AD weird call

[Malum]

Take a picture of the watch with the days paper showing the date . Tell them it’s like an old time crime story and they’re the criminals .

[steveclr]

Despite the OP's post count, this seems like a reasonable non-troll post. I agree with omar-rye and see no harm in wearing a previous purchase unless the AD was acting like your BFF. I've only known one Karen reasonably well and she perfectly fits the inuendo which I've recently learned about, however I hope that anybody that is biased by a person's 1st name is unable to write and we will not be hearing from them.

[bluestreak]

Originally Posted by dba

Can someone explain this to me? I cannot for the life of me, understand why an AD would care what you do with a watch they sold you. This is simple commerce. They have a product you want at a certain price. If you can live with that price, you buy it with money and the relationship is paused until another transaction.

1) they want to discourage people from flipping watches
2) There are likely 50 other people who will buy the watch if OP turns it down
3) Because until they sell it, it’s their watch and they can put whatever condition on sale they choose
4) Because nobody is entitled to a luxury watch

[charlesheung]

Originally Posted by puma1552

Sounds like they want to confirm you aren't a flipper, which IMO is ridiculous/absurd. It's none of their business what you do with products purchased with your own money.

That said, I'd just bring it to get the GMT and not make a big deal of the request, but I'm rolling my eyes pretty hard over here.

Yes, you have your right to do with the watch you purchased from them before ( to flip or other ... )
at the same time, they have their right to choose to sell / or not sell the next new watch to you as well, it is totally fair.

[gramo]

Originally Posted by amh

So wear the old watch when you pick up the BLNR, easy! Win-win.

That GMT model still enjoys a lot of hype. Very $ought after.

And have two watches on you to be stolen as you walk from the store? security issue for me.

[gramo]

Originally Posted by Crashbush

Hello, I am on the waiting list for a GMT and i have received a call from the AD asking me to bring my previously purschased DJ 41 in order to allocate the GMT for me! is that's normal?
has anyone experienced this before?

What country is this?

[jb335]

Originally Posted by gramo

And have two watches on you to be stolen as you walk from the store? security issue for me.

Put one in the box, or wear long sleeves. Problem solved.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jb335]

Originally Posted by omar-rye

Repeat after me “Sticks and stones will break my bones but words will never hurt me”. Feel better?

Did I quote anyone in my post? Did I single out anyone in particular? Did I even call anyone a Karen? The answer is no. Grow up. Can I say that without offending anyone?

Read the TRF rules. No personal attacks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[gramo]

Originally Posted by jb335

Seriously? Are you that scared?

Put one in the box, or wear long sleeves. Come on now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Id check with your insurance first, I would be very surprised you are insured if you had both watches on you at the same time?

[jonckt]

Perhaps SA had the instruction from Upper Management. Tell the SA you will have your DAD to courier back the watch and problem solved.

[ffjfjfjjd]

Sounds like OP has indeed sold the watch (or at least he can't prove that he has access to it), is now slightly offended that he's being asked to prove that it's in his possession, and is venting some frustration and also looking for possible ways out.

I'd say the technique from the AD has worked and has smoked out what they perceived as a flipper.

[Podmornica]

"Dads now owning a watch in a different country" really sounds suspicious .. It's like a convenient lie in the eyes of the AD that should tell the watch is still in the family but can't be represented ..

No hard feelings though .. If you were after a ladies 31 DJ two tone with diamonds reference I am sure no one would ask you to prove anything .. In this case however they are giving you basically free money with the GMT so I am glad for the rest of us that the AD is implementing some sort of mechanism to make sure watch is going into the hands of a true watch wearer ..

[Mini2]

So close but so far

[KatGirl]

Originally Posted by drrd

I respectfully disagree.

Aside from the race/class/gender slur (as if that’s not enough), it’s basically a term used to silence and to discredit the opinions of others. There’s absolutely no place for it on a discussion forum.

Race, class, gender slur? Um, not seeing any of that, at all….Agree to disagree. You are way overreacting, IMO!

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[drrd]

Originally Posted by omar-rye

Let me know if you want the link.

I have been called a "Stan" before in conversations where I defended Rolex and somehow seemed biased to the interlocutor. I didn't pull out the race, gender, or class cards. It definitely wasn't my intention to do any of those things you accused me of.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I read the article.

While it has some interesting personal perspective, I don’t think it acknowledges the wider issues.

You don’t need to know someone’s colour or gender to discredit them or shut them down with that term.

It’s so versatile, you can even apply it to someone who complains about it.

It’s a scot free way to tell people to ‘shut up’.

Your first post perfectly explained your opinion. You didn’t need to add the second sentence.

[drrd]

Originally Posted by Crashbush

I have bought it for my father who lives in a different country, I have told them that and how hard it is but they still wants me to bring the DJ to get the GMT!!
I have even offered to show it to them on a video call but they refused as if they are dealing with a thieve.

Ok. That’s tough then.

I know ADs that have a similar stance. They make it clear that they know the market value of a piece and that if they find out a client sold it then said client will not be getting any more watches.

