What’s the point?

[Maybelline]

Of Rolex making all of these cool sport model watches and then if you have cash in hand you can’t find one.

I stopped by my local AD last week the guy who’s real nice btw told me he only sees a few come in of each model yearly.
Such as Batman, hulk, Daytona’s, deepblues etc.

Really what’s the point just to keep prices high?

Or something else?

I’m not a watch expert and I only own one Rolex so maybe for me the answer is not so obvious.

[zaratsu]

The point is hype.

It gets people talking about Rolex, calling the stores, walking in to stores, complaining on forums, active trading on the used market for high prices ... All building that halo around Rolex.

Sent from my Pixel XL using Tapatalk

[Giangos]

Exclusivity!
That's the point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Arthur Daley]

Originally Posted by Giangos

Exclusivity!
That's the point.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's right. That's why they "only" sell about a million pieces a year! :)

Rolex is far from exclusive - it's perhaps the Mercedes of watch brands. Sure you can buy an S Class but it'll never be a Maybach, Rolls Royce or anything exotic. But to many, Mercedes is viewed as the pinnacle of car brands.

That being said, within the Mercedes staple some cars are more exclusive than others. I think the scarcity is indeed about keeping the hype train going long-term. It's not about how many watches they'll sell this year, but perhaps about how many they'll sell over the next decade. Flood the market, and demand will dissipate and interest will wane.

It's not dissimilar to deBeers artificially constraining the supply of diamonds to keep prices high. Diamonds are not in short supply. Their circulation is simply limited by a Company that sits on something like 95% of the world's diamond supply.

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[Maybelline]

Wouldn’t they be better off selling more watches that can be seen out in the wild on people’s wrists??

[RHJ]

Originally Posted by Maybelline

Wouldn’t they be better off selling more watches that can be seen out in the wild on people’s wrists??

Their goal is holding the brand value at the top, not to earn more! Earnings goes 100% in charity.

[DantonIzzo]

Originally Posted by RHJ

Their goal is holding the brand value at the top, not to earn more! Earnings goes 100% in charity.

That's not true. Although Rolex is held by a non-profit trust, the 100% of profit doesn't go to charity. They reinvest in company with profits, executives still make millions, and like all other companies they also donate to charities.

[Snow-Dweller]

Originally Posted by DantonIzzo

That's not true. Although Rolex is held by a non-profit trust, the 100% of profit doesn't go to charity. They reinvest in company with profits, executives still make millions, and like all other companies they also donate to charities.

100% of dividends go to the charitable foundation that owns Rolex.

[No SUBctitute]

Originally Posted by Snow-Dweller

100% of dividends go to the charitable foundation that owns Rolex.

A charitable foundation does not own Rolex. Rolex is owned by a private trust that does give SOME money to charity.

[No SUBctitute]

Originally Posted by RHJ

Earnings goes 100% in charity.

That is not true. Although, Rolex is involved in SOME philanthropy.

[Maxy]

Originally Posted by Maybelline

Wouldn’t they be better off selling more watches that can be seen out in the wild on people’s wrists??

https://fablesofaesop.com/the-goose-...lden-eggs.html

Rolex is not here to make quick money and damage the brand. They think for next 20 years and plan stuff, sales, production numbers, etc.

[rossi46]

Originally Posted by Maxy

https://fablesofaesop.com/the-goose-...lden-eggs.html

Rolex is not here to make quick money and damage the brand. They think for next 20 years and plan stuff, sales, production numbers, etc.

So were they "damaging the brand" when SS watches were available? You know, like last year?

That argument makes literally zero sense.

[SpeedyTuomas]

Originally Posted by rossi46

So were they "damaging the brand" when SS watches were available? You know, like last year?

That argument makes literally zero sense.

Ditto. These steel models like the Sub have been produced for over sixty years(?) and you cannot artificially make a mass produced steel watch into a super-excusive product with marketing gimmicks - sorry. I would assume that it hurts revenues to have people willing to buy but an inability to meet the demand.

[zjd168]

Originally Posted by Maybelline

Wouldn’t they be better off selling more watches that can be seen out in the wild on people’s wrists??

