Hoping I could take an informal poll: What would you pay to lease a Rolex?

[HL65]

Zero....

[rolio]

But why?

[Oyster Junkie]

Originally Posted by Submarino

Leasing a watch is just pretending to have something you don't. There's a similar service that leases designer purses. It's ridiculous. To me if you can't afford buying the watch why pretend you have the money to have it on your wrist. It's just for posers IMHO!

I think watch leasing takes away the whole concept of working hard to be able to purchase a precious timepiece that you will own as long as you choose to. The whole 'sale premise' of Patek would be dead if they leased them. Is not like a car that takes you places and wears out drastically!

Patek Phillippe:"No longer do you hold it for the next generation, you rent it to be a pretentious db."

[McLovin]

Interesting question, Danny. I could see this being profitable in a handful of cities where there is a big enough mass of young professionals who need a luxury watch as part of the corporate uniform. I think there would be a rental market for Pateks in NYC and DC, for example. Price is hard to say -- what's the cost/benefit ratio, and when does the customer say "I might as well buy one?" I could see maybe $200/month for a Patek.

[(DMB)]

Some of the comments in this thread show just the type of snobbery that makes people hate Rolex and Rolex owners. NEWS FLASH: Rolex watches are nothing special in the grand horological scheme of things. I own a couple and really like them because they look cool to me, are the size I like, and are tough and reliable. That's about it. In terms of haute horology I don't consider Rolex anywhere near JLC, BP, AP, GO, A Lange and Sohne, etc. However, because of (hands down) the best marketing in the business, Joe Sixpack thinks Rolex = "I made it, Top of the World Ma".

I know a lot of serial flippers that would probably lease a watch. Not because they want (or need) to be poseurs, but because they lose their butt every 2 -3 months when they sell off their latest acquisition. You can always tell the fanbois or the guys that just got that 1st Rolex by the comments they make. Comments like "pretending to have something you don't" or "probably the same type of person that would buy a knockoff" make all Rolex owners look like total D Bags in the eyes of someone that doesn't own one. It's embarrassing. Do you go around bagging on someone who leases a car or rents a house? How is leasing a watch, a Timeshare Condo, or a set of golf clubs for that matter any different? It's not. Let's all get over ourselves ok?

[Dr.B]

Live within your limits....

[Zed Homme]

Interesting question. I have my reasons why I'd never do it, but let me think.

The problem I see is that there isn't enough depreciation in a watch's value for the interest charged on top of the financing to be worth the leaders while. Also, one would have to see if the used market could take so many extra pieces. Beyond us wis I doubt a lot of people want to buy a used watch. However, if the used watch market took off, I think rolex themselves would object as the perception will be a devaluing of their product. To counter this they would stop selling to the leasing company (just like the stop sales to other resellers). I think if there was any profit in this, someone would already be doing it now.

[Cuts33]

I don't get all of the "No Way!!!" and "Faking" and "Poser" comments. There is no difference between what the OP is contemplating versus someone who leases a car. If someone leases an expensive car are they a poser? Are they driving a "fake BMW?."

I have two cars - lease one and own one. The one I own is an SUV and I'll drive it into the ground. The other is a sedan and I lease because I like a new care every 3 years without the hassles of buying/selling.

Like anything else, the numbers have to make sense. In general, the value of a car depreciates 50% in 3 years. So if a car costs $50K new, in 3 years it will be worth $25K. If I lease that car, as long as my total payments over 36 months add up to $25K or less, I'm coming out OK.

Same principle will apply to the watch leasing. It has to make sense to the lessee. For example, if a new Sub C is $8K and in a year it depreciates $1K, for someone to "rent" that watch for 1 year and pay around $80 - $100 a month, it makes sense.

The way the business is going to make money is that after that first year, the depreciation slows down. They can charge $100 a month for 5 years to 5 different people and collect $6K total during that span on a watch that only cost them $8K to begin with. And they still have an asset (the watch) worth about $5-6K.

If you then sell the watch outright for say $5K, you have made a total of $11,000 on an $8,000 investment for a profit of $3,000.00 in 5 years or 7% return per year.

Not a bad ROI but you aren't going to get rich of it unless this is a very very high volume operation.

[JUSTROLEXES]

It doesn't make sense at all to rent a watch and not to mention there will be no way to repo it if the owner stop paying
The best way around it is to sell it to your buyer and buy it back whenever he's done with it for a little lower value
So let's say I sold a watch for $6800 and I bought it back for $6400 after 8 months, in your case your total rent will be ($6800- $6400) / 8 months= $50 a month

[Welshwatchman]

No way !!!!!

