Settling the debate once and for all: Is Tudor really the poor mans Rolex?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 июл 2023
- You've likely had this debate before. Is Tudor the poor mans Rolex? Well, in this video, I do my very very best to settle that debate once and for all. Put it to rest by going in depth on analysing and understanding the differences and commonalities between Rolex and Tudor.
The answer? It may surprise you.
For inquiries and collabs: twtw.mike@gmail.com
Hope you enjoy! Like and subscribe to support the channel 😀
Cheers!
I have many Rolex watches and I still bought a Tudor because I liked it. I think a poor man’s Rolex is a fake Rolex not a Tudor
thank you. I expected watching the 18-minute long video will give me an answer, but it was your comment that did.
ah well
You hit the nail on the head, a fake Rolex is indeed a poor man’s Rolex.
I have both, and they are great watches.
The great thing about wearing a Tudor, is that people know it's real.
Lol 😂😂
Take ANY Tudor watch, replace the logo with the Rolex logo, and the suckers will LINE UP to pay $15k for it
Not entirely unlikely 😃
I own 7 Tudor and 7 Rolex watches. Is a Tudor a poor man's Rolex? No, it's a watch I can buy and more importantly, they are producing innovative watches that I can buy when I want to buy them, which is a bit of a curse as I have not been able to buy a Rolex in 3 years because no one will sell me one. So I buy Tudor from the AD that used to sell me Rolex, win win for them, they are a great bunch.
Why would someone need 7 beater watches? That seems foolish. Should have just bought another Rolex or two
@@italianstallion3130 that’s the point here in the U.K. it’s not possible unless I spend £10k on shit I don’t want. I would rather spend that money on “beater” watches or more correctly tool watches as the gentleman that put together this excellent analysis noted. A friend has finally go her Air King, to be put on the list she had to buy a £5000 Omega, lovely watch but 5k nonetheless. Gets a call six months later for a date just on a Wimbledon dial, very nice but not the watch she wanted, she takes it on the basis that she wants an air king. Gets the call but is out of the country so I collect the watch for her, the AD want’s her to purchase a “little” piece. I get to the store, it’s the salesman’s day off so I deal with his colleague who tells me a “little” piece should be £2k, did not have to consult friend and that was a hard no, you want another £2k for an Air King! She wanted earrings at £850. Deal was done. Seriously this shit is what it is but thank god Rolex is increasing supply and the grey market is back to semi reality.
Remember the old days? Six years back when brands like Cartier and Omega had to buy back stock that had flooded the market, and you could still get a discount on a datejust (I got 11% off one in 2017)?
Those were the days when consumers had the watchmakers and ADs by the short and curlies….
Thanks for contributing 😀💪
@@Mike.thiswatchthatwatch the only time I got a discount was when I did not ask for it in Saudi Arabia, was not a lot but nice to have, this was on a hulk. Most of the stuff I have I never had to wait for, saw it in the window and just wandered in.
very well made comparison!
This has fast become my favourite watch commentary channel!
Thanks!!!! Really glad you enjoy my vids 😀😀😀
I agree wholeheartedly. This is not just another RUclips channel for watch geeks. This channel sets aside exuberance and fanboy fluff in favor of analysis and insights based on facts, features, brand comprehension and market realities. Every time you watch a video from this RUclipsr you feel as though you come away with knowledge to help you make a better decision on your next purchase.
The thinking man's Pete McConvill.
Same
Sigh. It’s such a stupid statement. Tudor use vintage Rolex as their blueprint (usually models that are iconic and unobtainable by any standard) and they have moved into Rolex’s former price segment. It is therefore more accurate to say that modern Tudor is the OLD Rolex, and that vintage Tudor was the working class Rolex, as Hans Wildorf intended
Interesting way of putting it. I like 😀
I used to think of Tudor as second fiddle to Rolex years ago. As of now I have multiple Omegas and `TUDORS` in my rotation. In the beginning I self I posed a limit on the amount of money I would spend on a piece. Example; I have a Tudor BB chrono reverse panda that I prefer over a Daytona or a Speedmaster. Can I afford a Rolex? Yes but I prefer the Tudor regardless of price. Bottom line, Tudor IS NOT my watch because I'm can't buy a Rolex. I simply am more attracted to what Tudor is offering now days.
But you have several Omegas which is actually a great and nice looking watch so why would you be buying Tudors? That doesn’t make any sense.
@@italianstallion3130 you are correct but isn't it also true that the last reason that we buy watches for is to tell time? I am just being sincere.😉
I own a couple of luxury watches but I still wear a Casio from time to time. Depends on the mood. Just because he owns omega's doesn't mean he can't buy anything cheaper that he like?
You would also get as good a watch for half the price of an omega. 50% of the cost is purely branding.
Is an omega seamaster worth 2.5x the price of an Oris aquis 300? No it's not. Quality is on par
I own an Omega SM300 and still wear my Longines and Rado watches, which are dressier watches. For me it’s about my mood and outfit that determines what watch I wear.
