Would you rather see Rolex go up market and more exclusive or higher production and w

[thenewrick]

Would you rather see Rolex cut ADs by a large portion and shift to a higher end boutique experience, produce fewer watches, increase quality and price, enhance the waitlist phenomenon.

Or would you rather see them double production, increase availability, minimize price increases, and try to create a system where more watches are available to more people, and keep the quality where it is now and get away from gemsetting and the fancier stuff and go back to its tooltastic roots?

$20,000 plain Daytona with 3 year waitlist or $15,000 Daytona you can walk in and buy anytime?

[minute_man]

If they were to go with option #1, they need to bring MORE, much more to the table.

[padi56]

No nothing wrong with Rolex now, except all this AD relationship stuff which many think now you must miss the feet of the AD before he/she allows you to buy a watch from there retail shop.

[HHIslander]

As a customer, I’d prefer the latter. If I was on the board, I’d change nothing or very little.

[Saransh]

I think its fine where it stands . If only they could fix the rolex crown on the crown itself lol

We have 10 pieces in total and only my gmt LN has an upwards facing “ correct “ crown

[Jackie Daytona]

I’ll live with the middle ground where it stands.

My reason being creating the sense of luxury or exclusivity is really what keeps them alive and able to provide the Rolex brand of their watches as they currently are.

Mechanical time pieces have been surviving to some degree on this basis since the quartz crisis. Take the idea of luxury and exclusivity away I’m not sure the outlook going forwards is the same. Their is a sense of nostalgia for one group but I’m not sure that’s a large group to appeal to at a give or take $10k entry point.

I would like to say option 1 but believe those days have passed.

[Hollie_Rollie]

I prefer the days of 2015 when the hobby was fun, you could buy models at reasonable prices that actually reflected their true value. A BLRO is not a 18k watch. Heck even DJ are ridiculously priced. Laughable


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Midlifegoals]

To maintain the massive market share that Rolex enjoy, they have to produce watches and sell them to the masses.

Personally, I think there should be enough supply to maintain certain maximum wait times on certain models. For example- OPs and DJs shouldn’t require a wait of more than 1-2 months. Subs, GMTs, YMs- maybe a maximum 3-6 month wait. Daytonas, maybe a year max. All models should occasionally be available for a lucky chap to purchase them on a walk-in- that keeps the dream alive in the watch-world online, and creates long-term brand loyalty.

If Rolex did away with their independent AD network with the new Bucherer purchase, they could easily create the above environment if production could increase enough. I don’t see that happening (in the short term, at least), so it’s really hard to pull off since I feel positive that Rolex has no clue what the “real” waitlists look like in their AD network. I assume ADs just get what they can, and what they are pretty sure they can sell quickly- Rolex hasn’t a clue how long folks wait for their pieces down to the AD level.

TLDR: my point is that they need to keep the market in a state of “wanting” while also avoiding customers from seeing any need to ‘go grey’ and lose that customer’s purchase. That means more supply and clear directives for ADs not to put everything that’s for sale in the case out front.

[thenewrick]

So far it seems people are very happy with the current Rolex retail climate, quality, and pricing. Even though many complain about all 3.

[Driver8]

I’m a watch fan - I’m not a flipper, not an “investor”, I don’t give a damn about “flexing”, and I have zero interest in resale value. I also don’t care how many other people own the same watches I do. I just want to be able to buy the watches I like and want to wear.

So option 2 would suit me absolutely fine. Or in other words, go back to like it was 15-20 years ago.

[codecow]

I think they’re doing really well now.

If I could change anything; I think I’d want numbered limited editions with < 500 pieces on an infrequent basis. Maybe one limited edition per year, possibly even tied to a particular region, boutique/retailer, etc…

[Jackie Daytona]

Originally Posted by thenewrick

So far it seems people are very happy with the current Rolex retail climate, quality, and pricing. Even though many complain about all 3.

I think those unhappy will always be the loudest about it. Especially in todays social media/influencer/ fomo sort or mentality that goes around due to the prevalence and accessibility of it all. Everyone wants instant gratification.

I would like the old days, but the reality I believe is that the mechanical watch industry doesn’t fully survive if it goes that route. So maybe not fully restricted like a year a two ago but sort of current state with milder availability, sort of needs the middle ground IMO.

[Marcjvr]

If Rolex prices go to the moon the “is it safe” threads on here will just increase

[stephentross]

I like option 2. Keep people interested.

[SDR581]

I can see Option 1 more likely

Bucherer offers some high end haut movements. I think they will perfect those and start to offer more complicated pieces to move even further up market.

They might cut production numbers by at least half. I would also reduce the need for training new watch makers.

[jcdevoe26]

Originally Posted by Driver8

I’m a watch fan - I’m not a flipper, not an “investor”, I don’t give a damn about “flexing”, and I have zero interest in resale value. I also don’t care how many other people own the same watches I do. I just want to be able to buy the watches I like and want to wear.

So option 2 would suit me absolutely fine. Or in other words, go back to like it was 15-20 years ago.

you said it perfectly....

[MONTANTK]

Pump up production. I don’t want a Rolex for the clout. I want one because I like their watches.

[GoingPlaces]

Originally Posted by thenewrick

Would you rather see Rolex cut ADs by a large portion and shift to a higher end boutique experience, produce fewer watches, increase quality and price, enhance the waitlist phenomenon.

Or would you rather see them double production, increase availability, minimize price increases, and try to create a system where more watches are available to more people, and keep the quality where it is now and get away from gemsetting and the fancier stuff and go back to its tooltastic roots?

