Celebrity Endorsement
 

Following some sort of cultural shift in the main threads recently, I wanted to ask about this "celebrity" thing.

How do you feel about the posting of "celebrities" wearing Rolex watches and how do you feel about the fact that they are wearing them.

I am using the term "celebrity" as all emcompassing which today includes, sports professionals, movie stars, singers, politicians heck even astronauts.

Does their wearing of your timepiece detract a little from the personal values you regard in your own or does it boost you to see that other people have the same great taste as you?

Would you buy a watch because a certain person you admire endorses it and if so, who?

Are you happy with Rolex's advertising policy?

I personally love the ads Rolex used to run...the diving, yachting etc ads (btw I recently saw the oil fire ads for the first time and thought they were great) however I could not personally care less whether Roger Federer or Dame Kiri wear a Rolex!!!!!

Where do you stand?

Please let's keep this sensible for once, no bitching, arguing or oposting pics of half naked women!!!!!!!

Jim

well honestly, i don't care who wears a rolex really ( but maybe i do as i sold one and bought a Panerai):thinking: But my GMT IIC is going nowhere, I love it.
In regards to someone like Federer, i think it is great that a man like that wears a Rolex, the same as us. He is top sportsman, gentleman and a worldwide ambassador for tennis and even Rolex if you like. But as for some of the others, i don't really care what they do- who are half of them and what have they done anyway (nothing particularly special).

But Roger is a class act IMHO:thumbsup:

It depends on the "celebrity".

I am interested only if it is a person of some genuine achievment or standing. That is the virtue of Rolex's ambassadors - they are usually people of distinction or standing who have achieved something in their respective fields. I particularly like it when explorers choose Rolex watches. It does say something about the brand when a distinguished person chooses it - but the difficulty is identifying when it is a genuine choice and not marketing puff. Federer for instance, is being paid to wear Rolex watches. I am not convinced that his association is sincere. I believe it with the older celebs - such as Jackie Stewart.

I dont give a toss about various actors, celebrities and models who wear them. I am pretty tired of posts featuring some unknown "celeb" (usually female) wearing her Daytona and looking bombed out of her head. Or some witless pop star wandering around with his Sub. For me this cheapens the brand and does not make me feel so happy about Rolex.

On the other hand it is genuinely illuminating and inspiring to find people such as Che Guevara and Fidel Castro wearing Rolex watches.

those celebs wearing rolex threads with repetitive pictures bore me.

You all know me. You know what I do.
 

Have and would buy a Rolex because it was worn by the "James Bond" character in a movie or Ian Fleming novel.

Why not? If you're gonna "collect," having a theme is as good as any other reason I've seen out there.

:cheers:

Great points.

Obviously Federer is a great, talented man and a tennis player I greatly admire but I'm not really into what watch he wears. Same as Jackie Stewart or any of the others.

I like the Rolex ambassador policy but only that they are selecting people who they consider represents their product. You dont see the movie star ditz types or those famous for being famous types being offered the role however I bet Rolex isn't too bothered about the coverage and press these types give them.

If one person sold a Rolex to me it was Sir Rog' in Live and Let Die...that was the first time I knew about a Sub and thought it was the coolest thing in the world.

J

I will come back to this when I see 'banned' under the OP.:lol::lol:

IMO it makes for more interesting reading and saves time. :rofl::rofl:

:chuckle::chuckle::chuckle:










































:justkiddi Jim.

Great minds Dell.....

J

I think our Heros have changed. We have gone from Bond, Red Adair, Great Explorers and Navy Submariners to now. It used to be about what the watch could do and how it could perform. Now it's all about the money and status. Way back before the the Quarts battery watches became popular a Rolex was not that much more then any other nice mechanical watch. Heuer, Hamilton, Gruen, Bulova and even Seiko were as much or even more then as Rolex. Compare the price of a Rolex Sub to a Seiko 27 jewel Bellmatic in 1967. Rolex stayed true while most went the way of the battery. I hope Rolex can keep it up. :thumbsup:

Corndog King...sometimes you wisdom seems few and far between :rofl::dummy:

This post though....just knocked it out of the park!

:thumbsup:

J

Rolex invention of marketing
 

Your list reminds me that Rolex "endorsements" have been a mixed bag over the years. In some cases, product placement followed visibility (eg, Ian Fleming mentioned the brand by name in Live and Let Die based on knowing it via advertising, as opposed to having been compensated for it). Conversely, you have the bathyscape dives and Channel swims where Rolex led.

Bottom line for me is my understanding of history: Rolex invented wristwatch branding and marketing. From that came its value proposition, margins, and, frankly, perpetual profitability (no pun intended).

Endorsements of today are simply "different." :twit:

The Fleming point is interesting...

I have to be honest...in my struggling novel, my protagonist is a watch enthusiast and mentions Rolex in a few places although, if anything the greatest "endorsement" is given to Breguet!!!!!

Note: I am not dumb enough to compare my amateur scribblings to the late, great Mr Fleming...just wanted to say that if you love something enough I guess it eventually seeps into your day to day work or at least your conciousness.

J

very good points but on the the one I have quoted, do you think this is likely to change again towards refined characters and outstanding acheivers at some point in the future? I say this as these things, like all else often go through cycles
:cheers:

Yup. And yup.
 

No reason to be shy about comparing yourself to Ian Fleming. From what I know of him and discussions w/ his family, I think he would have been flattered. And encouraged your efforts.

More particularly to your point, this is exactly how he wrote. There were many things which he approached w/ a journalist's curiosity and discipline to research. That is where the "secret agent" and "license to kill" aspects of James Bond were sources. But in terms of personal tastes and habits and often details, these were not only "seeps" from Mr. Fleming, but evident passions.

That's a key to how I've analyzed his writing in researching James Bond watches, by the way.

Absolutely. I think we are only now starting to see the new factor of the Internet play into this. So that's a new feedback loop. And potentially an avenue for new (or old) direction.

My background, by training and experience, is in marketing. LINK and LINK So please forgive me if I get a bit over-the-top here. On the other hand, it may explain a core part of my interest in studying Ian Fleming, James Bond, and Rolex ~ fundamentally, brilliant marketing in all!

:thumbsup:

Celebrity endorsement or endorsement of the celebrity? The recent spate of posts seem to point to the latter for me.
Rolex seems to be pretty good at sponsoring the right things and they tend to associate themselves to events. An off shoot of this is if a person excels in their field they are associated with Rolex and success, pretty good strategy for me.:thumbsup:

I loathe celebrity worship - there are plenty of sites dedicated to that.

I do not mind occasional threads that highlight the topic, but multiple John Mayer threads is a little too much for my taste.

Great thing about this site - you can pass them up and move on!

x2

Jim....alike in name...alike in nature

J

X3 :thumbsup: