can generate that demand through exclusivity, image, etc, the higher the price you command. So no, the cost of complications in a chrono movement don't remotely equate to ADDED markup the Daytona commands.

[train-time]

"Why is the Daytona so expensive?" Because they can and get away with it, simple as that.

My AD, who is a good friend of mine, once asked me "how much do you think it costs them to mass produce this watch?" He was talking about a SS model Rolex that had been in production for quite some time, so it didn't have any big new development costs associated with it. I through out some numbers and then he replied with a number that was under $1000. I was surprised and he was probably right.

[padi56]

Well with most high end watches or other so called designer goods today. The prove of the fact that there is no difference proportionality between price and quality, with most watches today. The value of a commodity like a high end watch or designer product is only in the price the market will bare.

[slcbbrown]

The high or hype prices are strictly what the market will pay, today. Rolex doesn't make that many Daytonas, and people have decided that they want that version (especially the SS). Once we have a few more people chasing the watch than there are watches to go around-- the price can rise regardless of the cost that went into the watch.

For example-- how else can we explain that a used SS Daytona can fetch $2,000 to $3,000 more than a TT Daytona?

Rolex has made models like the TT DJ and Sub for 50+ years, and the used watches are readily available. You can't say the same for the Daytona. If used SS Daytonas were available for $5,000 in every city, would you pay $12,000 for a new one?

Sorry to be so long winded.

[hennabav]

Originally Posted by Enzo thecat

Totally ignorant statement of which I am surprised to find on a watch forum of all places (timex vs Rolex argument). Ferrari might have a higher profit margin but that is probably due to not having the marketing expenses that Toyota does. How do I know? I am an owner and have been for quite some time. I've visited the Factory and have been involved with Ferrari for 20+ years.

e

What kind of Ferrari do u own just out of curiosity? I'm a huge car fan.

[jdc]

Originally Posted by slcbbrown

The high or hype prices are strictly what the market will pay, today. Rolex doesn't make that many Daytonas, and people have decided that they want that version (especially the SS). Once we have a few more people chasing the watch than there are watches to go around-- the price can rise regardless of the cost that went into the watch.

For example-- how else can we explain that a used SS Daytona can fetch $2,000 to $3,000 more than a TT Daytona?

Rolex has made models like the TT DJ and Sub for 50+ years, and the used watches are readily available. You can't say the same for the Daytona. If used SS Daytonas were available for $5,000 in every city, would you pay $12,000 for a new one?

Sorry to be so long winded.

can we see a picture of your vintage thunderbird?

[DRAWTOOL]

Originally Posted by train-time

"Why is the Daytona so expensive?" Because they can and get away with it, simple as that.

My AD, who is a good friend of mine, once asked me "how much do you think it costs them to mass produce this watch?" He was talking about a SS model Rolex that had been in production for quite some time, so it didn't have any big new development costs associated with it. I through out some numbers and then he replied with a number that was under $1000. I was surprised and he was probably right.

AHHH...just as I suspected...It's a Profit Deal!

[slvrstar]

if u think the watch is expensive, u should see what it cost for a routine 5 0r 7 year routine maintenance compared to a sub. approx. $2000 to $500? go figure.

[allanofcalifornia]

A Daytona is so expensive because it is the absolute best!!


Allan

[LocoNBroko]

Its expensive because Rolex has found that raising the price does not slow down the sales... In other words, people are willing to pay what ever Rolex feels like charging.

[bodybump]

im still scratching my head why i bought one...

[Strut99GT]

Originally Posted by LocoNBroko

Its expensive because Rolex has found that raising the price does not slow down the sales... In other words, people are willing to pay what ever Rolex feels like charging.

I know all about pricing and the concept of the consumer's willingness to pay (in fact, took an entire class on it at one time )...so my question was more of a philosophical one. But as you guys have made clear, it sounds like this is simply clever marketing and supply/demand.