[Welshwatchman]

Originally Posted by justrolexes

$50 a month

Make it $25 and you've got yourself a new customer.

I'll have one of those gold things.

Yes way!!!!!

[JUSTROLEXES]

Originally Posted by Welshwatchman

Make it $25 and you've got yourself a new customer.

I'll have one of those gold things.

Yes way!!!!!

hah hah, the buy back on the gold ones is way less then the sale price but for you my friend I will do $50

[DT14]

There is probably a market out there for leasing a luxury watch and I am guessing that quite a few who browse this forum would fall into that target market, but still not sure it's a large enough group. The fact that many here see leasing a watch as "posing" doesn't mean a lot of people would not be interested. Most Rolex owners would not own their beloved watch if it didn't have that all important word on the dial. Point being, most of us are image conscious on some level.

[phillycheez]

Originally Posted by (DMB)

Some of the comments in this thread show just the type of snobbery that makes people hate Rolex and Rolex owners. NEWS FLASH: Rolex watches are nothing special in the grand horological scheme of things. I own a couple and really like them because they look cool to me, are the size I like, and are tough and reliable. That's about it. In terms of haute horology I don't consider Rolex anywhere near JLC, BP, AP, GO, A Lange and Sohne, etc. However, because of (hands down) the best marketing in the business, Joe Sixpack thinks Rolex = "I made it, Top of the World Ma".

I know a lot of serial flippers that would probably lease a watch. Not because they want (or need to be) to be poseurs, but because they lose their butt every 2 -3 months when they sell off their latest acquisition. You can always tell the fanbois or the guys that just got that 1st Rolex by the comments they make. Comments like "pretending to have something you don't" or "probably the same type of person that would buy a knockoff" make all Rolex owners look like total D Bags in the eyes of someone that doesn't own one. It's embarrassing. Do you go around bagging on someone who leases a car or rents a house? How is leasing a watch, a Timeshare Condo, or a set of golf clubs for that matter any different? It's not. Let's all get over ourselves ok?

Agreed... I see comments on trf all the time that make me want to leave the Rolex brand entirely just so I don't feel associated with such "classy" individuals.

[Stonedcl]

You lease things that depreciate (cars) and buy stuff that appreciates (homes well sometimes and watches) say someone leased a 16610 2 years back when it cost $5k new and say they paid $100 a month so that's $2400 but now they see that watch is selling still for $5,000 what would they not just buy it out.. Who would pay $2400 for something that cost the same 2 years later and shell out $2400?

I can see this for women's handbags because every season styles change but a rolex looked the same the last 50 years..

[phillycheez]

Originally Posted by dannyp

Selection would actually be great, since in this scenario the leasing company doesn't acquire the watch until the customer decides to lease it. At that point, leasing company buys it, takes in the lease payments, then sells it at the end of the lease. Financing would be either through a bank or the manufacturer, much like auto leasing. The only risk is that the customer won't pay, or the leasing company won't be able to offload the watch at the end of the lease, but they don't actually acquire watches before there is a person waiting to enter a lease for it.

Interesting.

The risk I see is somebody switching parts for fakes. You just never know.

Or how bout just switching a banged up crown, crystal, bezel for the nice one on the rental? I'm sure they sign up for rental insurance if anything bad were to happen but than I see that insurance company dropping you like a bad habit if it happens all the time.

[rolexkiwi]

I think this is a tough crowd for sure.
I know I never would as I want to own or not buy.
Certain models seem to hold value well and as such the potential loss over two years is not that great, could make it very difficult to make a dollar with low lease costs.
Also what about damage, wear and tear, how would you factor this in and cover all these ongoing costs as well as put $ away for servicing in the future.
What about the defaults how would you deal with that? Watches that are "stolen"...
Insurance on all of the above? Costs for?

Hmmm, seems hard.

Good luck with the number crunching.

[Art 1]

No.

[Wineman]

Originally Posted by (DMB)

Some of the comments in this thread show just the type of snobbery that makes people hate Rolex and Rolex owners. NEWS FLASH: Rolex watches are nothing special in the grand horological scheme of things. I own a couple and really like them because they look cool to me, are the size I like, and are tough and reliable. That's about it. In terms of haute horology I don't consider Rolex anywhere near JLC, BP, AP, GO, A Lange and Sohne, etc. However, because of (hands down) the best marketing in the business, Joe Sixpack thinks Rolex = "I made it, Top of the World Ma".