One also suggested that they could ask to see a previously purchased watch.

It’s ridiculous I know but where future purchases are concerned you play by their rules.

[Gwai]

Originally Posted by bluestreak

Who uses newspaper anymore?

Fishmongers.

I'm in the camp of those who don't think the AD's policy is outright scandalous. However, based on OP's follow-up just quoted above, AD should be accommodating another form of proof of non-flipping.

Cheers
Marc

[Ten Ten & 32]

Originally Posted by puma1552

Sounds like they want to confirm you aren't a flipper, which IMO is ridiculous/absurd. It's none of their business what you do with products purchased with your own money.

That said, I'd just bring it to get the GMT and not make a big deal of the request, but I'm rolling my eyes pretty hard over here.

Of course it’s their business to make sure your not a flipper - in fact their whole business relies on the fact your not a flipper.

If they want to maintain their Rolex AD status they have to be very careful who they sell the hot pieces to.

Rolex have started to come down very hard on AD’s selling out the back door to grey market dealers.

I don’t blame the AD for asking this, they are protecting themselves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[travisb]

Never happened to me but I have heard of it. Ridiculous but just another sign of the times.

[Andad]

Originally Posted by omar-rye

Why? I called it the way I saw it. I guess I could have used the word "entitled" instead of "Karen"

I though you made your point.

[2thdock]

More posts concerned with “Karen” than about the OPs dilemma. Lol. If the situation is real, perhaps OP cabin ask his dad to ship him the watch if he really wants the GMT that much. Are get his dad a plane ticket to visit. Crazy, but the AD game is real and will continue. I’m in the camp that sure, it’s none of his business but I like what he is doing as well.

[Auric Goldfinger]

Originally Posted by Podmornica

"Dads now owning a watch in a different country" really sounds suspicious .. It's like a convenient lie in the eyes of the AD that should tell the watch is still in the family but can't be represented ..

I thought the same.

[1William]

More AD games. If the right customer came in and wanted an in demand watch it would be on the wrist. No wait time or produce other purchases or gifts from the AD. I have seen this at multiple AD's and was present when a 300k PP purchase occurred and amazingly two SS Daytona's appeared for purchase as well. Just business. Not fair but as I was told, "The Fair is where you ride rides and eat cotton candy". If I was a betting man I would double down on the fact that the OP no longer has the watch, nor does his father in another country, but that is just speculation on my part. So factor in money, msrp from AD, and accountability for your purchases from the AD and you have a good reason to utilize the Trusted Sellers. But if money was not the driver the OP would already have the watch on his wrist. Just my thoughts.

[salnuaimi]

watch is in another country would sound so suspicious for the AD .

Just pass and let it go

[Giovannibravo]

I actually like this approach. Too many people have gotten into the hobby to try and make a quick buck.

[mulberry083]

I think this is fine. I always wear my Sub when I stop at the AD, and it has helped with other purchases. He has specifically mentioned he knows I’m not flipping and it helps in allocation discussions.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ol' Rex]

Originally Posted by Giovannibravo

I actually like this approach. Too many people have gotten into the hobby to try and make a quick buck.

I agree.

And let's not forget that these flippers supply the so-called "trusted sellers".

In the end, this sort of approach protects us, the watch enthusiasts, who actually intend to wear and enjoy the watches they buy.

I'm totally in favor of it.

[mfnj]

We live in a new world of waiting lists, buying watches and jewelry we don't want just to be "allowed" to purchase a Rolex model we like along with other so-called AD "procedures". The stories abound. Experiences at AD's are both positive and negative. So the AD asks something of a previous buyer, their prerogative. If it offends or you cant' do it, don't comply and move on! Not really a big deal or big ask!

[Oyster Al]

Originally Posted by bluestreak

I think the collective noun should be “a complaint of Karens”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[puma1552]

Originally Posted by Ten Ten & 32

Of course it’s their business to make sure your not a flipper - in fact their whole business relies on the fact your not a flipper.

If they want to maintain their Rolex AD status they have to be very careful who they sell the hot pieces to.

Rolex have started to come down very hard on AD’s selling out the back door to grey market dealers.

I don’t blame the AD for asking this, they are protecting themselves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Given that Rolex sells 1MM pieces annually, I don't think Rolex can manage even trying to care who an AD sells to for 99% of those transactions (Rainbow Daytonas etc. excepted). As a result, I also haven't seen any objective evidence of Rolex actually caring who an AD sells run of the mill watches to (yes, a GMT is a run of the mill watch), nor have I seen any objective evidence of Rolex suspending an AD's license explicitly for being caught selling to grays out the back door (though we know it happens, no other way for stickered, in demand watches to end up at trusted sellers).

If you have a source showing how/when Rolex has come down on an AD for backdooring to grays, I'd love to read it.

IMO ADs that are concerned about flippers should be far more concerned about the other ADs selling bulk loads out the back door to grays than some poor guy who bought a single Datejust.