Happy Burger Maybe you're right, but then what about other "luxury" brands? Pricing in this category is not logical, it's just how much is somebody prepairing to pay for an item. Not only watches.
In a rather simplistic view, companies have hired bright people to determine the price of a product to maximize profit. And yes, they still abide by the law of supply and demand. One of the ways to maximize profit is to create scarcity. Why does diamond cost so much where there's an abundance of supply? Because companies regulate the amount of diamonds being mined/harvested, along with aggressive marketing to "value" an otherwise over abundant supply of crystalized carbon. :)
Hey Guy, Kudos - this is probably the best, most level-headed video I've seen on the subject. I think you nailed it with the two kinds of value being the "how good is the quality" kind and the "what exactly are you buying" kind. This is important because with Rolex, you are buying a lot more than a watch, as you mentioned. You are buying the brand equity and paying for the lifestyle/status/prestige that goes with it and supporting the whole ecosystem that sustains that perceived value. On the "brand" argument, I do agree that Rolex is "worth it", because as you said, you're very unlikely to lose money as long as the watch isn't stolen or damaged, and even then I suppose you could insure it to cover those cases and minimize your losses. And if you're lucky enough to get a rare model, then as with anything collectible, you'd actually be able to flip it for a sizable profit if you wanted to. On the quality argument though -- which is what I'm more interested in personally, as I actually don't want to deal with all the baggage that comes with the other aspects of owning a Rolex -- the value just doesn't line up on the curve of diminishing returns, as no doubt a Rolex may be technically "better" than a $1500 competitor, it just isn't "$8000 better" based on quality alone. (Which is why the flip side of that is also true, in that if a competitor without all the brand heritage tried to sell an equivalent quality watch at Rolex prices, they'd be laughed out of business.)
Thanks for watching and fort he comments Tim. Very good observation about the idea that a competitor not being able to build a similar quality watch and compete at the same price point without the brand equity that Rolex has built. I hadn't really thought about it from that angle.
Hey Stoney Lonsome, I think we are mostly in agreement here - all the extra "value" of a Rolex is absolutely due to the marketing of their brand equity. You're paying for the name "Rolex", and paying for the fact that non-watch-nerds know Rolexes are expensive, no doubt. Which is why I personally am not interested in the brand. I can't speak for Guy, but I'm certainly not saying that Rolex deserves their asking price based on their history, quality, or technical achievements alone. Where I slightly disagree is that the holy trinity brands need to be as expensive as they are either, though. Past a point, all of the elite brands set their pricing higher than it needs to be for the same reasons: to make a statement, and to make sure that not everybody who wants one of their watches can afford one, not only for exclusivity reasons, but for practicality. It just wouldn't be logistically possible to maintain Patek quality standards with Seiko production quantities.
Morpho Polis I'm ethically opposed to copies/replicas, but I am a fan of some of the more well done homage type watches from micro brands such as the Borealis Estoril. I would say I mainly prefer unique mid-tier watches that just don't look like anything else and are doing their own thing. I agree, I am definitely *not* the type of customer a brand like Rolex caters to.
Value (like most things in life) is subjective. Things are only "worth" what people are willing to pay for it. People are willing to pay high prices for a Rolex so Rolex will keep selling them for high prices. If people stopped buying them, they would likely lower their prices. My short answer is it's only "worth" what you think it is. I would love an Explorer I but for me, right now, it's not worth the money. Down the road, it may be. But, for now, I'll settle for an homage. Thanks, Guy.
IMHO It's a business, they don't perfect the watch so people keep buying and upgrading to the newer version. There will always be something slightly off about a replica so that they could "Fix" it in the next version so that people would buy the newer "closer to original" but there will be something else off. It's bad for business if they get it 100% right if that makes sense. People can buy what they want, personally I would like to have something I can pass down to my kids that I worked hard for and that I am proud of. Fantastic video as always Guy!
The problem is 5 years ago a Sea Dweller cost xxx now it costs 3 times as much...production and labour costs have not gone up this much....it's market driven Retained value may not last ...look at Panerai ,Breitling etc.....I do not think Rolex are good value I do however think they are good buying...
JustBlueFish Watch Reviews not msrp ...friend at work bought a sea Dweller for 2200 pounds 3-4 years ago when his mum died and left him some money ...just sold for 5800 ..not sure what year was made guessing thec80's..another guy has a two tone bluesey bought for peanuts years ago...holes case etc...God knows how much profit he would get from this if he sold it now
Preowned prices on very worn watches, with beaten up bracelets may have picked up, but that can be cyclical, and I agree with BlueFish that it wasn't three fold, except for a lucky few. Actually people often forget that preowned prices for Rolexes don't hold up for damaged and very worn examples, because the chance of refinishing may have gone and the movements may have real water damage and so on.
Light 15 you must be sing different things to me ...in my local AD a few weeks ago the last steel sports they had was an Explorer 1 £5250 in the next window pre owned.... Explorer 1 £4950.....i couldn't believe it 300 pound different....and last week both pieces have gone....no steel sports at all just datejust's etc..... I know in England we seem to pay more...on chrono 24 UK prices always seem to be 1000 or there abouts more than the rest.....and here we have seen an explosion in pre own prices
Not worth it, I own two, a 11.5k euros Yacht-Master and a 10.5k euros Sea-Dweller 50 anniversary. I'm not getting 22k satisfaction out of them. Don't fall for it, there are much better value propositions with equal quality. I'm 100% against replicas though. Replicas are for losers. There are plenty of affordable and respectable brands offering tons of quality.
This guy's perspective makes total sense and exactly what I was thinking happy he took it to RUclips! Remember Rolex is a business they're in the business to make a profit and invest in the longevity of company, us the consumer that purchase their products help support them so they can offer us better products in the future
Good point about everything that goes into the build of a Rolex that MUST be taken into account. Rolex had to pay probably $billions in design, R&D, and the actual construction and maintenance of the manufacturing infrastructure, the precision machines, robotics, equipment, clean rooms, quality control, developing the advanced technologies that goes into the movements (not counting the personnel, engineers of every kind, etc. Etc.) All of that stuff had to be built in order to be able to "make a watch for $1000" or whatever.
« Design »? « R&D »? Lol. When was the last time they released a new watch? They only upgrade the materials or the size. They have the same models for the last 30 years!
Good commentary. There are so many factors but certainly quality and esp. DESIRABILITY are major factors. How else high horology brands priced way higher can charge many multiples of Rolex prices for steel sports pieces etc. Same in other things - want Microsoft, Apple or joe’s, an iPhone or a Shenzhen special etc etc. It takes time and costs a lot to build that international desirability. Thanks for your great reviews
Some more pluses for the fake: 1, less worry -- you can wear it in more situations. 2, if you damage it or if it gets robbed, you don't care. 3, if you can only resell the Rolex for $8k, the "retained value" argument is moot. The big plus for the Rolex is the feeling you get knowing it is real. It is not the same feeling with the fake.
Yeah I had considered that, but given their presence in so many countries I assumed they must pay taxes at least in the countries that they have offices and service centers.
JustBlueFish Watch Reviews not necessarily, a lot of big companies find a way of avoiding these, like Tele2 in my country and McDonald's in France. At the end of the fiscal year the parent company from the originating country sends imaginary receipts for training, royalties or something intangible at the amount of the profit the company made in a given country resulting in 0% profit which means %0 taxes. This was a scandal that was allowed to last for years until France decided to do something about it and sued McDonald's. Tele2 is a big swedish mobile carrier that has been in my country for years and when you check their financial results they haven't made a profit in all the time they have been here 😄. The only taxes these countries get are from salaries of local workers. Facebook is another company taking advantage of this, but there are many
you pay taxes even if you are making a minus. plus which tax are even talking about here ? the corporate tax ? well maybe that they don't pay ... but everything else they do, especially if they are registered in every country where they sell ... thats where u have to pay tax on made profit.
Another thing that cost money is the tooling. In a mass production scale, retooling is spread among the number of pieces it produces. A limited production would bear more of that tooling cost.
Good point, establishing and evolving the infrastructure to produce these watches is probably a considerable cost. Paying people to come up with ideas that we never even see because they decide not to run with them, and any number of other things behind the scenes that can't easily be quantified by the average person speculating on this topic, factor in to the whole picture.
That’s the number one priority in a business, Make as much profit as possible and number two is to last for a long time , and Rolex does both very well. They don’t work for peanuts, and if you become very good in what you do, you will never ever do it either
There was a rumour that Rolex was going to raise the price of their sports watches by 20% at BaselWorld 2018 because they're getting too accessible to peasants.
Another very important point is that producing and selling a fake is completely illegal and supports criminals. Not an acceptable thing to do. The real problem would be fakes being passed off as real Rolex’s to uninformed buyers. On a different subject, It would be interesting to see a comparison between a Rolex Sub and a Tudor Sub. Great video
Good points, thanks for watching and sharing. Oh and I don't know anyone that has a Tudor Sub. I do know someone with a Tudor Black Bay, but I'm not sure they would be willing to mail that to me for a video though.
Thanks. The Black Bay looks completely different, and I didn’t see the Sub on the Tudor site. I do not know but maybe it’s been discontinued. I thought it would be an interesting comparision
Hope your channel blows up, you make great, informative content! Thanks for the thoughtful videos, very helpful for those who are contemplating purchasing a Rolex.
Great discussion and well articulated. It’s a tough question to answer but my position on watches is buy what you like and can afford and enjoy! Never go into debt for a watch and enjoy what you can afford. If Rolex fits your budget and price point buy one and wear it and enjoy it!
Thanks buddy, appreciate you watching and your response. It is a hard question to answer and I'm sure the longer I think about it the better I'll understand it and myself. For now I'm happy to have the Submariner and that's all that really matters.
Yes, enjoy your submariner! It’s a great watch. Excellent videos by the way as you are truly offering a fair discussion on some topics where people have very strong opinions.
Whether or not Rolex is worth the money? That depends on who's willing to part with the money the product is commanding. It is a status symbol after all. For people who can afford it, will say it's worth the money. For people who can't, they will say it's not worth it. Another way of seeing it is, if people who think they can use the money for better purposes like putting food on the table, taking care of their family, maybe a grand vacation, cosmetic surgery, or another hobby they are more in to than collecting watches, then it's not worth it. The people with extra money to burn, people who value $8k the way I value $500, then it's definitely worth it. Some people view a watch as tool, something that helps them day to day, some view it as a fashion accessory, and there are people who view it as a mask. Some view it as a combination. So in the end the value will be subjective and will be different for different people.
Yeah the idea of "value" is to some degree subjective and people will look at it differently based on their personal situation. Objectively even if I can't afford something though, I'd like to think I could appreciate that it may be worth the asking price.
JustBlueFish Watch Reviews True, but how you view that worth isn't immune to your subjective reasoning, no matter how you try to be objective on your reasoning. To be accurate - objectively, you need data, most of that data, as you have stated no one knows except maybe to the Rolex execs.
I wouldn't mind if the real Rolex Sub cost around $2k-5k and were in stock brand new at AD's. But the reality is, the AD marks up the price so they can make 40% profit on every Rolex Sub and they restrict supply to create artificial demand for new Rolexes.
The sub is my dream watch, but after taxes you are approaching 10k... I just can't. That's why I bought a omega 39.5 PO for half the price. Sure, it's not a rolex, but a nice watch indeed
Many years ago I watched an Interview with a VW manager. He was asked why they sell their cars for such a higher price than Toyota for example. He was asked if the VW cars are that much better. His answerd with a question: " Why shouldn't we take the money as long as people pay that much?" I am sure he has regretted to be such honest for this little moment. 😂 Now I am waiting for a Rolex manager to be as honest as the Volkswagen guy 😏...just for a moment...please.
