Random Serial Numbers, the Best Idea Rolex has had in Years!

[dysondiver]

i wouldnt buy something i didnt have a fair idea of its age, makes a service history a must.

[hhh007]

<<< Random Serial Numbers, the Best Idea Rolex has had in Years!

I don't get that statement, even if you think 'condition is king'. >>>




I said that because I think way too much emphasis is put on the exact production year (or close) of any given pre-owned Rolex, when IMO there are more important aspects to correctly value a watch. As I said in my initial post, would you rather have a 2 yr. old Sub that's been beat on, beat down, damaged and repaired, etc, or a Sub several years older that is virtually as new and was rarely ever worn? Yet still, the newer model will always bring more $$$$ just because of its age.

As others have said, these watches were made to last a lifetime or more, so several years difference in age and the corresponding big differences in market value has always seemed silly to me.

[GradyPhilpott]

I'm not much into the used market or flipping, but I'm wondering if individual watches come with a manufacturer's invoice and whether or not an AD would produce one if asked.

[pradeep]

Random serials are the way to go!

[sub2004]

Isnt that like an oxymoron: "random" "serial" numbers. If its 'serial' then it wouldnt be random. Youn would have to call them Rolex Random Numbers haha

[psv]

Needless to say, you will be able to find out the production year somehow, but the info won't be publicly available. The whole thing is just disappointing and annoying.

[mikelprz]

The serial numbers are not random

Rolex knows what they mean.. and someone will break the code.
It will just be a matter of time.
I'm not worried about Rolex new number system, because like all secrets, others always find out.


I'm sure there is some WIS right now, attempting to crack the code as we post on this forum
I can't wait for the info to come out.

Lastly, I think Rolex put up the challenge.. and is saying,
"Hey fans, try and crack this code"!!

[Kokyuryoku]

I'm not a fan of the random numbers either. If I was going to buy another BNIB from an AD, I'd insist on seeing the paper work they have on when this watch arrived in their shop. It may not be much, but it'd be better than nothing.

[mikelprz]

+1

[padi56]

Clasp codes case codes just cannot see what the fuss is as long as there have been no upgrades to that model what difference does it make.I have two Rolex watches 80 years old still keeping great time.And expect they will be still ticking when my own ticker stops.I ask you guys this if you had a choice of new old stock watch say 5 years old.Or one thats been worn and spent quite a bit of those 5 years on a winder which one would you choose.Rolex watches are the only brand as far as I know where the obsession with case/clasp codes, first it was hologram, and now its case and clasp codes.And the only watches that could be at ADs long enough to gather any dust are the precious metal diamond slow selling watches.And if you buy any serviceable mechanical item used with no service history, then it would be prudent to service it or at least have it checked over just like you would with a used car.

[nowzen]

Originally Posted by sakuraba

They only discomfort I have about this random development is that I believe the consumer should have information on his side at all times. Denying info, however trivial it may seem, is unbefitting of a company that generates so much enthusiasm from collectors.

X2

All the rationalizing of 'only' condition being relevant just doesn't play out with me.

Even if you're buyin that, why keep the production date a secret from those of us who do want to know.
It sure is a contradiction to the trend for most large, reputable corporations who are increasingly transparent, rather than closed and secretive.

Originally Posted by sub2004

Isnt that like an oxymoron: "random" "serial" numbers. If its 'serial' then it wouldnt be random. Youn would have to call them Rolex Random Numbers haha

oxy MORON is right!

[Dob]

Originally Posted by padi56

Clasp codes case codes just cannot see what the fuss is as long as there have been no upgrades to that model what difference does it make.I have two Rolex watches 80 years old still keeping great time.And expect they will be still ticking when my own ticker stops.I ask you guys this if you had a choice of new old stock watch say 5 years old.Or one thats been worn and spent quite a bit of those 5 years on a winder which one would you choose.Rolex watches are the only brand as far as I know where the obsession with case/clasp codes, first it was hologram, and now its case and clasp codes.And the only watches that could be at ADs long enough to gather any dust are the precious metal diamond slow selling watches.And if you buy any serviceable mechanical item used with no service history, then it would be prudent to service it or at least have it checked over just like you would with a used car.

