When Will We HAVE To Go Aftermarket..

[Tools]

With all the new offerings coming out of Rolex lately..

The new GMT ceramic, the latest Sub Ceramic...The SD ceramic..

The announced discontinuation or phase-out of 15xx parts and repair....

It seems like it is just a matter of time before Rolex won't be supporting movements and bezel inserts........Possibly even acrylic crystals..

At what point do we have to go aftermarket for our parts....... ??

Will the quality of aftermarkets meet OEM... ??

[Dan Pierce]

It's a real shame Rolex doesn't value it's vintage pieces. A vintage Rolex will always be in demand and it will never hurt new sales.
dP

[JimSnyder]

Originally Posted by Dan Pierce

It's a real shame Rolex doesn't value it's vintage pieces. A vintage Rolex will always be in demand and it will never hurt new sales.
dP

x2

[fear]

Originally Posted by Dan Pierce

It's a real shame Rolex doesn't value it's vintage pieces. A vintage Rolex will always be in demand and it will never hurt new sales.
dP

That's the weirdest thing. You'd think that Rolex would service vintage like PP, even Omega. Yes, I understand that Rolex needs to be efficient and maximize their profits by not servicing a watch after it's been discontinued for 25-30 years. Servicing many vintage watches will eat into Rolex productivity.

So, some guy has a COMEX, he wants to wear it but Rolex does not service anymore. Replacement parts are available but not Rolex parts. What does a WIS do? 1) Keep the COMEX in a box-and like stamps- people can look at it? 2) Service and fit it with non-rolex parts knowing that the watch ain't pure? 3) Cannibalize other vintage to service the COMEX?

Why can't Rolex set up (or outsource) a branch that's independent of current manufacturing which services only vintage/discontinued watches? Give all the old parts and machinery to that branch and they can do all the vintage/discontinued repairs, make/outsource parts.... This repair facility will still have the Rolex imprimatur and the value of these vintage will not be affected. Rolex may make money off of it too?

[rpryan55]

Originally Posted by fear

Servicing many vintage watches will eat into Rolex productivity.

This is what I don't get - Rolex hires more watchmakers, fixes its vintage watches and charges enough for that service to pay for the additional watchmakers it hired. How does this eat into their profits or reduce their productivity? I guess I just don't get it - can someone explain how repairing vintage watches hurts Rolex?

[Spark]

Originally Posted by rpryan55

This is what I don't get - Rolex hires more watchmakers, fixes its vintage watches and charges enough for that service to pay for the additional watchmakers it hired. How does this eat into their profits or reduce their productivity? I guess I just don't get it - can someone explain how repairing vintage watches hurts Rolex?

It would only be parts manufacture time and space in any event as the servicing is done at service centers who's entire reason for existence is to service Rolex and Tudor watches.
I am sure they will not totally abandon their heritage.
They know already by the amounts serviced and the parts supplied to RSC's and independent Rolex accredited watchmakers there is a very healthy business to be had in the vintage market.

[AJF]

I have a 15223 TT Date on an "L".

I am UK based, but for arguments sake say that I had been US based.

How long would RUSA be prepared to service and repair the watch?

Can anyone tell me what movement number the watch has and is the movement the same as the DJ's, both current and older?

Thanks.

AJF.

[fear]

Originally Posted by rpryan55

This is what I don't get - Rolex hires more watchmakers, fixes its vintage watches and charges enough for that service to pay for the additional watchmakers it hired. How does this eat into their profits or reduce their productivity? I guess I just don't get it - can someone explain how repairing vintage watches hurts Rolex?

I think once that old Rolex can't be serviced anymore, Rolex would want us to buy new ones instead of fixing the old ones.

[frostie]

Ιt will have an effect on the profit that rolex is making in many ways

As i have said many times it is not cost effective for a business to have two separate manufacturing technologies

Rolex is refreshing it's manufacturing procedures and equipment it is very expensive in the beginning but in the long term you are experiencing profit due to the economies of scale as all of it's watches are manufactured under the same technology + they will not have to produce extra parts since ceramic bezels can take a lot of punishment.

From a business perspective this is what rolex is doing

From a marketing point of view they are trying to facelift all of their watches without destroying that much the classic design which is their trademark and that's what other manufacturers are doing too so rolex has to change some things or else competitors will have a bigger slice of the market.

Last but not least rolex is trying to re-establish itself as a luxury watch in the affluent market as many competitors like PP,VC, Ulysse nardin, jaeger are dominant there

[Baptistman]

Originally Posted by frostie

Last but not least rolex is trying to re-establish itself as a luxury watch in the affluent market as many competitors like PP,VC, Ulysse nardin, jaeger are dominant there

Nicely put (the whole post) Wonder why they can't set up a vintage company like Omega have done

[frostie]

Originally Posted by Baptistman

Nicely put (the whole post) Wonder why they can't set up a vintage company like Omega have done

I don't know why maybe they don't feel threatened in the market or maybe there is no need since they sell all of their new watches

[AJF]

I spoke to Rolex UK and they told me they would service and repair watches that were manufactured going back to the 1950's

Are US RSC refusing to servce older watches? I did not think there was a problem getting them to service these watches.

AJF.

[mike]

Originally Posted by AJF

I spoke to Rolex UK and they told me they would service and repair watches that were manufactured going back to the 1950's

Are US RSC refusing to servce older watches? I did not think there was a problem getting them to service these watches.

AJF.

Aly,

RUSA still services 15xx movements subject to parts availability. (Though I've heard 1580 movements might be problematic). 10xx movements are a no go to my knowledge.
One of problems here as opposed to our overseas friends is RUSA's forcing more and more hands and or dial changes. Additionally "Exotic" dials are an issue with RUSA. References like the 1680 RED, 1655, etc... raise issues even though the movement is the same as in other references.

I had NY RSC service a 1680 WHITE with no problem yet I was refused service on a RED two weeks later with the explanation "We don't service those".

Dallas RSC on the other hand had no problem with service on the RED. As I understand it now BH RSC is the best shot for these pieces, but at the lack of warranty.

The two Independent Rolex service centers in Chicago and San Francisco offer a bit more leeway--so far, but who knows for how long.

It's more a matter of doing your homework before hand...at least for now.

[TempoKing]

Originally Posted by frostie

Ιt will have an effect on the profit that rolex is making in many ways

As i have said many times it is not cost effective for a business to have two separate manufacturing technologies

Rolex is refreshing it's manufacturing procedures and equipment it is very expensive in the beginning but in the long term you are experiencing profit due to the economies of scale as all of it's watches are manufactured under the same technology + they will not have to produce extra parts since ceramic bezels can take a lot of punishment.

From a business perspective this is what rolex is doing

From a marketing point of view they are trying to facelift all of their watches without destroying that much the classic design which is their trademark and that's what other manufacturers are doing too so rolex has to change some things or else competitors will have a bigger slice of the market.

Last but not least rolex is trying to re-establish itself as a luxury watch in the affluent market as many competitors like PP,VC, Ulysse nardin, jaeger are dominant there

Bravo Veli
The above shows mature and balanced thinking plus
exactly what Rolex is doing.
You have nailed it my friend

[frostie]

Originally Posted by TempoKing

Bravo Veli
The above shows mature and balanced thinking plus
exactly what Rolex is doing.
You have nailed it my friend

Thank you

Good to get this sort of reply from a rolex insider

[TempoKing]

Originally Posted by frostie

Thank you

Good to get this sort of reply from a rolex insider

...

Veli here....and me hitting him...lol

[f16570]

Well put Velitsko, perhaps they will realise how much their heritage is worth one day.

[frostie]

Originally Posted by f16570

Well put Velitsko, perhaps they will realise how much their heritage is worth one day.

Zillions of euros and that is just my rough estimate

We are facing a transition period we just gotta get used to it

In 20 years it will be like it never happened

The interesting thing though is that they will have the chance to boost up sales as they will be able to offer old and new models at the same time until they empty their warehouses from the old models that they were producing.

Old rolex fans will start buying the older models and new rolex fans like myself will buy the new stuff so this = Revenues for Rolex

[mike]

Velitsko, you make some excellent points. Rolex is in a transitioning stage. One that I'm not totally opposed to. More than one collector has indicated we are on the cusp of a new era that will have the best of the old and the new. The phasing in of the maxi-dial is but one aspect of this.

However; to chip in on Larry's original post and to echo Dan's statement, it is a crying shame Rolex is turning it's back on the very references that brought them to the place they are. These are some of the watches that made history and as such should always have an avenue of repair and maintance with the mothership.

As I've said before, in great measure the legacy that is Rolex has in some sense fallen to the collector to preserve. Thankfully parts for these common calibers exist and will continue to do so for some time. It is the factory support that is being curtailed.

I'm one of the "nature abhors a vacuum" guys. At some point (and I think it's already begun) collectors will accept the work of select master watchmakers
to service, and make, parts for these treasured pieces. Certainly originality will always reign supreme with some, but having a watch that runs is a lot better than one that doesn't.