But can you purchase a Rolex?
Long story short, YES. Price point, target market and availability as well as it was literally produced and priced as a "poor man's" Rolex, which was the as-referenced intention of Hans Wilsdorf in his direct quote.
Exactly, this should have been a 30 second video. It is a "poor's man" Rolex by design as literally publicly announced by Wilsdorf himself.
@@CorkKNIFE This aint a tiktok video. Its a "DISCUSSION".
@@PyroClit Filler =! discussion.
Not everyone has to be like Oprah creating a fantasy counterpoint that is not sustainable.
@@CorkKNIFE Filler? He has a very good points though. You shouldnt be here if you dont want discussions.
@@PyroClit I'm all for discussion, this one simply strained my patience.
I wish Tudor would change the hour hand it looks like a child designed it with scissors and paper. That’s probably the biggest thing that stops me buying a Tudor or Rolex of that kind. Oh and the cost too 😂
Rolex is now the poor man's Patek. Tudor is now the unpretentious man's Rolex. Its more tool oriented, high quality and a great value. This is exactly what made Rolex's reputation in the past (plus some clever marketing). Rolex is now desperately trying to go upmarket. As if they have some kind of inferiority complex vs. the haute horlogerie brands like Patek, AP, and Vacheron. They're now doing open case backs with more movement finishing and the 1908 is nothing more than a Calatrava homage. I think they've betrayed their tool watch origins and the DNA that made them so great. Rolex is nothing but a lifestyle brand now. I have several Tudors and many more Rolexes (all bought before the hype). Do I wear my Sea-Dweller 4K when I dive? No, I wear my Pelagos. Do I wear my Explorer II 42mm or my GMT Master II when I travel? No, I wear the BBPro or BBGMT. The Tudors get much more wrist time in almost all situations. Why? Because they give off a different vibe. More tool-like and not flashy jewelry. No hype, no status-symbol, no bling bling.
Fair perspective. Tudor definitely is the more humble everyman watch for sure 😀😀😀
Tudor is the wise man's (and woman's ) Rolex. I am speaking from 58 years of experience and enthusiasm in watches - horology.
As you speak, I listen 😀👍
Thoughtful analysis, nicely done! To an extent, there is a bit of Thinking Man's Rolex in Tudor. I have a blue BB58. I bought it because I really like it, yes, but it embodies so much of what people used to buy Rolex for. Solid build, good finish, everything works well from the bezel to the movement to the lume. Nothing it doesn't need, nothing flashy: it's practical, versatile, durable. These are the things that people who've had their Rolex for decades value in their watch. Today Rolex has become a different beast and a more costly one.
Thanks! Appreciated.
Also tend to agree - tudor, for some at least, embodies something that Rolex no longer does - some level of authenticity.
Good perspective - thanks for sharing 😀
People used to buy Rolex because they were well built, reliable and able to take a beating.
These days If you want a reliable well built watch you get a G Shock. For diving you get a dive watch, nobody is doing serious dives with automatic watches nor are they climbing Mt Everest or hunting Elephants with them unless it's as a piece of jewelry and you got the sherpa or game warden keeping track of the time.
Poor people struggle to put food on the table let alone being able to afford a Tudor.
Proper perspective.
Very true point 👍
Median global net worth is ~$8300.
Just watched 2 of your videos. Very good quality - a lot of information and analysis, and no sensational stuff or use of graphics to attract attention. Subscribed!
Much appreciated! 😀😀😀
Simplest answer: Poor people don't buy $2k+ watches. They buy Armitron. 💯
That’s right, it’s not a poor man’s Rolex it’s a suckers Rolex. Just save you’re money and buy the real thing, or at least buy a good looking and special watch like an seamaster. Don’t be impatient and settle for a black bay.
@@italianstallion3130 Unless you hate too much flashiness and a Black Bay is exactly the thing you want.
@@italianstallion3130yeah but the seamasters ugly
I hear ya Stallion💪
Nah mate I got two tudors but will add a omega and Rolex to my collection and wear them all with pride
I own two Rolex and two Tudor, in my 13 watch collection, I never have never thought I purchased a Tudor because I can’t afford a Rolex, I purchased every watch because It was what I wanted ..
Its the rich mans Christoher ward.
CW does deliver a lot of value for sure… 😀
I have the OP39 sitting next to my beloved and very underrated (even in this video not mentioned) Tudor Style 38 (black on stainless steel). Both of them sitting next to each other in my box. No poor feelings on the Tudor but also no rich feelings on the Rolex. I only see two strong brands and two strong watches there! Great video!! Great comparisons, thoughts and ideas!
Thanks - Glad you enjoyed it 😀😀
It's one of the most interesting watch-related videos I've ever seen on RUclips
Yay! Thanks - means a ton to me 😀
Rolex is the poor man’s Patek.