Wow, awesome discussion! Awesome comments too. I am a Black Belt Manufacturing Engineer and I can tell you, maybe they are charging the customer a lot of non-value added steps in an Oldschool manufacturing enviroment. Some times people think of this as art and see a value on it. But in terms of manufacturing, non-value steps are non-value steps. I you can replicate someone else's researched steps and make your processes even faster, that's just a good play. With this said, replicas are not just replicating the watch. they are traying to replicate the process too, obviously not with the same standards but they are getting there. At one point they will be able to deliver an outstanding quality product for a 1/8 of the price by eliminating the middleman, the art, and nonvalue added steps of the equation.
Quality is one thing but the name on the dial is the most important factor. I don't see anyone matching Rolex quality at $2,000-$2,500. I don't even think Omega hits Rolex quality, let alone some smaller brand getting to that level. Rolex has nearly perfected the simplicity in what it does. They don't go all out with crazy movements or innovation but they are the best at what they though. Close does not equal the same and that is what separates the Rolex.
Rolex SA is owned by the private Hans Wilsdorf Foundation, which is registered as a charity and DOES NOT pay corporate income taxes. In 2011, a spokesman for Rolex declined to provide evidence regarding the amount of charitable donations made by the Wilsdorf Foundation.
I wasn't sure about the taxes, especially being that they have business presences in so many countries. Do their service centers located in the US pay taxes? I wasn't entirely sure but assumed they must.
Regarding tax-status: I refer to Rolex S.A., “the parent company.” ADs are privately-held, and while they employ “Rolex-certified” watchmakers, the watchmakers are actually paid by the ADs, or “Rolex authorized/not Rolex owned” service centers. So these independent entities likely do pay taxes in their country/state of operation. Having said this, they are not owned by Rolex S.A., or the Wilsdorf Foundation, which made nearly $5 billion USD in 2016. I do agree with you 100%, in that items (all items) are valued by buyers & sellers in a free and open market.
Guy, all great points. Owning myself a couple of Rolex, Omegas, Tudor, Cartier, etc one can perform your own comparison from a value to visual and emotional points of view. However, I believe Rolex prices lately have crossed that fine line and are now too expensive. I would like to see a review based on the movement and its finishing as I believe that's where Rolex faces a tough challenge for its price point. For example compared to Omega, JLC, Grand Seiko, etc
I don't know, when did Rolex last raise the prices on something like the Submariner. I think the last increase was in 2011-12. It's been stable for quite a while. So would you really say Rolex prices have gotten to high lately, or that other less expensive watches have started catching up in quality? I'd say the later.
I used the term lately ver loosely but since I started paying attention prices have gone up too high for me as a consumer. I am no watch expert but there is an excellent article about Rolex pricing through time from "Ablogtowatch", and yes competitors have improved quality too. People need to open up to other brands and not be afraid, don't just follow others. A sub for $8k to 9k is steep and i'm a Rolex fan.
Excellent explanation. Your other video on diminishing returns hit the nail on the head. As much as I want a sub 16610 laying out close to retail for one is a real draw back. As you said, is it worth the money based on cost retention, yes..do you wish it was more affordable, sure. The bubble is reaching its breaking point and if Rolex doesn’t start restocking steel watches they will drive more customers to other premier brands or the homages. Most of the time luxury purchases are based on want, not need, and laying out that much money may not make sense despite the value retention. Of course, it still comes down to how much do you want it and how much fun money do you have. Evidently, there appears to be an inexhaustible demand for Rolex and if you won’t buy it, someone else will... and Rolex knows that!
seems like all these people asking the questions dont really even know why you would buy a rolex. If you want to buy a replica of something that just says a lot about yourself
Now I wonder if the rehaut misalignment is a quality control issue. More often than not when I’ve seen a close-up, that coronet is slightly off 12 o’clock. Most I’ve seen are off to the right.
Another point to hit on with the low wages paid by the counterfeiters in their factories would be the fact that their cost of living over there is, in all probability, way cheaper than it is in Europe or North America. I would be led to believe that their profit margins are quite high for the $500 price tag.
Every watch company needs to make $, but if you keep your watches i feel brands like Oris & Alpina are excellent bang for the buck. I feel Rolex are excellent watches also but way overhyped. I feel that chronometer grade ETA or sellita movements rivals the Aegler movements in Rolex’s. Rolex 904l steel might be a tad bit better but meaningless in practical use. BTW im saving for a overhyped Rolex. If you don’t want to spend that type of money go with oris or alpina. It comes down to personal preference.
You buy a real Rolex because you want the satisfaction that comes from knowing you own a real Rolex. You buy a fake because you want the satisfaction that comes from assuming other people think you own a real Rolex.
Excellent video my friend, also I would like to add the fact that having an authentic watch is so important, as of everything else in life. This things are luxury and emotional items that deserve to own them and treat them as the complex things they are. Looking fwd to se more videos from you and keep it up.
Very honest and clean information. Sounds like the differences are just differences. Neither has anything to do with one being better than the other. The fact that Rolex may have operating costs, taxes , machinery etc etc. still does not warrant the cost. I call that manufactured desire. They are excuses for "why" they charge more and why its "worth" it. It is just like 904 stainless. Meaningless feature that is a selling feature that has no benefit to the wearer. Excellent video guy as always. Honest, truthful and most of all respectful. In the end buy what ultimately makes you happy and dont put others down who like other brands. Thanks for not being a watch snob.
Somebody is already creating a competitive option for half the price and that somebody arguably has as much history and prestige behind their brand; Omega Seamaster.
I don't have enough first hand experience to say I entirely agree or not, but I've followed the opinions of other people who I respect who think that it's not really on the same level. Perhaps one day I'll get to spend enough time with a Seamaster to form my own opinion.
Discussing value in watches is very hard, you have done a great job at wrestling with it 😄 My $600 King Seiko is worth the money to me, but to a person wearing a $10 Casio I am a madman for paying that much for a 30+ year old watch.
Very good video and a good lesson in basic economics! Everyone should be considering these topics when making any kind of purchase, not just watches. Thank you!
As with most things luxury, the people who can afford Rolexes most likely don't want submariners to be $2.000 as that would mean more people would wear them and they wouldn't be able to show off with their expensive watch that only the select few get to wear.
"Is Rolex Worth the Money?" Obviously, yes, to the folks who buy them. And to date, that's been enough to make it, hands down, the most sought-after and successful watch brand on planet Earth. In fact, no one knows just how successful since they are not obliged to reveal their costs, revenue, net profits, or much anything else for that matter. Could that change? Perhaps. As the knockoffs get better and better, they could put pressure on Rolex sales. But that's way down the road.
Buy Tudor! Excellent build quality and now with in-house movement. It’s Rolex quality at half the price. I personally prefer it as it’s less showy but still feels and looks expensive. If it’s the thrill of the hunt you are after, they also have fabricated supply shortages on certain models so you have to wait on lists to get the watch (Bb58 and bb gmt for example) which manages to keep market values stable.
Here is a question . Are there companies legitimate ones who are producing watches of Rolex quality or exceeding Rolex quality, but at a lot lower cost to the consumer ?
That's a good question, and I'm not entirely sure. I don't know that I have enough experience with a wide enough selection of watches to answer that yet. Maybe someday I will be able to.
I thought the Ginault review by Guy was very interesting. It offers close to the same amount attention to detail, but offer it at an excellent price. So if it's the fit and finish that your after, and don't really care about horological significance, and brand recognition. I think that is the perfect watch. 🙂
I sold it and bought the Submariner a few months later. I lost a bit on the sale but I bought it at a pretty good price so it wasn't the end of the world.
Well done. There is really only one way to judge value. Will people pay the price asked? That said, Rolexes are worth what they are charging. I can’t pay that for a Rolex, but don’t begrudge anyone who pays the price for a Rolex. Though I am more of a Seiko guy, I do appreciate the attention to detail Rolex pays.
Thanks for watching Jeffery. I appreciate it. Nothing wrong with being a Seiko guy. I have a few. My Hamilton Khaki Field is another affordable watch I love.
I agree with everything you said... Except that brands like Omega also have a great haretage, a large number of employees, they also spend money on marketing and research... For half the price. So no, I think Rolex is not worth the money they are asking.
Guy imo it is worth the money because of the marketing strategy and business model they follow, like you said in time you probably won’t loose Money and possibly make a little money if you buy it wisely and not pay an insane premium! As far as the materials within the Watch, no it’s not worth the money , even their own secondary brand Tudor is less than half the money and I feel is just as good quality in manufacturing. I have owned 3 Rolex including a 2005 Blusie which compared to my current Black Bay was no better in any way except of course the use of gold on it. As far as accuracy the B.B. has superior accuracy at +/-2 sec for the last 3 months! Check out the comparison that Mike from JustWatch did on the Sub vs BB it was interesting how he evaluated them! Anyhow great vid! Thanks
The interesting factor here is actually Rolex's little brother brand, Tudor. A Tudor is basically made by rolex with rolex materials but the price point is a lot less. I think if you're intelligent enough you can see the truth in the Tudor price, on what it actually should cost for a rolex.
I don't have enough first hand experience with Tudor to say one way or the other that something like a Black Bay is equal in quality to a Submariner. In the little I've looked at them in an AD, my impression was that it was good, but not quite the same quality. With things like still using aluminum bezels, and the bracelet/clasp being perhaps slightly inferior my initial reaction would be to think they're not equal.
Carlo Dimacali There is no 'might be different', it is different material. People just don't get.... Rolex could outsource everything including using a generic ETA movement and decorate it. They could stop using white gold and other precious metals. Use a cheaper sapphire crystal. Use less advertising and marketing and close their research departments among other things. Only give the Submariner a 1 year warranty. Once Rolex does this, they can charge $300 wholesale for the Submariner and dealers can mark up the watch to about $800. However, the Submariner will no longer be the same quality as it is now, it will be on par with the high end clones and the homage watches... Do you get it? It was explained in great detail by the gentleman in the video. The clone and homage markers do nothing but copy and the copies are of less quality. There is no white gold in a clone Submariner, the crystal on a clone is nowhere near the same quality as a genuine Submariner. The genuine movement is far Superior than the clone version or a fake ETA movement. The clones look like clones.. Rolex pays for everything and they do everything inhouse. Nothing comes from China where Rolex is concern. The Submariner is an original made by Rolex. All this cost money to produce and this is why a Submariner is $8000+ and not $500. Get it? If not, ask me something specific.
Mamadou Aziza Oh I get it, it seems you didn't get my question. So let me rephrase it. How much did it cost Rolex to procure the materials versus TUDOR to justify the premium charged by Rolex? As far as I know Tudor does not use any Chinese materials, nor labor.
The intangible aspects of the brand are more than enough to justify its pricing. There are emotional and psychological benefits attached to owning a Rolex. You can't really quantify that.
I think Rolex marketing is spot on.... almost out of reach of the normal guy except the watch geek that will save up for one.... easily affordable to mid earners Who want to make a wealth statement....and expensive enough for the super rich collector to find rare pieces and buy them as they come up ..building enviable collections......its all in the marketing
I would agree, and add that the price is probably set right where it needs to be. People are buying them and they retain value reasonably well. If anything they might be underpriced if you look at the secondary market and the markup you see on some models.
Worth it is all relative to what the end-user feels is appropriate, and it is the same in every industry. Rolex can charge a premium because of the branding, so there is certainly a markup percentage 'just because' and I'm sure they've done it for years, and as long as people continue to buy, they will continue to do it. My Hamilton watch was $500....would a Rolex at $8-10,000 be 20x the watch? Likely not, which is why I'm going for a Breitling Colt 41 for around $4200 in the future. And 904L steel in a bracelet isn't worth an extra $4-5k. Another solution is to buy used.
