ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
12 February 2016, 06:25 AM | #121 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2011
Real Name: Simon
Location: Houston
Watch: Some
Posts: 1,109
|
|
12 February 2016, 06:25 AM | #122 | |
Banned
Join Date: May 2014
Real Name: John
Location: La Jolla, CA
Watch: Platona
Posts: 12,194
|
Rolex's strategic plan was to transition from tool watches to a luxury brand. And they succeeded.
Quote:
|
|
12 February 2016, 06:44 AM | #123 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Real Name: Carlos
Location: Eivissa
Watch: Rolex, Tudor....
Posts: 1,635
|
Quote:
I can understand your feelings but personally I cannot understand a watch collection without a Rolex!! He he Sell all and buy a 5517!! Afterwards go for the Blancpain!! |
|
12 February 2016, 08:57 AM | #124 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2014
Real Name: Dan O
Location: Park City, UT
Watch: Cosmograph Daytona
Posts: 741
|
I think each of us have a unique subjective relationship with the Rolex brand. Rolex evolves and innovates - and some may feel disenfranchised. Can't please everyone.
Most accept the ceramic bezel to be a technological improvement over aluminum on the SS models. Yet I don't like or agree for the PM models such the new Yacht-Master and the Daytona. To me, replacing a PM bezel with ceramic seems cheap. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk while driving down the interstate at 75 mph
__________________
-Dan, WIS In Training 116520 Cosmograph Daytona 116622 & 16622 Yacht-Master 114060 & 14060 Submariner |
12 February 2016, 10:45 AM | #125 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Real Name: Neil
Location: UK
Watch: ing ships roll in
Posts: 59,242
|
Quote:
|
|
12 February 2016, 11:06 AM | #126 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: In your head
Watch: SS YMII
Posts: 1,619
|
Phase III here.
|
12 February 2016, 05:01 PM | #127 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2015
Real Name: Mitch
Location: UAE
Watch: Big Ben
Posts: 2,451
|
Jst to add.
I was the opposite. I had the feeling of Rolex being too flash until a year ago. Until that moment I kind of had something against Rolex. Too common, social status watch choice, too flashy............ but, hey, lots of other models are available and once I got my hands on one Rolex and started to realise how good they are. I belive Rolex caters for all tastes hence so many dial, bezel, metal options to choose from.....if older models are your preferance, lots of watches available on the market......
__________________
IG: @watch_idiot_savant |
16 February 2016, 04:32 AM | #128 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Tejas
Watch: your step
Posts: 2,806
|
Quote:
__________________
116520 white; 16613 black; 116710; 16570 polar; 16600. AP 15400; 15703. Blancpain Fifty Fathoms. Glashutte Sport Evo GMT. Omega Planet Ocean 2907.50.91; Planet Ocean Liquidmetal LE 222.30.42.20.01.001; Seamaster 2255.80.00. Breitling Crosswind, white. Panerai PAM 005. VC Overseas Chrono, black. |
|
16 February 2016, 05:47 AM | #129 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2013
Real Name: Bob
Location: NJ
Watch: Less each year...
Posts: 464
|
My journey to Rolex has been somewhat circuitous. Earlier in my watch collecting days, I disregarded the virtues of Rolex and its watch offerings. I thought them to be high-volume manufacture watches whose success was based on a monolithic marketing machine and controlled distribution channel. To my arrogant way of thinking, brand conscious, watch naive consumers were who bought Rolex watches. I focused on low volume, hand finished watches which exemplified "high watchmaking".
The funny thing is, about 4-5 years ago after having some mileage under my belt in watch collecting, I began to give their watch offerings an in depth look. What I found when I looked was the design and quality of their offerings were truly excellent. About 4-years ago, I bought my first Rolex a Yachtmaster (116622). It was a fantastic watch in every regard. Then about 3-years ago, I purchased a second Rolex, a Submariner Date (116610LN). Again, a fantastic watch in every regard. What I have found is gone are my watches Blancpain, Breguet, Chronoswiss, Glashutte Original, IWC, Jacquet Droz, Jaeger-LeCoultre, Patek Philippe and Ulysse Nardin. What I have kept is a APRO 15400, a BP FF Bathyscaphe Chrono and a trusty Rolex Sub Date. Now when faced with my next purchase, what am I buying? A Rolex DD 40mm (228239) of course. In the end, yes Rolex is a manufacturing giant, a marketing force and a company who strictly controls its distribution channel. But they also make robust, beautifully designed and engineered, high quality watches. So in the end, I am convinced that two types of buyers buy Rolex watches. Those who know know absolutely nothing about watches AND those who know everything! My $.02
__________________
_____________________________________________ Audemars Piguet - Blancpain - Damasko - Grand Seiko - Rolex |
16 February 2016, 11:07 AM | #130 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Hong Kong
Watch: 214270
Posts: 256
|
Quote:
I've come full-circle, too.
__________________
“Wit, you know, is the unexpected copulation of ideas…” (Samuel Johnson) |
|
16 February 2016, 03:32 PM | #131 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Real Name: Russell
Location: KC, MO
Watch: FedEx 4 next 1
Posts: 2,244
|
My sense is that you have a chip on your shoulder for some reason and that your feelings about Rolex watches is just a symptom of some bigger issue. Personally, I have all the new ones that currently interest me. I love aluminum and ceramic. Currently I'm more interested in adding vintage pieces but again that's mostly because I already own the new ones I'm interested in at this time. If you basically despise all of your Rolex watches it is silly to keep them.
|
16 February 2016, 07:21 PM | #132 |
Banned
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: NYC
Posts: 570
|
I don't like the modern Rolex watches because they are bigger, more square, and have ceramic bezels. But I still like them better than all other brands with the exception of Patek.
That being said, perhaps I'm in the minority. Rolex still sells every watch it makes, is still one of the most recognizable brands, is the epitome of an aspirational purchase, and still makes quality products. Quite clearly, they are doing a lot of things right, even if they don't please the tastes of an aging old fart such as myself. They already took my $$$ and are unlikely to get any more from me, so good job refining the product and marketing and selling to the rest of the potential customers who matter. |
16 February 2016, 08:33 PM | #133 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: uk
Posts: 40
|
I think that ceramic as a material is a fantastic technical move forward. A different issue is the one of size. In a marketplace producing bigger and bigger watches to pander to modern fashions rolex were between a rock and a hard place and have had to move with the times.
Some of their new design cues are spot on (face of the new explorer II with fat hands and steve mcqueen pointer) but in my view some are a little inelegant for example do the horns really need to be that thick?? half a mil off would be better. Rolex is known for the quality of it's engineering and they have lost some of that engineering integrity with their current trend of just piling on more metal for no reason other than fashion. I'm an engineer and I remember a famous lecturer of mine used to say "anyone can design a bridge that will stand, but it takes a talented engineer to design a bridge that will JUST stand" Look at the Eiffel tower, melt it down into a square the same size as it's footprint and the steel used in its construction would be just four inches high! If the current Rolex fashion designers were tasked with designing a MKII Eiffel tower how fat and ugly (ie over engineered) do you think its legs would be!! |
17 February 2016, 01:29 AM | #134 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Wild Blue Yonder
Watch: 116710 LN
Posts: 1,613
|
Interesting observations, Complications. And thanks for sharing that great line from the lecture. I agree with him and with the de Saint Exupery notion that less is more. That said, I don't personally feel the newer models are unnecessarily over engineered. They have lovely lines of their own. Just like the bevelled edges and thinner crown guards of the earlier references have great lines as well. They're all beautiful timepieces to my eyes.
|
17 February 2016, 02:50 AM | #135 |
Banned
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: USA
Watch: of course
Posts: 8,429
|
That's why I have 95% vintage watches. No reason to give up on these, they are soaring in value. You have something special that nobody can go out and plunk down some cash and get.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
17 February 2016, 03:20 AM | #136 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Aug 2011
Real Name: Josh
Location: Lost in time
Watch: Me Nae Nae
Posts: 9,821
|
Quote:
You are certainly not alone in your feelings. I know for sure that many, including myself have questioned our connection with Rolex as a brand and wondered if it was still a brand we want to be associated with. I think most true watch connoisseurs are able to break past those thoughts and continue to appreciate Rolex for what they are – a great watch company with an even greater history. Good luck and I hope you stick it out!
__________________
"Sometimes the songs that we hear are just songs of our own." -Jerome J. Garcia, Robert C. Hunter |
|
20 May 2017, 02:32 AM | #137 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Stockholm
Posts: 1
|
Quote:
Which brands have you found so far? Skickat från min iPhone med Tapatalk Pro |
|
22 May 2018, 07:17 PM | #138 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Real Name: Morten
Location: Denmark
Watch: 16800 Submariner
Posts: 265
|
Just over 1 year later I no longer own any Rolexes. Everything has been sold/traded off and I now only have 2 Audemars Piguet watches in my collection..