Patek is the poor man’s Phillipe dufour
That escalated quickly 😂
True 🤣🤣🤣
I own a Submariner and a Datejust, and 3 years ago I bought my first Tudor, a Pelagos. Of the three watches, I wear the Pelagos daily. It’s more accurate than either Rolex and it looks great. Naturally people comment more about the Rolexes, because they’re Rolexes. But I simply prefer the Tudor, it has a beautiful blue dial and bezel, compared to the black dial/bezel of the s/s Sub, and champagne dial of the Datejust, and it’s a two-tone s/s-18k yg, which I hardly wear anymore. I’d probably wear it more if it was white gold.
At the end of the day, it's about what you like. My favorite watch (currently - that changes all the time) is NOT my most expensive or "high status" watch. It's a lowly Seiko....
Thanks for sharing 😀😀😀
First, I want to say how much I appreciate your channel. It stands out of the sea of over-caffeinated, superficially informed bloggers and “influencers” that believe that they are an authority and their rankings of “best to worst watch” are gospel. The few channels of interest either bring true technical insight into watch making, or are done by people who have a true and broad knowledge built over decades of watches and different watch models, or that bring a perspective on the watch industry and things like brand positioning, pricing, etc. You do a lot of the third type, and you do it well. Informed, with substance, and in a style that is pleasant and informative. Your channel is for the adults in the room, and I want to thank you for that. Added it to the only two other watch channels I subscribe to.
Where I’d like to challenge you on the content is on comparing the various model portfolios. You start with Rolex and point out very well how perfectly delineated the various models are. Then you overlay other brands, and then sometimes ask the question “Is it the Aquaterra or is it the Explorer, or which” - which is biased, because you assume that every watch model portfolio is structured to be the “answer to” one of Rolex’ models. But maybe other watch brands have a different logic of structuring their portfolio, which also works for them. Try it out: do the same exercise of lining up models you started with Rolex, but this time do it with IWC first. You will find that models are well delineated (there may be wider gaps between the models, but IWC produces 12 times fewer pieces than Rolex). And then try to position the Rolex models against that, and you’ll find it difficult to place some of them.
Lastly, I would love to see a video done by you on Omega, discussing the logic behind the overwhelming number of variations in their catalogue - a good thing or not? And IWC, looking at what that brand actually stands for, whether it has a soul, and where it might be going next.
Thanks again for your contribution to the watch geek community
It seems to me that tudor listen to the customer and offer much better variations in colour and sizing. As an owner of both I think rolex could learn from tudor. Imagine if rolex released a submariner variation in bb58 proportions, people would loose their minds.
Tend to agree - Rolex doesn’t at least seem to give an impression of listening to the customer in the same way that Tudor does. There’s less distance, it seems between Tudor and the end customer
Cheers 😀
Rolex knows that treating us mean will keep us keen. I don't particularly like the look of modern Submariners, but somehow in my mind, I feel like I need to buy one. Genius marketing.
Tudor has enabled Rolex to get into the higher almost unobtainable "list" league. Tudor becoming the clear second choice and soon-to-be direct competitor to Omega. It's ingenious market placement as it will inflate Rolex to new positions, protecting the brand, whilst Tudor sweep up after those that cannot afford or (more relevantly) cannot obtain a Rolex!
However, Tudors manufacturing is very strong and could arguably outshine both Rolex and Omega if they continue with their combined level of development, quality and affordability... Especially considering their aim to gradually make the BB line METAS over the next few years.
Terrific video, truly. Very well researched and presented. Question: Where do you place the Tudor Black Bay Ceramic.
Thanks, glad you enjoyed it 😃
The logic I've applied in the vid would dictate that it's an upgrade. It's basically the "same" as the entry model but with a different material (and a Metas movement).
There is though a case to be made if some materials make the watch a separate category. It's the same question that applies to something like the Titanium Yachtmaster. It's way more expensive than the base YMs, so it's in many ways an "upgrade", but making it in titanium - does that make it fundamentally different from all the other YMs, that are more or less pure dress/showcase pieces?
What would be your take?
😃
I own 2 Tudor, 1 Rolex and 1 Omega.
Your analysis is spot on. I do want to hear about your review on the BB54 from Tudor.
Thanks again.
Glad you enjoyed the video. Check out my reviews - I have a review of the 54 there as well 👍👍👍
The 54 video: ruclips.net/video/-wKT5S1723Y/видео.html
Really excellent analysis! I honestly bought my Tudor GMT because I yearned for a true GMT that harkened back to days gone buy when the GMT Master was used as a tool and not jewelry. I couldn’t afford an older model and was worried it would be destroyed if used day to day. I was on the wait list for a new model but got impatient. I decided to get the Tudor because it was the absolute closest I could get to my fondness for the Fat Lady GMT Master of my birth year p, while still being usable every day. I am so glad I did. My fondness for Tudor is apparent in my collection. I now have three and honestly have ZERO yearning for a Rolex at all anymore. Except for one…..just one.
Also the only thing that I thought was missing from the video was the SkyDweller……and the Tudor counterpart? Really amazing video. Be well
Thanks for the feedback and for sharing. Appreciated 😃
100% agree. I have always loved the classic Rolex GMT either Coke or Pepsi. The newer Rolex GMT with the ceramic bezels and extra polishing in its finish just does not do it for me. I would have loved an old classic Rolex GMT but they are very expensive I found the Tudor Black Bay GMT and I was sold it was exactly what I was looking for....love the watch.
I'm in the same club. I like the subdued colors on the Tudor's bezel, and I'm going to say it, the Rolex is overpriced. If it were like $7,000 and had less of a bejeweled appearance, absolutely. But that ain't the case.
Love your discussions.
Always fascinating. Many thanks 🙏 👍
and as always.... Thanks to you 😃😃
Another wonderful and insightful analysis. Lots of food for thought from many different intresting angles that I would never have considered. The video editing is also superb!!! I'm delighted that I found this channel!!! In my mind you have proven that Tudor has it's own design language, distinct from Rolex and it should be seen as such.
Thank you - Glad you found my video worth you time 😀😀
The Pelagos is just an incredible dive watch. It’s a tool. Understated and cool.
True 😃
Agree have bought one in last November it’s the Pelagos LHD love it such a cool watch don’t like the newer version it looks more cheap made lume it’s poor than the last versions wish I’ve not made the same mistake every one does … and wait to buy that specific model instead buying other brands at the end when you start making maths you spent more money on models that you just buy it because you saw a RUclipsr making a review bla bla bla …
All that said we need to follow the “cheep’s 😂 today went to a Tudor AD try some Tudor chronos the panda , reverse and the tow tone and when you saw it on a review they look great all that said my opinion aiaiaiaiai 8200€ for the Two tone really 🤔…
Have Hanhart Pioneer Mark II used to like it and know it’s on the box , bought a Longines Hydroconquest chronograph in 2016 aiaiaiaia like it accurate but rather at time saw those Tudor before but weren’t available not even an AD now all AD’s full of them but prices are crazy for nothing special watch … that’s my opinion and now I’m in a cross road situation should I wait for next April Geneve Watch and Wonders …???? I bet they will raise prices plus new models will show up this is an expensive disease!
I’ll gone wait some will start showing up pre-owned for sure money talks ! Always!
If they offered a Pelagos GMT… that is my dream watch.
Tudor is young man's Rolex. A young man who didn't inherit an old Rolex, so he either wants something new and interesting, or something new that looks old.
Quite possibly accurate. Tudor definitely speaks to a younger generation 😀
Casual listening! Nice work. Good editing and loved the visuals
Glad you enjoyed it! 😃
The way you explained and displayed the delineation was brilliant. Subscribed!
Thanks! Really appreciated 😀
Watching your videos is an intellectual experience in horology and I love it.
Coming back to this video after the latest video on Tudor’s future. A couple points from a different perspective:
1. Tudor watches feel more like Old Rolexes than innovative or new. For instance, BB aluminium bezels look similar to old Subs especially the font. BB41 jubilee is old Datejust Jubilee. BB GMT has quite the traits of 70s 80s Pepsi. Ranger borrows heavily from old Explorer (but is even more dull)
2. Tudor is limited in the quality it can offer because the better stuff is for Rolex’s catalogue. Don’t think they will even be even allowed to release a watch that’s more accurate or has better materials or the elite finishing and applied indices of Rolex.
Now this is by no means a price point bottle neck. This is just that they are below Rolex in their conglomerate and that positioning makes it the Cheaper (price and quality) offering from Rolex group for me even though not Entirely a Cheaper version of Rolex’s current catalogue. Point to note, their Pepsi type GMT, jubilee type bracelets and vintage Sub vibes from BB do step in Rolex territory and might be seen as Cheaper Rolex alternatives adding to the weight on its ankles and reason for the tag.
Having the privilege of owning watches from both houses, you summation, I feel is pretty accurate! As you quote “dare to be different”. They seem to have managed to do this pretty well. However, Rolex’s dabbing in the Ti materials I believe will open up more Ti options in the future line up! The Explorer 2 in Ti will be my grail. 😂 great content, keep it up! Tot die volgende keer.
Explorer ii in titanium…. May need to schedule a meeting with the bank *drools 😂😂😂
The customer is always right in matters of taste. Except with Hublot.
Fantastic video. You just reminded me of why I (very recently) subscribed to your channel! Very informative and non-judgmental commentary.
This watch debate has been around as long as I can remember. I have a Rolex DeepSea, but given how much it's appreciated in value I rarely wear it. Recently I've been looking at alternatives that I can drive daily and ended up landing on Seiko (bought an SSK001 and SSC911), but I can honestly say after watching this video that a Tudor GMT might be in my not-so-distant future. 😃
Keep up the great content. Cheers!
