ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Ragnarok · 4 June 2018, 03:29 AM

A huge demand for premium watches is the aftermath of a successful bull market we have seen shortly since the 2008-2010 financial fiasco. I'm sure many people shares the same rationale to purchase a rolex when there investment portfolio is up 50% last year.
Anyway, what if this whole production issue not only help reclaim rolex as the most desirable watch brand but also to take their subsidiary band, tudor, to a new height. More and more people on this forum have either acquired a taste for tudor before or during the recent year.

Again, just speculation but tudor have been rock it as well.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

zjd168 · 4 June 2018, 04:11 AM

There are definitely consumers buying Tudor watches due to its price and availability comparing to the Rolex counterparts.

For me I will still want to buy the Rolex BLRO SS even if its retail price is 50% more than the current 9k while the waiting list is two times longer, meanwhile won't consider the Tudor GMT pepsi even if its price is 50% lower than the current one of 4k and available at anytime.

What I want is the new Rolex SS Pepsi, I don't need a blue/red SS GMT.

wytrader · 4 June 2018, 04:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by zjd168

What I want is the new Rolex SS Pepsi, I don't need a blue/red SS GMT.

At least you are honest about it which I applaud.

Go Rolex marketing.

lecorsaire · 4 June 2018, 04:59 AM

It’s not just Rolex marketing. The Rolex is objectively superior. The 3235 is better than the Tudor MT5652. The steel, finishing and attention to detail is also better. The Tudor is a larger, thicker watch with a much cheaper bracelet. They are nowhere being close to the same no matter if we’re comparing it to a 16710 or a 126710.

Muxi · 4 June 2018, 09:44 AM

I would never consider Tudor even if it is a brand created by Rolex. For me Tudor would have to compete with all the other brands out there on its own. No special treatment as a sister company

Likestheshiny · 4 June 2018, 09:48 AM

I think Tudor makes great watches, but in-hand it's obvious that they're not nearly on the same level as a Rolex. Tudors are great -- and in particular they take a design direction that Rolex would never touch -- but they're not somehow a Rolex at a third the price with a different logo.

I'm pretty sure Tudor is there not to raise Tudor up but to pull Omega down. Omega can't keep trying to climb to Rolex heights when it also needs to compete with a strong competitor in a lower price bracket.

4 June 2018, 03:29 AM	#1
Ragnarok "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2018 Real Name: Long Location: San Diego Watch: 3714 Portugieser Posts: 444	Question: direction of recent scarcity A huge demand for premium watches is the aftermath of a successful bull market we have seen shortly since the 2008-2010 financial fiasco. I'm sure many people shares the same rationale to purchase a rolex when there investment portfolio is up 50% last year. Anyway, what if this whole production issue not only help reclaim rolex as the most desirable watch brand but also to take their subsidiary band, tudor, to a new height. More and more people on this forum have either acquired a taste for tudor before or during the recent year. Again, just speculation but tudor have been rock it as well. Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

4 June 2018, 04:59 AM	#4
lecorsaire "TRF" Member Join Date: Dec 2015 Location: NYC Watch: 116710BLNR Posts: 1,541	It’s not just Rolex marketing. The Rolex is objectively superior. The 3235 is better than the Tudor MT5652. The steel, finishing and attention to detail is also better. The Tudor is a larger, thicker watch with a much cheaper bracelet. They are nowhere being close to the same no matter if we’re comparing it to a 16710 or a 126710. __________________ Rolex 116710 BLNR Rolex Day Date 118238 Champagne/Batons

4 June 2018, 04:11 AM	#2
zjd168 "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2009 Location: US Posts: 2,698	There are definitely consumers buying Tudor watches due to its price and availability comparing to the Rolex counterparts. For me I will still want to buy the Rolex BLRO SS even if its retail price is 50% more than the current 9k while the waiting list is two times longer, meanwhile won't consider the Tudor GMT pepsi even if its price is 50% lower than the current one of 4k and available at anytime. What I want is the new Rolex SS Pepsi, I don't need a blue/red SS GMT.

4 June 2018, 09:44 AM	#5
Muxi "TRF" Member Join Date: May 2018 Location: Philippines Posts: 1,823	I would never consider Tudor even if it is a brand created by Rolex. For me Tudor would have to compete with all the other brands out there on its own. No special treatment as a sister company

4 June 2018, 09:48 AM	#6
Likestheshiny "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2017 Location: _ Posts: 1,877	I think Tudor makes great watches, but in-hand it's obvious that they're not nearly on the same level as a Rolex. Tudors are great -- and in particular they take a design direction that Rolex would never touch -- but they're not somehow a Rolex at a third the price with a different logo. I'm pretty sure Tudor is there not to raise Tudor up but to pull Omega down. Omega can't keep trying to climb to Rolex heights when it also needs to compete with a strong competitor in a lower price bracket.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)