$20,000 plain Daytona with 3 year waitlist or $15,000 Daytona you can walk in and buy anytime?

Increase quality how? Overall Rolex is pretty robust for a mechanical watch. Finishing? Open casebacks? I mean Rolex has tremendous overhead, one million watches a year or more. Cut back and what? Shut down factories and lay offs? What would be their gain? Re-shift one of the most successful luxury businesses in history?

I don't have a problem with raising prices to thin out some of these absurd secondary market margins. This might bring some control to market and make some references attainable.

Why would anyone pick a 20K Daytona with a 3 year wait over a 15K buy now?

[thenewrick]

It'll be interesting to see what their new factory produces. I could see it making parts to lower cost of repairs and warranty service and lower production costs but not actually produce more final watches to keep final production numbers low. Maybe faster turnaround times for service and more flexibility for production schedules. Perhaps more variants. I think we will see more two tone and precious metal stuff. More gemset stuff. Higher margins while keeping bread and butter references steady production numbers. I forsee consistent price hikes as well.

Maybe an increase in two tone datejust as a priority build. I've seen those being pushed hard and they're high margin pieces.

There are always ways to increase quality.

Increased finishing, packaging, improvement movements, more quality control, more engineering etc. The Daytona in particular badly needs a movement update to high beat rate and decimal chronograph. To pull that off and keep the same power reserve and case thickness would cost big $.

Or do people just want the cheapest, most available "Panda" looking Daytona they can get their hands on?

[alphadweller]

Option B for me.

I don't value high horology enough to prefer it to high-end. One HH piece in my collection is enough, I had to have it, ticked the box and I love it, but that's it. I'm not after more HH pieces. These things tend to be less robust, more dainty for daily wear.

Also, I'd like more availability at Rolex ADs, like it used to be in the old days.

[Sauzo]

Originally Posted by Hollie_Rollie

I prefer the days of 2015 when the hobby was fun, you could buy models at reasonable prices that actually reflected their true value. A BLRO is not a 18k watch. Heck even DJ are ridiculously priced. Laughable


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

^^This. Buying from Rolex ADs is not a fun experience. Have to kiss tookus and pretend to be buddies if you don't care for the SA. It's like you owe them your first born child for the chance to spend your hard earned money with them. Bring back the days of being able to get a Rolex to celebrate a life achievement.

[BraveBold]

They already do both. They have done a great job marketing distinctions between different watches - so despite selling 1m units, their most desirable watches are produced in quantities more akin to up market brands (eg AP).

They get the best of both worlds so doubt they’ll adjust strategy.

The disruption is the intermediaries grabbing supply and hoarding (slowing the already slow distribution further). This doesn’t change total supply but because of intent (taking profits over volume) and the existing overall supply/demand imbalance, the slowing of supply is price discriminating between those willing to wait and those who a) can pay more easily or b) are willing to pay more for “other” reasons.

Creates a vicious cycle that temporarily (temporary being measurable in years) elevates prices overall.

Best strategy (selfish) is for Rolex to crackdown on grey sellers and ADs that facilitate.

[kieselguhr]

I think there should be standard models that you can buy off the shelf. Things like Submariners, Datejusts, GMTs, etc.

Then I see no wrong with having special/upscale models that are lower production numbers. Maybe unique features of standard models etc

[Rolexken]

Just keep going as Rolex are now and let market forces determine prices and availability imo.

[Mystro]

If Rolex listen to what their customers wanted, they would be an Omega or Breitling sitting in the cases.

This isn’t a dig on Omega like brands but that is what you buy if you want to walk in a AD and purchase a fine automatic watch. You may even get to negotiate a discount.
I suspect those brands are a better fit for many of todays current Rolex customer base that can’t tolerate the vetting system top upscale products require.

[garyk]

option 3, doesn't matter what we think or prefer...

[georgew]

Originally Posted by Mystro

If Rolex listen to what their customers wanted, they would be an Omega or Breitling sitting in the cases.

This isn’t a dig on Omega like brands but that is what you buy if you want to walk in a AD and purchase a fine automatic watch. You may even get to negotiate a discount.
I suspect those brands are a better fit for many of todays current Rolex customer base that can’t tolerate the vetting system top upscale products require.

seems pretty accurate assessment to me

[Rolexken]

Originally Posted by Mystro

If Rolex listen to what their customers wanted, they would be an Omega or Breitling sitting in the cases.

This isn’t a dig on Omega like brands but that is what you buy if you want to walk in a AD and purchase a fine automatic watch. You may even get to negotiate a discount.
I suspect those brands are a better fit for many of todays current Rolex customer base that can’t tolerate the vetting system top upscale products require.

I do agree but that description applied to Rolex as well until about 5 years ago.

[Sauzo]

Originally Posted by Rolexken

I do agree but that description applied to Rolex as well until about 5 years ago.

Agree. Not sure I'd call Rolex a top upscale product. They are mass produced goods, nothing like a true handmade watch. They just got marketing down to a science. I do still love my 16570 polar explorer 2.

[brandrea]

Originally Posted by Driver8

I’m a watch fan - I’m not a flipper, not an “investor”, I don’t give a damn about “flexing”, and I have zero interest in resale value. I also don’t care how many other people own the same watches I do. I just want to be able to buy the watches I like and want to wear.

So option 2 would suit me absolutely fine. Or in other words, go back to like it was 15-20 years ago.

I’m the same. Appointments required just to discuss your “interest”, no real watches to try on and buy right then and there ….

God we must be old