It’s real simple... Tudor is the new Rolex

[Old Expat Beast]

Originally Posted by adnjoo

I always feel like Tudor products are holding back a bit though. Like they can’t upset the balance of the universe. Whereas Rolex you know you’re holding the absolute perfection or distillation to whatever purpose the watch was designed for sub/Explorer/gmt/datejust.

Some would say the "jewelleryfication", if that's a word.

[Polarbears]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

Some would say the "jewelleryfication", if that's a word.

I agree with that. I don’t really desire the Rolex Pepsi as it doesn’t look...Less than perfect. I imagine in 50 years the 2018 Rolex Pepsi will largely look just as pristine. I don’t see it gaining character like vintage watches, Tudor however will imo.

[10klakes]

Originally Posted by Polarbears

I believe a company with the resources of Rolex can increase production to meet demand. I don’t believe they can’t keep up with demand.

As a business owner I can understand how delicate and difficult it can be to increase production while maintain quality. In fact, I have often thought just how hard it must be to fill the positions at Rolex. To mfg/produce such a high quality wrist watch consistently.... its mind blowing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JR16]

Originally Posted by DKRanger22

It amazes me that Rolex releases one new reference and the whole world gets turned upside-down. I look at it from this perspective: with this one release (BLRO SS) coupled with the Tudor Pepsi, Rolex has offered something for everyone. We have options to buy in-house produced Pepsi GMT models ranging anywhere from $3,900 to $30K. Precious metal or stainless steel. Jubilee or Oyster style bracelet. Ceramic or aluminum bezel. We spend 11 months of the year speculating what will come each and every Basel, griping about lack of options. And when we finally get what we've been craving, somehow, Rolex is conspiring against us? Give me a break.

Ha! I’ve been thinking this for 2 days now after reading also many BLRO-bashing posts.

Originally Posted by jstan9

Also, am I the only TRF member who thinks the blue dial WM BLRO is a cool reference? I’ll never be able to afford it, but I think it’s beautiful.

The more I look at it,the more I like. In person it’s prob even better.... but I’d rather spend my $ on the SS


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[linesiders]

Rolex can move up, charge a little more, make same money, and better handle the pressure of the Smart Watch.

I collect old Tudor and Rolex, have not bought a new one though close a few times, but I am getting the Tudor BB GMT.



One of many

[airpeace]

it's the status that it represents, my friend

[Polarbears]

Originally Posted by linesiders

Rolex can move up, charge a little more, make same money, and better handle the pressure of the Smart Watch.

I collect old Tudor and Rolex, have not bought a new one though close a few times, but I am getting the Tudor BB GMT.



One of many

That is gorgeous. Love the Rose.

[No SUBctitute]

Originally Posted by The Joker

What's the new Tudor then?

Christopher Ward? It is a watch company started in the UK but now makes its in-house movement in Switzerland.

Sounds like that former British company, Wilsdorf and Davis.

[No SUBctitute]

Originally Posted by 10klakes

To mfg/produce such a high quality wrist watch consistently.... its mind blowing.

I'm not that impressed it can produce a high quality Sub. It retails for almost $9,000. They make enough to produce a very high quality watch and not have some of the QC problems we see here.

[HogwldFLTR]

Really IMHO, Rolex was a tool and jewelry watch manufacturer; they weren't cheap and they were waterproof, durable, and reliable. How distorted is perception now when a $4-5K Tudor is regarded as cheap and second class because it hasn't been turned into an over priced piece of jewelry lacking the newest refinements of the Rolex line. Rolex is no longer a tool watch manufacturer. Yes their watches are capable but they're overpriced and in general worn as jewelry with owners worried about ever blemish affecting their "investment." Of course Rolex watches were never disposable watches like most watches on the market. They were worn for their ruggedness and durability in situations where their durability was required.

Today Tudor is every bit as durable as Rolex for half the cost. It isn't as expensive a piece of Jewelry but at the price point it still is expensive. Many still worry about their Tudors as much as their Rolex watches. Some may think that because Tudor has watches that look and function similarly to the 5 digit Rolexes that they've taken over the Rolex of yesteryear role but the truth is they haven't. They are a less expensive Jewelry watch. The day of the mechanical Tool watch is gone due to the cost of acquiring a worthy watch. Those days are gone never to be seen again.

[No SUBctitute]

Originally Posted by Old Expat Beast

It goes back to the days when Rolex got in trouble for claiming they invented the self-winding watch, when they actually just invented the "rotor" self-winding watch.

Great history lesson! Thanks!

[Dr.Smellody]

Maybe.... with that, they are making exclusivity. They make discontinued, important models from the past even more desirable.

I live what they are doing.

And guess what? We will keep buying! You guys will buy off wait lists and I'll buy five years later at a reasonable cost.

[samshah]

Interesting thread overall.

Would Tudor have more “prestige” if it retained value as strong as the Rolex professional models? I don’t know the exact percentage but the non-professionals (DJ, OPs) could be comprable to Tudor depreciation?

The more I think about it, the value retention aspect of this hobby does take a bunch of wind out of the sails. After this Basel, I almost want to consolidate and sit on the cash until things balance out.

[No SUBctitute]

Originally Posted by Polarbears

Correct. But it’s now the aspirational brand not the starter brand.

I disagree. I saw an interview with a Tudor exec in which he pointed out that the 1926 line had a lower price point ($1650-$1850, I think) so that more people could afford it.

