What does Rolex stand for?

[ellio32]

One of the common theories regarding limited availability of Rolex sport models (at retail at least) has to do with Rolex intentionally restricting supply to remain exclusivity. I am not suggesting that this isn’t the case, but wouldn’t that be going against what Rolex stands for? Out of curiosity do those of you that know the history of Rolex think Hans Wilsdorf would have supported restricting supply?


Cheers,

Ell

[actionkwj]

Doesn’t matter. It’s a different company today and Wilsdorf is long gone.

If he still wanted to develop tool watches, he’d have surely gone to work for Seiko or Casio. Today Rolex is a mid-level luxury watch manufacturer that makes close to a million watches per year.

Is that restricting supply when Patek makes less than 20,000 watches per year? Me thinks not.

Rolex is a mass produced item with an amazing brand identity. That’s their value proposition and Wilsdorf would probably be proud his little company was still in business in the digital age.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[beshannon]

Originally Posted by ellio32

wouldn’t that be going against what Rolex stands for?

How so?

Rolex sells high end luxury jewelry. Not everyone is supposed to be able to buy or even afford such items.

[ellio32]

Originally Posted by beshannon

How so?

Rolex sells high end luxury jewelry. Not everyone is supposed to be able to buy or even afford such items.

Fair enough. I just never thought of Rolex brand identity as being about high end luxury jewelry. I more so thought of Rolex as being focused on creating amazing watches that are reliable, built to last, and of course beautiful. I always viewed
Rolex as the equivalent of what Apple is in the tech world.

[beshannon]

Originally Posted by ellio32

Fair enough. I just never thought of Rolex brand identity as being about high end luxury jewelry. I more so thought of Rolex as being focused on creating amazing watches that are reliable, built to last, and of course beautiful. I always viewed
Rolex as the equivalent of what Apple is in the tech world.

A former CEO of Rolex was asked how the watch business was doing and he replied "Rolex is not in the watch business we are in the luxury business".

People can perceive whatever they wish. No one needs a Rolex. They are desired and the more that desire them drives up their status, supply and cost.

Anyone who happens to like a Rolex watch has to accept this truth.

[ellio32]

Originally Posted by actionkwj

Doesn’t matter. It’s a different company today and Wilsdorf is long gone.

If he still wanted to develop tool watches, he’d have surely gone to work for Seiko or Casio. Today Rolex is a mid-level luxury watch manufacturer that makes close to a million watches per year.

Is that restricting supply when Patek makes less than 20,000 watches per year? Me thinks not.

Rolex is a mass produced item with an amazing brand identity. That’s their value proposition and Wilsdorf would probably be proud his little company was still in business in the digital age.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Good points. However, IMO I think it likely matters to the company more
than we think it does. Also, whether or not the watch community agrees,
I think that Rolex still views themselves as making tool watches.

[77T]

Originally Posted by ellio32

Out of curiosity do those of you that know the history of Rolex think Hans Wilsdorf would have supported restricting supply?

Hans’ actions of outsourcing parts production to multiple vendors - and sometimes more than one vendor for certain items like dials - would suggest he did all in his power to expand production of finished watches.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[MrEleven]

I dont think they are restricting supply think its down to rolex being a brand that appeals to the poor man who gets his first bit of money and want a luxury item.
I have quite a few friends who are all on waiting lists for rolexs dont want to sound mean but there not well off in the slightest but have worked hard and saved for a rolex. Rolex is a hype brand and appealing to people who want to be noticed and look wealthy. Trouble is todays generation all want to look wealthy instead of putting the work in to actually get wealthy.

[ellio32]

Originally Posted by 77T

Hans’ actions of outsourcing parts production to multiple vendors - and sometimes more than one vendor for certain items like dials - would suggest he did all in his power to expand production of finished watches.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Great point. I was thinking along these same lines.

[Zakalwe]

Rolex stands for the manufacture of high quality, tough, accurate mechanical timepieces that people aspire to own.

The italics are for emphasis. How do you keep a product that is made in vast quantities of not far off a million units per year aspirational? Clever marketing is one way. Creating the appearance of scarcity is another.

[Dr. Robert]

A Rolex is a Rolex, the rest are just watches.

[ellio32]

Originally Posted by Zakalwe

Rolex stands for the manufacture of high quality, tough, accurate mechanical timepieces that people aspire to own.

The italics are for emphasis. How do you keep a product that is made in vast quantities of not far off a million units per year aspirational? Clever marketing is one way. Creating the appearance of scarcity is another.

Great point. Thanks for the response.

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by ellio32

One of the common theories regarding limited availability of Rolex sport models (at retail at least) has to do with Rolex intentionally restricting supply to remain exclusivity. I am not suggesting that this isn’t the case, but wouldn’t that be going against what Rolex stands for? Out of curiosity do those of you that know the history of Rolex think Hans Wilsdorf would have supported restricting supply?


Cheers,

Ell

There is zero evidence Rolex is intentionally restricting supply.

There is significant evidence that demand has increased dramatically whilst supply has not.

[Brew]

I think Hans would say, "They all should be buying DJs anyway. They're who it was made for."

[SOG DIVER]

Having put 49 years on a 1680 red Submariner as the original owner,
I have owned only Submariners. For that purpose, I consider this reference a very
tough albeit upscale tool watch. In the late 1960s-Rolex sport stainless watches were not cheap, but
still affordable if one desired a lifetime utility investment. Combat use of a tool watch tends to place the owner
and the watch in a time capsule. The view is nice, if somewhat seriously exclusive...........