Thank you 😊😊
The upgrade in Rolex = fancier metals/jewels etc. The upgrade of Tudor = Rolex.
Wonderful! Compare and contrast instead of complain. Graphic "timeline" approach is fantastic.
Thanks a ton - Really appreciate the feedback 😀
Yet another excellent analytical presentation! I'm so glad you do my thinking for me. (Wouldn't want to play chess against you!) Now, how about a similar analysis on Grand Seiko? A brand I love, but have numerous issues with!
Lol... Thanks 😀😂😂
Grand Seiko. There is a video in the works, but I'm still wrapping my head around them. Those kinds of deep dive vids take some time for me to get right 😀😀
Very well thought review of this topic. Personally, I don't see Tudor as a "poor man's" Rolex. If someone wants a Rolex, no amount of Tudor can satisfy that feel. Tudor by itself, regardless of being a subsidiary of Rolex, makes very desirable watches. Both Rolex and Tudor are going to coexist within any watch enthusiast's growing collection.
Thanks. Glad you enjoyed it 😀
New to your channel, I like your approach. A very interesting essay. Subscribed. 👍
Thanks and welcome aboard 😀😀😀
Sometimes a person simply prefers the looks of the Tudor over the Rolex. I sold my Rolex GMT II “all black” ceramic bezel watch and also my Rolex GMT II “Batman”, and purchased a Tudor GMT, because I preferred the looks of the Tudor.
I have switched out the Tudor bracelet for something different (Forstner).
But the bottom line, for me, was I did not like the aesthetics of the modern Rolex GMTs.
As it should be - buy what you like 😀
Brilliant breakdown. Thank you for sharing.
Glad it was helpful! 😀
Great analysis. I know that almost everyone who I’ve met at my Tudor AD’s events also owns 1 or more Rolexes. But they own more Tudors because they are the obtainable Rolex. Much shorter waits.
2024 will be interesting to see if one of your assertions - Tudor can do their own thing as long as they make money - is true. My salesperson told me there will be a lot of things customers have been requested released next April.
Same kind of people say a Boxster is a poor man's 911 absolute bollocks!
Honestly, I learned more from this video about the Rolex/Tudor relationship than I have during the last 35 years of being both a Rolex and a Tudor watch collector/enthusiast ☺
Thanks a lot!
I got my BB pro because it's a great watch and fantastic value for the money , it's my daily watch I prefer Tudor more than Rolex as Tudor I feel is much more in line with my personality and I like the more rugged feel of Tudor tool watches.
Tudor does tool watch really really well for sure .😃
Very interesting take. Thank you for your analysis.
Glad you enjoyed it!😀
Rolex is a status symbol. If owning a Rolex becomes someone's life goal, no chance that he or she will buy a Tudor because it is cheaper. That said, I own a BB36 and I bought it on purpose as a poor man's Rolex. I wanted a robust and well finished shiny timepiece that made me think of an first explorer.
Great analysis on the Omega product range. the overlap could have been a video on itself.
I like your take on the "born to dare". Actually it's "Dare to be different in the marketing".
Thanks - really appreciate the feedback.
Have recently done a whole “the trouble with omega video” you could check out.
As for the BB36 - Had one until my wife took it over. She loves it and I’m unfortunately likely never getting it back. 😂
Thanks for contributing 😀😀
Very thoughtful and well analyzed.. I really like your conclusion on this. Ultimately buy what you want if you like the Tudor and the value proposition suits you then go for it. If you really want a Rolex you gotta get one. To me the poor man’s Rolex makes no sense because Tudor has its own identity, it’s not a Rolex « replacement » and never will be.
Thanks! Glad you enjoyed it. (and tend to agree with your conclusion as well 😀
As you mentioned, Tudor used to manufacture its products with Rolex components (cases, crowns, hands, dials, gaskets). The only difference was the name on the dial and the movement inside. It was literally produced and priced as a "poor man's" Rolex, which was the as-referenced intention of Hans Wilsdorf.
Currently, Tudor uses different cases and parts along with its own movements (i.e. non-ébauche movements). It is no longer the intention of the company to explicitly position Tudor as a "poor man's" Rolex. Instead, Tudor is positioned to compete with other entry-level luxury watch brands, which is evidenced by the pricing structure of its products.
Tudor will never be as up front as old Hans was about it but at the end of the day it's a poor man's Rolex despite the marketing.
That doesn't make them bad watches or whatever, like you said they're entry level luxury which Rolex is not. Making them by default a poor man's rolex.
A very thoughtful and detailed analysis. I like your intelligent approach to this age old debate. Unfortunately there are too many unintelligent people that will always judge a book by it's cover.
