PM models appreciate in value more?

[ImmanuelFoods]

Was pondering about Rolex as a store of value and inheritance for future generations.

Does precious metals models appreciate in value more compared to steel? Want to hear from the brothers here!

IMG_2759.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[tkerrmd]

Probably the opposite

[henrylee]

No SS historically appreciate more

[scooba]

Originally Posted by ImmanuelFoods

Was pondering about Rolex as a store of value and inheritance for future generations.

Does precious metals models appreciate in value more compared to steel? Want to hear from the brothers here!

Attachment 850099


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I would say they don't but , I have the Ceramic GMT like yours and gave £8750 for it when they first came out in the UK around 10 years ago ,I also received a free service on another Rolex at the time to get the deal done , What I do know is it won't have lost money , Around the same time I bought a 16610lv for £3200 and that has doubled in value, Both purchased at a Rolex AD in the UK

[Louis (Toronto)]

As a % of original price, SS models appreciate more.

[HL65]

If you meant depreciate - if so then yes for sure!

[beshannon]

Originally Posted by ImmanuelFoods

Was pondering about Rolex as a store of value and inheritance for future generations.

No.

Watches are not investments and the cost of a precious metal watch far outweighs the actual value of the metal.

How long are your future generations willing to wait while your currency depreciates and you falsely believe you have increased value?

[mahefa]

Seems that PM models lose value like BMW's in first three years of ownership. I think buying 3-5 year old platinum model would be a good buy.

[Etschell]

Originally Posted by tkerrmd

Probably the opposite

agreed. i know for sure, based on research i have done, that mid to late 1980s gold subs havent gone up at all adjusted for inflation. likewise the MSRP is very similar in 2017 dollars.

[travisb]

SS appreciates more but if you buy right with PM and hold onto it for a while you will do pretty well.

[THC]

Agree with all, but I would also consider the original purchase as well.. if from an AD, yes, depreciation. If bought very wisely with box and papers from a very reputable DSW type, then depreciation would be far less imo

[peterpl]

Nope. PM will not appreciate more - in fact once you buy new you will lose a tonne of money.

[Rolex addict]

Originally Posted by tkerrmd

Probably the opposite

Yep.

[GoingPlaces]

I wouldn't expect appreciation, but PM will drop faster. SS holds stronger.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[kilyung]

Originally Posted by peterpl

Nope. PM will not appreciate more - in fact once you buy new you will lose a tonne of money.

Not necessarily. I've purchased new and would get my money back on the secondary market. It's all dependent on how much discount you can get up front. Of course that doesn't mean you'll make money.

[KDS777]

Take a SS watch and flatten it with a 10 pound sledgehammer.

Take an 18K Submariner, etc, and do the same.

I can sell the gold watch for its weight on the open market. The SS watch is junk..

[Golfster]

But how much would you have spent and lost with the hammer and each model?

[landroverking]

They haven't for me. I would never buy a PM Rolex new.

[Etschell]

Originally Posted by KDS777

Take a SS watch and flatten it with a 10 pound sledgehammer.

Take an 18K Submariner, etc, and do the same.

I can sell the gold watch for its carat weight on the open market. The SS watch is a paperweight.

if there are 150 grams in a gold sub then youll get 5.3 ounces which is $6,800 at current gold prices. but you wont get that youll get below spot.

you would still lose more under that scenario.

however, my post isnt a this versus that analysis just an observation.

[ImmanuelFoods]

Tks for feedback everyone! I bought mine sub yg 2016 and Gmt yg 2016 at 20,700 usd each at the pre-owned market. Hoping it will return a better price for kids in future. Sorry for not mentioning I'm comparing between pre-owned PM and pre-owned SS models


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ImmanuelFoods]

For the kids

IMG_1624.JPG

[KDS777]

My point was rhetorical.

I don't disagree that the SS watches in the used market have done well as a % of net sale price solely due to a couple of decades of inflation and demand. When it's all said and done however the SS watch as a component of its actual net value is technically worthless under my scenario. If I was to compare acquisition cost (not MSRP) of my gold sub the result would favour PM by far.

If the market for the product no longer exists or price discovery revises itself (geez I sound like a bankster here) then you have to fall back on the asset break up value.

Go to The Louvre in Paris or the Museum of Antiquities in Cairo........there is neither a fiat money exhibit nor a SS one.

[Etschell]

Originally Posted by KDS777

My point was rhetorical.

I don't disagree that the SS watches in the used market have done well as a % of net sale price solely due to a couple of decades of inflation and demand. When it's all said and done however the SS watch as a component of its actual net value is technically worthless under my scenario.

If the market for the product no longer exists or price discovery revises itself (geez I sound like a bankster here) then you have to fall back on the asset break up value.

Go to Louvre in Paris or the Museum of Antiquities in Cairo........there is neither a fiat money exhibit nor a SS one.

sure i get it it. everything is worthless other than hard assets and steel isnt worth anything.

that said let's be realistic about it. we live in a fiat currency credit bubble society. now if that changes gold per ounce would be worth far more than the current price and owning a gold rolex for its value in underlying gold ounces would be worth it tremendously.

[Will1979]

Take a sledgehammer to the Mona Lisa and a gold Rolex. Boom, Gold Rolex was a better investment. I always base my buying decisions on how they'd stand up to a sledgehammer.

[Mick P]

Originally Posted by mahefa

Seems that PM models lose value like BMW's in first three years of ownership. I think buying 3-5 year old platinum model would be a good buy.

Your credit rating is going to slide.

[ImmanuelFoods]

For the kids IMG_9896.jpgIMG_2741.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[904VT]

No, quite the opposite as others have said. SS are an okay store of value if you choose the right models, but I think you would get much more utility just enjoying them

[AK797]

Originally Posted by kilyung

Not necessarily. I've purchased new and would get my money back on the secondary market. It's all dependent on how much discount you can get up front. Of course that doesn't mean you'll make money.

Yes, exactly, while some SS tend to rise and hold their value more, PMs can be bought at far greater discounts, up to 30% often, which can negate the initial fall in value, and in the UK if you had bought say a YG GMTc ten years ago you would be looking to sell at 40-50% profit now, due to price rises since.

[dominic.warren]

Originally Posted by KDS777

Take a SS watch and flatten it with a 10 pound sledgehammer.

Take an 18K Submariner, etc, and do the same.

I can sell the gold watch for its weight on the open market. The SS watch is junk..

Really!!! Lol I must say I see your point. But for the upfront cost of each piece you can smash several SS before you get to the cost of the all Gold one.

[ras47]

It seems to me that PM is softer than SS and more prone to scuffs/scratches. I'm no expert, but I'd expect SS to hold up over time better. So in 10 years or so I would expect SS watches to be in better condition. Of course that's all moot if we're talking about strictly collectors' watches that sit in their boxes in a safe.