GMT Master ll Pepsi dial in tungsten?

[madmax21]

Here's an awesome idea for next year how about a GMT Master ll in tungsten with your choice of either a black bezel or say a Pepsi dial or Coke dail would you buy one...and will make the price say
14 K

[AS1]

don't really follow the idea or what a Pepsi or Coke dial means, but in any case don't think there is any chance of this happening. sorry.

[madmax21]

Originally Posted by AS1

don't really follow the idea or what a Pepsi or Coke dial means, but in any case don't think there is any chance of this happening. sorry.

It's my opinion that we will never see it because Rolex decides on coming out with gold versions, don't get me wrong I love Rolex watches if not I wouldn't be here but I really dislike how they try to force people to buy gold whether they like it or not, this is just another way for them to over price items and call it luxury

[breitlings]

Why don't you like 904L? Do you own a rolex currently? I have to say your first two ideas and threads are not traditional Rolex and don't seem like good ideas.

[GB-man]

I wouldn't mind a ti offering from rolex but I am not sure it fits the gmt. Maybe a new model or a sub.

[madmax21]

Originally Posted by GB-man

I wouldn't mind a ti offering from rolex but I am not sure it fits the gmt. Maybe a new model or a sub.

A submariner would definitely be cool

[madmax21]

Originally Posted by breitlings

Why don't you like 904L? Do you own a rolex currently? I have to say your first two ideas and threads are not traditional Rolex and don't seem like good ideas.

I own about 5 watches Subs Datejust GMTs and so on.. I'd like to see something different

[HogwldFLTR]

Originally Posted by AS1

don't really follow the idea or what a Pepsi or Coke dial means, but in any case don't think there is any chance of this happening. sorry.

Quite cetain the OP meant Pepsi or Coke bezel insert. And, no, in general I'm not fond of the Ti luster.

[Eric Chan]

Originally Posted by madmax21

It's my opinion that we will never see it because Rolex decides on coming out with gold versions, don't get me wrong I love Rolex watches if not I wouldn't be here but I really dislike how they try to force people to buy gold whether they like it or not, this is just another way for them to over price items and call it luxury

Do you have something against gold watches, specifically gold watches from Rolex? Over the course of two threads now, you have made this point known, but with little or no logical reasoning.

Also, how does Rolex "force" people to buy gold watches? Do their AD's hold guns to the heads of their customers? If your logic is based on the fact Rolex changed the BLRO to be available only in WG, then your claim is pretty weak. I am sure it upset people that the BLRO is no longer available in SS, but I would be shocked if anyone felt "forced" to buy the WG version.

You claim to love Rolex and hell, you even own five references as you have mentioned above, but you do have a funny way of showing this "love" for this brand. Comments such as overpriced gold models, forcing customers to buy gold models, changing models to gold so they can be overpriced and call it luxury seem to suggest disdain for the brand as opposed to love.

In all honesty, if Rolex or its business practice and marketing do not appeal to you anymore, maybe, as I mentioned in your other thread, it is time to consider another brand that is less expensive and does not offer gold watches that you feel is overpriced. I don't think there is a "luxury" brand out there that offers this, but you never know.

[AK797]

Originally Posted by Eric Chan

Do you have something against gold watches, specifically gold watches from Rolex? Over the course of two threads now, you have made this point known, but with little or no logical reasoning.

Also, how does Rolex "force" people to buy gold watches. Do their AD's hold guns to the heads of their customers? If your logic is based on the fact Rolex changed the BLRO to be available only in WG, then your claim is pretty weak. I am sure it upset people that the BLRO is no longer available in SS, but I would be shocked if anyone felt "forced" to buy the WG version.

You claim to love Rolex and hell, you even own five references as you have mentioned above, but you do have a funny way of showing this "love" for this brand. Comments such as overpriced gold models, forcing customers to buy gold models, changing models to gold so they can be overpriced and call it luxury seem to suggest disdain for the brand as opposed to love.

In all honesty, if Rolex or its business practice and marketing do not appeal to you anymore, maybe, as I mentioned in your other thread, it is time to consider another brand that is less expensive and does not offer gold watches that you feel is overpriced. I don't think there is a "luxury" brand out there that offers this, but you never know.

[crowncollection]

good post X 3

Originally Posted by Eric Chan

Do you have something against gold watches, specifically gold watches from Rolex? Over the course of two threads now, you have made this point known, but with little or no logical reasoning.