While it may be true that people are overly obsessed with dates of production - this does not change the fact that the consumer should have the right to know when the watch was made. You cannot always gauge condition by appearance and there is a difference between a watch that may have sat under hot display lights for 3-4 years and one that arrived last week. I dislike the lack of transparency. These are not inexpensive, throw-away items - they are "investments" in the sense that people expect to have and use them for some time. This move only benefits Rolex AD's who lose sales when someone knows that they can buy a brand new Sub that has been made within the last 6 months at the same price as one that may have sat around for 3-5 years. While you may not think it matters when spending your money, it seems pretty clear by the volume of posts here that many disagree with your view. Perhaps the real issue here is the volume of production.

[hhh007]

I think I've changed my mind and am moving over to the other side.......I no longer favor random serial numbers and do not think it was the best idea Rolex has had in years.

[gold canyon]

Originally Posted by sakuraba

They only discomfort I have about this random development is that I believe the consumer should have information on his side at all times. Denying info, however trivial it may seem, is unbefitting of a company that generates so much enthusiasm from collectors.

Bingo. They've deliberately made it difficult to determine the age or production date with this obscure numbering system. If I wanted to purchase a Rolex, and two different ADs had the model I wanted, and were both offering the watches for the same price, I'd likely go with the most current one... because that's MY prerogative.

[Manx]

That I'm guessing first after the first five years we can know about Rolex did something smart or stupid. (I already know they do some stupid, but what about the sale market into the future?)I do not think it will play a role, they underestimate their customers, I do not like it, they need our money and do not think we are stupid. I do not like factories as trying to hide something for me. We speak not about watches to a few hundred $, but watches for many thousands of $. I have to pay perhaps 25 000 - U.S. $ for a watch that my AD can not tell me it was made a month ago or five years ago? Ha Ha Ha, It will be mutch better to buy a watch with V or Z number from DAVIDSW for half the price.

As you write, think about a car factory to do the same, selling a NEW car that may have been produced three years ago and the buyer does not know. NOT GOOD.

I'm pretty sure someone in that time has broken the code, OR a mole has written out the entire number list on the internet.

only my 0,02

-M-

ps:papers and tags will be invaluable importance in the future!

[Andad]

Originally Posted by sub2004

Isnt that like an oxymoron: "random" "serial" numbers. If its 'serial' then it wouldnt be random. Youn would have to call them Rolex Random Numbers haha

Yes, I knew the OP was challenged when I read that.

The 'date of purchase' card is now king.

The car analogy is interesting but I would rather buy a 5 year old car with 50000 Km that had been drived fairly and serviced regularly than a 5 year old car that looked brand new with no Km that had been sitting in a shed. Use it or lose it IMO.

[Andad]

Originally Posted by mikelprz

The serial numbers are not random

Rolex knows what they mean.. and someone will break the code.
It will just be a matter of time.
I'm not worried about Rolex new number system, because like all secrets, others always find out.


I'm sure there is some WIS right now, attempting to crack the code as we post on this forum
I can't wait for the info to come out.

Lastly, I think Rolex put up the challenge.. and is saying,
"Hey fans, try and crack this code"!!

Hey, I'm sure JJ told me he had an NOS enigma machine he bought when he was young - let's lets' le'ts put it to use.

[Time Collector]

It is ironic that you can know the "[B]born on date[/B]" of a $3 beer and not know the production date of a $7000 watch. That goes to show that even the small purchases require the knowledge of the production or build date of a item. Rolex is clearly trying to extend the shelf life of the watches at their AD. The seasoned Rolex watch buyer can just add 2 years onto future Rolex purchases.

[Chris B]

It'll make sales/service documentation a more important issue

[Singslinger]

I wouldn't describe it as the "best'' idea Rolex has had in years - I think that title goes to the ceramic bezel or the Glidelock - but I would say it's the most controversial (even though the ceramic bezel has also had its fair share of critics).

I can't speak for everyone or all brands but I think fans/collectors of other manufacturers that make long-standing and hugely popular models are not as concerned with serial numbers as are Rolex followers. For instance, I don't think someone buying an Omega Speedmaster, Seamaster or Breitling Superocean or an AP Royal Oak worries about getting the latest serial number. They simply pay for whatever the AD or seller has in stock at the time.

By the same token though, I think Rolex changing the system mid-stream is not right and that this is the root of the problem. People dislike change, especially after they've grown used to things being done a certain way - recall for example, that apart from the ceramic bezel, the other big recent controversy was the introduction of the Deepsea, which many have criticised because of its larger-than-before size, thickness and weight.

