Also, people don't like them - if they can't afford them)
@Decrin you do know you can edit the title
Yes word of advice, don’t join Rolex Forum as “ Overpriced Seiko,s” as a Screen Name. They didn’t like that apparently..... They were quite a serious bunch years ago.....
The way Rolex does business, the words "charitable" or "trust" are not part of the vocabulary...
That, unfortunately, is an accurate description of most large nonprofit organizations and, although I regret having to say it, that includes organized religion.
I don't like them (pretty much any modern Rolex) and I can certainly afford them.
Rolex makes a good product. I simply don’t find their watches to be attractive. The cyclops on many of their models just ruins the dial for me and I find many other models to be gaudy. Omega has certainly had its fair share of ugly models over the years, but I generally find their styling to be far superior to Rolex.
Rolex AD don’t want my money. Rolex don’t want my money. My money is good money : a dollar is still a dollar , no more no less. So I have been spending on Non Rolex. Actually I have been spending on Omegas
Same. But that's what Rolex marketing has managed to do: convince the world that it is the watch you must wear to show everyone you have "made it" and, if you don't have one it must possibly only be because you can't afford it. Geniuses.
I don't dislike the sub but it isn't worth the hassle while I can have lots of other watches I really like without Rolex shenanigans. I would rather cut my arm off than being caught with a Daytona around my wrist.
Yes, and there is a certain segment of the collecting community that just can't believe that you don't actually want what Rolex is selling, so they pull out the old "your just jealous because you can't afford one" line...
When Rolex starts putting out something like this, at a reasonable price, and without a year long waitlist, then maybe I’ll be interested ...
I thought Michael Bloomberg owned JHU.
Good for you Al. I was actually talking about people who can't afford them, and saying that they don't like it. I don't think, I said there are no people who just don't like the product.
I think Lamborghini and Ferrari make some of the most hideous cars on the planet- and no, I can’t afford them nor would I want them if I could.
Hey, I know where you are I can't say DC is much better, other then the blight tended to be pushed out a bit from the center of the city. JHU has some sweet plots of real estate, but that also have a lot of space in areas that are not the best. I imagine there is some trade-off w/ Baltimore where they try and do more in the worst areas and in return get rewarded by being able to obtain land along the water, etc.
I don't really have any Rolex content to add, other that Under Armor seems very similar to Rolex. The built on an air of exclusivity initially, and positioned it as more of a high-end brand than the established players (Nike and Adidas). Now they own a ton of property, build hotels, etc. They keep their good priced at premium levels, and people tent to have a love/ hate relationship with them.
It's not good or bad for me. What Rolex does with their modern watches is mostly irrelevant to me.
I didn't indicate that you said or didn't say anything specific. I only related my own feelings as a data point.
One question though - when people say they don't like Rolex, how do you actually know they can't afford them? Are they telling you this directly?
I totally agree, one of the many reasons I don't own any Rolex, and don't intend to. I was just quoting the naive statement made before me.
The most successful companies tend to be the ones that market the best, not the ones that make the best product. But surely there are enough 60-year-old Rolexes floating around to illustrate that they do, in fact, make a good product. One's decision to pay current prices are an individual choice. $10,000 - $20,000 is a lot for a watch to many of us, but I'll be at that high end just to have my driveway repaved or a patio installed, and I would get more enjoyment out of a watch (and probably better resale value).
The most expensive watch I have ever purchased was my Navitimer at $2.2k ( my GMT was less than that back when they were stil affordable on the used market). That’s a huge amount of money for me and took time to save it (I don’t buy on credit unless I can pay it off same month). The reality of spending $10k on a watch is foreign to me, but I can think of many I would want to own-other than a Rolex for that kind of money.
Well I use the language "much of the profits" because I am aware that charitable trusts do play games. They can play games in terms of the salaries they give to different executives - and Rolex in particular is well know for re-investing much of their cash back into the brand both in terms of advertising - as well as such things as having an in-house foundry (something that would never make sense for a normal company).
However - the fact remains they are a trust and they do give out charitable money. That has Swatch group beat.
Omega (and many other watch brands) give to charities, sponsor events, etc. so Rolex is not alone in that regard.
If you take the time to look at Swatch Group's annual reports, you will see their charitable efforts outlined.
Separate names with a comma.