If It Wasnt For The Price...

[terppride7]

If you were to put all price, both retail and second hand value aside, and evaluate a Rolex just for it's aesthetics, it's movement, it's history, etc. Do you think that would change your view on which Rolex's you desire and find attractive?

I'll be the first to admit, it definitely is something that I take into consideration, and might have been what got me into wanting a Daytona at first. But it wasnt until I learned more about its history and importance to the Rolex lineage that I began to appreciate it even more.

I guess my question is, how much do you think the Second Hand Market price or Cost of the Watch influences your desire and want for it? (Assuming you could afford any of the Rolex watches)

[franktehtank]

It very well might! I think a strong second hand market reduces the RISK of purchasing a specific model.

For example, if I buy a submariner or GMT and decide I don't like it or would prefer the money, selling it is easier and I'll usually get most if not all my money back. Therefore, these are considered safe models.

However, if I want a Cellini, I better make sure I want it because a mistake will be more expensive. It will likely sell slower, and will be harder to get a good price for. Therefore, the risk of purchasing the Cellini is higher, even if you buy used (always try to get the best price used for this reason!).

I always consider this "risk of not bonding" when purchasing any watch, new or used. Certain watches you might just be stuck with, whether you like it or not. I like to call these "Grave watches", because when they drop you in the ground, they'll toss the watch in with you because no one else wants it!

They say buy what you love and you'll never have to sell, but tastes always change, and I'd hate to be saddled for life with an expensive watch I grew to dislike simply because no one will buy it.

[mgsooner]

I'm not sure why value retention carries such a negative connotation in some circles. And no, I'm not talking about watches as "investments." When you go to purchase a car, many people consider value retention (or resale value) when making their decision. I've yet to encounter anyone who gets bent out of shape because someone would dare to consider such a thing when purchasing a car.

The fact is that Rolex watches retain their value just about as well as any watch brand. This obviously varies from reference to reference but as a whole it is true. However if you were to cite this fact as one of your considerations when making a watch purchase there are some people who would become absolutely indignant over it. I personally don't understand it. We're not talking about a disposable item - much like a car these things should be functional for decades.

I'm not saying it should be your only consideration, or perhaps even one of your top considerations, but once you reach a certain price level it's probably something that should enter your mind. That is of course unless you are in a position to simply not have to care about such trivialities or you plan to keep the watch forever and do not care about any potential value it may have as a family heirloom.

[macrowatch]

Give me a panda Daytona for 10k sticker and 0 residual value, and id still buy on looks alone. Give me an Omega SMP with those wavy line dials at 7k sticker but 10k secondary, and I still wouldn’t buy it.

All of this just to say, panda Daytona is soooo good in design. Maybe not worth the crazy secondary, but it’s a great looking watch. Just add a silver steel dial like the 519 and the ability to Easily swap to OF strap...would be perfection.

[Harry-57]

Probably not. I like what I like and I buy what I can afford. So in that regard the price factors in. I love the Smurf, but I would not pay that much for a watch. All my non Rolex watches are worth less than I paid for them and are unlikely to appreciate, at least in my life time. None were bought with value in mind. I just like them.

I would like to say that when it comes to my Rolex watches, the value doesn't mater. But in the back of my mind, the Rolex watches that I own being potentially worth more (much more in some cases) than I paid for them, must play a part. If only to make me feel good about having something I love which retains value. But it wouldn't make me rush out and buy more Hulks And I wouldn't be inclined to buy a hot watch from an AD, just because I could..

[aw9nineteen]

Great question, I don’t think so. For the most part I find the more expensive models to actually look better. That said I also know the price so subliminally I could bias.

My favorite Rolex from pure looks would be the Platinum Daytona and the RG Olive DD40. I think it’s the dials that obviously separate them and of course they put them on more expensive models. My wife thinks I’m a lunatic but even she loves the Platona.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[mmaggi]

Resale value has absolutely ZERO meaning to me and has no part in any of my watch purchasing decisions.

And that's the reason why I would purchase 2-3 different watches before I purchase another Rolex.

[Jona]

OK, hypothetically price aside, I'd evaluate a watch on aesthetics, servicing, and movement. History holds nothing for me. In reality, purchase price matters, with holding value secondary.