[subdownunder]

Originally Posted by Brenngun

Everyone should always argue in support of full disclosure to the consumer. A company making quality products should never be afraid to disclose when it was produced. To do so only fosters mistrust at the consumer level. Would you buy a bottle of Bordeaux with no vintage on the label? Could you imagine Chateau Margaux announcing it will no longer include the vintage year on their labels? This would never happen as they understand the importance of open communication with their customers. In fact as Jib says it actually works to increase the value of their product. Imagine no identified model year for cars? The list goes on and on. Shame on Rolex and anyone supporting this action.

I can see both the logic and the business sense of this decision.

Basically, Rolex provides full disclosure to all potential buyers as watches within a series are all alike irrespective of year of manufacture; to you as the buyer of a brand new watch get a new current watch with full support of the AD and Rolex. This more than meets their obligations.

The date of the watch that matters is the date of purchase that is on the associated documentation.


Many companies use random seriel numbers without a thought to collectors, and Rolex seem to have decided to make a very smart business decision based upon the fact new buyers don't care, and more importantly, they don't earn a cent through second hand Rolex watch sales.

In fact second hand Rolex watches are probably Rolex's biggest competetior and by going to random numbers the second hand buyer is now taking a bigger risk of a fake or unserviced watch pushing some to say blow it I'll go with a new one thus lessening the demand for second hand watches.

The seriel number issue is important to members of this forum as a lot of members here trade and collect Rolex, however this does not mean that Rolex owes a duty of care to secondary or grey market buyers, it is the responsibility of the buyer to check the history, authenticity and condition of the watch not the AD nor Rolex.

[buz-lh]

Originally Posted by padi56

Clasp codes case codes just cannot see what the fuss is as long as there have been no upgrades to that model what difference does it make.I have two Rolex watches 80 years old still keeping great time.And expect they will be still ticking when my own ticker stops.I ask you guys this if you had a choice of new old stock watch say 5 years old.Or one thats been worn and spent quite a bit of those 5 years on a winder which one would you choose.Rolex watches are the only brand as far as I know where the obsession with case/clasp codes, first it was hologram, and now its case and clasp codes.And the only watches that could be at ADs long enough to gather any dust are the precious metal diamond slow selling watches.And if you buy any serviceable mechanical item used with no service history, then it would be prudent to service it or at least have it checked over just like you would with a used car.

Once again Padi cuts through the obfuscation and hits the nail on the head. With Rolex producing over 600,000 watches per year and cases being manufactured and binned and movements being manufactured and sent for cosc testing who's to say that the newest case doesn't have the oldest movement? If each watch were produced in the old method of a watchmaker assembling a complete watch from start to finish then I would think the serial number would have more value. The only thing we can know for sure is the approximate age of the case and bracelet. In truth it's the movement that is most important and there is no way, other than when changes are made, to know the exact age of the movement. And I agree someone will break the code.

[gqllc]

I also care about the manufacturing date because it is important to know for service intervals when buying but another reason is when a watch is "updated' or "upgraded" with internals or external features. I may or may not like the changes and can buy accordingly...

[Flyjet601]

Originally Posted by sakuraba

They only discomfort I have about this random development is that I believe the consumer should have information on his side at all times. Denying info, however trivial it may seem, is unbefitting of a company that generates so much enthusiasm from collectors.

Interesting point but when Rolex sells you a watch, you can ask what the production date is and I am sure that the AD will give it to you or find out, but the warranty starts when you buy the watch so as a company they are doing what is required for the consumer. They hide nothing.

I believe that when you start buying second hand, older models, this is a whole different area. That is between you and the seller, Rolex has no longer a responsibility to anyone. Rolex are not denying anything. Rolex is in the business of selling NEW watches, that's it. They want you to buy new watches.....and they provide you with all the info necessary with the sale of a new watch.

A relatively small group of people have decided that a Red Sub, James Bond this and Steve McQueen that, are valuable...so be it, market value. But that has nothing to do with Rolex's responsibility to the consumer.
As far as they are concerned...these are nothing more than out of production watches...old stuff. I was speaking to a Rolex Singapore watch tech in Sing....the DRSD means nothing to him. Old is old.....

