Millennials asking questions

[zetaplus93]

Originally Posted by RolexNorth

I'd answer right back to a millennial why do you need to update each successive Apple iPhone when there's not much of a difference from the new one from the previous and the timespan has been less than a year?

The vast majority of millennial I know don’t upgrade every year (usually 2-3 years unless the phone breaks). It’s usually the tech geeks who do that...

But even if they do, iPhones and other smartphones are so useful for them that it’s worth the price of admission. More so than luxury watches that are have little functionality but are great status symbols...

[gliderpilot]

Originally Posted by JacksonStone

That's the same one you posted earlier, in post 112 - the open letter article. Did you mean to post it twice?

Not really, but since I wanted to point a few things from the article out, I included the link again.

It is great to see how some people actually pay attention (that would be you), one of the reasons I like TRF :-)

[theken]

Seems the demographic of PGA professional golfers, multi-millionaire 20-40 year olds, have a great appreciation for Rolex watches. Oh, and add Roger Federer, et al, to that list.

[904VT]

Originally Posted by gliderpilot

While talking watches with different demographics, I can’t help but notice the following opinions over and over again, especially from young educated individuals that are less susceptible to any hype:

1) Why does Rolex produce diving watches that can go to depths humans can’t, when all it does is negatively affect everyday wearability

2) Why would you drill an extra hole in the case (HEW), when the few people that actually need one are unlikely to dive with a $10k+ watch

3) Why would you make brightly bi-coloured bezels, when Rolex needs to project elegance and class

4) Why would you continue to produce so called sports and tool watches, when people doing sports wear Apple, Fitbit, Suunto, etc. and don’t want to worry about their watch while doing so (… substitute your own “is it safe” activity…). In addition, a smart watch provides significantly more functionality.

5) Why does Rolex stick to obsolete looking cases, instead of designing with simple, modern, and elegant curves that project class, exclusivity, and art

6) Why doesn’t Rolex provide display casebacks so that people can actually admire and appreciate the artistic value of their mechanical timepiece

I guess the answer to all of the above is history and tradition. I know only a handful of millennials that care enough about these to give Rolex a serious consideration, though.

Curious how rolex is going to address this problem long term, other than boosting exclusivity through unavailability

What would you do if you were Rolex CEO?

The word on the street is that we should prepare to be shocked by Rolex at Basel this year. I sincerely hope so! Let's see something refreshingly new :-)

Those aren't problems needing to be addressed. You can consider me a millennial for the purpose of this conversation. I'm not sure where these opinions come from, but they sound like

1. The DSSD and other watches can be used for specialized purposes. Some appreciate the technical capabilities needed to produce a watch that can be stress tested for harsh environments (no matter how unrealistic and survive).

2. Same as above. Sound like more comments from

3. Rolex needs to produce nothing, let alone what suits the tastes of those that don't own Rolex and may or may not be ready to spend on a luxury timepiece. Patek offers some nice time only pieces, maybe the hipsters ought to buy those instead. But I'm sure they'd expect them for under $10k

4. Most of the Is it Safe threads, seem troll related. Otherwise, I have some serious doubts about the intelligence level of some posters.

5. Obsolete as in not like Hublot or Bell & Ross?

6. A little better question. Each luxury timepiece manufacture has their own niche. Rolex has never been about showing highly finished movements to impress, but rather practical tough timepieces. The flat metal case backs are rather comfortable and I'd place more usefulness in that feature than clear case backs. Sounds like the mindset of someone still not quite mature enough to realize high-end time pieces are not about showing off.

I'd venture to guess some of those opinions observed are those of collectors very early into the hobby. I'd also, say Rolex and Patek will never make wholesale change for popular opinions. Because as a whole each brand has the ability to influence opinions, while others largely cater to opinions. I think of other brands as shorter-term in their designs and marketing, while Rolex, Patek and some others as market influencers.

None of the above are directly in response to you, just my perspective on the opinions from "millennials" that we are including.

[JacksonStone]

Originally Posted by 904VT

1. The DSSD and other watches can be used for specialized purposes.

I know I'm sounding like a broken record, but for what purpose can a DSSD be used that a Sea-Dweller cannot, assuming that purpose is survivable by a human wearing the watch? I'm not trying to split hairs. I just really can't see any purpose to the watch other than for the ability of Rolex to say, "We can do this." The Sea-Dweller is at least justifiable in that it provides water resistance beyond the Submariner, at depths humans actually can and do dive to; and since those divers are often in a saturation system, the HEV makes sense - notwithstanding the low likelihood of such people wearing a five-figure watch for the job.

It's ultimately moot, since Rolex has been producing the DSSD for a decade, and people are buying it. But since the question was raised, I'm curious if anyone can provide an answer.