[brandrea]

I like the way you posed the question OP, hadn't really thought of it in those terms.

I think value retention for me is one factor that plays a role in my purchases ... so why would a watch be any different?

That said, I buy what I like regardless of resale value.

For example the only watch I've ever paid more than MRSP for is this Panerai. Some will ridicule that decision, but I wanted the watch, couldn't buy it at a boutique (they were sold out) so I paid up to get what I wanted.

No right or wrong but I'd say it is a consideration. 20190426_182615.jpg

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

[terppride7]

Completely agree with you all! I dont know if its just me, but I generally feel like the concept of value retention, or using that as a factor when determining your love and enjoyment for a watch is generally seen as a negative thing and is the fine line between a 'watch enthusiast' and 'watch collector' if that makes sense, but might just be me!

Personally, I have bought a couple of Rolex's, but I dont think I will ever be in a point of my life where I can just not take into account the amount of money I spent on one of those watches, unless I win the lottery and money is near meaningless to me. And as mentioned above, knowing that the watch can fetch a decent penny even after purchasing it does help me justify the purchase!

I find this entire topic to be very interesting and love everyone's viewpoints on it!

[77T]

Even at market prices nearly 2x of MSRP - there are no SS Daytona’s to be found in AD cases.

So the demand continues strong.

I believe every collector would want a Daytona in the collection.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[AK797]

At first when I joined here I never thought I'd buy a PM piece, I was still struggling with justifying buying a SS piece to be honest, but after a couple of years here and after some planning I made the mental leap and bought one and am really glad I did, so price has never been an overriding factor, just as availability would not be, in the end if I really want a watch then I will find or wait for a way to get it, within reason.

[kieselguhr]

I never buy based on price but it is a valid limiting factor.

I buy based on design appealing to my taste and functionality.

I don’t care about resale value. I buy to keep.

[campfire]

Originally Posted by terppride7

Completely agree with you all! I dont know if its just me, but I generally feel like the concept of value retention, or using that as a factor when determining your love and enjoyment for a watch is generally seen as a negative thing and is the fine line between a 'watch enthusiast' and 'watch collector' if that makes sense, but might just be me!

Personally, I have bought a couple of Rolex's, but I dont think I will ever be in a point of my life where I can just not take into account the amount of money I spent on one of those watches, unless I win the lottery and money is near meaningless to me. And as mentioned above, knowing that the watch can fetch a decent penny even after purchasing it does help me justify the purchase!

I find this entire topic to be very interesting and love everyone's viewpoints on it!

Good question OP.

Like most here, I buy what I like of course.

But I also know I don't live in a vacuum. And I'd be naive or fooling myself if I said the desirability and market value of a watch has zero bearing at all in my decision making. I'm sure it does. But generally, it's not the biggest of factors.

Additionally, I try to be responsible with purchases (even non-watches). So I feel a bit less concerned knowing that if my family is ever in a situation where we're down to our last dollar, my watches are liquid enough to keep us alive. (Knock wood.) This allows me to indulge a bit more I guess.

[Calatrava r]

I remember when, and it was not that long ago, nobody worried about Rolex resale values and people bought Rolex watches for what they were and to wear. Sure, they could be sold for something, retaining more value than other watches, which were for the most part worthless after you bought them, but not much thought was put into the used market as a condition to buy.

[peterpl]

Once you start buying PM and moving up and spending $30k+ on watches, small price differences of $1-$2k on SS means nothing.

[HarisGR]

It is very comfortable to enjoy a luxury watch for free, maybe even to make some small money if you decide to sell it.
Although I am looking always to other brands, I will most probably stay for ever with Rolex after some bad experience with low reselling value and bad service.
I would immediately buy a Daytona if the call comes ��, although I prefer the aesthetics and engineering of my DBlue. I have to admit that it is nice to have the most desired watch on the planet.
You will be educated to like it. The hype shapes imo our taste.

[Yess]

If the Grand Seiko SBGA229 and the 114060 were valued the same on the secondhand market - it is not even a split-second decision which I would go for - and it ain't the Rolex.

Let me add, I'm not talking making money here - simply that the resale value was the same, whether that's a loss, break even, or gain.