I think the good news is that IMO all these new shiny, maxed out, oversized versions will nowhere near fetch the value in 30 years that the 30 year old watches are fetching today.....so random serial number will make no difference.

To me if I buy a pre-owned watch, and it has service papers within about 5-8 years....good enough for me. Dont care when it was made cuz for me, Im in the watch wearing business, not collecting.

[mountainjogger]

Originally Posted by Speed

I doubt anything will change.

Look, I agree with the anti-random serial # sentiment. As an owner of only one BNIB Rolex (the rest used) I like the old system...imprecise though it is...

The fact is this random # program is - as was said in this thread and others - relieve Rolex ADs of worring about a watch sitting in their case for a few years and/or a customer trying to get a discount on new / old stock.

I don't think Rolex Sr mngt stay up at night wondering how to keep WIS / used watch buyers happy!

Good Point. I purchased a new Explorer in 09 which I have since traded. The serial number allowed me to point out that it had been sitting for 3 years and I got a nice discount for that reason.

IMOP random serial numbers will take away that bargaining power. And the AD will have no reason to discount the watch, even if it has been sitting for 3 years.

[danberger]

chances are most forum members prefer (not necessarily all) to buy with papers in which case year of sale is known....we all know which models may or may not lurk in AD's as slow sellers so can work out service dates

the other positive of random serial numbers is surely to the consumer's benefit and that is fakers won't be able to guess genuine numbers to copy onto fakes

[padi56]

Originally Posted by psv

Needless to say, you will be able to find out the production year somehow, but the info won't be publicly available. The whole thing is just disappointing and annoying.

Even with the Internet code thats been used now for decades you could only get a rough estimate when a case was stamped.And not when a fully assembled watch was shipped to AD for sale.Rolex sent well over 700000 watch movements for testing at COSC 2009.And the majority of them was the cal 3135 now who knows when that actual movement was orininally made.Rolex must have a huge stock on shelves waiting to be cased,plus one down the COSC being tested.So what this boils down to the main bit the movement could be older newer in any particular case or visa versa.Rolex watches are not made to order by the day week or even year.They are mass produced and don't have any expiry date when bought new same warranty all round no matter whats stamped on case.And any watch when bought used if no history just like a used car you would have it serviced for piece of mind.

Most today put far too much enthuses on these series stamps.And as far as I know, no other brand high end or low gets this hysteria over a few letters and numbers on a case.Maybe now with all the internet hype over Rolex watches we have a totally new Rolex wearer that we had 20 years ago.Then all the buyer was concerned about was maybe the price,and getting one of the finest watches on this planet.And then knowing that watch with little care would last you a life time and beyond.

Now with a Vintage now thats a different ball game, but modern day Rolex so many around and most of them will be still running 20 to 30 year time so why worry over a few letters numbers on a case.I have a few from 1920s and expect they will be still ticking when my ticker stops permanately case stamps humbug the watch is the most important.And lets be totally honest how many of the popular models are at ADs long enough to gather any dust no matter whats on letter number is on case..

[slcbbrown]

Having less information never makes you smarter. The first number or letter is probably close enough to the real dates, but how does random numbering help?

To echo the general nature of the current SN's-- I own my father's 1950's TOG, which is my favorite Rolex. The case SN dates it to 1947, and they began making TOG's (I think) in 1953. I remember my father got the watch from a friend who flew to Europe to buy it, new, and a replacement Rolex for himself.

This friend used to water ski with us in Venezuela (oil bidness), and he made the mistake of skiing with his Rolex. For all I know, it's still ticking at the bottom of Lake Maracaibo.

[buke45]

How can you think that deciding to limit Information is "the best idea Rolex has had in years"??? For
Me condition is always most important but how can you say it is a good Idea to make it practically impossible to tell when the watch was manufactured. Who benefits from this great idea???

[mtrunner]

I personally want to know when my watch was made. I see where people are coming from on both sides of this issue.

Clearly it does matter to Rolex when a watch is made and they are now going to certain lengths to hide the production date of their watches from the consumer. Yes I know the serial numbers of the past were only an approximation but at least we had a general idea when the watch was made. But Rolex clearly does not want the consumer to know when their watch was produced. This comes down to one thing and that has to due with the fact that Rolex does not want you to be able to determine how long a watch has been sitting in an AD. This to me is ridiculous. To have a a manufacturer of a product blantantly trying to hide something from the consumer is wrong.