Nope.

[Maybelline]

Originally Posted by zjd168

Nope.

Please explain because I must just be ignorant.

[ras47]

Rolex has limited production capacity. Amping up the GMT production would mean cutting something else. Re-tooling would also cost Rolex both time and money.

[gt0279a]

Originally Posted by ras47

Rolex has limited production capacity. Amping up the GMT production would mean cutting something else. Re-tooling would also cost Rolex both time and money.

1Million+ a year does not seem so limited.

[Tysonoxide]

Originally Posted by gt0279a

1Million+ a year does not seem so limited.

But most of them are Datejusts I bet

[Wcdhtwn]

Originally Posted by ras47

Rolex has limited production capacity. Amping up the GMT production would mean cutting something else. Re-tooling would also cost Rolex both time and money.

Because they have 100 different DJ's in small sizes that end up sitting in AD's forever. Retooling would cost time and $$, but they'd be producing watches that actually sell. They should focus on how much they could make instead of how much retooling might cost.

[ras47]

Originally Posted by Wcdhtwn

Because they have 100 different DJ's in small sizes that end up sitting in AD's forever. Retooling would cost time and $$, but they'd be producing watches that actually sell. They should focus on how much they could make instead of how much retooling might cost.

Bite the bullet now and spend the $$ on retooling makes sense. But that presupposes a certain flexibility in Rolex’s thinking. Seems akin to turning a fully laden oil tanker. They seem rather set in their ways.

[run23]

So we keep posting how much we really, really want these watches. Desire for something you can’t have is a strong force.

[vinny84]

Remember the days you had to wait 2 years to receive your new Ferrari or pay over sticker on the used market?

Same exact concept.

[SeaDweller50]

Originally Posted by vinny84

Remember the days you had to wait 2 years to receive your new Ferrari or pay over sticker on the used market?

Same exact concept.

No. Lol.

[vinny84]

Originally Posted by Ra_88

No. Lol.

Yeah same here lol. However, I have witnessed it by looking on the market and reading the Ferrari forums

Having said that, it’s not that way anymore it seems like

[Armyguy03]

Originally Posted by Ra_88

No. Lol.

[BadBlue]

nope

Originally Posted by vinny84

Remember the days you had to wait 2 years to receive your new Ferrari or pay over sticker on the used market?

Same exact concept.

[FTX I]

Supply can change again after Basel. Let's give it some time to find out.

[Token74]

This forum is getting crazy! Seriously guys, I doubt there is a conspiracy! Rolex could I'm sure increase production but that would likely involve significant risk in additional facilities etc. at a time when the Swiss watch industry is facing an uncertain future according to industry analysts.

They would be nuts to change what they are doing.

Rolex owe us nothing. They are not our friend. They are a commercial entity. We don't buy their watches because we are loyal to them, we buy them because we like them. We are no more their friend than they are theirs!

[FTX I]

Originally Posted by Token74

This forum is getting crazy! Seriously guys, I doubt there is a conspiracy! Rolex could I'm sure increase production but that would likely involve significant risk in additional facilities etc. at a time when the Swiss watch industry is facing an uncertain future according to industry analysts.

Vince, I don't have data so this is just speculation, but what if they said well let's cut the SS supply, those suckers will think we're moving PM only, with that we'll sell the WG stock that's bothering us right now and then we throw SS versions that will sell greatly and we discontinue the problem. From now on it's their problem not ours and SS watches will show up again.

Old wham bam thank you maam kind of behaviour. Capitalism 101. Not saying that's what happened but think about it..

[Token74]

Originally Posted by FTX I

Vince, I don't have data so this is just speculation, but what if they said well let's cut the SS supply, those suckers will think we're moving PM only, with that we'll sell the WG stock that's bothering us right now and then we throw SS versions that will sell greatly and we discontinue the problem. From now on it's their problem not ours and SS watches will show up again.



Old wham bam thank you maam kind of behaviour. Capitalism 101. Not saying that's what happened but think about it..

It's possible Flávio, but not convinced. I suspect that PM does very very well in some markets, so is probably less of a problem than we may imagine.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk