The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Old 12 March 2010, 04:23 PM   #121
Green Arrow
"TRF" Member
 
Green Arrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 1,060
I've owned a number of brands....

I've owned 6 Rolexes, 1 JLC, 4 GPs, 3 Breitlings, 6Panerais, and a host of Seiko, Ball, Luminox, Timex and on and on.

I've recently sold my Deepsea, and my gold GMT Master II C, but would consider the new SS Submariner if it comes out, or even the TT. Love the look, the maxi-dial, the glidelock, and Rolex's durability. Don't like how small the dials are, even on the Deepsea.

I have a Super Avenger now. Really durable, large enough sub-dials for my almost 60 year old eyes to see. Love the accuracy, comfort of the watch despite the weight on the Pro II bracelet.

The only thing I don't like is that it is probably just a little too big and a lot too flashy. The same watch in brushed SS would probably be better. The COSC timekeeping is just as good as Rolex, and you get the date, the chrono, the timer bezel, and lume about on par with the better Rolexes.

My new Seiko auto 200 meter SRP 043 is a $300 watch and I put a waterproof Chronissimo strap on it. Keeping as good of time as either of the "better" brands, and the lumibrite lume blows both of the other brands into the weeds. Finely ratcheting timing bezel, and the hardlex crystal seems just fine. Makes me wonder a little bit as to why I ever bought a Deepsea, or worse, a gold GMT Master II C. For a daily use watch this inexpensive Seiko is just as good or better than the others if you don't need the chrono, and you really don't. I think if one can get past not looking "rich" with a Rolex on your wrist, a Seiko Marine Master is probably the best all around sport watch you could buy for less than any of these other brands.

The Panerais are a style comment and a group of really terrific people who share a passion. I never get the feeling of durability out of my Panerais that I get out of Rolex, Breitling, Seiko, and Omega.

I've had Omega Speedmasters, POs and PO chronos. Great watches except for the stupid helium release knob on the case.

If I'm buying a watch for showing to other people, I go with Rolex. Well recognized, far more durable than either my JLC or GP experiences except the Seahawk II Pro XL, which is also fabulous.

If I'm buying a watch purely for function, great lume, great legibility, I'd go Seiko and probably a Marine Master.

From there, every single one of these brands makes truly excellent watches, and if we all had to live with any one of these brands we'd still be incredibly lucky. I don't think there are any wrong answers here.
Green Arrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 March 2010, 07:27 AM   #122
Ceb
"TRF" Member
 
Ceb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: UK
Watch: SD, Sub's & GMT's
Posts: 157
I've owned a few Breitlings over the years and have been an avid follower of the brand for some time, Its with regret I have to say I'm disappointed with the new models too big, too heavy and too much polished steel, therefore I've decided to keep my Titanium Chrono Avenger Auto and PX my Crosswind Special (to big and heavy, I must be getting old!!) for a Rolex Submariner, which IMO is a probably the most classic watch design ever, but it's all down to the individual......we all have a choice....
Ceb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25 March 2010, 02:07 PM   #123
AAMD11
"TRF" Member
 
AAMD11's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Real Name: Illusive Man
Location: NYC
Watch: Omega Worldtimer
Posts: 590
Breitling has fast become one of my favorite brands. I am looking into the new Colt GMT they announced in Basel. I like its simplicity and functionality, not too big not too common looking (like Rolex) I for one think Rolex is overrated, too conservative for my taste, very minimal difference in styles on the series Rolex has. When I got my new Rado Sintra I was considering the Colt GMT they had there as well. The Rado was actually pricier at 3,500 while the GMT was about 2,800. However, when I saw that a new Colt GMT was announced I decided to get the Rado, very sleek and formal watch I must say. When I get the Colt it will be my everyday watch.
AAMD11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26 March 2010, 05:27 AM   #124
uracowman
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 461
Isn't this argument really more of personal choice? Not to offend anyone but are you buying the watch because YOU like it or are you buying it so other people go "wow that guy is wearing a rolex!". I mean...come on....

I currently own a Breitling but am in the market to add a Rolex to my collection so I am not by any means biased towards any brand since I love both. For those who say Breitling has a inferior internal mechanical movement system, or doesn't have the "prestige" of Rolex, I think that is your inner Rolex ego speaking. This is absurd in my opinion. My Breitling is incredibly accurate and the last time I checked, both brands meet and exceed COSC certifications for accuracy. The quality and attention to detail are spectacular as well.

In my opinion (OPINION, don't flame me), people believe Rolex is far superior because of a brilliant advertising campaign they have used over the years and people associate Rolex as symbolizing achievement. In reality, Rolex from a technical perspective probably isn't as good of a watch as say a Panerai but people believe so because the company has done a great job over the years with it's price structure and intelligent advertising.

This brings up the age old trick: Blindfold someone with a $1000 bottle of wine and a $10 bottle of wine and ask which is the $1000 dollar bottle?
uracowman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26 March 2010, 05:06 PM   #125
multimedia
"TRF" Member
 
multimedia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Real Name: Joe
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,835
Quote:
Originally Posted by uracowman View Post
In my opinion (OPINION, don't flame me), people believe Rolex is far superior because of a brilliant advertising campaign they have used over the years and people associate Rolex as symbolizing achievement. In reality, Rolex from a technical perspective probably isn't as good of a watch as say a Panerai but people believe so because the company has done a great job over the years with it's price structure and intelligent advertising.
Oh oh, watch out!

I can't say anything regarding the technical side, (I've only had this hobby for a couple of years, and though I always try and want to learn as much as I possibly can - I know that there are guys out there, that are far more superior on this particular subject) but I fully agree with what you are saying about the marketing part. Just look at other luxury goods like for example LV. They are in my opinion the pinnacle of successful marketing campaigns - and have been so for many many years.

It's like that old saying; "people don't buy products, they buy stories"


Another thing that always strikes me as being rather funny, and forgive me because this has probably nothing to do with the org. message in this thread. But sometimes I wonder how much part of a companies fame and success comes from the "dark side", and how much impact this really have on the popularity of the brand?

Just take China as an example. If you ask most people here (the ones that can afford it), what brand they will buy when buying a new bag - they would say LV. Which brand is the most copied brand in the world, and where do these fake products come from? China of course. So year after year, they have been producing these fake bags and spread them all over the country (and the world of course) And now when more and more people here get the money to buy a real bag, what brand to they go for - answer above, but here it is again, the LV.

It's like they've been bombarded with these bags and logos for so many years (being fake though) so now when they have the money, they want the real deal... I'm just wondering if it's the same deal with Rolex when it comes to buying watches? I know I'm talking about one specific case here, and that this perhaps has nothing to do with the rest of the world. But I always found this a bit odd, because I thought that since such a big part of the LV bags one see on the streets over here, is fake, people who can afford to buy the real deal, would instead go for something else rather than with the brand so many people associate with the word fake.

I'm definitely not saying it's marketing, but it's an interesting thing to toss around when talking about why certain brands are so popular.

Cheers,
Joe
__________________
"Design is not just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works." - S.J.
multimedia is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3 April 2010, 03:19 PM   #126
CKLinLA
"TRF" Member
 
CKLinLA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Real Name: KL
Location: ... Los Angeles
Watch: Explorer II Black
Posts: 1,434
Quote:
Originally Posted by multimedia View Post
... .... I wonder how much part of a companies fame and success comes from the "dark side", ... ... ...
Joe


This a new and interesting idea/viewpoint to me. I do understand that Rolex (or other luxury brand) would not want their stuff pirated, but in some round about way they may reap some benefit down the road....
__________________
Explorer II 1655; Day Date 1803; Submariner 14060; Deepsea Sea-Dweller 116660;
5-Digit Datejusts; Perpetual Date 1500 and 15000; Pelagos FXD M25707B;
Omega Dynamic 'Targa Florio' 5291.51.07; 'Good Planet' GMT 232.30.44.22.03.001;
Planet Ocean 215.30.40.20.03.002; Zenith Chronomaster Original 03.3200.3600/22.M3200.
CKLinLA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 6 April 2010, 11:43 PM   #127
lorsban
"TRF" Member
 
lorsban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Philippines
Posts: 1,199
I think I said it before, but I'll say it again, I like both brands. But, I respect Breitling more and I find it easier to identify with their products more than with Rolex.

I see it this way: Mass marketing -> Mass recognition -> Mass distribution -> Loss of identity

No matter what the roots of the brand are, what market niche it was intended for, once you mass market it to a broad spectrum of people, a sizable percentage from that broad spectrum will want that same product/brand, whether or not it actually suits their needs or their budget, which eventually leads to a percentage actually ending up with a product from that brand and each individual in this group, by virtue of wearing it around, markets it to others, thereby perpetuating distribution.

Once this happens, and people identify a particular product with a brand, the brand is pressured into producing something that suits a broad spectrum of people, making it as palatable to as many people as possible, thereby turning a very specific functioning product into a "vanilla" product. Something for anyone and everyone, which can also mean it's for nobody in particular.

That's why when I buy a Rolex, I don't identify with it like "this is for me." Rather, it feels like "I've arrived" like I've reached a final destination that everyone wants to get to. Like we're all in some artificial race to the finish line where we have a Rolex, a high-end car, this type of house, this type of job, income, family, wife etc...In other words, it has that superficial "vibe" or feeling of being "assimilated" that I can't quite shake off or stomach.

Unlike with Breitling where the style is so distinct that I know for a fact that not a lot of people will want one. That, in itself, makes it novel, unique, and since I'm attracted by it, it somehow validates my individuality, my own uniqueness. And that to me, is priceless.
__________________
Rolex TT Datejust, Panerai PAM 312, Omega Connie C-Shape, Anonimo D-Date II, Squale 20 Atmos Blue Ray, Concord Impresario Triple Date Chrono Seiko SKX007, Monster Tuna
lorsban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 April 2010, 02:36 AM   #128
uracowman
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by lorsban View Post

I see it this way: Mass marketing -> Mass recognition -> Mass distribution -> Loss of identity
I completely disagree. Loss of identity? You realize Rolex is probably one of the top 10 most recognized and prestigious consumer non-cyclical brands on our planet right?
Quote:
Originally Posted by lorsban View Post

No matter what the roots of the brand are, what market niche it was intended for, once you mass market it to a broad spectrum of people, a sizable percentage from that broad spectrum will want that same product/brand, whether or not it actually suits their needs or their budget, which eventually leads to a percentage actually ending up with a product from that brand and each individual in this group, by virtue of wearing it around, markets it to others, thereby perpetuating distribution.
This isn't a bad thing. How is this negative? Just because a broad spectrum of people want one, doesn't mean they can afford one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lorsban View Post

Once this happens, and people identify a particular product with a brand, the brand is pressured into producing something that suits a broad spectrum of people, making it as palatable to as many people as possible, thereby turning a very specific functioning product into a "vanilla" product. Something for anyone and everyone, which can also mean it's for nobody in particular.
I don't agree with you here. you realize that almost all of the mainstream timepieces that rolex has used ever since anyone can remember haven't really changed in design. On top of this, Rolex was the first to pioneer many design elements that are used today by many watch makers. This is hardly meeting the general "wants" of the public.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lorsban View Post

That's why when I buy a Rolex, I don't identify with it like "this is for me." Rather, it feels like "I've arrived" like I've reached a final destination that everyone wants to get to. Like we're all in some artificial race to the finish line where we have a Rolex, a high-end car, this type of house, this type of job, income, family, wife etc...In other words, it has that superficial "vibe" or feeling of being "assimilated" that I can't quite shake off or stomach.
I'll agree with you here but that is just the aura and mentally in the individual that Rolex has achieved in their marketing campaign for the past 70 some odd years.
uracowman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 7 April 2010, 11:41 AM   #129
lorsban
"TRF" Member
 
lorsban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Philippines
Posts: 1,199
Quote:
I completely disagree. Loss of identity? You realize Rolex is probably one of the top 10 most recognized and prestigious consumer non-cyclical brands on our planet right?
When I say loss of identity, it applies to the consumer base, again the company can be whatever it wants to be, but its consumer base, that group we become a part of, has no identity. Rolex isn't just the brand, it's also the consumers.

Quote:
This isn't a bad thing. How is this negative? Just because a broad spectrum of people want one, doesn't mean they can afford one.
Not saying it's bad. Of course, every company wants to be in this position. Rather, as a consumer, if you want to be unique, this isn't the way to go.

Quote:
I don't agree with you here. you realize that almost all of the mainstream timepieces that rolex has used ever since anyone can remember haven't really changed in design. On top of this, Rolex was the first to pioneer many design elements that are used today by many watch makers. This is hardly meeting the general "wants" of the public.
It's true that Rolex came up with a heap of firsts but their latest designs, like the Deapsea for instance, it looks to me like they're joining this whole "me too" fad of upsizing, in your face designing. Compared to the original SD, this looks different. I think there was a thread on here showing how it's grown in size.

Quote:
I'll agree with you here but that is just the aura and mentally in the individual that Rolex has achieved in their marketing campaign for the past 70 some odd years.
Right, that's why at the beginning, I mentioned that I can't identify with the brand. Their uber-successful marketing campaign has made it the most recognizable and most desired brand, that's why everyone wants one, around every corner you see a guy/girl/kid wearing one or wearing a copy of one or at least ends up wanting one. Like lemmings almost.
__________________
Rolex TT Datejust, Panerai PAM 312, Omega Connie C-Shape, Anonimo D-Date II, Squale 20 Atmos Blue Ray, Concord Impresario Triple Date Chrono Seiko SKX007, Monster Tuna
lorsban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 April 2010, 11:29 AM   #130
docnagel
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ontario, Canada
Posts: 172
breitling or rolex both great

I have the great pleasure of owning both brands. Each has it's own endearing qualities, and my favorite is the one I'm wearing at that time.
Regards, Mike
__________________
Rolex SS Daytona x 2, Milgauss GV, SD, Deep Sea;
Breitling Montbrillant Olympus, Navitimer Fighters x 2, SOHC LE, Bentley GT LE, Lemans LE
Muhle Glashutte Horch LE, Oris Carlos Coste LE Chrono
Ernst Benz Chronoscope, M Lacroix Dble Retrograde GMT,
docnagel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 April 2010, 12:04 AM   #131
bewithabob
"TRF" Member
 
bewithabob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Real Name: Bob
Location: Dallas, Texas
Watch: Daytona Meteorite
Posts: 3,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by lorsban View Post
I think I said it before, but I'll say it again, I like both brands. But, I respect Breitling more and I find it easier to identify with their products more than with Rolex.

I see it this way: Mass marketing -> Mass recognition -> Mass distribution -> Loss of identity

No matter what the roots of the brand are, what market niche it was intended for, once you mass market it to a broad spectrum of people, a sizable percentage from that broad spectrum will want that same product/brand, whether or not it actually suits their needs or their budget, which eventually leads to a percentage actually ending up with a product from that brand and each individual in this group, by virtue of wearing it around, markets it to others, thereby perpetuating distribution.

Once this happens, and people identify a particular product with a brand, the brand is pressured into producing something that suits a broad spectrum of people, making it as palatable to as many people as possible, thereby turning a very specific functioning product into a "vanilla" product. Something for anyone and everyone, which can also mean it's for nobody in particular.

That's why when I buy a Rolex, I don't identify with it like "this is for me." Rather, it feels like "I've arrived" like I've reached a final destination that everyone wants to get to. Like we're all in some artificial race to the finish line where we have a Rolex, a high-end car, this type of house, this type of job, income, family, wife etc...In other words, it has that superficial "vibe" or feeling of being "assimilated" that I can't quite shake off or stomach.

Unlike with Breitling where the style is so distinct that I know for a fact that not a lot of people will want one. That, in itself, makes it novel, unique, and since I'm attracted by it, it somehow validates my individuality, my own uniqueness. And that to me, is priceless.
This is an interesting opinion, but I am afraid that I will also have to disagree with you on several points.

Rolex intelligently has never mass marketed its products, although one might argue that they have dramatically expanded their distribution footprint over the past 50 years.

Their product designs were refined to drive very specific appeal to very specific market segments (divers, pilots, doctors, racing enthusiasts, Presidentsetc).

Over the years, their product team came up with noteworthy and publicity-worthy product demonstrations and partnerships ( 'the swim', 'the dive', COMEX, Daytona) that became the envy of product marketers worldwide. At the time, and even in retrospect, these marketing stunts did not make national or international headlines. But they were noticed by a select few to whom it mattered.

What has made their marketing so brilliant indeed is that it is NOT mass marketed, but rather that it is targeted to select discriminating individuals and opinion leaders who have made the brand respected and desireable among those who who can afford it, and the envy of those who can not.
That Paul Newman, Eisenhower, or a Pope made these their personal selections was the beginnning of today's big money in celebrity endorsements. Do you think anyone now cares that Tiger Woods was paid a huge sum of money to wear his brand in public to the exclusion of all others or to use his image to promote that brand?

If there was ever a brand that is certainly not ubiquitous, it is Rolex.

That you now see people from all walks of life who wear a Rolex, is not a result of mass marketing, but results from word of mouth and among people want to feel good about themselves. And so, with the fruits of their hard earned labor, they have chosen to buy a highly respected brand and wear it proudly.

If anything, your plumber and your gardener and the owner of your pool cleaning company paid a far higher percentage of their incomes to buy Rolex, than Paul Newman did back in the day.

So I am happy when I see an authentic Rolex or a Breitling on anyone's wrist, regardless of their walk of life, and feel a sense of comaraderie and cheer with them for their choice to celebrate their accomplishment.

As my grandfather told me when I was a young boy, "Man makes the money, but money does not make the man. Likewise neither applaud or begrudge a man his success, or his failures."
__________________
meteor flying to Earth onto my wrist...

116509 Daytona Meteorite, 116520 Daytona Black, 116710 GMTIIC, 16013 DATEJUST,
CARTIER SANTOS 100 W20090X8, IWC Big Pilot, IWC Top Gun



"Everything works out in the end. If it hasn't worked out, it's not the end."
bewithabob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 April 2010, 04:36 AM   #132
uracowman
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by bewithabob View Post
This is an interesting opinion, but I am afraid that I will also have to disagree with you on several points.

Rolex intelligently has never mass marketed its products, although one might argue that they have dramatically expanded their distribution footprint over the past 50 years.

Their product designs were refined to drive very specific appeal to very specific market segments (divers, pilots, doctors, racing enthusiasts, Presidentsetc).

Over the years, their product team came up with noteworthy and publicity-worthy product demonstrations and partnerships ( 'the swim', 'the dive', COMEX, Daytona) that became the envy of product marketers worldwide. At the time, and even in retrospect, these marketing stunts did not make national or international headlines. But they were noticed by a select few to whom it mattered.

What has made their marketing so brilliant indeed is that it is NOT mass marketed, but rather that it is targeted to select discriminating individuals and opinion leaders who have made the brand respected and desireable among those who who can afford it, and the envy of those who can not.
That Paul Newman, Eisenhower, or a Pope made these their personal selections was the beginnning of today's big money in celebrity endorsements. Do you think anyone now cares that Tiger Woods was paid a huge sum of money to wear his brand in public to the exclusion of all others or to use his image to promote that brand?

If there was ever a brand that is certainly not ubiquitous, it is Rolex.

That you now see people from all walks of life who wear a Rolex, is not a result of mass marketing, but results from word of mouth and among people want to feel good about themselves. And so, with the fruits of their hard earned labor, they have chosen to buy a highly respected brand and wear it proudly.

If anything, your plumber and your gardener and the owner of your pool cleaning company paid a far higher percentage of their incomes to buy Rolex, than Paul Newman did back in the day.

So I am happy when I see an authentic Rolex or a Breitling on anyone's wrist, regardless of their walk of life, and feel a sense of comaraderie and cheer with them for their choice to celebrate their accomplishment.

As my grandfather told me when I was a young boy, "Man makes the money, but money does not make the man. Likewise neither applaud or begrudge a man his success, or his failures."
They HAVEN'T mass marketed? Think about every single equestrian event, tennis event, higher end magazines and commercials just to name a few.

Mass marketing IS the reason why people choose to buy a certain product over another. That is one of the basics they teach you in any marketing class you take at the high school, college or graduate level. A great example of this are golf clubs. Look at a company like Nike for example. When someone walk into a Golfsmith to look at a new driver or a set of irons, what is the first brand they usually go to? 9 out of 10 times, it is a mass marketed brand such as Nike or Callaway. People don't realize that there are brands out there that make comparable quality or better products than the mass marketed brands. An example of this is Mizuno. As a golfer, Mizuno irons are the best irons I have ever hit in my life yet they aren't as well advertised as many of the bigger name brands that you see all over the web and on the television.

Go out and ask people what they believe a fine watch brand is regardless of whether or not they know anything about watches or not. Almost every person will have Rolex in their list of two to three brands which they feel is a superior brand.
uracowman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 April 2010, 09:04 AM   #133
lorsban
"TRF" Member
 
lorsban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Philippines
Posts: 1,199
Well said.

Lets also not forget the impact of watches in movies. I remember buying a seamaster after seeing james bond.
__________________
Rolex TT Datejust, Panerai PAM 312, Omega Connie C-Shape, Anonimo D-Date II, Squale 20 Atmos Blue Ray, Concord Impresario Triple Date Chrono Seiko SKX007, Monster Tuna
lorsban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 April 2010, 01:28 AM   #134
bewithabob
"TRF" Member
 
bewithabob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Real Name: Bob
Location: Dallas, Texas
Watch: Daytona Meteorite
Posts: 3,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by uracowman View Post
They HAVEN'T mass marketed? Think about every single equestrian event, tennis event, higher end magazines and commercials just to name a few.

Mass marketing IS the reason why people choose to buy a certain product over another. That is one of the basics they teach you in any marketing class you take at the high school, college or graduate level. A great example of this are golf clubs. Look at a company like Nike for example. When someone walk into a Golfsmith to look at a new driver or a set of irons, what is the first brand they usually go to? 9 out of 10 times, it is a mass marketed brand such as Nike or Callaway. People don't realize that there are brands out there that make comparable quality or better products than the mass marketed brands. An example of this is Mizuno. As a golfer, Mizuno irons are the best irons I have ever hit in my life yet they aren't as well advertised as many of the bigger name brands that you see all over the web and on the television.

Go out and ask people what they believe a fine watch brand is regardless of whether or not they know anything about watches or not. Almost every person will have Rolex in their list of two to three brands which they feel is a superior brand.
Again I will respectfully disagree.
Rolex has never engaged in mass marketing.

If they had, they would be advertising indiscriminately, without targeting any segments particularly. Marketing executives understand this, and I am not so sure that any classes you took would qualify you to assess their segmentation strategy.

The events, sports and publications Rolex chooses to advertise in are specifically chosen to target households with an income in excess of perhaps $200k annually, and that have by some measure attained the pinnacle of success in their profession, whether it be sport, finance, medicine etc.

The fact that Rolex became associated with Bond, was due largely to an author; and then again, that a film maker gave an actor a piece to wear. That served to further burnish the brand image of being worn by discriminating people who are at the top of their profession.

That criteria of HH income is certainly less than 5% of the global population, and would not satisfy anyone's definition of 'mass marketing'.

For definitions of mass marketing, look to the AMA, or here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_marketing

Retailers such as Walmart and consumer packaged goods like coca-cola are more likely to fall into categories of mass marketers, where the target markets are more broadly defined.

Your example of golf, is misinformed. If a marketer is trying to sell golf equipment he chooses marketing vehicles that target golfers, not home makers or children to elimnate waste in his budget. Of course there are differences, Avid golfers who play weekly, or three times a week, or even daily are different from casual golfers who play once a month or twice a year. Or scratch golfers vs casual golfers

I have spent the better part of 30 years in the field of marketing; I have a pretty good handle on the topic, having reached the pinnacle of success in that field....

Cheers.
__________________
meteor flying to Earth onto my wrist...

116509 Daytona Meteorite, 116520 Daytona Black, 116710 GMTIIC, 16013 DATEJUST,
CARTIER SANTOS 100 W20090X8, IWC Big Pilot, IWC Top Gun



"Everything works out in the end. If it hasn't worked out, it's not the end."
bewithabob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 April 2010, 08:20 AM   #135
lorsban
"TRF" Member
 
lorsban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Philippines
Posts: 1,199
Quote:
The fact that Rolex became associated with Bond, was due largely to an author; and then again, that a film maker gave an actor a piece to wear. That served to further burnish the brand image of being worn by discriminating people who are at the top of their profession.
Ah totally forgot that it was a book series first. Thanks for the reminder. Sort of like Breguet coming out in Count of Monte Cristo and some other classic (not sure if it was Around the world in 80 days or 20,000 leagues).

I suppose its really Omega that used Bond more for marketting.

Still, I do see Rolex and Tag being in the same publications does that mean they're after the same markets?
__________________
Rolex TT Datejust, Panerai PAM 312, Omega Connie C-Shape, Anonimo D-Date II, Squale 20 Atmos Blue Ray, Concord Impresario Triple Date Chrono Seiko SKX007, Monster Tuna
lorsban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19 April 2010, 10:19 AM   #136
uracowman
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 461
Quote:
Originally Posted by bewithabob View Post
Again I will respectfully disagree.
Rolex has never engaged in mass marketing.

If they had, they would be advertising indiscriminately, without targeting any segments particularly. Marketing executives understand this, and I am not so sure that any classes you took would qualify you to assess their segmentation strategy.

The events, sports and publications Rolex chooses to advertise in are specifically chosen to target households with an income in excess of perhaps $200k annually, and that have by some measure attained the pinnacle of success in their profession, whether it be sport, finance, medicine etc.

The fact that Rolex became associated with Bond, was due largely to an author; and then again, that a film maker gave an actor a piece to wear. That served to further burnish the brand image of being worn by discriminating people who are at the top of their profession.

That criteria of HH income is certainly less than 5% of the global population, and would not satisfy anyone's definition of 'mass marketing'.

For definitions of mass marketing, look to the AMA, or here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_marketing

Retailers such as Walmart and consumer packaged goods like coca-cola are more likely to fall into categories of mass marketers, where the target markets are more broadly defined.

Your example of golf, is misinformed. If a marketer is trying to sell golf equipment he chooses marketing vehicles that target golfers, not home makers or children to elimnate waste in his budget. Of course there are differences, Avid golfers who play weekly, or three times a week, or even daily are different from casual golfers who play once a month or twice a year. Or scratch golfers vs casual golfers

I have spent the better part of 30 years in the field of marketing; I have a pretty good handle on the topic, having reached the pinnacle of success in that field....

Cheers.
I'll agree with just about everything you said but you have to realize that the target market they advertise to causes them to indirectly advertise to the general public a.k.a the masses.
__________________
PAM 372, PAM 424, PAM 720, PAM 968, AP 15500, 116610LV, 126710BLRO, Sistem51, G-Shock

Soon to come: AP 26401 RG, AP 15202OR, Patek 3940G
uracowman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2010, 06:36 AM   #137
Double_J
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: USA
Posts: 98
Quote:
Originally Posted by bewithabob View Post
Again I will respectfully disagree.
Rolex has never engaged in mass marketing.

If they had, they would be advertising indiscriminately, without targeting any segments particularly. Marketing executives understand this, and I am not so sure that any classes you took would qualify you to assess their segmentation strategy.

The events, sports and publications Rolex chooses to advertise in are specifically chosen to target households with an income in excess of perhaps $200k annually, and that have by some measure attained the pinnacle of success in their profession, whether it be sport, finance, medicine etc.

The fact that Rolex became associated with Bond, was due largely to an author; and then again, that a film maker gave an actor a piece to wear. That served to further burnish the brand image of being worn by discriminating people who are at the top of their profession.

That criteria of HH income is certainly less than 5% of the global population, and would not satisfy anyone's definition of 'mass marketing'.

For definitions of mass marketing, look to the AMA, or here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_marketing

Retailers such as Walmart and consumer packaged goods like coca-cola are more likely to fall into categories of mass marketers, where the target markets are more broadly defined.

Your example of golf, is misinformed. If a marketer is trying to sell golf equipment he chooses marketing vehicles that target golfers, not home makers or children to elimnate waste in his budget. Of course there are differences, Avid golfers who play weekly, or three times a week, or even daily are different from casual golfers who play once a month or twice a year. Or scratch golfers vs casual golfers

I have spent the better part of 30 years in the field of marketing; I have a pretty good handle on the topic, having reached the pinnacle of success in that field....

Cheers.
It seems that you're arguing semantics more than anything else.

The context of Lorsban's post doesn't seem to ding Rolex for it's 'mass marketing' per se. Rather, it seems to ding Rolex for a move away from it's 'tool watch' heritage - something that Breitling has thus far resisted (moreso than Rolex, at least).

Your assertion that Rolex ads target those at 'the pinnacle' of their profession reinforces this notion that Rolex marketing has shifted the brand image towards one of prestige and success rather than pure functionality for a specific purpose. I would assume that this was done to broaden the appeal of the brand to all takers. I suppose this could be construed as 'mass marketing' (relatively speaking, that is).

I personally think that Rolex has a very smart marketing machine behind it. Bully for us - helps to keep up those resale values!
Double_J is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2010, 07:02 AM   #138
CKLinLA
"TRF" Member
 
CKLinLA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Real Name: KL
Location: ... Los Angeles
Watch: Explorer II Black
Posts: 1,434
While some of us might be nice to think that in owning a Rolex we are
among some select few with sufficient taste/money/success/etc to own
one, truth is Rolex sells a lot lot LOT more watches than many other
'mass market' brands like Breitling or Tag.

Lots of nice watches, buy/wear/enjoy what you like
CKLinLA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2010, 08:20 AM   #139
bewithabob
"TRF" Member
 
bewithabob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Real Name: Bob
Location: Dallas, Texas
Watch: Daytona Meteorite
Posts: 3,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by uracowman View Post
I'll agree with just about everything you said but you have to realize that the target market they advertise to causes them to indirectly advertise to the general public a.k.a the masses.
The strategy of marketing to opinion leaders , pays huge dividends. That is the beauty of it.

Thus celebrity spokespersons are not always chosen just for their ability to get attention, but because they have authority and credibility beyond their areas of expertise .

So, would Tiger be a better spokesperson for golf clubs, Viagra, a sex addiction clinic or car insurance? What qualifies him to be a spokesman for Tag or Buick?
__________________
meteor flying to Earth onto my wrist...

116509 Daytona Meteorite, 116520 Daytona Black, 116710 GMTIIC, 16013 DATEJUST,
CARTIER SANTOS 100 W20090X8, IWC Big Pilot, IWC Top Gun



"Everything works out in the end. If it hasn't worked out, it's not the end."
bewithabob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2010, 09:17 AM   #140
rr-nyc
Liar & Ratbag
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Real Name: Renato
Location: NYC / Miami Beach
Watch: Rolex Daytona
Posts: 5,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by bewithabob View Post
Again I will respectfully disagree.
Rolex has never engaged in mass marketing.

If they had, they would be advertising indiscriminately, without targeting any segments particularly. Marketing executives understand this, and I am not so sure that any classes you took would qualify you to assess their segmentation strategy.

The events, sports and publications Rolex chooses to advertise in are specifically chosen to target households with an income in excess of perhaps $200k annually, and that have by some measure attained the pinnacle of success in their profession, whether it be sport, finance, medicine etc.

The fact that Rolex became associated with Bond, was due largely to an author; and then again, that a film maker gave an actor a piece to wear. That served to further burnish the brand image of being worn by discriminating people who are at the top of their profession.

That criteria of HH income is certainly less than 5% of the global population, and would not satisfy anyone's definition of 'mass marketing'.

For definitions of mass marketing, look to the AMA, or here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_marketing

Retailers such as Walmart and consumer packaged goods like coca-cola are more likely to fall into categories of mass marketers, where the target markets are more broadly defined.

Your example of golf, is misinformed. If a marketer is trying to sell golf equipment he chooses marketing vehicles that target golfers, not home makers or children to elimnate waste in his budget. Of course there are differences, Avid golfers who play weekly, or three times a week, or even daily are different from casual golfers who play once a month or twice a year. Or scratch golfers vs casual golfers

I have spent the better part of 30 years in the field of marketing; I have a pretty good handle on the topic, having reached the pinnacle of success in that field....

Cheers.
I'm going to respectfully disagree with you.

Dozens of Rolex billboards along major interstates, in airports, at train stations and full page ad in virtually every Sunday NY Times long and every fashion magazine in publication IS mass marketing and indiscriminate to say the least.

Its similar to Mercedes-Benz. While they may sponsor "wealthy" events like auto racing and tennis, they advertise in every media possible. In fact, I would argue against your example of Walmart. Their advertisements are extremely targeted toward budget conscious consumers.

PS- The global per capita income is just shy over $8000 USD per year. Its safe to say that less than 1% of the global population makes $200,000 per year, not 5%
rr-nyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2010, 10:31 AM   #141
CKLinLA
"TRF" Member
 
CKLinLA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Real Name: KL
Location: ... Los Angeles
Watch: Explorer II Black
Posts: 1,434
Quote:
Originally Posted by rr-nyc View Post

PS- The global per capita income is just shy over $8000 USD per year. Its safe to say that less than 1% of the global population makes $200,000 per year, not 5%

I suspect that the global per capita annual income is a closer to US$800
than $8000. Of the two biggest countries, China is at $3,200 while
India is at $1000. [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...al)_per_capita ]
(Its about $45,000 in the USA.)
Less than 1% over $200K is a pretty safe guess.
__________________
Explorer II 1655; Day Date 1803; Submariner 14060; Deepsea Sea-Dweller 116660;
5-Digit Datejusts; Perpetual Date 1500 and 15000; Pelagos FXD M25707B;
Omega Dynamic 'Targa Florio' 5291.51.07; 'Good Planet' GMT 232.30.44.22.03.001;
Planet Ocean 215.30.40.20.03.002; Zenith Chronomaster Original 03.3200.3600/22.M3200.

Last edited by CKLinLA; 20 April 2010 at 11:02 AM.. Reason: Added US figure
CKLinLA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2010, 11:17 AM   #142
rr-nyc
Liar & Ratbag
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Real Name: Renato
Location: NYC / Miami Beach
Watch: Rolex Daytona
Posts: 5,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by CKLinLA View Post
I suspect that the global per capita annual income is a closer to US$800
than $8000. Of the two biggest countries, China is at $3,200 while
India is at $1000. [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...al)_per_capita ]
(Its about $45,000 in the USA.)
Less than 1% over $200K is a pretty safe guess.
Thanks but I was citing the PPP (Purchasing Power Parity) method which is the most widely accepted way of comparing per capita incomes by adjusting them for cost of living, etc. This is used by the CIA Factbook
rr-nyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20 April 2010, 11:36 AM   #143
bewithabob
"TRF" Member
 
bewithabob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Real Name: Bob
Location: Dallas, Texas
Watch: Daytona Meteorite
Posts: 3,413
I too see outdoor billboards in Dallas; these are not placed by Rolex, but by the local AD Bachendorf's. Chances are you will see likewise that the local ads results from less sophisticated ADs in the areas. Those same ADs are also advertising otherbrands, such as Omega, Breitling and the AD owns a 12 month contract on the board, but rotates other attention-getting brands into their schedule to off set the costs with advertising co-op money.... These guys use outdoor because they havent discovered the means to access more targetted and efficient methods to reach the higher income areas. Also, those areas are in poockets, butt he AD may be miles away. So the get their store brand recognized in those pockets, they but outdoor which reaches a are broad and inefficient market with pllenty fo waste circulation.
__________________
meteor flying to Earth onto my wrist...

116509 Daytona Meteorite, 116520 Daytona Black, 116710 GMTIIC, 16013 DATEJUST,
CARTIER SANTOS 100 W20090X8, IWC Big Pilot, IWC Top Gun



"Everything works out in the end. If it hasn't worked out, it's not the end."
bewithabob is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 April 2010, 12:18 PM   #144
CKLinLA
"TRF" Member
 
CKLinLA's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Real Name: KL
Location: ... Los Angeles
Watch: Explorer II Black
Posts: 1,434
PPP doesn't work with Rolex pricing. The use (or non use) of PPP adjustment
is controversial and often dictated by the user's stance on trade policy and
economic/development aid.

Quote:
Originally Posted by rr-nyc View Post
Thanks but I was citing the PPP (Purchasing Power Parity) method which is the most widely accepted way of comparing per capita incomes by adjusting them for cost of living, etc. This is used by the CIA Factbook
CKLinLA is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 April 2010, 01:40 PM   #145
rr-nyc
Liar & Ratbag
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Real Name: Renato
Location: NYC / Miami Beach
Watch: Rolex Daytona
Posts: 5,344
Quote:
Originally Posted by CKLinLA View Post
PPP doesn't work with Rolex pricing. The use (or non use) of PPP adjustment
is controversial and often dictated by the user's stance on trade policy and
economic/development aid.
Nobody is using it for Rolex pricing. I used the PPP average per capita income of 6 Billion people living in the various countries and economies because its the most widely accepted way of calculating such a number.
rr-nyc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 22 April 2010, 08:23 AM   #146
iDamo4u
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Australia
Posts: 1
Quote:
Originally Posted by moby33 View Post
I agree. Not only is the Pro I more comfortable IMO, I like the look of it a lot better than the Pro II. Again, II seems more dressy which is not the look I'm going for when I sport a watch like a Breitling.



Yep. I eventually bought a Skyland Avenger Blacksteel as the DLC finish was awesome. I liked pretty much everything about the watch except one minor point. The hands just seemed too plain to me and pretty thin...hence the lume wasn't very good (actually, the lume of the markers was pretty week too due to their small size).