Also, how does Rolex "force" people to buy gold watches? Do their AD's hold guns to the heads of their customers? If your logic is based on the fact Rolex changed the BLRO to be available only in WG, then your claim is pretty weak. I am sure it upset people that the BLRO is no longer available in SS, but I would be shocked if anyone felt "forced" to buy the WG version.

You claim to love Rolex and hell, you even own five references as you have mentioned above, but you do have a funny way of showing this "love" for this brand. Comments such as overpriced gold models, forcing customers to buy gold models, changing models to gold so they can be overpriced and call it luxury seem to suggest disdain for the brand as opposed to love.

In all honesty, if Rolex or its business practice and marketing do not appeal to you anymore, maybe, as I mentioned in your other thread, it is time to consider another brand that is less expensive and does not offer gold watches that you feel is overpriced. I don't think there is a "luxury" brand out there that offers this, but you never know.

[madmax21]

Originally Posted by Eric Chan

Do you have something against gold watches, specifically gold watches from Rolex? Over the course of two threads now, you have made this point known, but with little or no logical reasoning.

Also, how does Rolex "force" people to buy gold watches? Do their AD's hold guns to the heads of their customers? If your logic is based on the fact Rolex changed the BLRO to be available only in WG, then your claim is pretty weak. I am sure it upset people that the BLRO is no longer available in SS, but I would be shocked if anyone felt "forced" to buy the WG version.

You claim to love Rolex and hell, you even own five references as you have mentioned above, but you do have a funny way of showing this "love" for this brand. Comments such as overpriced gold models, forcing customers to buy gold models, changing models to gold so they can be overpriced and call it luxury seem to suggest disdain for the brand as opposed to love.

In all honesty, if Rolex or its business practice and marketing do not appeal to you anymore, maybe, as I mentioned in your other thread, it is time to consider another brand that is less expensive and does not offer gold watches that you feel is overpriced. I don't think there is a "luxury" brand out there that offers this, but you never know.

Wow, point taken thanks for your opinion.. wasn't trying to offend you

[watchwatcher]

Yeah....no.

[Eric Chan]

Originally Posted by madmax21

Wow, point taken thanks for your opinion.. wasn't trying to offend you

Not offended in any manner.

Just trying to understand the logic you are basing your statements on.

[Rocket_Man]

There are countless posts on here of people with wish lists of what they'd like to see come from Rolex. His wish, while not traditional for Rolex, is no less valid. The OP seems to get very negative responses, especially by PM owners. The forum is for discussion, so why not discuss?

There is a lot of men's jewelry made from Tungsten. And no, Tungsten and Titanium (Ti) are two different materials. Tungsten has some properties that are superior for a watch to 904L. For example, PCLs that never scratch. No issues with Nickel allergies. But it is a difficult material to work with, hard to make threads in, and can only be polished with diamond tools or diamond dust. Plus it is a sintered metal and doesn't get formed like 904L through machining with CnC machines. The ability to make highly polished Tungsten jewelry is fairly recent in the history of jewelry so I doubt it was ever considered by Rolex early in its history. But as we have seen with Ceramic bezels and rubber bracelets, they are not afraid to explore new materials. PCLs in Tungsten could be considered the equivalent of Ceramic bezels. Very wear resistant from the traditional material. Wouldn't everyone who likes PCLs want them to never scratch?

As to the Gold comment... Rolex doesn't force anyone to buy any of their products. But they certainly do make certain models exclusive to PM versions. The Day-Date would be extremely popular in SS, and when someone posted in the 'Basel 16 wish list thread' that they's like to see a SS Sky-Dweller (me included) no one attacked them. So in this sense, Rolex does force you to go PM if you want certain models or feature like the Pepsi bezel on the new GMT. Even among the PM models you have to step up to Platinum to get some features. PT models being far more expensive to YG or RG even though as a material it is cheaper. So Rolex marketing establishes these tier levels in their product line and to get certain watches you have to go PM. Those that have stepped up into the higher tiers don't want to see those models cheapen by see SS versions made or see the Pepsi bezel offered on the SS GMT (for example). But... like a lot of things we want, we can't always get. Doesn't mean we can't talk about it.

PM models are overpriced. The price structure is not based on the material costs, it is based on what they can sell them for. The easiest example to see this is PT vice YG. PT is cheaper than gold but the PT models are significantly higher than gold models. So PM buyers are paying for exclusivity, not the material. Rolex can sell them at a higher price, but they do tend to offer larger percentage discounts and in the secondary market, the PM models lose value at a higher rate then SS models. Not much different than diamonds. Diamonds are very over priced but the demand for diamonds has less to do with monetary value than intrinsic value. I've bought many over priced diamonds, but just try to sell one for anything close to what you paid for them. Again, buyers are willing to pay the intrinsic price for diamonds even if the real value is far less.