[frostie]

Originally Posted by mike

Velitsko, you make some excellent points. Rolex is in a transitioning stage. One that I'm not totally opposed to. More than one collector has indicated we are on the cusp of a new era that will have the best of the old and the new. The phasing in of the maxi-dial is but one aspect of this.

However; to chip in on Larry's original post and to echo Dan's statement, it is a crying shame Rolex is turning it's back on the very references that brought them to the place they are. These are some of the watches that made history and as such should always have an avenue of repair and maintance with the mothership.

As I've said before, in great measure the legacy that is Rolex has in some sense fallen to the collector to preserve. Thankfully parts for these common calibers exist and will continue to do so for some time. It is the factory support that is being curtailed.

I'm one of the "nature abhors a vacuum" guys. At some point (and I think it's already begun) collectors will accept the work of select master watchmakers
to service, and make, parts for these treasured pieces. Certainly originality will always reign supreme with some, but having a watch that runs is a lot better than one that doesn't.

Nice post

Collectors will suffer a bit since as you mentioned they will have to find master watchmakers

Too bad that rolex is turning it's back to their heritage but business is business i know that this sounds hard but that's how things are.

[rpryan55]

A shame it is. Patek will fix any watch it has manufactured in its 169 year history (yes, it has more of a "history" than Rolex) and replace and/or re-manufacture any part for your vintage piece. Perhaps this (and the fact that they are known for "jacking up" the bids on Antiquarium) explains why no Rolex has ever surpassed the value of the highest Patek.

Actually, if Rolex were to act a bit more like Patek (and other brands) in regards to their vintage pieces, they would increase their profits, not decrease them. Just my $0.02.

[frostie]

Originally Posted by rpryan55

A shame it is. Patek will fix any watch it has manufactured in its 169 year history (yes, it has more of a "history" than Rolex) and replace and/or re-manufacture any part for your vintage piece. Perhaps this (and the fact that they are known for "jacking up" the bids on Antiquarium) explains why no Rolex has ever surpassed the value of the highest Patek.

Actually, if Rolex were to act a bit more like Patek (and other brands) in regards to their vintage pieces, they would increase their profits, not decrease them. Just my $0.02.

There is something missing here and it is really important

Patek is manufacturing 13,000 watches per year if i am not mistaken whereas rolex is manufacturing 800,000 watches a year and probably rolex is servicing 200,000 watches a year.

Patek has the ability to produce vintage spare parts for their vintage watches since their production is not 24/7 like rolex whereas rolex doesn't have the time to produce any spare parts as they are on a non-stop production all the time since they have to cover the huge demand all around the world.

So from a manufacturing perspective rolex is searching for a higher and faster automation of the manufacturing procedure.

In other words it is impossible to produce spare parts for all of the watches that you've manufactured firstly when you have such a huge production schedule every year and secondly when there are variations on the movements since a 2006 rolex movement is a lot more different than a 1960 rolex movement

All of their moves are completely justified

It's all part of the game and the game for rolex is to be No.1

[rpryan55]

Originally Posted by frostie

There is something missing here and it is really important

Patek is manufacturing 13,000 watches per year if i am not mistaken whereas rolex is manufacturing 800,000 watches a year and probably rolex is servicing 200,000 watches a year.

Patek has the ability to produce vintage spare parts for their vintage watches since their production is not 24/7 like rolex whereas rolex doesn't have the time to produce any spare parts as they are on a non-stop production all the time since they have to cover the huge demand all around the world.

So from a manufacturing perspective rolex is searching for a higher and faster automation of the manufacturing procedure.

In other words it is impossible to produce spare parts for all of the watches that you've manufactured firstly when you have such a huge production schedule every year and secondly when there are variations on the movements since a 2006 rolex movement is a lot more different than a 1960 rolex movement

All of their moves are completely justified

It's all part of the game and the game for rolex is to be No.1

Frostie, I hate to disagree, but Rolex, being bigger, has the funds to hire more people, create or buy more machinery, to service their vintage pieces. It is, in fact, possible to produce spare parts for all of the watches you've manufactured - their production schedule, and their different movements, would not stop a committed company from manufacturing the parts (and that could be done on an individual basis) for their vintage pieces. They're hardly overworked - and they surely have the money to do this. This is a choice they've made because they want their customers to buy new, not to savor old. That philosophy worked for them for years.