Those knocks aside, I was planning on keep the watch for at least a year until I was going to flip to purchase a DSSD (the boss, aka wife, wasn't going to authorize more expansion to my collection in terms of numbers)...but sure enough about a month after I bought it I found a DSSD and had to purchase (this was over a year ago when it wasn't very easy to find a DSSD). So, the Breitling didn't stay in the collection too long. I'm sure I'll get another soon as I've seen a few w/ their new collection that look promising via pictures.





SA vs Sub Date lume:

I got exactly the Skyland avenger and omega seamaster like you but just no Rolex, they are great watch ya... is really base on "beauty is in the eye of the beholder" :)
iDamo4u is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 April 2010, 12:04 PM   #147
Big Joe
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Nashville, Tn
Watch: Rolex GMTII
Posts: 15
I have 2 Rolex watches and 2 Breitlings, as well as an Omega, and a Tag. I love them all. All these watches are tools to me. However, they do each look and feel different. The Breitlings are the best for low light viewability of any watch I've seen. The detail, and fit and finish of the Breitling is incredible and I think a step above the others. They are more concerned about the engineering and functional aspect than the fashion aspect.

Rolex is still my favorite, not because it is better, just because I like them. However, my Breitling is more comfortable and seems sturdier. Any of these watches would last anyone for a lifetime with proper care. They are all very accurate (with the exception of my GMTII, which just back back from service, so we will see how it does now). They all look good, and they all are very comfortable to wear.

Rolex and Breitling are not the same, but each is still as incredible as the other!
Big Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27 April 2010, 11:27 PM   #148
lorsban
"TRF" Member
 
lorsban's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Philippines
Posts: 1,199
Quote:
Originally Posted by banned4life View Post
that screams diversity??? Reallly??? Simply changing the bezel and dial color does not show diversity. Rolex has two watch styles...period, the Submariner style and the datejust style. Every watch looks exactly like one of those two watches with very minor detail diferences. Not a whole lot of diversity.
Like Harley. Few engines and frames, many many models.

Compare Harley to any of the Japanese brands and you immediately see the difference. The Japanese offer you many very distinct models and they try to compete with every range, developing flagships from cruisers, sportsbikes, trail bikes etc...With Harley, you have just the one, but they're making a killing with it.

It's highly commendable that both Harley and Rolex are able to focus on such few model lines and yet, are able to develop such a huge following. Very risky business model for sure since you're basically putting all your eggs in one basket.

I'm actually amazed with the DJ shape/line in particular. From that one shape, you have a range of sizes and "models" from small, mid, AK, DJ, Explorer, Milgauss, DDII.
__________________
Rolex TT Datejust, Panerai PAM 312, Omega Connie C-Shape, Anonimo D-Date II, Squale 20 Atmos Blue Ray, Concord Impresario Triple Date Chrono Seiko SKX007, Monster Tuna
lorsban is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 April 2010, 01:34 PM   #149
Big Joe
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Nashville, Tn
Watch: Rolex GMTII
Posts: 15
I have both. I own a Rolex Sub blue face, two tone and a GMT II black face two tone. I love both, but the GMT is my favorite watch. I also have a Breitling Navitimer World with leather strap and a Chronomat Evolution with gray face and sub dials in SS with bracelet. The Chrono Evo is the most comfortable of the bunch on the wrist. They are all very accurate. The Breitling far surpasses anything else for low light visibility. If I were a pilot the ability to read the Breitling in the cabin with low light would make the Chrono jump heads and tails above the others.

The Navitimer World and the GMT II both have GMT functions which I love. The Navitimer is quite a bit bigger and is probably why I like the Rolex better.

That being said, my Omega Seamaster is the most comfortable watch I've ever worn. My oldest son is borrowing it currently. I also have a Tag Huer Monaco and I really love that watch as well. It has a mineral crystal so I do not wear it when I may damage it. The Rolex watches always look good, and work well. The Breitlings always look good and work very, very well. More bling with Rolex but the Breitling is the chief when it comes to function and useability.

I think the other reason I like my Rolex a bit better is emotional. I waited 30 years to get my Sub and a few more to get my GMT. In addition, if you want to impress someone the Rolex will do that. Most people don't know the difference in the others or a Fossil. They don't work better than the other watches, but I probably wear the GMT 1/2 the time, the Sub 1/4, and the others the rest of the time. All great watches to be sure.
Big Joe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 28 April 2010, 02:57 PM   #150
mywifespissed
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Real Name: Ethan Whitaker
Location: Washington State
Watch: IWC cal 852
Posts: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by astcell View Post
Breitling actually tests every movement they make, not just a sampling of them. I find them #3, with Rolex being #2 and Panerai being #1.
I imagine you mean among sporty watches. Because the world is filled with way more exclusive, and completely hand-finished and hand-built watches than Rolex or Breitling. Rolex is so overproduced, like Porsche, it surprises me they still turn heads. The good fakes are getting better and better too, making the real thing almost impossible to spot at a glance. I do like the Rolex brand, and have one now and have had many in the past. But if I could afford it, a Breguet, Vacheron or Patek would be a finer and more interesting watch to own, IMO. Also, as a watchmaker, over the last three years or so I have seen five seperate Rolex watches that have had scarred movements as a result of screws backing out. With no other brand except "mushroom" wanna-be luxury brands have I seen this. And I'm refering to virgin Rolex movements i.e. watches less than 10 years old and never serviced. I think it's because Rolex polishes the entire screw including the threads, which makes them slippery and prone to backing out. And they MUST lose that weight axle. In ten to fifteen years it's shot, and tends to leave marks on the autowinding bridge. Use ball bearings like most other brands.
mywifespissed is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Takuya Watches

Bobs Watches

My Watch LLC

OCWatches

DavidSW Watches

Coronet


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.