One thing that perhaps you should do while comparing the fake with genuine submariners is to put them on your time grapher and compare the accuracy. It would be interesting....
I did test the replica on the TG, but the video didn't turn out. My room was too dark or something. It ran pretty well. +/- 5 to 6 seconds in most positions. However when I tested it with very low power reserve, it ran like garbage.
Let's keep it simple. You only have to look up the numbers. Unfortunately Rolex doesn't publish all that much (because they don't have to) but there are some estimated numbers from 2014. Let's assume they still apply today and that they are accurate. The profit margin of Rolex is about 30% which is very good. But it also means that if Rolex were to sell their watches for about 30% less they would go out of business. This includes everything: Taxes, engineering, Bill of material, advertisement, supply chain, dealer margin etc. Normally a 10% margin is sufficient to survive in a long term. So you could say that Rolex-watches are a bit overpriced by 20% or so. But it doesn't really matter. What matters is if those watches are worth it to the people who buy them and that answer is pretty vlear.
Great video! Rolex doesn't pay taxes though. Rolex is owned by the Hans Wilsdorf Foundation. That foundation is recognized by the Swiss government as a charitable trust, and thus, pays no taxes.
Yeah I wasn't sure about that, especially given their presence in so many different countries. For example does Rolex pay taxes on revenue generated from their holdings in the USA? I assume so?
Yes, Rolex is worth it. My dad bought a Rolex Sub 15 years ago for about $4000 and sold it few days ago because he needed the money and got $4900 for it from a dealer...and keep in mind he really beat up the watch good and he still got $4900...if it was in good condition he would've gotten $5700 or more....
He probably could have done even better by selling it to another consumer directly instead of a dealer as well. That's a testament to the Submariner and the value it holds. Thanks for watching. I appreciate it.
That was a very good video on the subject and I appreciate it. I might add that there is a reputation of quality to consider when buying an original anything. A company stakes it's entire future on maintaining it's reputation in a consistent manner year after year and to this point, Rolex has done an excellent job over the companies existence. Put simply, it's quality you can count on Today, tomorrow and forever. All products of this caliber stand an excellent chance of becoming an family keepsake, not only because of it's unique engineering and the solid backing of it's company, but because a great watch is a very personal item. One worthy of being passed from father, to son and to grandson. And one that will invoke the memories of each in the minds of whoever is wearing it at the moment. That is real value worth paying for and something no knock off can, or ever will accomplish.
mechanism will need service/repair after 20 years of use. There is no miracles. You are talking about grandsons but its just advertising to sell it now.
I think the only way you can profit from a Rolex you've bought, is one: you have to be very knowledgeable, two: Nostradamus like trend prediction, and three: buying used, let the first owner take the hit, and buying future trends. Of course if I had Nostradamus like predictions, I'd probably be better at day trading, and wouldn't care if I buy an $8k Rolex for $10k... LOL
Yeah I wouldn't suggest anyone buy a watch with the expectations of making money, but it's nice to know that you won't likely lose a lot should you decide to flip it somewhere down the line.
Good video and interesting topic. I find this topic coming up jot just with Rolex but with any major brand selling watches routinely above $5000. The truth is there is a difference between those watches and something less than $1000. If you look through a loupe or wear the watch for years you'll notice the differences. But for some, many even, those differences aren't worth the additional $4000+. As for the cost to build don't forget to include other expenses like building leases, utilities, equipment leases, and other overhead expenses and then you have R&D costs and legal expenses and shipping costs and yes even inventory costs. Heck, Baselworld isn't exactly free nor is paying a celebrity to endorse the product. As for the microbrands they make fewer models and have fewer designs and market mainly by world of mouth and through the enthusiast community. So, it's not as cut and dried and there is a reason why a Rolex costs so much more. I think a better question to ask and perhaps a great topic for you is, should a Submariner Date cost $2000 more than a Seamaster Planet Ocean?
Great points, there are a ton of things going on behind the scenes that factor into the cost of running a business and building a product that we can't begin to quantify.
Hey Guy, you might want to build website and viewer forum. I'm enjoying reading the comments that a forum would be awesome. Even if it's just those Free forum sites. 🙂
I got intimidated seeing all the high end wristchecks on that group. I don't think I'll be able to relate. But thanks for approving, I'll just probably browse quietly. :)
I doubt a Rolex cost more to build than an Omega similarly spec model but Rolex having less history than Omega has dumped a ton of cash on marketing. They both have high paid staffers like designers and engineers, But Omega spends way less in marketing and sponsorships. The end results is desirability and has forced Rolex into a limited market. Their watches are priced for the upper 20 percent of the work force. If you make 120K a year then just one months salary gets you a submariner.
I don't know if Rolex costs more to build or not, good question. For sure Rolex has done a better job in positioning it's brand and that recognition is actually added value in terms of the retained value of the product. If a person doesn't care about that aspect then saving the money and buying an Omega makes more sense.
also you chalked up the unacounted 8,000 dollars to research and development, employees, distribution, warranty and other overheads - which almost every single watch manufacture (especially brands with in house movements) has to deal with, while not gouging their customers.
Hello Alexander, true a manufacturer like Seiko does have to contend with the same cost in developing a product, but that cost is also distributed to the number of pieces they sell. Seiko sells a heck of a lot more of watches compared to Rolex, so they can charge less for development cost per piece. Also Rolex customers know they pay more for a watch, but they also expect more, like exotic materials, excellent fit and finish. The more time you exert effort on quality the more it cost with deminishing return on value. Have you closely seen the applied indeces of a luxury watch such as a Rolex, it's corners are just exquisite. But that's something you wouldn't notice a foot away. That attention to detail might cost two to three times compared to the fit and finish of, let's say a seiko. That I understand. But I'm with you on the "it's not worth it" camp. Whether it's worth it to you or not will depend on how you view a watch. If you see it as a tool (like me), then that fit and finish isn't worth it. If you see it as a fine piece of art or engineering, then it doesn't matter if you can afford it or not, it will be worth it. :) I look at a Ferrari, and see the price tag, I'll be surprised at first, but when I see the specs and performance of that car as well as the exclusivity of membership, I'd definitely say that Ferrari is worth the price its asking. :)
they are worth it because they can’t keep them in stock at the AD because people are buying them. They are doubly worth it because they hold the strongest resale value of any sports watch.
One thing that’s being referred to is the retained value, however I wouldn’t be buying a Rolex or any other luxury brand because of that, I would be buying it for the purpose it’s made, ie telling the time accurately & when paying Rolex prices it’s quality, not for 5 years but for a lifetime & I would be looking to pass it down to my children, maybe that should be talked about instead of it’s re-sale value, we’re not all dealers or collectors, most people simply appreciate a quality timepiece & don’t mind spending the money on one IF it meets the standards, & because we’re not all experts we look to people with the knowledge to pont us in the right direction which unfortunately this video certainly doesn’t!
Short answer: Rolex are good watches but heavily overrated. That makes them keep their value as there is always a person who wants to buy a used Rolex. As for the costs of servicing, better o for a watch with a standard ETA/Sellita/Seiko/Miyota movement that can be services by any watchmaker. As for the accuracy: Most standard movements can be adjusted very accurately. Always keep in mind: if you buy a Rolex, most of the price is the name. You can get a lot of great watches for a lot less money.
I personally believe that a myth has been created around Rolex. Maybe it's a generational issue, but I think there are equal or better than Rolex for a fraction of the price. Even watches manufactured in China today are of excellent quality and design. Rolex is a marketing company rather than a manufacturer of watches.
Do you think eventually the counterfeit watches will get so good that it will be almost impossible to tell them apart? If they are able to get so close now, it's scary to think about what they'll be able to do in the future. It's depressing and infuriating to think about.
I'd like to think that the authentic manufacturers will stay ahead of the game and keep innovating security features. But who really knows for sure, I guess it's possible.
They do it with purses, shors, and other luxury items. Shoot, id wager some of the other brands out there that get copied are even better then the Rolexes.
JustBlueFish Watch Reviews The watch brands can implement better and more sophisticated anti counterfeiting measures on the watches they’ve yet to make but what about the ones they’ve already made. Take the 116610LV for example. What happens when they make a fake so good that you simply can’t tell? Or maybe there will be ways to tell but it takes a trip to RSC to find out if the watch is real or counterfeit. Maybe there are already “secret” measures put into place on the watches that only Rolex knows about. Do you think a super high quality fake could ever slip past RSC?
The fact that Rolex changes something year to year means they're trying to stay ahead of the game, it would be expensive for a counterfeiters to keep on retooling, and will always have a flaw whether the flaw is subtle enough not to be seen by the majority of people.
The watches can't be overpriced if people are paying that price - simple supply and demand. Rolex easily sell every watch they make (in fact, they don't make enough!).
And that's why they hire intelligent folks to determine the price of a product versus the number they produce. If a Submariner is priced at 40k with the same amount of production, then they clearly made too much. :)
One thing to the funny comment you got "you are telling the makers what to fix" lmao!!!! The makers know realy good what they need to fix to make a perfect 1:1, and tbh they do not have any limitations for making such. The one and only reason in why there is nit a real 1:1 is simpley one word; "marketing". Atm the latest Noob is a V9, or version 9. In every "update" they fix a flaw, but at the same time they on perpose make a new one. For example, the V6 had a perfect bezel (color of the inlay) but a bad clasp. In the V6s update they fixed the clasp, but ruined the dialprint. Then the V7 had both issues fix, but again a to dark inlay color on the bezel,... etc etc etc. This way they make sure customers keep buying the new versions. If they would make the perfect 1:1 then that would sell like hell, but only untill everybody (who wants) has one.... then it would stop. Now, with the "flaw-game" every update makes sure the next update will be sold good aswell.
That's pretty funny I hadn't considered that. I'd say in the end a person is better off just not buying them at all and they don't have to worry about running around in that circle.
JustBlueFish Watch Reviews thats indeed what is happening. But more you will see people putting original rolex parts on them,... or Franken as they call it. The crystal, the bezel, all dimensions are 1:1 and interchangable.
I absolutly would buy a real rolex and not a replica no matter what the quality. I dont care that others think its a fake or that its snob. Its a personal thing, im worth it and life is short furthermore i would buy from a retailer with all the original box,paperwork reciept etc. you can always get something for it god forbid you have to sell. Even in bumfuck idaho you could pawn it to a shop that wouldnt consider taking a patake because there, most people wouldnt know what it was...but EVERYONE knows rolex.. Plus as an original you can feel good that you supported the real item and not some knock off.
These watches are not worth it in any traditional sense. If you don't care about brand name then you are honest to god throwing money away. However, as someone who is really into folding knives, sometimes its cool to have a fancy brand, even if you gain little from it. A Sebensa is s35vn and titanium, mid range materials at best, but is sold at a premium and many people still love it. If you wan't good finishing, craftsmanship and quality from your money, however, these are not the brands for you. these are for the people who want the name. prestige and history.
You made an other great argument against buying the real thinhg. Why would I suport a "dealer" that does basicaly nothing past hes innitial investment in setting up the dealership. Ofc same applies to many more things than just watches.
Some brands are now also selling direct via the internet, like Omega bypassing the retail chain entirely, yet still charging full price. I'd like to see some cost savings passed on to the consumer if they're gonna do that, but I guess that puts the retailer out of business if they do.
You have a fair point but a Planet Ocean or a Black Bay aren't half of a watch than the Submariner and the price is. They are price as the market is willing to pay. And the same can be apply to Patek.