[rabbithole88]

As W is so difficult to work with you might find that the prices are not too dissimilar to Au.

[Eric Chan]

Originally Posted by Rocket_Man

There are countless posts on here of people with wish lists of what they'd like to see come from Rolex. His wish, while not traditional for Rolex, is no less valid. The OP seems to get very negative responses, especially by PM owners. The forum is for discussion, so why not discuss?

There is a lot of men's jewelry made from Tungsten. And no, Tungsten and Titanium (Ti) are two different materials. Tungsten has some properties that are superior for a watch to 904L. For example, PCLs that never scratch. No issues with Nickel allergies. But it is a difficult material to work with, hard to make threads in, and can only be polished with diamond tools or diamond dust. Plus it is a sintered metal and doesn't get formed like 904L through machining with CnC machines. The ability to make highly polished Tungsten jewelry is fairly recent in the history of jewelry so I doubt it was ever considered by Rolex early in its history. But as we have seen with Ceramic bezels and rubber bracelets, they are not afraid to explore new materials. PCLs in Tungsten could be considered the equivalent of Ceramic bezels. Very wear resistant from the traditional material. Wouldn't everyone who likes PCLs want them to never scratch?

As to the Gold comment... Rolex doesn't force anyone to buy any of their products. But they certainly do make certain models exclusive to PM versions. The Day-Date would be extremely popular in SS, and when someone posted in the 'Basel 16 wish list thread' that they's like to see a SS Sky-Dweller (me included) no one attacked them. So in this sense, Rolex does force you to go PM if you want certain models or feature like the Pepsi bezel on the new GMT. Even among the PM models you have to step up to Platinum to get some features. PT models being far more expensive to YG or RG even though as a material it is cheaper. So Rolex marketing establishes these tier levels in their product line and to get certain watches you have to go PM. Those that have stepped up into the higher tiers don't want to see those models cheapen by see SS versions made or see the Pepsi bezel offered on the SS GMT (for example). But... like a lot of things we want, we can't always get. Doesn't mean we can't talk about it.

PM models are overpriced. The price structure is not based on the material costs, it is based on what they can sell them for. The easiest example to see this is PT vice YG. PT is cheaper than gold but the PT models are significantly higher than gold models. So PM buyers are paying for exclusivity, not the material. Rolex can sell them at a higher price, but they do tend to offer larger percentage discounts and in the secondary market, the PM models lose value at a higher rate then SS models. Not much different than diamonds. Diamonds are very over priced but the demand for diamonds has less to do with monetary value than intrinsic value. I've bought many over priced diamonds, but just try to sell one for anything close to what you paid for them. Again, buyers are willing to pay the intrinsic price for diamonds even if the real value is far less.

It is odd that you would say the OP has received negative feedback. It is more constructive than negative as the OP has made points and claims that in my opinion are not that logical, such as Rolex forcing people to buy gold watches. They produce a product and change product lines. Sometimes these decisions agree with consumers, sometimes they don't. In the end, it is up to the consumer to make a choice to buy or not. I could care less if Rolex offered watches in SS or tungsten, even though my preference is for stainless steel over tungsten.

The OP has stated in at least two different threads that he wants to see something different. As Rolex has proven in the past, their watches and designs do not change much over the years, so maybe, the OP should venture into other brands and maybe he can find something that appeals to him as it most likely will not happen with Rolex.

With respect to the SS Sky-Dweller issue referenced above, I assume the reason why no "negative" comments were cast is that it was a logical question as many Rolex models come out in precious metals first, then followed by two-tone and finally stainless steel. I am pretty certain if the statement was posed as to why the Sky-Dweller was so expensive and Rolex should use other gold like alloys, etc. there reaction would have been much different.

Very true, that we can't always get what we want, but it is more important to know and understand that luxury items are priced a certain way and we either accept it or don't, much like your diamond analogy. Sure, it's a public forum, however, public forum or not, one would hope that members would put some thought into the subjects before posting them on the Forum for discussion.

[Speed]

Originally Posted by madmax21

I own about 5 watches Subs Datejust GMTs and so on.. I'd like to see something different

Might want to look at other brands.