[jrs146]

Originally Posted by sensui

Greedy AD this...greedy Grey seller that.....then comes the complaints of Rolex restricting supply...yet everyone loves how their Rolex holds/appreciates in value....it is what it is folks....who can fault ADs and grey sellers making a living maximizing profit. Everyone wants to have their cake and eat it too....but that's not always how things play out.

Well said my friend. Actually I’m way more frustrated with the complainers criticizing and judging “flippers”, AD’s, Rolex... pretty much everyone. I always point out the fact that AD’s are way more frustrated than your average joe crying about how he can’t get a Daytona. But he’s so entitled he things if he can’t get one than everyone else is to blame. Put yourself in the AD’s shoes for one minute. They have millions of dollars invested and their cases are empty during the holiday season. They can’t sell watches to their best customers who keep their lights on because inventory is so low, and on top of that 10,000 other customers, who have never even purchased $5.00 with of product from them are complaining that they won’t take their name down on a list.

End rant.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Polarbears]

Originally Posted by No SUBctitute

I disagree. I saw an interview with a Tudor exec in which he pointed out that the 1926 line had a lower price point ($1650-$1850, I think) so that more people could afford it.

#1. I don’t think there are many 1926 fans
#2. $1650-$1850 I believe are for ladies sizes they go up in price with size
#3. In 1980 a Rolex Submariner was $950(adjusted for inflation is around $2600)

[MinMay]

I don't think Tudor will get any respect. In the end, Rolex is the king in name recognition. Everyone knows Rolex. They don't care about Tudor and most will look elsewhere.

Ask your friend, neighbors, coworkers, etc...if they heard of Tudor :)

I like anything that looks good, but I prefer Rolex :)

[run23]

I’m almost certainly more likely to buy a new Tudor (probably BB58 at this point) over a new Rolex. Older Rolex’s on the other hand- I’m all in.

[Polarbears]

Originally Posted by MinMay

I don't think Tudor will get any respect. In the end, Rolex is the king in name recognition. Everyone knows Rolex. They don't care about Tudor and most will look elsewhere.

Ask your friend, neighbors, coworkers, etc...if they heard of Tudor :)

I like anything that looks good, but I prefer Rolex :)

You don’t want them to have heard of Tudor. You want the Rolex experience without the judgement.

[codecow]

Originally Posted by Polarbears

I understand. But how can you aspire to purchase something that doesn’t exist? How do they manage to make enough Tudors to more than meet demand but fail at doing so with Rolex?

Probably because not that many people want a Tudor.

[HogwldFLTR]

Originally Posted by Polarbears

You don’t want them to have heard of Tudor. You want the Rolex experience without the judgement.

Can't have the Rolex experience without a Rolex!!

[Polarbears]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

Can't have the Rolex experience without a Rolex!!

A taste.

[Polarbears]

Originally Posted by codecow

Probably because not that many people want a Tudor.

And that is going to change as more buyers are priced out or wait listed out.

[codecow]

Originally Posted by Polarbears

And that is going to change as more buyers are priced out or wait listed out.

When I was young a made those compromises and regretted it. If you like the Tudor GMT there’s nothing wrong with that. Buying it as a replacement for the genuine article will not be satisfying in my experience.

[NeoAnderson]

GlAd im happy with the watch I have now (sd4k) and the other one I want (DD40 yg) is fairly easy to obtain. The Simple life is so nice!

[Polarbears]

Originally Posted by codecow

When I was young a made those compromises and regretted it. If you like the Tudor GMT there’s nothing wrong with that. Buying it as a replacement for the genuine article will not be satisfying in my experience.

I understand your point and in truth I prefer the Tudor Pepsi. I like the BLNR the most from Rolex. For some reason I see pink and purple with the Rolex Pepsi.

[Hogtown Fatty]

Originally Posted by MinMay

I don't think Tudor will get any respect. In the end, Rolex is the king in name recognition. Everyone knows Rolex. They don't care about Tudor and most will look elsewhere.

Ask your friend, neighbors, coworkers, etc...if they heard of Tudor :)

I like anything that looks good, but I prefer Rolex :)

believe it or not, brand recognition (or desirability) aren't every single persons chief criteria when buying a watch.

[codecow]

Originally Posted by Polarbears

I understand your point and in truth I prefer the Tudor Pepsi. I like the BLNR the most from Rolex. For some reason I see pink and purple with the Rolex Pepsi.

Fair enough, the other option is getting a used 16710. The bracelet and clasp probably aren’t as nice but it’s a Rolex.

[Polarbears]

Originally Posted by codecow

Fair enough, the other option is getting a used 16710. The bracelet and clasp probably aren’t as nice but it’s a Rolex.

I’ve never been a Pepsi fan. I have zero Pepsi desire. I like and have subs and explorers and working on getting a Milgauss and BLNR.

My thoughts are based on what’s happening with both brands releasing a Pepsi and how most will not be able to purchase the Rolex, but the Tudor is going to be plentiful. That to me was done by design. This is why I believe Tudor is the new Rolex.

[GB-man]

I love Tudor nearly as much as Rolex I just wish they would stick to Tudors illustrious history and not try and fuse Tudor and Rolex history into modern offerings.

For that reason the Pelagos is still my favorite Tudor. Original and a nod to Tudors past.

The snowflake is a grail Tudor for me and I don’t think we will ever get one in steel 40mm. Meantime I’ll keep looking and enjoy a Pelagos.