For me personally I completely disconnected with the brand and today I have no desire to own a Rolex watch again. But I still enjoy reading this forum as there is much valuable info and I can still get exited for other people who get their first/new Rolex, although I dont personally want one any longer... Just a quick follow up |
22 May 2018, 09:20 PM | #139 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2016
Real Name: Noah
Location: Ulster
Posts: 388
|
Interesting to see you have followed up on the feelings stated in your post.I can empathize as I have transitioned to Tudor for many of the reasons you have stated.
|
22 May 2018, 09:32 PM | #140 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2014
Real Name: Douglas
Location: London, UK & USA
Watch: Submariner 16610
Posts: 723
|
I felt the same way and had a vintage Seiko phase for awhile. I recently purchased a 16610 to rekindle my Rolex hobby.
|
22 May 2018, 09:34 PM | #141 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: DC
Posts: 679
|
With respect, my GMTIIc is superior in every way to the model it proceeded. More rugged, more durable. The flash is no different. Same for my other Rolex’. And all the PM watches were never anything but luxuary from the beginning. It’s the buyers s (us) who’ve lost our way. More st seem to clamor for new watches whose complications they’ll never use. Buying for looks overs function. In this day and age, even SS watches are more jewelry than function.
|
22 May 2018, 10:01 PM | #142 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2016
Real Name: Noah
Location: Ulster
Posts: 388
|
You are certainly right in that modern Rolexs are now luxury jewellery items and for me too blingy. Add in the fact that i do not like bracelets and you can see I am on a 'hiding to nothing' with modern Rolexs haha. Hence. my next watch is going to be a Tudor Black Bay 58 on leather. Just my musings!
|
22 May 2018, 10:32 PM | #143 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jul 2014
Real Name: Ken
Location: USA
Watch: DJ41 (126300-0007)
Posts: 445
|
Quote:
It’s interesting after reading your first post that you’ve ended up with two APs. To me they are in the same direction that caused you to lose interest in Rolex... appreciate your openness in sharing, thank you! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
|
22 May 2018, 11:01 PM | #144 |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: May 2011
Real Name: Kevin
Location: Tornado Alley
Posts: 3,212
|
There have been many threads on when Rolex transitioned from tools to jewelry. Always interesting to hear everyone’s perspective. I think it happened some time in the 1980s.
|
22 May 2018, 11:07 PM | #145 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Real Name: Morten
Location: Denmark
Watch: 16800 Submariner
Posts: 265
|
Quote:
As for my direction into AP…. I have always LOVED to RO design. I had the new 15202 and loved it but parted ways with it to finance a Patek 5960, which I thought was a keeper. But the I came a cross a MINT 5402 that I could get at a very attractive tradeprice. This to me is THE Royal Oak to have. Add to that the fact that it was sold 5 months after I was born and you have something that to me is very special. So I traded the last of my Rolexes for it and was suddently left with the 5402 and the PP 5960… The Patek was really a watch I had a lot of love for as I feel that for the money it’s the best patek value prop – hands down. But ultimately I could never collect Patek as I don’t really like any of the other models. Nautilus does nothing for me. And for me there can only ever be ONE Jumbo…. So I decided to keep the 5402 – yet I knew that this could never work as a “one watch”…. And my love for AP has just grown… Therefore I recently traded the 5960 for an AP 15707 CE (Ceramic Diver) and I feel like the 5402 and the 15707 is a good match… Patek is just not for me I suppose, and neither is Rolex anymore. I don’t see that changing. The ultimate goal however is to land a MINT AP ROO 25721 blue dial… Matching that with a 5402 and you have two watches that probably had the largest impacts on watch designing – period. I would love a 2 watch duo like that. Gerald Genta and Emmanuel Gueit…. |
|
22 May 2018, 11:12 PM | #146 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: Tennessee
Watch: DW-5600
Posts: 1,584
|
Just get rid of the "flash / bling" of the ceramic bezel. Send it to LAWW like I did.
|
22 May 2018, 11:18 PM | #147 | |
2024 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: USA
Posts: 6,171
|
Quote:
That AP is a great reference so I'm genuinely curious about your rationale between the two. |
|
22 May 2018, 11:19 PM | #148 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2016
Real Name: Noah
Location: Ulster
Posts: 388
|
Very nice. Is that just the original ceramic sanded or whatever process to achieve a matt finish.
|
22 May 2018, 11:21 PM | #149 | |
2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Paris, France
Posts: 34,502
|
Quote:
Have to agree. The RO and (especially) ROO take flash to the next level. Beautiful watches though (just like Rolex). Whatever floats one's boat. |
|
22 May 2018, 11:28 PM | #150 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Real Name: Charlie
Location: Miami
Posts: 1,534
|
It's like people who resisted netflix, they preferred going to Blockbuster. Many cited the 'feeling' of going into a video store, etc.
That's all gone now, and everyone moved on. I think Rolex watches evolved into modernity quite well. I think they'd be overtaken by the liked of Omega, had they not responded to market changes. Even Patek Philippe, AP and Vacheron have responded. From the new overseas lines, to PP's sport watches (and their 40, and 42mm sizes, hell that orange Aquanaut Chorno is a perfect example). Compared to other top players, Rolex has done a great job at staying true to their brand. |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.