Guy love the show. Cheers! You have a lot more patience than l. The fact of the matter is people set the price not Rolex. The price reflects what the market will bare. Finance 101. Of course Rolex are over priced, it's like going out for a fine dinner. You can easily pay 200 or 300 dollars and more. But l am sure some of your more frugal minded viewers can find a way to prepare almost the same meal for next to nothing. Is it exactly the same, no but it's close.
Great point, and I think honestly the market has set the price too low. At least we are seeing that to be the case on certain very desirable models on the secondary market.
Other Swiss manufacturers of great quality like Oris, Tissot, Certina, Hamilton, etc etc also hire highly qualified personnel in their factories, will they have lower salaries? I do not think so. In the 80s a Rolex cost as much as any other reputed brand, without reaching the excesses of today. Undoubtedly the success of Rolex is in making its customers believe that they are buying a product of exceptional characteristics -without being- or selling the idea that is the WATCH that will be passed on to their children. !BUT THE CHILDREN DO NOT EVEN USE WATCHES TODAY.!!!!!!
No I don’t think Tissot or Certina have the same type of highly skilled employees. Rolex has a science lab filled with scientists, gemologist, experts to run their precious metals foundry, and engineers to make every part of their watch movements including the incredibly difficult hairsprings. Those other brands don’t do any of those things. It’s honestly not close. You’re wrong on this one.
JustBlueFish Watch Reviews Guy, I don't think anyone will ever overtake Rolex's international cache, but there will always be plenty of competitors. As you know by now, I'll take a Breitling over a Rolex any day, but I still like and respect Rolex, especially their Seadweller. Good stuff on the reviews as always.
I really like and appreciate your channel, because you argue very differentiated and full of knowledge. I think if you want to get your money back one time - in this case a original Rolex makes sense. If you only like the form, look-alike of a certain type then it might be interesting to buy a good made replica. For example there are special editions like the Spike Lee Version of Artisans. You will never have the chance to buy a real one - but they look incredible cute. In this case this might be a reason to buy a replica. Just my 50 Cents.
Thanks for watching and for the compliment Sven. I appreciate it, and I'm pleased to hear you enjoy the channel. I'm not familiar with the Spike Lee version you're referring to, I'll have to look that up.
One important point you were missing - the huge development costs like for the www.rolex.com/de/science-and-exploration/exploration-underwater/rolex-deepsea-challenge.html Rolex is investing for developing new calibres and watch cases.
OK. So let's take another example of a luxury watch and compare it to Rolex, in this case I will be talking about Omega. Omega is a luxury brand with a heritage just like Rolex and produces great quality watches just like Rolex. For example let's compare the Submariner to the Seamaster; we've got two of the most iconic divers from iconic manufacturer. I honestly wouldn't think Omega as a company being significantly lesser than Rolex, however, a Submariner is almost double the price of a Seamaster. Does Rolex spend more money on research, science, marketing and employees to warren doubling the price of a very similar product? In my opinion no; hence Rolex is very overpriced.
But doesn't Omega make way more models, so wouldn't all the costs associated with R&D, setting up tooling and all the rest of it get distributed over a wider product range?
And also I don't think (haven't done any research either) that a stainless steel generic Submariner not being a limited edition or a special color will even retain it's original value. It might not lose a lot of value but talking about a profit, in my opinion, is far fetched.
In 2008 a standard Submariner 16610 had an MSRP of $6000. They presently sell for that or a bit more. If you hold the watch for 5-10 years it's not really far fetched.
I don't know, I'm not an expert or a watch collector but I don't think that I will be paying this amount of money on a 10-year-old used (and dated) watch; I would rather pay the extra thousand or two and get a brand new watch. But hey, that's just me :'). Thanks for the videos by the way.
I was loaned an AP Royal Oak for review a while back. The quality and precision in the finishing was exceptional. Is it worth the asking price? I guess that's largely up to the purchaser to decide, but as we know there are diminishing returns when it comes to quality. The more finely crafted the product is the more exponentially the price rises. The devil is in the details, as they say.
I live in the UK. Back in 1980 when l was 18 l was a junior office worker earning about £110 a week. I really wanted a Rolex submariner (5513 maxi dial) it cost £360 nearly a month's pay. In the end l bought a Tudor (snowflake) submariner for £210. A couple of years later l sold the Tudor and bought a Rolex submariner for £500. Today that 18 year old office junior would have to earn about £60,000 to even consider the Rolex. Even if you earned £100k a year after taxes buying that submariner would still take a chunk out of your annual income. Could you walk around with an item worth £7k on your wrist? Did Hans Wilsforf envisage that his watches would only be for the very rich?
It's not exactly fair to compare that 5513 to a modern watch, when we talk about price. They aren't the same thing. Visually similar but many advancements have come in that time. People often make the "adjusted for inflation the watch should cost $xyz" argument but fail to account for the decades of updates and innovations that have gone into the current model versus those older ones. That position would be valid if they were selling the exact same product but they aren't. That said it's still expensive but I don't think a Submariner is for the very rich. It's about priorities and what you want to do with your money. If someone wants to spend their disposable income on going out, having fun, nice vacations, or any number of little things that chisel away at their savings by all means. But they have to recognize they're just spending their money on a different set of luxury items.
Can you touch on brand snobbery? Not among the owners, the brands and the ADs themselves. Such as Rolex keeping the resale value high, by various means, in order to stop the common man from buying.
I haven't thought about it a ton, but I'm not sure if I believe it's part of the Rolex plan to keep resale and secondary market prices especially high. I think it might be a byproduct of other things they are doing. But I'd have to think about that more to form a real opinion on it.
1500 cost, then add 1500 overhead immediately, taxes paid on employing staff and taxes to be paid on profits. And these are on their profitable watches, I bet they don't do well on the Cellini line? If you think overpriced, then buy JLC, Breitling, Omega or others. Also think of all the other watch companies that go bust or get swallowed, so the margins in this business may not be sufficient if the volume sold is not enough. They have to sell watches in bad times, when their overheads remain very high.
So, here we have another video "explaining" the justified value of Rolex. I find the video contains some rather, glaring, flaws. Firstly, we're expected to believe we will get a balanced and honest appraisal of the value of Rolex from someone who has purchased the product, and therefore already decided that the value is justified....now, some will say that ownership is a prerequisite to making such an expose on the subject, however, I disagree. Having the ABILITY to own said watch, and performing a balanced evaluation is all that's required. Secondly, why is the counter point to justifying the value of a Rolex a fake imitation Rolex? Is that choice a watch purchaser has? Of course not, there are hundreds of watch brands out there, offering equal to, or more than what Rolex offers, for less money. Surely the value proposition of Rolex should be compared to this plethora of options, not just some random fake. Thirdly, one of the justifications for Rolex value, was indeed it's advertised value retention......lol, my favourite! So, unless we have soothsayers or clairvoyants purchasing Rolex watches, this stated value retention is something that is only retrospectively realised, you can not guarantee that in 1, 5, 10 years, you will see value retention on these watches. Like any investment, there is an element of the unknown and therefore risk. There are quite a few scenarios that could reduce the value of an antique Rolex.....are they likely to happen? WHO KNOWS......and that's the point. So selling a watch, and suggesting this feature is something that should be factored into the inflated retail price, is absurd....it suggests you're paying extra to enjoy a risk benefit, great!
Thanks for watching and sharing your thoughts Anthony. In reference to the discussing the value relative to a fake watch, perhaps you didn't see the previous video, but in showing both an authentic and replica watch many comments said the price of the authentic watch is unjustified because of the quality of the fake. I disagree with that sentiment and this was my explanation as to why. Regarding the potential future value, like any "investment" all we can do is look at past performance, but of course unknown variables and future events can derail our expectations. Everything is a risk.
Like any investment you can always check the charts on how your specific investment had performed long term, to minimize risk and lessen the loss, maybe even profit a little in the short term if you can visual future trends. But you're right, nothing is for certain. 🙂
Price is market driven, let' s put that aside. Longevity, durability, long term value, that's Rolex.
Thanks for watching and for the comments Ernest.
Ernest Krajnc in case of Rolex price is driven by artificial scarcity they maintain
Happy Burger Maybe you're right, but then what about other "luxury" brands? Pricing in this category is not logical, it's just how much is somebody prepairing to pay for an item. Not only watches.
In a rather simplistic view, companies have hired bright people to determine the price of a product to maximize profit. And yes, they still abide by the law of supply and demand. One of the ways to maximize profit is to create scarcity.
Why does diamond cost so much where there's an abundance of supply? Because companies regulate the amount of diamonds being mined/harvested, along with aggressive marketing to "value" an otherwise over abundant supply of crystalized carbon. :)
Hey Guy, Kudos - this is probably the best, most level-headed video I've seen on the subject. I think you nailed it with the two kinds of value being the "how good is the quality" kind and the "what exactly are you buying" kind. This is important because with Rolex, you are buying a lot more than a watch, as you mentioned. You are buying the brand equity and paying for the lifestyle/status/prestige that goes with it and supporting the whole ecosystem that sustains that perceived value.
On the "brand" argument, I do agree that Rolex is "worth it", because as you said, you're very unlikely to lose money as long as the watch isn't stolen or damaged, and even then I suppose you could insure it to cover those cases and minimize your losses. And if you're lucky enough to get a rare model, then as with anything collectible, you'd actually be able to flip it for a sizable profit if you wanted to.
On the quality argument though -- which is what I'm more interested in personally, as I actually don't want to deal with all the baggage that comes with the other aspects of owning a Rolex -- the value just doesn't line up on the curve of diminishing returns, as no doubt a Rolex may be technically "better" than a $1500 competitor, it just isn't "$8000 better" based on quality alone. (Which is why the flip side of that is also true, in that if a competitor without all the brand heritage tried to sell an equivalent quality watch at Rolex prices, they'd be laughed out of business.)
Thanks for watching and fort he comments Tim. Very good observation about the idea that a competitor not being able to build a similar quality watch and compete at the same price point without the brand equity that Rolex has built. I hadn't really thought about it from that angle.
Hey Stoney Lonsome, I think we are mostly in agreement here - all the extra "value" of a Rolex is absolutely due to the marketing of their brand equity. You're paying for the name "Rolex", and paying for the fact that non-watch-nerds know Rolexes are expensive, no doubt. Which is why I personally am not interested in the brand. I can't speak for Guy, but I'm certainly not saying that Rolex deserves their asking price based on their history, quality, or technical achievements alone.
Where I slightly disagree is that the holy trinity brands need to be as expensive as they are either, though. Past a point, all of the elite brands set their pricing higher than it needs to be for the same reasons: to make a statement, and to make sure that not everybody who wants one of their watches can afford one, not only for exclusivity reasons, but for practicality. It just wouldn't be logistically possible to maintain Patek quality standards with Seiko production quantities.
Yep. I try to ignore that stuff as much as I can since it takes away from the enjoyment of the hobby for me. I just care about the watches!
Tim if you "just care about the watches" then replicas are the way to go because they seem to offer the most "watch value" of anything out there.
Morpho Polis I'm ethically opposed to copies/replicas, but I am a fan of some of the more well done homage type watches from micro brands such as the Borealis Estoril. I would say I mainly prefer unique mid-tier watches that just don't look like anything else and are doing their own thing. I agree, I am definitely *not* the type of customer a brand like Rolex caters to.
I don't care about the resale value because I'm not going to sell my watches. I bought my Rolex, Omega and Seiko because i liked it.
That is the best reason.
Kudos to you. I feel that's how a collector should be.
