Quote:
Originally Posted by surillious
mcubed:
I have to respectfully disagree with your assessment that, "discontinuing the watch would likely not result in any lost sales (most people would who wanted it would likely just buy the sub date)."
When I first began looking for my 14060M I passed up several with date-subs. If the 14060M wasn't being offered new I think those who wanted one would simply find one on the used market.
|
You might be right, but given that Rolex discontinued the Sea-Dweller (another Icon), and the consistency with which they have been upgrading the line, I don't think the current 14060 fits with where the Submariner line is headed. Also 99% of Rolex buyers (I would guess) know little to nothing about the history of the brand, what the models are, or how they evolved. They just walk into Lux Bond and Green, or Lee Micheal's, or Ben Bridge or wherever, and buy a Rolex they like because it's a Rolex. They may know they want a Submariner, but I think the subtlety of date vs. no date does not even enter into their universe. I guess time will tell, and I hope I am wrong, because I like the No Date. They may keep it since they use the movement in the Airking and the Explorer anyway, but I have my doubts.
Also, I would agree that the Submariner is an Icon, but specifically the Submariner No Date? I am not sure that distinction exists for most people, even the casual enthusiast. and Technically, the last No Date Bond sub was the 5513, which is long gone, though Timothy Dalton wore a 16610(or perhaps a 16800) Sub date, so actually the 16610 may the only "Bond Sub" currently made.