I know a lot of serial flippers that would probably lease a watch. Not because they want (or need to be) to be poseurs, but because they lose their butt every 2 -3 months when they sell off their latest acquisition. You can always tell the fanbois or the guys that just got that 1st Rolex by the comments they make. Comments like "pretending to have something you don't" or "probably the same type of person that would buy a knockoff" make all Rolex owners look like total D Bags in the eyes of someone that doesn't own one. It's embarrassing. Do you go around bagging on someone who leases a car or rents a house? How is leasing a watch, a Timeshare Condo, or a set of golf clubs for that matter any different? It's not. Let's all get over ourselves ok?

Here, here. Some people here just seem to like to criticize at every turn rather than considering the issue, which is too bad and a turn off to me at times. A nice healthy discourse if great, but pounding on someone who has an idea is not.

[cedargrove]

I lease my car but view this as a luxury. I get a new car evey three years, but I know in the long run I am paying a lot more for this.

However I would never do this with a watch. I want to accumulate watches, and a have a personal attachment to them. So I realize I am not your customer.

I am not sure there are enough people that are BOTH mad flippers and watch enthusiasts to make this worthwhile. I say BOTH, because non enthusiasts will likely not be your customer either - they will either be content wearing a knockoff, or will have the funds to just buy one outright. I may be wrong though.

As a business not something I'd invest in, but if you give it a go then good luck.

[snowbird]

I think it's an interesting idea and seems pretty similar to what serial flippers do in effect. As noted above the lack of depreciation is a potential issue, so it might work best for brands and models with the highest depreciation (for Rolex, gold and platinum models). It could also be a cheap way to test a watch out before making a purchase decision.

The point above about the difficulty of doing a repo is important. I think the borrower would have to post a bond or something to make it work.

[chhatre9]

You probably have to remember that on this forum, most everyone would think its a horrible idea (admittedly me too), however, your market would be mostly people who are not this forum because they aren't anywhere close to purchasing even one rolex.

[JadeRaven]

It wouldn't work for the sheer fact that they're too small to keep track of. Unless you thoroughly pre-screened folks and had them post significant collateral, repo-ing a leased watch would be near impossible.

[p_mcgee]

I'm no expert, but I understand that on a car lease you are typically paying for taxes, interest, insurance & depreciation over the lease term.

Here are some back of the envelope estimates:
Say you buy a Rolex sports model (SubC) discounted for $7400.
After 2 years, maybe it depreciates $1000, or around $40 per month.
Not sure what to do for interest rate, but assume 15% credit card-type rate, or around $90 per month.
Insurance probably around $10/month.
I'd assume taxes don't apply, so maybe ballpark lease payment would be $140/month.

After 2 years you are down over $3300. I'd have to agree with most of the people above & would prefer to buy. As noted above maybe the math would be better for a model that depreciates faster.

[JadeRaven]

Also I suppose I just don't know enough about the watch market, but a lot of y'all seem to think that these watches are non-depreciating assets.

I'm sure that if you keep your watch boxed for a couple years you'll get back a lot of money on the re-sale, but I just can't see someone paying the original retail sales price for a worn watch a couple years later when there's new ones on the shelves.

[Pep04]

Interesting to say the least. Everyone is hung up on the lease of Rolex. But take a look at brands like AP. When an AP ROO retails for $25,000 and we see them here NIB or LNIB for $15,000, the question of depreciation comes into mind.

The one caveat is what the lease would be.

[Pep04]

Interesting to say the least. Everyone is hung up on the lease of Rolex. But take a look at brands like AP. When an AP ROO retails for $25,000 and we see them here NIB or LNIB for $15,000, the question of depreciation comes into mind.

The one caveat is what the lease would be.

[zhiunit]

Isnt jewelry rentals done in rap music videos where they rent their chains, watches, etc?....i know jay z/kanye definitely own the pieces on their wrists, but this could be more so directed towards those who are new to the "game."

[humvee]

ZERO -- Leasing a Rolex is for showoffs-- wannabes-- I classify Rolex leasers in the same category as those who buy Fake Rolexes.

[timeisfathaoftruth]

I would never lease a watch...I just wouldn't enjoy wearing a watch that I was renting and for me that is the bottom line.