Do you include service costs when choosing a watch?

[AK797]

Not if it's new but if it was used and out of warranty or close then yes.

[returntorolex]

Originally Posted by Eric Chan

No. If you can't afford the service, then you can't afford the watch. Very similar logic to buying a car.

I hear you....let's say this:

Buyer can easily afford watch and service and is deciding between two watches. Buyer is equally passionate about both. Both are similar in suggested retail price - let's say $30,000.00.

Service cost on Watch 1 runs X
Service cost on Watch 2 runs 3 times X

For me, this is in the mix when it comes to decision time. It is not the most important but is one of the half dozen factors that are considered prior to selection.

Make sense?

[tkerrmd]

Originally Posted by returntorolex

I hear you....let's say this:

Buyer can easily afford watch and service and is deciding between two watches. Buyer is equally passionate about both. Both are similar in suggested retail price - let's say $30,000.00.

Service cost on Watch 1 runs X
Service cost on Watch 2 runs 3 times X

For me, this is in the mix when it comes to decision time. It is not the most important but is one of the half dozen factors that are considered prior to selection.

Make sense?

that reasoning makes financial sense but buying a 30k watch doesn't, meaning there are so many more factors buying a luxury item I don't think service comes into play. buying a watch for me is an emotional, visceral, passion, and at that level of cost I am getting the watch that I like the most!

does that make sense?

[Cinquecento]

no

[returntorolex]

Originally Posted by tkerrmd

that reasoning makes financial sense but buying a 30k watch doesn't, meaning there are so many more factors buying a luxury item I don't think service comes into play. buying a watch for me is an emotional, visceral, passion, and at that level of cost I am getting the watch that I like the most!

does that make sense?

Yeah...lol it does. Your last "does that make sense" tickled me and reminded me of this exchange:

"ARE WE CLEAR?"
"Crystal."

[tkerrmd]

Originally Posted by returntorolex

Yeah...lol it does. Your last "does that make sense" tickled me and reminded me of this exchange:

"ARE WE CLEAR?"
"Crystal."

yeah, hard to sense humor sometimes on the internet!

[Loevhagen]

For a sports watch; Rolex = never
For other "fancy" watches; always

[RollieVerde]

Originally Posted by Eric Chan

No. If you can't afford the service, then you can't afford the watch. Very similar logic to buying a car.

I heartily concur. It never ceases to amaze me that people bitch about service costs, which w/ most Rolex Oysters usually means about 10% the value of the watch every 5 to 7 years.

[iclick]

If the watch has no known service history I presume it needs a service and factor that into the price I'm willing to pay. Of the last four watches I've purchased, two had been serviced recently by RSC and two had not. Of the former two, one was ca. 2004 and thus not a vintage that would be violable by RSC "make it look new" standards. The other was a Tudor chrono ca. 1993 which fortunately wasn't tarnished by the experience. The latter two with no known service history were serviced before I even wore the watches, not by RSC but by a trusted indy watchmaker. This isn't about whether or not I can afford something or not, but rather how much I value a recent service history before I expose a watch to the rigors of a hostile world.

[RHIII]

Not really...it wouldn't stop me from a piece I want!!

[dman]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

Well, if that's your philosophy, then you must consider services costs when you buy a watch, or at the very least, you recommend that others do so.

For myself, it is a factor to consider.

I don't consider Rolex service costs to be a limiting factor however.

Agree with this statement. The service for a Rolex is sort of just "cost of doing business" but when talking about grand complications on watches like Patek or Lange then price would be a factor with me...then again if I could afford those it probably wouldn't be.

[jshepard]

I've actually never considered that... I've always gotten them solely because I like them. Worse is I bought them all like almost a year apart from each other, hopefully they won't need servicing consecutively...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[I-luv-Rolex]

Originally Posted by mjclark32

Figure $500 for a simple complication Rolex and $950 for chrono's. Of course this is general and going through a non RSC source.
I picked up my father in laws date just whom went through an AD and it was about $900 for a service

Someone correct me if I am wrong. I thought Rolex Service USA charge a flat fee. Except they will charge you extra for replacing the gold hands.

[Invictus Maneo]

Originally Posted by I-luv-Rolex

Someone correct me if I am wrong. I thought Rolex Service USA charge a flat fee. Except they will charge you extra for replacing the gold hands.

Okay,you stand corrected. The cost varies with the watch and also varies from RSC to RSC. Maybe not so much in the US but certainly abroad.

[metooxx]

Never entered my mind.

[One Ping Only]

I don't consider it.

[DoraTheExplorerII]

Sort of. It would be a headache if anything happens to my watch. Its one of the reasons why I prefer Rolex over Audemars Piaget or even Grand Seiko.

[AF_Rob]

I haven't on Rolex because for the price of the piece, the service cost is manageable. If I ever went into top tier brands, service intervals and pricing will be a factor.

[ingmar]

I do. But not Rolex. Standard movements.

However, when I had a JLC Moon & was told they were serviced by the same people that did perpetuals, I was more than aware.

My 15202 AP, however, doesn't bother me as it just "feels" like it should cost a lot to service.

Originally Posted by Mystro

X2

[regnant]

I asked about service cost or durability for Breguet Marine since I am interested in that watch but for Rolex, it never crosses my mind at all