Millionaires and Deca-Millionaires

[nylawbiz]

Reportedly, there are about 2,000,000 millionaires in the United States, and around 250,000 deca-milionaires (net worth $10 million or more). With that many people who can afford a Rolex, do you think that Rolex has a hard time selling watches here?

With worldwide production allegedly 800,000 to 900,000, and the US being the 2nd largest in the world, Rolex should have no problem selling as many watches as they like in the US. Even if the average millionaire buys a new Rolex every 5-10 years, that still should generate about 200,000 to 400,000 pieces sold in the US annually.

Yes, I know being a millionaire ain't what it used to be. But still, by the accepted definition (net investable worth, not including one's residence), Rolexes are likely a mainstay with a majority off them.

What do you think?

[Toxicant]

Take from that people that don't care about watches. Then take from that people with that kind of money might buy nicer watches. Take from that the people who think Tiffany watches are nice. Take from that people that don't wear watches. Then take from that how many watches do you actually need.

And what it comes down to is Rolex and all other high end everything are screwed for the foreseeable.

[Randy]

Patek, AP, Lange, U.Nardin, and Panerai are also purchased by heavy hitters. T

[siggen7]

In all contries, about 10% of the population is millionaires. I dont think Rolex have problem with selling watches, regardless of financial-crises. A lot of people have money.

[seedgun]

My thought is that there are indeed 2 million Mairs in this country but of that # you would be surprised at how many have very little disposable income. In my part time job as a banker it is constantly amazing how many folks worth more than $1mm still finance things like $4000 lawn mowers.
It's hard to belive but I know a lot of folks that are in this class and make $275k a year and after ongoing expenses can't make ends meet.
Thus I think that the folks that can indeed buy Rolexes are far fewer than the #'s would suggest. The other point is there are quite a few other choices of expensive watches and thus the # becomes even smaller.
While I'm at it 2 of my good friends that both have more than $10mm both wear Timex. Just cause you can, dosen't mean you will.
All the best,
Andy

[BLACK DIAMOND]

Originally Posted by nylawbiz

Reportedly, there are about 2,000,000 millionaires in the United States, and around 250,000 deca-milionaires (net worth $10 million or more). With that many people who can afford a Rolex, do you think that Rolex has a hard time selling watches here?.....

HUGE disparity between "millionaires" and having a net worth of $10million or more. Just being a millionaire means VERY LITTLE....having a net worth of $1million in assets, I'd imagine has little to do with whether such an individual is more likely to own a Rolex or not, versus those who do not meet the technical definition of "millionaire". For example, many "millionaires" have little disposable income to throw around on luxury items like Rolex watches, and just being a "millionaire" does not necessarily equate to particular spending habits that would attribute to higher sales of items like Rolex watches.

On the other hand, being a "deca-millionaire" probably has a much higher correlation to those owning expensive wrist watches, but then there are only around 250,000 or less of those individuals in the United States, and that is a much smaller target market to contend for their business, from a retailers standpoint.

My guess is that generally speaking, Rolex watch sales have little to do with socioeconomic status, unless of course you're focusing in on the sales of higher end models like platinum & masterpiece presidents, or higher volume purchasers of various lower end models. Rolex success is based on its sales appeal to the MASSES, not to the % of select millionaires, deca-millionaires, or billionaires who happen to also be Rolex owners or enthusiasts.

[nylawbiz]

All good points. I just want to add that even those people wearing Timex's still probably have a Rolex somewhere. Almost like a right of passage for a lot of people.

[SLS]

Ever glanced at Bill Gates wrist....from what I remember, it was digital! You have to realize that to some spending money on a watch is a waste of money!
~Scott

[rijowysock]

im sorry but rolex is a cheap watch, i would hope that the "millionaires and deca millionaires" aspire for something more like a Audemars/URWERK/other exotic over a rolex..

rolex are bought on expendable income... gentleman has extra 5-10k and buys a rolex.. that is why they are hurting because now the expendable incomes are down... used car guy isnt buying rolex w/ his commission check now.. so down.. yes some millionaires/etc buy rolex still but they are bought for beaters/etc..

ive bought maybe 15 rolex in the last 2 years but i dont wear mine everyday.. i wear an audemars or other...

i would say the Rolex target market is people with income 50-150k a year.. and net worth of maybe 100-300k... not millionaires... millionaires that dont have a clue about anything besides the advertisements they see are the dumb ones buying the 450k GMT's but any millionaire that knows his stuff is not buying rolex as a daily wearer if he appreciates the "finer" things...

not saying rolex sucks.. just is a tool watch, not a luxury watch.