[Ensign]

Thankfully, I always catch myself when I start falling for hyped watches. Sure, some guys have a non monetary in certain models, but most of us are subject to a crowd mentality. In one sense, nothing is wrong with that. For example if you see a large crowd running away from something, you should probably follow them. If a stock is falling and you have a chance to get out, you might want to take it.

[Phrank]

Originally Posted by brandrea

I like the way you posed the question OP, hadn't really thought of it in those terms.

I think value retention for me is one factor that plays a role in my purchases ... so why would a watch be any different?

That said, I buy what I like regardless of resale value.

For example the only watch I've ever paid more than MRSP for is this Panerai. Some will ridicule that decision, but I wanted the watch, couldn't buy it at a boutique (they were sold out) so I paid up to get what I wanted.

No right or wrong but I'd say it is a consideration.

Sent from my SM-G960W using Tapatalk

I've been meaning to ask, and can't remember if I already have, but what reference is that PAM, every time I see that beauty it grabs my attention, really gorgeous piece, and the blue dial....

[porschejeff]

For me Rolex has great value if I want to trade into a different piece, I know the value will be at least close to what I paid. Other brands expect to get 50% of what your purchase price was if you want to sell or trade. I don't consider watches an investment at my level of collecting.

[blue lion]

I wanted a Bluesy first so that's what I got. Don't care about perception. It's my watch.

[Sandpit]

I value a purchase on the three parts you refer to anyways (aesthetics, history and movement). Value retention has never formed a decision of mine because I don't buy with the intention of selling.

Cost is a slightly different matter though and it can form a part of the equation i.e. do I think a piece is worth its price and if not does my desire for that piece outweigh any price consideration.

A prime example of this is the 114060. Controversial statement - but, objectively, I do not think this watch is worth its retail price. Not for what it is (a time only, very simple 3 hand dive watch). However, the history, aesthetics and movement draw me far more and outweighs the asking price.

As was mentioned about the Panda - I would still buy this piece at full asking price even if I never got a cent back.

In my opinion, the heart far outweighs the head when it comes to a watch purchase. They're an unnecessary extravagance, and thats the way it should be.

[Onikage]

Not really. I like what I like. Whatever it costs.

[Yachtbuoy]

No, because that’s how I already think about Rolex. I think the watches Rolex make are the simple, focused ones like the OP, DJ, Exp I, Sub etc and the utilitarian nature of Rolex is what hooked me in in the first place. Hell, I chose a vintage DJ over a new one because I thought it was more utilitarian.

[horseShu]

If I can buy a Rolex for, say $3k or less, I'd probably wear it more often, beat the heck out of it, and ultimately have more enjoyment out of it.

Which one would I get? Probably the BLRO.

[GradyPhilpott]

My upper limit price-wise for any watch is $10,000, which admittedly doesn't go as far as it did when I got interested in the expensive watches.

I don't care at all about value retention, because I'm not selling and my heirs can figure that part out.

So, I buy Rolex because I like them and while I used to only buy new, I now look for good deals on used older watches, including Rolex.

It's nice that Rolex does retain value, but it's not why I buy Rolex.

[Oxfordian]

Originally Posted by macrowatch

Give me a panda Daytona for 10k sticker and 0 residual value, and id still buy on looks alone. Give me an Omega SMP with those wavy line dials at 7k sticker but 10k secondary, and I still wouldn’t buy it.

All of this just to say, panda Daytona is soooo good in design. Maybe not worth the crazy secondary, but it’s a great looking watch. Just add a silver steel dial like the 519 and the ability to Easily swap to OF strap...would be perfection.

I'd take the Seamaster over the Daytona every time, for me the SMP is the nicer watch. Sorry.

[Ihatecheese]

The retention of the 2nd hand prices allows me to take a punt in a Rolex where I'd be more wary with other brands. It's frustrating losing many $ when selling GO, Zenith, Hublot as my tastes changed. With Rolex I can sell without losing much and gaining the experience.

If the Rolex hadn't gone thru their instagram hype then probably they'd be as popular as 5-10 yr ago. Another choice of watch with lots of brand recognition.
Its all cyclical, trends will come and go. Just see how Instagram is being replaced by tiktok for a large amount of the population, going by the posts they have 0 interest in Swiss watches besides inferred success of the kids.

[captJON]

honestly i buy the design and how comfortable they wear and sometimes functionality