Value (like most things in life) is subjective. Things are only "worth" what people are willing to pay for it. People are willing to pay high prices for a Rolex so Rolex will keep selling them for high prices. If people stopped buying them, they would likely lower their prices. My short answer is it's only "worth" what you think it is. I would love an Explorer I but for me, right now, it's not worth the money. Down the road, it may be. But, for now, I'll settle for an homage. Thanks, Guy.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and perspective on the topic Justin.
Exactly what I was thinking, but more concise way of saying it. Cheers!
IMHO It's a business, they don't perfect the watch so people keep buying and upgrading to the newer version. There will always be something slightly off about a replica so that they could "Fix" it in the next version so that people would buy the newer "closer to original" but there will be something else off. It's bad for business if they get it 100% right if that makes sense.
People can buy what they want, personally I would like to have something I can pass down to my kids that I worked hard for and that I am proud of.
Fantastic video as always Guy!
Thanks for watching and the great comment buddy. I appreciate it.
Interesting, sort of like engineered obsolescence but in reverse.
The problem is 5 years ago a Sea Dweller cost xxx now it costs 3 times as much...production and labour costs have not gone up this much....it's market driven
Retained value may not last ...look at Panerai ,Breitling etc.....I do not think Rolex are good value I do however think they are good buying...
MSRP of the SD has tripled in price in the last 5 years?
JustBlueFish Watch Reviews not msrp ...friend at work bought a sea Dweller for 2200 pounds 3-4 years ago when his mum died and left him some money ...just sold for 5800 ..not sure what year was made guessing thec80's..another guy has a two tone bluesey bought for peanuts years ago...holes case etc...God knows how much profit he would get from this if he sold it now
Preowned prices on very worn watches, with beaten up bracelets may have picked up, but that can be cyclical, and I agree with BlueFish that it wasn't three fold, except for a lucky few. Actually people often forget that preowned prices for Rolexes don't hold up for damaged and very worn examples, because the chance of refinishing may have gone and the movements may have real water damage and so on.
Light 15 you must be sing different things to me ...in my local AD a few weeks ago the last steel sports they had was an Explorer 1 £5250 in the next window pre owned.... Explorer 1 £4950.....i couldn't believe it 300 pound different....and last week both pieces have gone....no steel sports at all just datejust's etc.....
I know in England we seem to pay more...on chrono 24 UK prices always seem to be 1000 or there abouts more than the rest.....and here we have seen an explosion in pre own prices
Not worth it, I own two, a 11.5k euros Yacht-Master and a 10.5k euros Sea-Dweller 50 anniversary. I'm not getting 22k satisfaction out of them. Don't fall for it, there are much better value propositions with equal quality.
I'm 100% against replicas though. Replicas are for losers. There are plenty of affordable and respectable brands offering tons of quality.
Thanks for watching I appreciate it.
This guy's perspective makes total sense and exactly what I was thinking happy he took it to RUclips! Remember Rolex is a business they're in the business to make a profit and invest in the longevity of company, us the consumer that purchase their products help support them so they can offer us better products in the future
Thanks for watching and the comments Michael. Appreciate it.
Good point about everything that goes into the build of a Rolex that MUST be taken into account. Rolex had to pay probably $billions in design, R&D, and the actual construction and maintenance of the manufacturing infrastructure, the precision machines, robotics, equipment, clean rooms, quality control, developing the advanced technologies that goes into the movements (not counting the personnel, engineers of every kind, etc. Etc.) All of that stuff had to be built in order to be able to "make a watch for $1000" or whatever.
Yeah I can't even fathom how much has been spent building the infrastructure of the company.
« Design »? « R&D »? Lol. When was the last time they released a new watch? They only upgrade the materials or the size. They have the same models for the last 30 years!
Good commentary. There are so many factors but certainly quality and esp. DESIRABILITY are major factors. How else high horology brands priced way higher can charge many multiples of Rolex prices for steel sports pieces etc. Same in other things - want Microsoft, Apple or joe’s, an iPhone or a Shenzhen special etc etc. It takes time and costs a lot to build that international desirability. Thanks for your great reviews
Thanks for watching and the comments AL.
Some more pluses for the fake: 1, less worry -- you can wear it in more situations. 2, if you damage it or if it gets robbed, you don't care. 3, if you can only resell the Rolex for $8k, the "retained value" argument is moot.
The big plus for the Rolex is the feeling you get knowing it is real. It is not the same feeling with the fake.
Thanks for watching I appreciate it.
I forgot to mention, Rolex doesn't pay taxes as they are owned by a charity, one of the funniest facts about them 😉
Yeah I had considered that, but given their presence in so many countries I assumed they must pay taxes at least in the countries that they have offices and service centers.
JustBlueFish Watch Reviews not necessarily, a lot of big companies find a way of avoiding these, like Tele2 in my country and McDonald's in France. At the end of the fiscal year the parent company from the originating country sends imaginary receipts for training, royalties or something intangible at the amount of the profit the company made in a given country resulting in 0% profit which means %0 taxes. This was a scandal that was allowed to last for years until France decided to do something about it and sued McDonald's. Tele2 is a big swedish mobile carrier that has been in my country for years and when you check their financial results they haven't made a profit in all the time they have been here 😄.
The only taxes these countries get are from salaries of local workers.
Facebook is another company taking advantage of this, but there are many
JustBlueFish Watch Reviews www.bbc.com/news/magazine-20560359
you pay taxes even if you are making a minus. plus which tax are even talking about here ? the corporate tax ? well maybe that they don't pay ... but everything else they do, especially if they are registered in every country where they sell ... thats where u have to pay tax on made profit.
+Andy What do you think corporation tax is? It is tax on profits. No profit = no corporation tax.
Another thing that cost money is the tooling. In a mass production scale, retooling is spread among the number of pieces it produces. A limited production would bear more of that tooling cost.
Good point, establishing and evolving the infrastructure to produce these watches is probably a considerable cost. Paying people to come up with ideas that we never even see because they decide not to run with them, and any number of other things behind the scenes that can't easily be quantified by the average person speculating on this topic, factor in to the whole picture.
JustBlueFish Watch Reviews exactly. 🙂
That’s the number one priority in a business, Make as much profit as possible and number two is to last for a long time , and Rolex does both very well.
They don’t work for peanuts, and if you become very good in what you do, you will never ever do it either
Thanks for watching and the comments I appreciate it.
JustBlueFish Watch Reviews thanks to you
There was a rumour that Rolex was going to raise the price of their sports watches by 20% at BaselWorld 2018 because they're getting too accessible to peasants.
There are always rumors floating around about Rolex. One thing I've come to learn about them. Only Rolex knows what they'll do next.
rolex make >600,000 watches a year..they are already too accessible.
Lmao, peasants.
Another very important point is that producing and selling a fake is completely illegal and supports criminals. Not an acceptable thing to do.
The real problem would be fakes being passed off as real Rolex’s to uninformed buyers.
On a different subject, It would be interesting to see a comparison between a Rolex Sub and a Tudor Sub. Great video
Good points, thanks for watching and sharing. Oh and I don't know anyone that has a Tudor Sub. I do know someone with a Tudor Black Bay, but I'm not sure they would be willing to mail that to me for a video though.
Thanks. The Black Bay looks completely different, and I didn’t see the Sub on the Tudor site. I do not know but maybe it’s been discontinued. I thought it would be an interesting comparision
Excellent point!
Hope your channel blows up, you make great, informative content! Thanks for the thoughtful videos, very helpful for those who are contemplating purchasing a Rolex.
Thanks Joey I appreciate that.
Great discussion and well articulated. It’s a tough question to answer but my position on watches is buy what you like and can afford and enjoy! Never go into debt for a watch and enjoy what you can afford. If Rolex fits your budget and price point buy one and wear it and enjoy it!
Thanks buddy, appreciate you watching and your response. It is a hard question to answer and I'm sure the longer I think about it the better I'll understand it and myself. For now I'm happy to have the Submariner and that's all that really matters.
Yes, enjoy your submariner! It’s a great watch. Excellent videos by the way as you are truly offering a fair discussion on some topics where people have very strong opinions.
Whether or not Rolex is worth the money? That depends on who's willing to part with the money the product is commanding. It is a status symbol after all. For people who can afford it, will say it's worth the money. For people who can't, they will say it's not worth it. Another way of seeing it is, if people who think they can use the money for better purposes like putting food on the table, taking care of their family, maybe a grand vacation, cosmetic surgery, or another hobby they are more in to than collecting watches, then it's not worth it. The people with extra money to burn, people who value $8k the way I value $500, then it's definitely worth it.
Some people view a watch as tool, something that helps them day to day, some view it as a fashion accessory, and there are people who view it as a mask. Some view it as a combination. So in the end the value will be subjective and will be different for different people.
Yeah the idea of "value" is to some degree subjective and people will look at it differently based on their personal situation. Objectively even if I can't afford something though, I'd like to think I could appreciate that it may be worth the asking price.
JustBlueFish Watch Reviews True, but how you view that worth isn't immune to your subjective reasoning, no matter how you try to be objective on your reasoning. To be accurate - objectively, you need data, most of that data, as you have stated no one knows except maybe to the Rolex execs.
Yeah with out the data all we can do is speculate, but hey that’s still fun.
JustBlueFish Watch Reviews Agreed! 🙂
I wouldn't mind if the real Rolex Sub cost around $2k-5k and were in stock brand new at AD's. But the reality is, the AD marks up the price so they can make 40% profit on every Rolex Sub and they restrict supply to create artificial demand for new Rolexes.
The sub is my dream watch, but after taxes you are approaching 10k... I just can't. That's why I bought a omega 39.5 PO for half the price. Sure, it's not a rolex, but a nice watch indeed
The Omega PO looks awesome, no shame in that watch. I'd love to check one out more closely. I bet it stands up well next to a Submariner.
True, but it’s not a Rolex. That’s the problem, many great watches but they are not Rolex.
Many years ago I watched an Interview with a VW manager. He was asked why they sell their cars for such a higher price than Toyota for example. He was asked if the VW cars are that much better. His answerd with a question: " Why shouldn't we take the money as long as people pay that much?"
I am sure he has regretted to be such honest for this little moment. 😂
Now I am waiting for a Rolex manager to be as honest as the Volkswagen guy 😏...just for a moment...please.
I'm guessing VW regrets the emissions scandal more than that haha.
ooohhh yes 😏, we can bet on this 😄 😄
Wow, awesome discussion! Awesome comments too. I am a Black Belt Manufacturing Engineer and I can tell you, maybe they are charging the customer a lot of non-value added steps in an Oldschool manufacturing enviroment. Some times people think of this as art and see a value on it. But in terms of manufacturing, non-value steps are non-value steps. I you can replicate someone else's researched steps and make your processes even faster, that's just a good play. With this said, replicas are not just replicating the watch. they are traying to replicate the process too, obviously not with the same standards but they are getting there. At one point they will be able to deliver an outstanding quality product for a 1/8 of the price by eliminating the middleman, the art, and nonvalue added steps of the equation.
Thanks Mario. Interesting perspective from an engineer, thanks for sharing I appreciate it.
Quality is one thing but the name on the dial is the most important factor. I don't see anyone matching Rolex quality at $2,000-$2,500. I don't even think Omega hits Rolex quality, let alone some smaller brand getting to that level.
Rolex has nearly perfected the simplicity in what it does. They don't go all out with crazy movements or innovation but they are the best at what they though.
Close does not equal the same and that is what separates the Rolex.
Good point close doesn't mean the same. And being as the devil is in the details, you have to pay more and more as those details get narrower.
If you friend still have that replica after 5 years, let us know how it holds up.
My guess is it won't hold up as well as an authentic but only time can tell.
Rolex SA is owned by the private Hans Wilsdorf Foundation, which is registered as a charity and DOES NOT pay corporate income taxes. In 2011, a spokesman for Rolex declined to provide evidence regarding the amount of charitable donations made by the Wilsdorf Foundation.