[boa2]

Originally Posted by SLS

Ever glanced at Bill Gates wrist....from what I remember, it was digital! You have to realize that spending money on a watch is a waste of money!
~Scott

Indeed.

As chance would have it, I'm frequently in the company of VERY wealthy people. Sure, some have a small collection (often including AP, Patek, or Lange) but having that kind of money doesn't predispose one to necessarily have an interest in this hobby. Many will have $3 million in cars before they have $30,000 in watches. In fact, most of the people I've met worth $100 million or more wear a Sub/Date, a SS Datejust, or no watch at all.

[Yume-sama]

Originally Posted by rijowysock

im sorry but rolex is a cheap watch, i would hope that the "millionaires and deca millionaires" aspire for something more like a Audemars/URWERK/other exotic over a rolex..

rolex are bought on expendable income... gentleman has extra 5-10k and buys a rolex.. that is why they are hurting because now the expendable incomes are down... used car guy isnt buying rolex w/ his commission check now.. so down.. yes some millionaires/etc buy rolex still but they are bought for beaters/etc..

ive bought maybe 15 rolex in the last 2 years but i dont wear mine everyday.. i wear an audemars or other...

i would say the Rolex target market is people with income 50-150k a year.. and net worth of maybe 100-300k... not millionaires... millionaires that dont have a clue about anything besides the advertisements they see are the dumb ones buying the 450k GMT's but any millionaire that knows his stuff is not buying rolex as a daily wearer if he appreciates the "finer" things...

not saying rolex sucks.. just is a tool watch, not a luxury watch.

Or maybe, they just aren't old enough to own a Patek In heart or mind!

I would much rather spend $100k on a Rolex with actual metal and diamonds than a Patek with a rubber strap and stainless steel casing.

[Thomas]

Originally Posted by nylawbiz

Reportedly, there are about 2,000,000 millionaires in the United States, and around 250,000 deca-milionaires (net worth $10 million or more). With that many people who can afford a Rolex, do you think that Rolex has a hard time selling watches here?

With worldwide production allegedly 800,000 to 900,000, and the US being the 2nd largest in the world, Rolex should have no problem selling as many watches as they like in the US. Even if the average millionaire buys a new Rolex every 5-10 years, that still should generate about 200,000 to 400,000 pieces sold in the US annually.

Yes, I know being a millionaire ain't what it used to be. But still, by the accepted definition (net investable worth, not including one's residence), Rolexes are likely a mainstay with a majority off them.

What do you think?

No every millionaire buys a Rolex

[theloxmyth]

All millionaires do not indulge themselves by buying Rolex, Omega, etcetera or even Tudor, nor by buying Allen Edmonds or Johnston & Murphy.

Some purchase Timex and Florsheim products.

The safecracker/loxmyth service industry that I am in gives rise to the Doritos mentality: "Don't worry, we'll make more."

This mentallity is similar to the sales mentality, which possessed me as a NASD register rep/insurance consultant: "If you buy a Cadillac, you'll have to sell (work hard) to afford it."

Have you noticed how hard some high-dollar people squeeze their pennies?! They make Lincoln cry!

Just remember that the harder you grasp a handful of sand the more it slips through your fingers.

Just my 2¢...

[rijowysock]

Originally Posted by Yume-sama

Or maybe, they just aren't old enough to own a Patek In heart or mind!

I would much rather spend $100k on a Rolex with actual metal and diamonds than a Patek with a rubber strap and stainless steel casing.

im 23 and own pateks... didnt know there was an age limit..

people that have millions, look for value.

i can spend 30k on a steel audemars or patek without even thinking about it... but wouldnt pay more than 15 for a rolex of any kind.. the patek/audemars will retain value and the rolex (only precious metal is above 10) will only depreciate.. fast..

the fact you would actually drop 100k on a rolex w/ precious metal and diamonds shows that your just silly.... that 100k diamond/precious metal rolex will be worth 30k in 4 weeks.. whereas a 100k patek (none made of steel are 100k... the aquanaut which is the rubber/steel patek you were referring to run around 15k) would retain value.. you spend 100k on a 5970G right now and in 4 weeks its worth same or more.. in 4 years its worth way more..

in rolex, steel maxxes out around 10k and they only get more when u add gems or precious metal because the quality is the same..

an audemars starts at 15k because even the cheapest model has time and effort put into it... and they go to 750k without any stones involved... their precious/stoned models go above 2-3mil. because the time and attention put into it..

if you think rolex is a "luxury" watch, you and others are mistaken.. they are built to be proven workhorses... and the luxury'ness only comes from name recognition stemming from over advertising... it would be like saying a Ford F150 is a luxury vehicle to be in the realm of rolls royce/etc..

Rolex=Ford (workhorse, non luxury.. try and make "luxury" but is nowhere in comparison) but still enjoyable
Audemars=Ferrari (quality and attention to detail, luxury... does not make low end pieces to coincide with market demands)

[SirLoki]

if you were a deca millionaire there would be no need to wear a rolex, you buy your assistent one and ask that person for the time. same with a car, you buy a car that has a comfortable back seat because you are not driving anymore.

[Yume-sama]

Originally Posted by rijowysock

im 23 and own pateks... didnt know there was an age limit..

people that have millions, look for value.

i can spend 30k on a steel audemars or patek without even thinking about it... but wouldnt pay more than 15 for a rolex of any kind.. the patek/audemars will retain value and the rolex (only precious metal is above 10) will only depreciate.. fast..

the fact you would actually drop 100k on a rolex w/ precious metal and diamonds shows that your just silly.... that 100k diamond/precious metal rolex will be worth 30k in 4 weeks.. whereas a 100k patek (none made of steel are 100k... the aquanaut which is the rubber/steel patek you were referring to run around 15k) would retain value.. you spend 100k on a 5970G right now and in 4 weeks its worth same or more.. in 4 years its worth way more..

in rolex, steel maxxes out around 10k and they only get more when u add gems or precious metal because the quality is the same..

an audemars starts at 15k because even the cheapest model has time and effort put into it... and they go to 750k without any stones involved... their precious/stoned models go above 2-3mil. because the time and attention put into it..

if you think rolex is a "luxury" watch, you and others are mistaken.. they are built to be proven workhorses... and the luxury'ness only comes from name recognition stemming from over advertising... it would be like saying a Ford F150 is a luxury vehicle to be in the realm of rolls royce/etc..

Rolex=Ford (workhorse, non luxury.. try and make "luxury" but is nowhere in comparison) but still enjoyable
Audemars=Ferrari (quality and attention to detail, luxury... does not make low end pieces to coincide with market demands)

Well, maybe once I am that old and hobbling around with a cane in my retirement I'll get a Patek, too.

[Lion]

What does it matter as to what others spend on watches, cars boats,etc....

[postiff]

Originally Posted by SirLoki

if you were a deca millionaire there would be no need to wear a rolex, you buy your assistent one and ask that person for the time. same with a car, you buy a car that has a comfortable back seat because you are not driving anymore.

Great point.

A watch in reality is a watch. A $100 watch will tell the same time if not better time than a $100,000 watch. I could never fathom spending more than $10,000 for a watch.

I think it was said but no Rolex actually has $24,000 or $100,000 worth of anything in it. As far as I know the diamonds are nowhere near “flawless” and the weight of the gold does not equate to the difference in price from an SS model to a GOLD model.

Just my 2 ¢


Danny


<>

[Yume-sama]

Originally Posted by postiff

Great point.

A watch in reality is a watch. A $100 watch will tell the same time if not better time than a $100,000 watch. I could never fathom spending more than $10,000 for a watch.

I think it was said but no Rolex actually has $24,000 or $100,000 worth of anything in it. As far as I know the diamonds are nowhere near “flawless” and the weight of the gold does not equate to the difference in price from an SS model to a GOLD model.

Just my 2 ¢


Danny


<>

Yes, Rolex does not use flawless diamonds. And no, while they are heavier, not enough to justify the price.

But there are plenty of things which are sold for many times what they are actually worth. Like... every Patek ever

Or those $350 pair of jeans with $5 worth of material. Or those $4000 Louis Vuitton bags with maybe $100 worth in them.

[theloxmyth]

Originally Posted by Lion

What does it matter as to what others spend on watches, cars boats,etc....

Is the OP simply trying to understand the mindset of a millionaire?

Anywho, its better to be here than at the (non-TRF ; ) bar!