I am an owner and big fan of both brands. Rolex marketing has always been in my subconscious since birth. However I had never considered or even heard of Tudor until they relaunched the original BB 41 in 2012. For me, I am attracted to Tudor for two reasons which may be considered the reason it is a poor man's alternative. Affordability and availability. But they're not the exclusive reasons for me to buy Tudor. I liked the Rolex designs of the 1980s and the pre ceramic era when I was growing up and reading Nat Geo magazines with Rolex ads that inspired me to want to own them. Tudor's introduction of vintage inspired designs allows me to scratch that itch without breaking the bank.
I think, although I hate the term a 'poor man's Rolex' there's truth in that statement no matter how I look at it. But it all depends on the individual's experience and perspective of these brands. You could call an Omega Seamaster or Speedmaster a poor man's Rolex. As I'm sure many watch collectors have purchased an Omega as an alternative or in regret of not being able to buy a Sub or Daytona at retail.....So is Omega a poor man's Rolex more so than Tudor?? Perhaps that may be an interesting psychological debate and a good title for your next video, albeit a controversial one.
That’s a strong point - Rolex is so dominant, so desirable that for many brands Tudor, Omega especially you could make the case that they are fall back or “poor mans” Rolexes.
The next couple of vids are going to avoid Omega, Tudor and Rolex if possible to coveri something a little out of the mainstream for a change 😉😀
I like "dive watches", I'm just not much of a "dress watch" guy. I bought the Tudor Black Bay GMT because I actually like the look of it better than its Rolex GMT brother. Sure, some people may look at Tudor as a cheaper Rolex. However, unless your very wealthy Tudor's are not all that cheap. In the end buy the watch that moves you the customer.
So true. 😀❤️
I have a Sub and also a BB58, I wear the BB disporportiantely more than the Sub. I just feel less that guy when I wear the Tudor.
I do like Tudor but their case sizes are too large. I hope they adapt to their market trends and start making less paneraisque cases.
I just purchased the Black Bay 41 with the burgundy bezel and the METAS certified movement. I love it. It’s a fantastic watch for the money. Great channel.
Thanks a lot. Appreciated. 😊
and totally agree on the burgundy model 👍
Tudor makes great pieces at fantastic price points. The certifications of their movements rival Rolex (METAS, COSC). Only the snobs are labeling Tudor as a "poor man's Rolex". Maybe it's regret for overpaying tens of thousands for a namebrand like Rolex.
Lol - Maybe 😃😂
Wow! just discovered your channel. Great content. You got a new subscriber.
Thanks a ton - Really appreciated 😃
No, I had multiple Rolex’s and have sold most all of them. I wear this because of its fit, look and case thinness and size. If Rolex made a dive watch like they did in the mid late 50’s, I would buy it.
Fair perspective. Buy what you like, as always 😃😃
This is an excellent informative video, keep up the great work!
Labelling a Tudor watch as a "poor man's Rolex" is no more than a crude pejorative of Hans Waldorf's "idea of making a watch that our agents could sell at a more modest price than our Rolex watches." My late father owned a Rolex Explorer. While I admire the quality and attention to craftsmanship of today's Rolex line of watches, the Rolex Explorers of his day were much more accessible. Thank you for another thoughtful analysis. Subscribed. Cheers.
Thanks for taking the time to share your thoughts 😀
As a woman I’m not a fan of either. It’s hard to find a nice watch, that isn’t quartz, small enough for a woman’s wrist. Once it’s small enough it just looks like another round watch…. Then do I want to help to pay for very expensive sports….?!
Lol. See your point 😂
Tudor is a decent watch, but it is also - very definitely - the poor mans Rolex. You even quoted Hans Wilsdorf laying it out himself: "For some years now I have been considering the idea of making a watch that our agents could sell at a more modest price than our Rolex watches." Mic drop!
Long story short, Tudor does what Rolex used to do: build robust mechanical tool watches that can be used by professionals. In my humble opinion. Even though I can afford a Rolex I choose Tudor since I can wear it anytime anywhere without feeling like someone will rob me just for my watch.
I think you nailed it here, down to the differences in corporate culture. Tudor is much more daring.
I expect to buy a Pelagos in titanium as the ultimate diving tool watch. It's almost funny how Tudor managed to remove anything dressy from the design. I can imagine the designers and engineers cheering each removal.
I hear from others that it is also is a fabulous watch to take ... diving, a sport I enjoy.
When I decide to buy one luxury watch, it will be a Tudor - but I like so many of them in 2024.
For such a laid back guy, you moved fast through the lists - I had to keep rewinding parts.
I honestly don't like Tudor, not because I think that they're a bad watch (because they're very good watches) but because they don't exist in a vacuum. With watches that are as good or better from brands like Mido, Tissot, Longines, Christopher Ward and Oris costing the same or less, Tudor clearly becomes a brand that is inflated by its association with Rolex.
I see this a lot when people try to compare Tudor with Omega against whom it falls completely flat. I look at a Tudor and I see a Tissot Seastar 1000, Mido Ocean Star or Longines HydroConquest that costs far more than it should.