I wasn't sure about the taxes, especially being that they have business presences in so many countries. Do their service centers located in the US pay taxes? I wasn't entirely sure but assumed they must.
Regarding tax-status: I refer to Rolex S.A., “the parent company.” ADs are privately-held, and while they employ “Rolex-certified” watchmakers, the watchmakers are actually paid by the ADs, or “Rolex authorized/not Rolex owned” service centers. So these independent entities likely do pay taxes in their country/state of operation. Having said this, they are not owned by Rolex S.A., or the Wilsdorf Foundation, which made nearly $5 billion USD in 2016.
I do agree with you 100%, in that items (all items) are valued by buyers & sellers in a free and open market.
Guy, all great points. Owning myself a couple of Rolex, Omegas, Tudor, Cartier, etc one can perform your own comparison from a value to visual and emotional points of view. However, I believe Rolex prices lately have crossed that fine line and are now too expensive. I would like to see a review based on the movement and its finishing as I believe that's where Rolex faces a tough challenge for its price point. For example compared to Omega, JLC, Grand Seiko, etc
I don't know, when did Rolex last raise the prices on something like the Submariner. I think the last increase was in 2011-12. It's been stable for quite a while. So would you really say Rolex prices have gotten to high lately, or that other less expensive watches have started catching up in quality? I'd say the later.
I used the term lately ver loosely but since I started paying attention prices have gone up too high for me as a consumer. I am no watch expert but there is an excellent article about Rolex pricing through time from "Ablogtowatch", and yes competitors have improved quality too. People need to open up to other brands and not be afraid, don't just follow others. A sub for $8k to 9k is steep and i'm a Rolex fan.
Excellent explanation. Your other video on diminishing returns hit the nail on the head. As much as I want a sub 16610 laying out close to retail for one is a real draw back. As you said, is it worth the money based on cost retention, yes..do you wish it was more affordable, sure. The bubble is reaching its breaking point and if Rolex doesn’t start restocking steel watches they will drive more customers to other premier brands or the homages. Most of the time luxury purchases are based on want, not need, and laying out that much money may not make sense despite the value retention. Of course, it still comes down to how much do you want it and how much fun money do you have. Evidently, there appears to be an inexhaustible demand for Rolex and if you won’t buy it, someone else will... and Rolex knows that!
Thanks for watching!
seems like all these people asking the questions dont really even know why you would buy a rolex. If you want to buy a replica of something that just says a lot about yourself
Interesting perspective, thanks for watching and sharing your thoughts sir.
The replica will never last more than 20 years, when using it every day like a real Rolex
Now I wonder if the rehaut misalignment is a quality control issue. More often than not when I’ve seen a close-up, that coronet is slightly off 12 o’clock. Most I’ve seen are off to the right.
I assume it's within their acceptable tolerances of quality control, but not ideal from a customer perspective that expects perfection.
Another point to hit on with the low wages paid by the counterfeiters in their factories would be the fact that their cost of living over there is, in all probability, way cheaper than it is in Europe or North America. I would be led to believe that their profit margins are quite high for the $500 price tag.
Good point and quite likely true.
Every watch company needs to make $, but if you keep your watches i feel brands like Oris & Alpina are excellent bang for the buck. I feel Rolex are excellent watches also but way overhyped. I feel that chronometer grade ETA or sellita movements rivals the Aegler movements in Rolex’s. Rolex 904l steel might be a tad bit better but meaningless in practical use. BTW im saving for a overhyped Rolex. If you don’t want to spend that type of money go with oris or alpina. It comes down to personal preference.
Thanks for watching.
You buy a real Rolex because you want the satisfaction that comes from knowing you own a real Rolex. You buy a fake because you want the satisfaction that comes from assuming other people think you own a real Rolex.
haha, yeah that's one way of looking at it.
Marketing 101. Luxury items are worth more than the sum of their parts because of their brand value.
Thanks for watching and commenting I appreciate it.
Excellent video my friend, also I would like to add the fact that having an authentic watch is so important, as of everything else in life. This things are luxury and emotional items that deserve to own them and treat them as the complex things they are. Looking fwd to se more videos from you and keep it up.
Thanks for watching Edu. I agree, with any watch be it a Rolex or a Casio.
Very honest and clean information. Sounds like the differences are just differences. Neither has anything to do with one being better than the other. The fact that Rolex may have operating costs, taxes , machinery etc etc. still does not warrant the cost. I call that manufactured desire. They are excuses for "why" they charge more and why its "worth" it. It is just like 904 stainless. Meaningless feature that is a selling feature that has no benefit to the wearer. Excellent video guy as always. Honest, truthful and most of all respectful. In the end buy what ultimately makes you happy and dont put others down who like other brands. Thanks for not being a watch snob.
Somebody is already creating a competitive option for half the price and that somebody arguably has as much history and prestige behind their brand;
Omega Seamaster.
I don't have enough first hand experience to say I entirely agree or not, but I've followed the opinions of other people who I respect who think that it's not really on the same level. Perhaps one day I'll get to spend enough time with a Seamaster to form my own opinion.
Discussing value in watches is very hard, you have done a great job at wrestling with it 😄
My $600 King Seiko is worth the money to me, but to a person wearing a $10 Casio I am a madman for paying that much for a 30+ year old watch.
No you're not a madman!
Very good video and a good lesson in basic economics! Everyone should be considering these topics when making any kind of purchase, not just watches. Thank you!
Thanks Bill, appreciate the view and feedback. Take care.
depends on how much people are prepared to pay....I wouldn't want one at any price, but to each their own
That's fair, and thanks for watching.
As with most things luxury, the people who can afford Rolexes most likely don't want submariners to be $2.000 as that would mean more people would wear them and they wouldn't be able to show off with their expensive watch that only the select few get to wear.
Those people would just buy something else I think.
"Is Rolex Worth the Money?" Obviously, yes, to the folks who buy them. And to date, that's been enough to make it, hands down, the most sought-after and successful watch brand on planet Earth. In fact, no one knows just how successful since they are not obliged to reveal their costs, revenue, net profits, or much anything else for that matter. Could that change? Perhaps. As the knockoffs get better and better, they could put pressure on Rolex sales. But that's way down the road.
Very true and great point thanks Dan.
Buy Tudor! Excellent build quality and now with in-house movement. It’s Rolex quality at half the price. I personally prefer it as it’s less showy but still feels and looks expensive. If it’s the thrill of the hunt you are after, they also have fabricated supply shortages on certain models so you have to wait on lists to get the watch (Bb58 and bb gmt for example) which manages to keep market values stable.
about to purchase my first rolex, hopefully its the one and only!
Good luck!
Here is a question . Are there companies legitimate ones who are producing watches of Rolex quality or exceeding Rolex quality, but at a lot lower cost to the consumer ?
That's a good question, and I'm not entirely sure. I don't know that I have enough experience with a wide enough selection of watches to answer that yet. Maybe someday I will be able to.
Grand Seiko.
I thought the Ginault review by Guy was very interesting. It offers close to the same amount attention to detail, but offer it at an excellent price. So if it's the fit and finish that your after, and don't really care about horological significance, and brand recognition. I think that is the perfect watch. 🙂
I'm curious. Did you sell your Explorer 214270 or trade it in for the Sub? In either case, did you take a hit in lost value?
I sold it and bought the Submariner a few months later. I lost a bit on the sale but I bought it at a pretty good price so it wasn't the end of the world.
Well done. There is really only one way to judge value. Will people pay the price asked? That said, Rolexes are worth what they are charging. I can’t pay that for a Rolex, but don’t begrudge anyone who pays the price for a Rolex. Though I am more of a Seiko guy, I do appreciate the attention to detail Rolex pays.
Thanks for watching Jeffery. I appreciate it. Nothing wrong with being a Seiko guy. I have a few. My Hamilton Khaki Field is another affordable watch I love.
I agree with everything you said... Except that brands like Omega also have a great haretage, a large number of employees, they also spend money on marketing and research... For half the price. So no, I think Rolex is not worth the money they are asking.
Good points, and thanks for watching I appreciate it.
Guy imo it is worth the money because of the marketing strategy and business model they follow, like you said in time you probably won’t loose
Money and possibly make a little money if you buy it wisely and not pay an insane premium! As far as the materials within the Watch, no it’s not worth the money , even their own secondary brand Tudor is less than half the money and I feel is just as good quality in manufacturing. I have owned 3 Rolex including a 2005 Blusie which compared to my current Black Bay was no better in any way except of course the use of gold on it.
As far as accuracy the B.B. has superior accuracy at +/-2 sec for the last 3 months! Check out the comparison that Mike from JustWatch did on the Sub vs BB it was interesting how he evaluated them! Anyhow great vid! Thanks
Thanks for watching and sharing your thoughts on the topic Robert. I'll look up that video you suggested that sounds interesting.
The interesting factor here is actually Rolex's little brother brand, Tudor. A Tudor is basically made by rolex with rolex materials but the price point is a lot less. I think if you're intelligent enough you can see the truth in the Tudor price, on what it actually should cost for a rolex.
I don't have enough first hand experience with Tudor to say one way or the other that something like a Black Bay is equal in quality to a Submariner. In the little I've looked at them in an AD, my impression was that it was good, but not quite the same quality. With things like still using aluminum bezels, and the bracelet/clasp being perhaps slightly inferior my initial reaction would be to think they're not equal.
John E. Fashion
Tudor does not use the exact same materials Rolex.
Yeah, materials might be different, but does that justify the difference in price?
Carlo Dimacali
There is no 'might be different', it is different material.
People just don't get....
Rolex could outsource everything including using a generic ETA movement and decorate it.
They could stop using white gold and other precious metals.
Use a cheaper sapphire crystal.
Use less advertising and marketing and close their research departments among other things.
Only give the Submariner a 1 year warranty.
Once Rolex does this, they can charge $300 wholesale for the Submariner and dealers can mark up the watch to about $800.
However, the Submariner will no longer be the same quality as it is now, it will be on par with the high end clones and the homage watches...
Do you get it? It was explained in great detail by the gentleman in the video.
The clone and homage markers do nothing but copy and the copies are of less quality. There is no white gold in a clone Submariner, the crystal on a clone is nowhere near the same quality as a genuine Submariner. The genuine movement is far Superior than the clone version or a fake ETA movement. The clones look like clones..
Rolex pays for everything and they do everything inhouse. Nothing comes from China where Rolex is concern. The Submariner is an original made by Rolex.
All this cost money to produce and this is why a Submariner is $8000+ and not $500.
Get it? If not, ask me something specific.
Mamadou Aziza Oh I get it, it seems you didn't get my question. So let me rephrase it. How much did it cost Rolex to procure the materials versus TUDOR to justify the premium charged by Rolex?
As far as I know Tudor does not use any Chinese materials, nor labor.
The intangible aspects of the brand are more than enough to justify its pricing. There are emotional and psychological benefits attached to owning a Rolex. You can't really quantify that.
I think Rolex marketing is spot on.... almost out of reach of the normal guy except the watch geek that will save up for one.... easily affordable to mid earners
Who want to make a wealth statement....and expensive enough for the super rich collector to find rare pieces and buy them as they come up ..building enviable collections......its all in the marketing
I would agree, and add that the price is probably set right where it needs to be. People are buying them and they retain value reasonably well. If anything they might be underpriced if you look at the secondary market and the markup you see on some models.
Worth it is all relative to what the end-user feels is appropriate, and it is the same in every industry. Rolex can charge a premium because of the branding, so there is certainly a markup percentage 'just because' and I'm sure they've done it for years, and as long as people continue to buy, they will continue to do it. My Hamilton watch was $500....would a Rolex at $8-10,000 be 20x the watch? Likely not, which is why I'm going for a Breitling Colt 41 for around $4200 in the future. And 904L steel in a bracelet isn't worth an extra $4-5k.