[rcher]

Originally Posted by rijowysock

im sorry but rolex is a cheap watch, i would hope that the "millionaires and deca millionaires" aspire for something more like a Audemars/URWERK/other exotic over a rolex..

rolex are bought on expendable income... gentleman has extra 5-10k and buys a rolex.. that is why they are hurting because now the expendable incomes are down... used car guy isnt buying rolex w/ his commission check now.. so down.. yes some millionaires/etc buy rolex still but they are bought for beaters/etc..

ive bought maybe 15 rolex in the last 2 years but i dont wear mine everyday.. i wear an audemars or other...

i would say the Rolex target market is people with income 50-150k a year.. and net worth of maybe 100-300k... not millionaires... millionaires that dont have a clue about anything besides the advertisements they see are the dumb ones buying the 450k GMT's but any millionaire that knows his stuff is not buying rolex as a daily wearer if he appreciates the "finer" things...

not saying rolex sucks.. just is a tool watch, not a luxury watch.

Why do you even bother posting here, junior?

Several of your posts have been all about Rolex bashing....and last time I looked, this was a Rolex based forum.

What's up with that??

BTW....did you not learn grammar in school?? Capitalization and punctuation are still considered proper grammar by grownups.

[housemad]

Originally Posted by Yume-sama

Or maybe, they just aren't old enough to own a Patek In heart or mind!

I would much rather spend $100k on a Rolex with actual metal and diamonds than a Patek with a rubber strap and stainless steel casing.

Ouch!

[housemad]

That is the watch deca-millionnaires are wearing...[ATTACH][ATTACH][ATTACH]fpjourne.jpg[/ATTACH][/ATTACH][/ATTACH]

[housemad]

Oh...And I Forgot this one...dewitt-incognito-wx-1-watch.jpg

[AIKO]

Originally Posted by rijowysock

im 23 and own pateks... didnt know there was an age limit..

people that have millions, look for value.

i can spend 30k on a steel audemars or patek without even thinking about it... but wouldnt pay more than 15 for a rolex of any kind.. the patek/audemars will retain value and the rolex (only precious metal is above 10) will only depreciate.. fast..

the fact you would actually drop 100k on a rolex w/ precious metal and diamonds shows that your just silly.... that 100k diamond/precious metal rolex will be worth 30k in 4 weeks.. whereas a 100k patek (none made of steel are 100k... the aquanaut which is the rubber/steel patek you were referring to run around 15k) would retain value.. you spend 100k on a 5970G right now and in 4 weeks its worth same or more.. in 4 years its worth way more..

in rolex, steel maxxes out around 10k and they only get more when u add gems or precious metal because the quality is the same..

an audemars starts at 15k because even the cheapest model has time and effort put into it... and they go to 750k without any stones involved... their precious/stoned models go above 2-3mil. because the time and attention put into it..

if you think rolex is a "luxury" watch, you and others are mistaken.. they are built to be proven workhorses... and the luxury'ness only comes from name recognition stemming from over advertising... it would be like saying a Ford F150 is a luxury vehicle to be in the realm of rolls royce/etc..

Rolex=Ford (workhorse, non luxury.. try and make "luxury" but is nowhere in comparison) but still enjoyable
Audemars=Ferrari (quality and attention to detail, luxury... does not make low end pieces to coincide with market demands)

I think you are making assumptions for what other people find to be luxery and value. I have a few multi-millionare family members, 3 of the 4 own Rolex as their primary watch. They have lot's of money because they do not waste a lot of money. To them, Rolex is a value watch.

[Welshwatchman]

You can bet there are quite a few millionaires on TRF and the classy ones are staying well away from this thread.

[nylawbiz]

Oh what have I done? What have I done? I tended a nice, pleasant discussion, and now I feel I need to wear my asbestos three piece suit!

Seriously though, I still think that most people with money are not watch hounds. But they own Rolex or maybe two, just as a status symbol. A Rolex is a safe watch to wear: not too flashy, not too expensive, but definitely scoially acceptable at the country club or swinger's orgy. Or whereever those deca-millioniares hob nob.

[redshirt1957]

As I read the posts they fall into two categories, those who are millionaires and those who are not millionaires. I buy what I want and others should buy what they want.

[redshirt1957]

Originally Posted by Welshwatchman

You can bet there are quite a few millionaires on TRF and the classy ones are staying well away from this thread.

Damn, and I answered before I read your post.

[Yume-sama]

Originally Posted by redshirt1957

As I read the posts they fall into two categories, those who are millionaires and those who are not millionaires. I buy what I want and others should buy what they want.

Exactly.

Though I will mercilessly tease you if you drop $250k on this thing.



Or this one.