It's able to get away with the higher pricing because some people think of it as "A Rolex without the Rolex name on it" which is as stupid as saying that a Longines is "An Omega without the Omega name on it". I look at Tudor as "A Rolex-endorsed homage brand" and while I don't have anything against homage watches per se, I don't think that they deserve to command high prices.
I agree with every word you just said my friend.
Your end remarks get to the heart of the issue: "poor man's Rolex" assumes someone else cares about your watch. Even if they do, does someone else's negative opinion really change your mind?
It shouldn’t 😀👍
Tudor is a between 3-5k mostly. At that price range it has little competition in build quality. I believe they know their place in the market and deliver arguably the best watch for your money at it's price.
Tend to agree. Although.... Longines and to some extent Oris are really doing good things in the same price bracket (more or less) as well 😃
I like how you lined these up and broke it down. Nice work
Thanks 😃
Wow, this analysis is a masterpiece!
Thanks. Wow... Glad you liked it 😃😃
Both Tudor and Rolex are aspirational and milestone brands, if you can afford a Tudor then you can probably afford a Rolex. Tudor is there as a gateway drug while you wait for your Rolex.
If you get Tudor because you want a Tudor then its fine, but if your buying a Tudor because you wanted a Rolex then its just a mistake.
Interesting perspective on the issue.
Thanks. Glad you found it interesting 😀
Seeing a lot of snobbery in the comments by Tudor owners seemingly insulted and very defensive about the "poor man's Rolex" tag. I don't think anyone is implying that someone who can afford a watch costing multiple thousands is a "poor man". Rather the term is simply a slight on Tudor that implies they exist purely for those who cannot get or afford a Rolex. Not a poor man, but not on that Rolex level. Of course its ridiculous as I'd think anyone who can afford to spend 3-5k on a watch could also stretch to a number of Rolex models too. But it is a slight on Tudor that like or not will likely always exist. The new Porsche Boxsters are fantastic cars (unlike the older ones), but because its not a 911 it will likely always carry that "poor man's Porsche" tag. Of course no "poor man" is buying any Porsche, but because that higher level is associated with the brand, getting the "entry level" option will always carry this tag.
I make a video about “How everybody comments that Tudor is the poor mans Rolex”
In the comments people proceed to discuss whether Tudor is the poor mans Rolex. The irony is not lost on me 😂😂😂
Tudor should have built on the North Flag, because it was a fantastic tool watch that had nothing in common with Rolex. It dared to be different. Your content is highly informative and balanced.
The Blackbay is a poor man's vintage Rolex. And I'm grateful for that. My BB58 is as close as I'll ever come to owning a Rolex 6538.
There's a reason the BB58 is such a crowd pleaser. Tried and true 😃😃😃
It’s probably a wise man‘s Rolex.
Perhaps 😂😀
Great insight! ... I bought my Pelagos 39 because I like it. Period
Right on! 💪💪💪
Thanks for the excellent video! I understand the Rolex/Tudor lineup and models a bit better now 😊
Great to hear that the vid was useful 😃😃
Tudor was literally made for regular working people. I'm a regular working person. Picking up a used BB or GMT is totally attainable for me. And with Rolex being owned by every idiot in Silicon Valley, the AD games, etc....
Can't argue against you on the whole bay area, silicon valley bit.... 😃😃
I live in a 500k house but I can afford a 1.5 Mil house … Does my house make me poor?
And if you have a $350k - $500k that you paid cash for, does that make you a poor person?
I have both Rolex and Tudor. While I didn’t like the BBGMT or the blue titanium pelagos (not that the pelagos is bad at all but I really hate titanium watches), I LOOOVE my BB54. Every bit as much as , or in some cases more than, my Rolexes.
As a side note I had my date just oyster bracelet all brushed and it makes it soooo much nicer to me. Less flash. More everyday casual. To me it’s kinda like an explorer with a date now.
Is Tudor a poor man's Rolex? A watch is a tool and its primary job is to tell time. As much as possible, we want that time to be communicated to us as accurate as possible. But, when you can get a $20 Casio quartz or a Casio Gshock Multiband 6 watch synchronize to atomic clocks around the world, it will out perform a Rolex, Tudor or Omega....etc, so why is this topic of rich vs poor so contentious? At the end of the day, a $20,000 watch can be beaten by a watch you can get at Walmart. Of course I do understand, luxurious craftsmanship, heritage and all that glitz and glamour...but bottom line, its job is to tell time. What do a rich man and a poor man's watch have it common....their watches tell time. You can praise a luxury mechanical watch for hours and hours....you can rhapsodize and write a poem about the deep emotional connection you have of it, but at the end, its job to tell time can be beaten by a quartz. As a collector of both mechanical and quartz watches, I don't get caught up about the perception of rich vs poor time pieces. Just wear what you like and enjoy it.