Another solution is to buy used.
Thanks for watching. I love my Hamilton. Which model do you have?
Great video guy, what are your thoughts on grey markets overpricing on rolex and do you think it’s just a temporary hype in the market?
I think secondary market prices will rebound eventually. I don't think demand can keep up like that forever.
One thing that perhaps you should do while comparing the fake with genuine submariners is to put them on your time grapher and compare the accuracy. It would be interesting....
I did test the replica on the TG, but the video didn't turn out. My room was too dark or something. It ran pretty well. +/- 5 to 6 seconds in most positions. However when I tested it with very low power reserve, it ran like garbage.
Is the power reserve of the replica the same as the original?
Let's keep it simple. You only have to look up the numbers. Unfortunately Rolex doesn't publish all that much (because they don't have to) but there are some estimated numbers from 2014. Let's assume they still apply today and that they are accurate.
The profit margin of Rolex is about 30% which is very good.
But it also means that if Rolex were to sell their watches for about 30% less they would go out of business. This includes everything: Taxes, engineering, Bill of material, advertisement, supply chain, dealer margin etc.
Normally a 10% margin is sufficient to survive in a long term. So you could say that Rolex-watches are a bit overpriced by 20% or so.
But it doesn't really matter. What matters is if those watches are worth it to the people who buy them and that answer is pretty vlear.
Interesting numbers, and lower then I would have thought if accurate. Thanks for sharing.
Great video! Rolex doesn't pay taxes though. Rolex is owned by the Hans Wilsdorf Foundation. That foundation is recognized by the Swiss government as a charitable trust, and thus, pays no taxes.
Yeah I wasn't sure about that, especially given their presence in so many different countries. For example does Rolex pay taxes on revenue generated from their holdings in the USA? I assume so?
Yes, Rolex is worth it. My dad bought a Rolex Sub 15 years ago for about $4000 and sold it few days ago because he needed the money and got $4900 for it from a dealer...and keep in mind he really beat up the watch good and he still got $4900...if it was in good condition he would've gotten $5700 or more....
He probably could have done even better by selling it to another consumer directly instead of a dealer as well. That's a testament to the Submariner and the value it holds. Thanks for watching. I appreciate it.
could have yes , he was aware of that but he was hurtin for cash to pay rent so he didn't have a lot of time to wait for the right buyer.
That was a very good video on the subject and I appreciate it.
I might add that there is a reputation of quality to consider when buying an original anything. A company stakes it's entire future on maintaining it's reputation in a consistent manner year after year and to this point, Rolex has done an excellent job over the companies existence. Put simply, it's quality you can count on Today, tomorrow and forever.
All products of this caliber stand an excellent chance of becoming an family keepsake, not only because of it's unique engineering and the solid backing of it's company, but because a great watch is a very personal item. One worthy of being passed from father, to son and to grandson. And one that will invoke the memories of each in the minds of whoever is wearing it at the moment. That is real value worth paying for and something no knock off can, or ever will accomplish.
Thanks for watching and the comments Gil. I appreciate it.
mechanism will need service/repair after 20 years of use. There is no miracles. You are talking about grandsons but its just advertising to sell it now.
I think the only way you can profit from a Rolex you've bought, is one: you have to be very knowledgeable, two: Nostradamus like trend prediction, and three: buying used, let the first owner take the hit, and buying future trends.
Of course if I had Nostradamus like predictions, I'd probably be better at day trading, and wouldn't care if I buy an $8k Rolex for $10k... LOL
Yeah I wouldn't suggest anyone buy a watch with the expectations of making money, but it's nice to know that you won't likely lose a lot should you decide to flip it somewhere down the line.
Good video and interesting topic. I find this topic coming up jot just with Rolex but with any major brand selling watches routinely above $5000. The truth is there is a difference between those watches and something less than $1000. If you look through a loupe or wear the watch for years you'll notice the differences. But for some, many even, those differences aren't worth the additional $4000+. As for the cost to build don't forget to include other expenses like building leases, utilities, equipment leases, and other overhead expenses and then you have R&D costs and legal expenses and shipping costs and yes even inventory costs. Heck, Baselworld isn't exactly free nor is paying a celebrity to endorse the product. As for the microbrands they make fewer models and have fewer designs and market mainly by world of mouth and through the enthusiast community. So, it's not as cut and dried and there is a reason why a Rolex costs so much more. I think a better question to ask and perhaps a great topic for you is, should a Submariner Date cost $2000 more than a Seamaster Planet Ocean?
Great points, there are a ton of things going on behind the scenes that factor into the cost of running a business and building a product that we can't begin to quantify.
Hey Guy, you might want to build website and viewer forum. I'm enjoying reading the comments that a forum would be awesome. Even if it's just those Free forum sites. 🙂
I'm a moderator and pretty active on the Horology 101 Facebook group, though it's not a group dedicated to my channel it's just a general watch group.
I'll check it out. Cheers!
I got intimidated seeing all the high end wristchecks on that group. I don't think I'll be able to relate. But thanks for approving, I'll just probably browse quietly. :)
There's plenty of all types of watches talked about there. Jump in, the water is fine!
JustBlueFish Watch Reviews Aight, if I can relate I'll go and post. Thanks for approving me mate. Cheers!
I doubt a Rolex cost more to build than an Omega similarly spec model but Rolex having less history than Omega has dumped a ton of cash on marketing. They both have high paid staffers like designers and engineers, But Omega spends way less in marketing and sponsorships. The end results is desirability and has forced Rolex into a limited market. Their watches are priced for the upper 20 percent of the work force. If you make 120K a year then just one months salary gets you a submariner.
I don't know if Rolex costs more to build or not, good question. For sure Rolex has done a better job in positioning it's brand and that recognition is actually added value in terms of the retained value of the product. If a person doesn't care about that aspect then saving the money and buying an Omega makes more sense.
also you chalked up the unacounted 8,000 dollars to research and development, employees, distribution, warranty and other overheads - which almost every single watch manufacture (especially brands with in house movements) has to deal with, while not gouging their customers.
No I didn't.
Hello Alexander, true a manufacturer like Seiko does have to contend with the same cost in developing a product, but that cost is also distributed to the number of pieces they sell. Seiko sells a heck of a lot more of watches compared to Rolex, so they can charge less for development cost per piece. Also Rolex customers know they pay more for a watch, but they also expect more, like exotic materials, excellent fit and finish. The more time you exert effort on quality the more it cost with deminishing return on value. Have you closely seen the applied indeces of a luxury watch such as a Rolex, it's corners are just exquisite. But that's something you wouldn't notice a foot away. That attention to detail might cost two to three times compared to the fit and finish of, let's say a seiko. That I understand.
But I'm with you on the "it's not worth it" camp. Whether it's worth it to you or not will depend on how you view a watch. If you see it as a tool (like me), then that fit and finish isn't worth it. If you see it as a fine piece of art or engineering, then it doesn't matter if you can afford it or not, it will be worth it. :)
I look at a Ferrari, and see the price tag, I'll be surprised at first, but when I see the specs and performance of that car as well as the exclusivity of membership, I'd definitely say that Ferrari is worth the price its asking. :)
they are worth it because they can’t keep them in stock at the AD because people are buying them. They are doubly worth it because they hold the strongest resale value of any sports watch.
One thing that’s being referred to is the retained value, however I wouldn’t be buying a Rolex or any other luxury brand because of that, I would be buying it for the purpose it’s made, ie telling the time accurately & when paying Rolex prices it’s quality, not for 5 years but for a lifetime & I would be looking to pass it down to my children, maybe that should be talked about instead of it’s re-sale value, we’re not all dealers or collectors, most people simply appreciate a quality timepiece & don’t mind spending the money on one IF it meets the standards, & because we’re not all experts we look to people with the knowledge to pont us in the right direction which unfortunately this video certainly doesn’t!
Sorry I failed you!
Buying fakes supports criminal activities.
Among the many reasons not to buy them. Thanks for watching.
Lets not talk about market manipulation. That’s definitely no doubt for me. Worth every hard earn penny!
Thanks for watching and sharing Dragonnetx.
Short answer: Rolex are good watches but heavily overrated. That makes them keep their value as there is always a person who wants to buy a used Rolex.
As for the costs of servicing, better o for a watch with a standard ETA/Sellita/Seiko/Miyota movement that can be services by any watchmaker.
As for the accuracy: Most standard movements can be adjusted very accurately.
Always keep in mind: if you buy a Rolex, most of the price is the name. You can get a lot of great watches for a lot less money.
Thanks for watching.
Like your videos man, great production. Subscribed :)
Thanks for the sub!
I personally believe that a myth has been created around Rolex. Maybe it's a generational issue, but I think there are equal or better than Rolex for a fraction of the price. Even watches manufactured in China today are of excellent quality and design. Rolex is a marketing company rather than a manufacturer of watches.
Thanks for watching.
Do you think eventually the counterfeit watches will get so good that it will be almost impossible to tell them apart? If they are able to get so close now, it's scary to think about what they'll be able to do in the future. It's depressing and infuriating to think about.
I'd like to think that the authentic manufacturers will stay ahead of the game and keep innovating security features. But who really knows for sure, I guess it's possible.
JustBlueFish Watch Reviews maybe they will add an unique NFC chip on the case back so they can confirm it is real
They do it with purses, shors, and other luxury items. Shoot, id wager some of the other brands out there that get copied are even better then the Rolexes.
JustBlueFish Watch Reviews The watch brands can implement better and more sophisticated anti counterfeiting measures on the watches they’ve yet to make but what about the ones they’ve already made. Take the 116610LV for example. What happens when they make a fake so good that you simply can’t tell? Or maybe there will be ways to tell but it takes a trip to RSC to find out if the watch is real or counterfeit. Maybe there are already “secret” measures put into place on the watches that only Rolex knows about. Do you think a super high quality fake could ever slip past RSC?
The fact that Rolex changes something year to year means they're trying to stay ahead of the game, it would be expensive for a counterfeiters to keep on retooling, and will always have a flaw whether the flaw is subtle enough not to be seen by the majority of people.
The watches can't be overpriced if people are paying that price - simple supply and demand. Rolex easily sell every watch they make (in fact, they don't make enough!).
That's the truth.
And that's why they hire intelligent folks to determine the price of a product versus the number they produce. If a Submariner is priced at 40k with the same amount of production, then they clearly made too much. :)
Value retention/overall quality
Worth it.
Thanks for watching buddy.
No comments about Rolex, but watching your beard grow ZZTop style is fascinating.
Best ZZ Top song of all time?
JustBlueFish Watch Reviews IMO : Gimme all your Lovin'
Agreed
One thing to the funny comment you got "you are telling the makers what to fix" lmao!!!! The makers know realy good what they need to fix to make a perfect 1:1, and tbh they do not have any limitations for making such.
The one and only reason in why there is nit a real 1:1 is simpley one word; "marketing". Atm the latest Noob is a V9, or version 9. In every "update" they fix a flaw, but at the same time they on perpose make a new one. For example, the V6 had a perfect bezel (color of the inlay) but a bad clasp. In the V6s update they fixed the clasp, but ruined the dialprint. Then the V7 had both issues fix, but again a to dark inlay color on the bezel,... etc etc etc.
This way they make sure customers keep buying the new versions.
If they would make the perfect 1:1 then that would sell like hell, but only untill everybody (who wants) has one.... then it would stop.
Now, with the "flaw-game" every update makes sure the next update will be sold good aswell.