Unfortunately, the watch business has changed - now, a watch company's present collection is valued by how they treat their earlier offerings. And Rolex is losing its image because of their refusal to treat their prior products with the reverance that they demand of their current line. Just my $0.02.

Oh, and Patek releases about 35K or so watches per year currently, give or take.

[frostie]

Originally Posted by rpryan55

Frostie, I hate to disagree, but Rolex, being bigger, has the funds to hire more people, create or buy more machinery, to service their vintage pieces. It is, in fact, possible to produce spare parts for all of the watches you've manufactured - their production schedule, and their different movements, would not stop a committed company from manufacturing the parts (and that could be done on an individual basis) for their vintage pieces. They're hardly overworked - and they surely have the money to do this. This is a choice they've made because they want their customers to buy new, not to savor old. That philosophy worked for them for years.

Unfortunately, the watch business has changed - now, a watch company's present collection is valued by how they treat their earlier offerings. And Rolex is losing its image because of their refusal to treat their prior products with the reverance that they demand of their current line. Just my $0.02.

I agree with you but in business you have to be in a continuous production and not to be stationary. Even if they had invested money on making themselves bigger and creating a factory just for producing vintage spare parts they would just pleasure a small portion of followers as most of rolex owners are not vintage owners and since there are master watchmakers that can service watches that are out of spare parts they couldn't care less. Lastly they like the fact that people will rush to buy new watches instead of servicing their old ones

They prefer to have 5.000 or 10.000 (don't exactly remember the number) employees and have such huge profits

[rpryan55]

Originally Posted by frostie

They prefer to have 5.000 or 10.000 (don't exactly remember the number) employees and have such huge profits

Agreed. But I think it's a dumb business decision on their part, and I think it's de-valuing the brand. But that's just my opinion, and I've been catastrophically wrong about this kind of thing before.

[HYDROMAROC]

Originally Posted by Tools

With all the new offerings coming out of Rolex lately..

The new GMT ceramic, the latest Sub Ceramic...The SD ceramic..

The announced discontinuation or phase-out of 15xx parts and repair....

It seems like it is just a matter of time before Rolex won't be supporting movements and bezel inserts........Possibly even acrylic crystals..

At what point do we have to go aftermarket for our parts....... ??

Will the quality of aftermarkets meet OEM... ??

What is the time frame on parts and service on the models...I know that the law on cars is 10 years for parts availibility after a vehicle is discontinued. Is there any standard on watches...????

I would hate to think that a watch could be considered "obsolete" after a certain point...

[cmr]

Originally Posted by HYDROMAROC

What is the time frame on parts and service on the models...I know that the law on cars is 10 years for parts availibility after a vehicle is discontinued. Is there any standard on watches...????

I would hate to think that a watch could be considered "obsolete" after a certain point...

i don't know how they are doing it but the auto manufactures are getting out of having to supply parts for 10 years. i have a 1998 lincoln mark vlll and a 1999 oldsmobile aurora. there have been many parts unavailable on those 2 cars for 3 years now. 2 years ago i couldn't buy new fog lamp assy's for the olds and that is a high sale item due to front impacts. likewise on the lincoln, haven't been able to buy new hid headlight bulbs or capsules for 3 years now. there are lots of parts for those 2 cars unavailable now. they are doing something to get around that law.

[Art161]

I read some time ago that Mercedes set up a facility in Southern California that will service any Mercedes vehicle, no matter how old. If a needed part is not available, they will manufacture one. I don't have any idea how much this costs the consumer. Undoubtedly a lot!!!

I don't know how this would go over for Rolex watches. If it's a money maker, then Rolex could do it. If Rolex doesn't think it will be a money maker, then they won't. I don't think Rolex is sentimental about its vintage watches. They just want to make the money.

[mike]

Originally Posted by HYDROMAROC

What is the time frame on parts and service on the models...I know that the law on cars is 10 years for parts availibility after a vehicle is discontinued. Is there any standard on watches...????

I would hate to think that a watch could be considered "obsolete" after a certain point...

The general rule has been 30 years after the reference/movement is discontinued. I don't know that it's strictly enforced. Again more of a parts availability issue.

[Denny M]

Originally Posted by mike

The general rule has been 30 years after the reference/movement is discontinued. I don't know that it's strictly enforced. Again more of a parts availability issue.

So how long can we expect Rolex to service the 16610 Subs, Sea Dwellers etc?

With the new improved ceramic bezel, maxi dial models coming out now, are the above considered discontinued? Or does discontinued mean when a line is completely dropped not just modified?