Value of OP Vs Daytona.

[Boba Fett]

I am interested in what we think of this idea. I am not interested in secondary market prices just retail.
The oyster perpetual is the quintessential basic Rolex, great watch, we have two Mrs Fett and myself. The Daytona is a really great watch, tried a friend's one on and I love it.
The problem is the price, £4500 against £10500.
What does the Daytona bring to the party for that great a difference?
It has been debated before and the consensus appeared to be that Rolex has only one level of quality unlike some watch companies that could be mentioned but I won't. So same quality both in house movements etc, all that's added is a chronograph function. So I conclude that one of them is priced incorrectly, is the OP underpriced of the Daytona overpriced?

[icnbne]

its a more complicated watch, not sure how else to explain it. you pay for more features when you buy a phone, house, car this isn't any different?

[garyk]

If anything, the OP is still quite a bargain. I love Daytona’s. My name is on a incoming 116508 JM at my AD. I briefly thought about a Patek Annual Calendar in RG that was around the same $$ but the Daytona is so much more watch for the money IMO...

[james_turk]

You think the Daytona is overpriced at retail? Oh boy....

Look up the price of the cheapest Patek Chronograph, and compare it to the price of the cheapest automatic 3 hander they make, then look back at the Rolex price difference.

[Abmatt2002]

Taking the additional functionality out of the equation, what the watches offer is down to you.

For me the Daytona offers nothing. If I had the money I would buy something else, but if I had to chose between the two, it would be the OP. I prefer them.

[Brew]

I love my OP too, but the Daytona has more functions, options, finishes, etc. than the OP.

[bp1000]

Watch pricing is virtually impossible to understand. Is an AP chronograph in steel worth twice the price of a Daytona? As really it’s mainly down to the finishing.

It’s likely the steel Daytona is undervalued. Even within its own line you see PM Daytona’s on rubber straps, oysterflex at astronomical prices relatively. Is Rolex saying the entire solid gold bracelet is only worth 5k.

So you can already see some creative uses of profit margin going on.

For what the Daytona sells for used it’s arguable it’s undervalued. It’s just you are comparing it to a arguable undervalued OP. The margin in the OP is probably much thinner in % terms and Rolex probably does this to sell as many as possible. They are easy to make. No complexities.

[beshannon]

Originally Posted by Boba Fett

ISo same quality both in house movements etc, all that's added is a chronograph function. So I conclude that one of them is priced incorrectly, is the OP underpriced of the Daytona overpriced?

Neither

The Daytona is the only chronograph Rolex produces. An exclusive in house movement demands and gets a premium. And it always will. If you want a chronograph there are many fine examples in the world of horology that cost less.

[77T]

Originally Posted by Boba Fett

What does the Daytona bring to the party for that great a difference?

It has been debated before and the consensus appeared to be that Rolex has only one level of quality unlike some watch companies that could be mentioned but I won't.

Because I won’t delve into the pricing debate that could surely close this thread, I wanted to ask about this section of your post.

I am a bit confused - is there a watch company that offers different levels of quality within the same model? I do know ETA movements come in different levels but not the watch itself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Boba Fett]

Without upsetting anyone naming names some companies in their cheaper offerings use out house movements and lower quality of finishings. If you want to research this further I recommend watchartsci channel on YouTube, I'm sure he's talked about this.

[joshua.pearl3]

Personally like both. The OP doesn't have PCLs, and the reserve is a day less than the Daytona.

Does that justify the 6k difference? Well, the Datejust has PCLs, has a more complex movement (kinda) and is over £1k more expensive. The chrono movement is more complicated but surely not multiple k worth. So I see the Daytona as being more expensive simply because Rolex wants to position it there.

I'll give you an example. I wanted to change my kitchen a couple of months ago. I went to a relative good German brand (Poggenpohl). I was between one that had glass front cabinets vs a traditional one. The glassy one was 30% more expensive. I asked why and was told not to try to rationalise it. It is just an "image thing".

Regardless, if I could get the Daytona (ignoring secondary values) I would over the OP as I simply find it a beautiful watch and the marginal benefit I get (enjoying a beautiful watch) is higher than the marginal cost of extra 6k. But your perspective is right, the Day-C is a bad value for money compared to the OP. Again though, I would pay 6k more to get it but no way I would pay £16k extra. That's why I am genuinely considering the OP (or the Datejust).

[LChanyungco]

The Daytona has more "presence."

[Bingofrank]

Lots of people mass produce a mechanical with a date and water resistance (eg omega aqua terra), lots of people make dive watches and field watches and GMTs.

No-one else can seem to mass produce an automatic chronograph as thin as a Daytona. Everyone else's is simply massive on the wrist. Go try on an automatic speedmaster, or an IWC or a Breitling B01. Some great watches but all thick.

The Daytona is Rolex's stand out superior watch. 12.2 mm automatic chrono.

[Boba Fett]

Originally Posted by Bingofrank

Lots of people mass produce a mechanical with a date and water resistance (eg omega aqua terra), lots of people make dive watches and field watches and GMTs.