Couldn't agree more - Wear what you enjoy 😀😀
I’ve had two Tudors over the years and I found them to be clunky compared to other comparable brands
Exactly! Because they're longines level.
Hypers paid pr machinery are making them to be what they're not....
This is the best brand comparison I’ve seen. Thank you 🙏
Glad you liked it! 😀
0:56 People are also idiots though. Quibbling over who's poor based on the brand they like. It's why you should take everyones comments with a grain of salt.
The irony of what gets discussed in the comments is not lost on me 😀
If you want a quality Swiss watch then you look at Tudor. If you want a technically better Swiss watch than a Rolex you look at Omega. If you want a user friendly Swiss watch then look at Rolex.
That's my opinion and no way is a Tudor a poor man's Rolex and that's because they are still expensive. You can get a very nice second hand car for a price of a Tudor.
Spot on
Can’t argue with that. 5k isn’t nothing 😀
Thoroughly enjoyed that. Really good stuff.Thank you.
Regardless of the merit of its watches, Tudor has been destroyed by sale policy of Rolex/Tudor retailers. In East Asia (Japan, Hong Kong, South Korea, Taiwan, etc) Rolex dealers require customers to buy two, three, four Tudors, in order to qualify for a Rolex quota. Of course, these Rolex customers immediately dump these unwanted, new Tudors in the secondary market at 40% to 60% discount. There is a tidal wave of 'surlplus' brand new Tudors in East Asia, and still nobody wants them.
Was not aware of how it works in asia. Very interesting 😀
loved this video ! thanks for sharing this
You're so welcome! Just glad you enjoyed it😀😀😀
soo quality materials. I like it very much.
Thank you! Cheers! 😀
Thank you for creating watch related content, which I find to be unusually thoughtful and interesting. With this in mind I was a little surprised to see the “let’s pooh-pooh Hublot” in the beginning of this video. Perhaps you simply don’t like the brand. That’s OK. But do they really deserve all the hate they receive? Why are they so successful if the suck so badly? (Because Hublot is very successful, it seems to me.) I would be intrigued to see a video from you on Hublot where you turn your analytical skills in this direction. In any event, keep up the good work!
Found the butt-hurt Hublot owner.
Ha. I actually put the comment in is a bit of a joke (That didn’t land well) because it’s kind of the opinion you’re supposed to have as a watch nerd of Hublot
I did a review of the fusion where I touch quite a bit on the views on Hublot and whether the criticism is fair
ruclips.net/video/fqhF8SLo6pc/видео.html
Have considered doing a full Hublot analysis - They’re doing some interesting stuff
Cheers 😀
@@Mike.thiswatchthatwatch Thanks for the reply. I have to admit to some embarrassment that I was not aware of this video, which puts a finger on a reason for the animosity held towards Hublot: low perceived value of Hublot (Fusion), which also involves a sense of unoriginality of the case design. My apologies. Are these concerns enough to rationalize the internet shit storm? Maybe they are.
Whatever the case Hublot has made interesting choices with regard to marketing and product placement (as far as I can tell) so I hope you find the time for a full Hublot analysis at some point.
No need to apologise. Binging 50 of my videos in one go is an ask, I won’t make of any viewer 😂😂😂
Just stick around for other videos, is all I hope for 😀😀
fantastic analysis of and extrapolation from the respective product lines; Rolex has trained the world to appreciate incremental changes, and Tudor has pressed the proverbial reset button to take a divergent track
Thanks for the feedback 😀😀
A poor man cannot afford a Tudor or any other luxury watch. We tend to see a watch that costs around 3000 to 4000 USD or Euros as an entry level luxury watch. We live in a bubble that's for sure.
I cannot afford a Rolex. But I would also never buy one - give me one for free and I will sell it the next day. I don't like the name, the culture, I don't want to be affiliated with Rolex in any way. I had IWC in the past, which is totally different. Now I have a BB GMT, the first 41mm. And I love it. I agree it differs enough from a Rolex, and it is also the budget where it stops for me. For this money I love the Tudor line-up. For Rolex money I would buy something else 100% certain.
Impressive review, thank you for the efforts paid to prepare such informative video content, keep it on.
I agree, buy what you like, regardless to logos
Thanks for watching! 😃
I just got the call from Tudor to pick up a Black Bay 54 and I cannot be happier, great watch, awesome story and fantastic models!
Luck you! The 54 is a stunner of watch 😃😃😃
Even people who can afford Rolex can’t buy Rolex. Their a factory watch anyway. Don’t get me wrong, I’d buy one if I could find an AD that would sell me one.. I bought a $6,990 AUD Tudor Pelagos 42 recently and LOVE IT!
Maybe Rolex doesn't actually exist anymore. Maybe they're just figments of everybodies imagination....🤣🤣🤣
I enjoy the thoroughness and disciplined methodical approach to the topic. Impressive. Thanks for the excellent content!
My pleasure! 😊