That's pretty funny I hadn't considered that. I'd say in the end a person is better off just not buying them at all and they don't have to worry about running around in that circle.
JustBlueFish Watch Reviews thats indeed what is happening. But more you will see people putting original rolex parts on them,... or Franken as they call it. The crystal, the bezel, all dimensions are 1:1 and interchangable.
I absolutly would buy a real rolex and not a replica no matter what the quality. I dont care that others think its a fake or that its snob. Its a personal thing, im worth it and life is short furthermore i would buy from a retailer with all the original box,paperwork reciept etc. you can always get something for it god forbid you have to sell. Even in bumfuck idaho you could pawn it to a shop that wouldnt consider taking a patake because there, most people wouldnt know what it was...but EVERYONE knows rolex.. Plus as an original you can feel good that you supported the real item and not some knock off.
Thanks for watching and the comments. I have had my Submariner for going on a year soon and I haven't regretted it for a minute.
C'mon, its common sense.
Obviously, Rolex can't sell a Submariner at $500, the clone markers can because they don't have the overhead that Rolex has.
Pretty much yes.
It is not only not worth the money, but also should only be sold for 20 dollars
These watches are not worth it in any traditional sense. If you don't care about brand name then you are honest to god throwing money away. However, as someone who is really into folding knives, sometimes its cool to have a fancy brand, even if you gain little from it. A Sebensa is s35vn and titanium, mid range materials at best, but is sold at a premium and many people still love it. If you wan't good finishing, craftsmanship and quality from your money, however, these are not the brands for you. these are for the people who want the name. prestige and history.
Thanks for watching. I was just talking to someone else in the comments about folders. I need get myself a new EDC folding knife.
You made an other great argument against buying the real thinhg. Why would I suport a "dealer" that does basicaly nothing past hes innitial investment in setting up the dealership. Ofc same applies to many more things than just watches.
Some brands are now also selling direct via the internet, like Omega bypassing the retail chain entirely, yet still charging full price. I'd like to see some cost savings passed on to the consumer if they're gonna do that, but I guess that puts the retailer out of business if they do.
You have a fair point but a Planet Ocean or a Black Bay aren't half of a watch than the Submariner and the price is. They are price as the market is willing to pay. And the same can be apply to Patek.
Ultimately yes the market sets the price. If no one was buying the price would be adjusted or the business would fail.
Guy love the show. Cheers! You have a lot more patience than l. The fact of the matter is people set the price not Rolex. The price reflects what the market will bare. Finance 101. Of course Rolex are over priced, it's like going out for a fine dinner. You can easily pay 200 or 300 dollars and more. But l am sure some of your more frugal minded viewers can find a way to prepare almost the same meal for next to nothing. Is it exactly the same, no but it's close.
Great point, and I think honestly the market has set the price too low. At least we are seeing that to be the case on certain very desirable models on the secondary market.
Other Swiss manufacturers of great quality like Oris, Tissot, Certina, Hamilton, etc etc also hire highly qualified personnel in their factories, will they have lower salaries? I do not think so. In the 80s a Rolex cost as much as any other reputed brand, without reaching the excesses of today. Undoubtedly the success of Rolex is in making its customers believe that they are buying a product of exceptional characteristics -without being- or selling the idea that is the WATCH that will be passed on to their children. !BUT THE CHILDREN DO NOT EVEN USE WATCHES TODAY.!!!!!!
No I don’t think Tissot or Certina have the same type of highly skilled employees. Rolex has a science lab filled with scientists, gemologist, experts to run their precious metals foundry, and engineers to make every part of their watch movements including the incredibly difficult hairsprings. Those other brands don’t do any of those things. It’s honestly not close. You’re wrong on this one.
I definitely see the reason why the Rolex Sub is worth $8500.
Thanks for watching John.
Are they worth good money? Yes. Are they worth 8,500$ ? That's a tough call. I say no.
Yeah it's hard to put a number on it.
JustBlueFish Watch Reviews Guy, I don't think anyone will ever overtake Rolex's international cache, but there will always be plenty of competitors. As you know by now, I'll take a Breitling over a Rolex any day, but I still like and respect Rolex, especially their Seadweller. Good stuff on the reviews as always.
I really like and appreciate your channel, because you argue very differentiated and full of knowledge. I think if you want to get your money back one time - in this case a original Rolex makes sense. If you only like the form, look-alike of a certain type then it might be interesting to buy a good made replica. For example there are special editions like the Spike Lee Version of Artisans. You will never have the chance to buy a real one - but they look incredible cute. In this case this might be a reason to buy a replica. Just my 50 Cents.
Thanks for watching and for the compliment Sven. I appreciate it, and I'm pleased to hear you enjoy the channel. I'm not familiar with the Spike Lee version you're referring to, I'll have to look that up.
JustBlueFish Watch Reviews www.hodinkee.com/articles/spike-lee-artisans-de-geneve-cool-hand-brooklyn-introducing ;)
One important point you were missing - the huge development costs like for the www.rolex.com/de/science-and-exploration/exploration-underwater/rolex-deepsea-challenge.html Rolex is investing for developing new calibres and watch cases.
That's cool thanks for sharing Sven.
Just look at service intervals. Rolex is 10 years, while others are 2,3, and 5 years.
OK. So let's take another example of a luxury watch and compare it to Rolex, in this case I will be talking about Omega. Omega is a luxury brand with a heritage just like Rolex and produces great quality watches just like Rolex. For example let's compare the Submariner to the Seamaster; we've got two of the most iconic divers from iconic manufacturer. I honestly wouldn't think Omega as a company being significantly lesser than Rolex, however, a Submariner is almost double the price of a Seamaster. Does Rolex spend more money on research, science, marketing and employees to warren doubling the price of a very similar product? In my opinion no; hence Rolex is very overpriced.
But doesn't Omega make way more models, so wouldn't all the costs associated with R&D, setting up tooling and all the rest of it get distributed over a wider product range?
And also I don't think (haven't done any research either) that a stainless steel generic Submariner not being a limited edition or a special color will even retain it's original value. It might not lose a lot of value but talking about a profit, in my opinion, is far fetched.
In 2008 a standard Submariner 16610 had an MSRP of $6000. They presently sell for that or a bit more. If you hold the watch for 5-10 years it's not really far fetched.
Well, that could be case. If you think about it, there are a some watches that cost way more than the Submariner like PP or AP; are they worth it?
I don't know, I'm not an expert or a watch collector but I don't think that I will be paying this amount of money on a 10-year-old used (and dated) watch; I would rather pay the extra thousand or two and get a brand new watch. But hey, that's just me :'). Thanks for the videos by the way.
How does the replica compare to the ginault?
All the things wrong with the replica, like the crappy crown and poor bezel action work better on the Ginault. I'd say it's a better made product.
hello sir, thank you for this englighment video. i totally agreee with you on this matter. cheers... :)
Thanks Zam.
the ultimate question, top 3 automatics for 500 or under?
Good question. There are so many good options I'm not sure I could say that any specific 3 stand out. But I could probably pick my 3 favorites.
Okay agreed,what about Audemars Piguet in steel at 25k usd?
I was loaned an AP Royal Oak for review a while back. The quality and precision in the finishing was exceptional. Is it worth the asking price? I guess that's largely up to the purchaser to decide, but as we know there are diminishing returns when it comes to quality. The more finely crafted the product is the more exponentially the price rises. The devil is in the details, as they say.
I live in the UK. Back in 1980 when l was 18 l was a junior office worker earning about £110 a week. I really wanted a Rolex submariner (5513 maxi dial) it cost £360 nearly a month's pay. In the end l bought a Tudor (snowflake) submariner for £210. A couple of years later l sold the Tudor and bought a Rolex submariner for £500. Today that 18 year old office junior would have to earn about £60,000 to even consider the Rolex. Even if you earned £100k a year after taxes buying that submariner would still take a chunk out of your annual income. Could you walk around with an item worth £7k on your wrist? Did Hans Wilsforf envisage that his watches would only be for the very rich?
It's not exactly fair to compare that 5513 to a modern watch, when we talk about price. They aren't the same thing. Visually similar but many advancements have come in that time. People often make the "adjusted for inflation the watch should cost $xyz" argument but fail to account for the decades of updates and innovations that have gone into the current model versus those older ones. That position would be valid if they were selling the exact same product but they aren't.
That said it's still expensive but I don't think a Submariner is for the very rich. It's about priorities and what you want to do with your money. If someone wants to spend their disposable income on going out, having fun, nice vacations, or any number of little things that chisel away at their savings by all means. But they have to recognize they're just spending their money on a different set of luxury items.
Can you touch on brand snobbery?
Not among the owners, the brands and the ADs themselves. Such as Rolex keeping the resale value high, by various means, in order to stop the common man from buying.
I haven't thought about it a ton, but I'm not sure if I believe it's part of the Rolex plan to keep resale and secondary market prices especially high. I think it might be a byproduct of other things they are doing. But I'd have to think about that more to form a real opinion on it.
1500 cost, then add 1500 overhead immediately, taxes paid on employing staff and taxes to be paid on profits. And these are on their profitable watches, I bet they don't do well on the Cellini line? If you think overpriced, then buy JLC, Breitling, Omega or others. Also think of all the other watch companies that go bust or get swallowed, so the margins in this business may not be sufficient if the volume sold is not enough. They have to sell watches in bad times, when their overheads remain very high.
Thanks for watching and commenting I appreciate it.
It was pointed out in another video that the UK Rolex prices are too low! Because GBP fell after Brexit and ROLEX could not respond!
Rolex worth the money! Because a lot of people paying its high prices thinks it worth the money!.
Thanks for watching.
Yeah it takes about a year to make a single Rolex because Its hand tested and stuf like that so it is worth the money
So, here we have another video "explaining" the justified value of Rolex. I find the video contains some rather, glaring, flaws. Firstly, we're expected to believe we will get a balanced and honest appraisal of the value of Rolex from someone who has purchased the product, and therefore already decided that the value is justified....now, some will say that ownership is a prerequisite to making such an expose on the subject, however, I disagree. Having the ABILITY to own said watch, and performing a balanced evaluation is all that's required. Secondly, why is the counter point to justifying the value of a Rolex a fake imitation Rolex? Is that choice a watch purchaser has? Of course not, there are hundreds of watch brands out there, offering equal to, or more than what Rolex offers, for less money. Surely the value proposition of Rolex should be compared to this plethora of options, not just some random fake. Thirdly, one of the justifications for Rolex value, was indeed it's advertised value retention......lol, my favourite! So, unless we have soothsayers or clairvoyants purchasing Rolex watches, this stated value retention is something that is only retrospectively realised, you can not guarantee that in 1, 5, 10 years, you will see value retention on these watches. Like any investment, there is an element of the unknown and therefore risk. There are quite a few scenarios that could reduce the value of an antique Rolex.....are they likely to happen? WHO KNOWS......and that's the point. So selling a watch, and suggesting this feature is something that should be factored into the inflated retail price, is absurd....it suggests you're paying extra to enjoy a risk benefit, great!
Thanks for watching and sharing your thoughts Anthony. In reference to the discussing the value relative to a fake watch, perhaps you didn't see the previous video, but in showing both an authentic and replica watch many comments said the price of the authentic watch is unjustified because of the quality of the fake. I disagree with that sentiment and this was my explanation as to why. Regarding the potential future value, like any "investment" all we can do is look at past performance, but of course unknown variables and future events can derail our expectations. Everything is a risk.
Like any investment you can always check the charts on how your specific investment had performed long term, to minimize risk and lessen the loss, maybe even profit a little in the short term if you can visual future trends. But you're right, nothing is for certain. 🙂
The clue is in the background.
Thanks for watching.