No-one else can seem to mass produce an automatic chronograph as thin as a Daytona. Everyone else's is simply massive on the wrist. Go try on an automatic speedmaster, or an IWC or a Breitling B01. Some great watches but all thick.

The Daytona is Rolex's stand out superior watch. 12.2 mm automatic chrono.

Bvlgari octo chronograph GMT, 6.90mm thick, just thought you might be interested.

[schoolboy]

OP I think it depends on how much you need the extra complication/s.

Just like with cars like someone said above.

If you don’t need the chronograph, and if the Daytona didn’t double your money as soon as you bought it, and wasn’t “the hottest watch on the planet” ...

I would argue that the OP is a better deal

Unfortunately the Daytona makes you money, and is currently a huge status symbol. Because it shows you are either well off enough that you can pay Grey, or cool enough that you bought it at msrp

Also UNFORTUNATELY the OP seems to be frowned upon by some people that consider it a “entry level Rolex”

So the watches aren’t just viewed objectively at the moment and that hurts the value proposition of the OP


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[schoolboy]

Originally Posted by 77T

Because I won’t delve into the pricing debate that could surely close this thread, I wanted to ask about this section of your post.

I am a bit confused - is there a watch company that offers different levels of quality within the same model? I do know ETA movements come in different levels but not the watch itself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Both watches are super accurate, both have decent water resistance, both have in house movements and give or take the same bracelet, with the same 5 year warranty

So the main difference (market value aside) is the look, the ceramic bezel and the chrono

OP is asking if that is REALLY worth the extra money

[77T]

Originally Posted by schoolboy

OP is asking if that is REALLY worth the extra money

I am well aware of that - and my question wasn’t regarding priceworthiness.

Do you have an answer to my question you quoted?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[DantonIzzo]

I think the better comparison is between OP and Explorer I. Why does the Explorer cost more?

[schoolboy]

It has to do with the image that a Daytona wearer gets vs that of a Oyster Perpetual wearer.

I made a mistake a few weeks ago. Literally.

I was at target, bought a cute black trash can for my office for $5.

Next day I went to Walmart and they had the same trash can for $3.

Of course shopping at target is “cooler” than Walmart, but images aside, talking just about the trash can, I should’ve bought the Walmart one.

I was just uninformed at the time

[schoolboy]

^^^ true story by the way

[schoolboy]

So the Daytona is “cooler,” “hotter,” gives you more status points

But if you just want a watch to wear every single day, the OP is a better deal IMO

Why?

Because you can actually wear it without banging it and worrying about a scratch causing it a loss of market value

Also, the fully brushed bracelet on the OP is better suited for daily wear vs the bracelet on the Daytona

[DonRickles]

It's difficult to determine the emotional value as opposed to monetary value difference for each individual wearer.

[peterpl]

Originally Posted by schoolboy

Of course shopping at target is “cooler” than Walmart, but images aside, talking just about the trash can, I should’ve bought the Walmart one.

Really? Target in Australia doesnt have a very good name either. LOL

We dont have a Wallmart here not sure what that would equate to over here in the land of Oz but I would like to know.

[Boba Fett]

Originally Posted by DantonIzzo

I think the better comparison is between OP and Explorer I. Why does the Explorer cost more?

A Faraday cage, parachrome hairspring and an easy link bracelet could explain the £700 extra if I'm right?

[fsprow]

One will drive themself crazy trying to explain price versus cost and features. Price is determined by what people will pay, based on their perception of value, advertising, future marketability, scarceness etc.

[Largoshark]

Originally Posted by Boba Fett

A Faraday cage, parachrome hairspring and an easy link bracelet could explain the £700 extra if I'm right?

Nope. The Explorer I does not have a faraday cage. You're thinking of the Milgauss/Air King. In fact the OP 39 and the Explorer have the same exact movement - 3132 with parachrome hairspring and paraflex shock absorbers...so the only real difference between the two would be the easylink.

[Boba Fett]

Originally Posted by Largoshark

Nope. The Explorer I does not have a faraday cage. You're thinking of the Milgauss/Air King. In fact the OP 39 and the Explorer have the same exact movement - 3132 with parachrome hairspring and paraflex shock absorbers...so the only real difference between the two would be the easylink.

Well done. Slightly different movement and bracelet then. Still, not a great price difference between the OP and the explorer.

[Bingofrank]

Originally Posted by Boba Fett

Bvlgari octo chronograph GMT, 6.90mm thick, just thought you might be interested.

Yeah I have seen them but I don’t like titanium.

Having said that though the msrp on one is higher than a daytona. So Rolex isn’t out of bounds with pricing.

Daytonas are definitely not worth the extra premium people pay for them second hand, no Rolex is.

[Tools]

Originally Posted by Boba Fett

. . . So I conclude that one of them is priced incorrectly, is the OP underpriced of the Daytona overpriced?

That would be a false conclusion.

Products, and their value, are based on what a willing buyer would pay to a willing seller - market pricing.

In the 60's you could have bought a Daytona for close to the same price as other models. Today, the market has changed.

[Largoshark]

Originally Posted by Boba Fett

Well done. Slightly different movement and bracelet then. Still, not a great price difference between the OP and the explorer.

...same exact movement