Confessions of a former watch flipper by GQ.

Martin_F

I guess my statement was more in line with the original topic of this thread instead of the modification of watches, but if Rolex sued a few flippers, maybe the practice wouldn't be as lucrative any more...

29. Rolex Watches are known to retain and/or increase in value, and the purchase of a pre-owned/vintage Rolex Watch is highly regarded in the watch industry as a smart and reliable investment.

51. Defendants have been unjustly enriched by illegally using and misappropriating Rolex’s intellectual property for their own financial gain. Furthermore, Defendants have unfairly benefited and profited from Rolex’s outstanding reputation for high quality products and its significant advertising and promotion of Rolex Watches and the Rolex Registered Trademarks.

Archer

Unfortunately you are right. People who have been arguing on behalf of Rolex's position don't seem to understand the wider implications. I've had people argue that as an individual, you can mod your own watch and Rolex doesn't care. Well I guess if you consider them classifying your watch a counterfeit not caring, they are right. 🙄

Although people often consider watch blogs to be giving people industry news, they are mostly extensions of the brand's marketing departments. There are some actual industry publications out there, but these are not geared towards consumers, and they are very different from Hodonkey, ABTW, Fratello, etc.

Uniqez

You can put it on https://wetransfer.com/ and share the link here.

Desmodromic

That's for the tip.

I need to finish up work for the day, I am taking tomorrow off. I'll set up and account on post a link to the complaint tonight.

jaspers

Come to think of it, it even surprises me they haven't thought about monetizing the second-hand market earlier. What I don't accept is folks buying into the marketing smoke screen that Rolex throws at them—and defend it vigorously without realizing they're being played.

jaspers

I second that—thanks for helping us not pay Pacer disproportionate amounts of money to basically access public information. After having read this post on the Fashion Law Blog, I think we might need to transfer this discussion to a different thread, though. Rolex v. Reference Watch is purely about trademark infringement, and it seems not at all about resale restrictions.

Desmodromic

But the claim that a modded watch is a counterfeit, if upheld, could have repercussions down the road, and not just for watches.

To be honest, I doubt it will get that far. Don't see these defendants as having the war chest to survive what looks like to be a very aggressive Rolex. My guess it that they will settle and cease, or settle and enter into a licensing agreement.

M'Bob

I don't quite understand their thinking here. Why not just agree to service under the auspices that whatever modifications were made would have to be returned to original spec...despite how expensive that would be.

jaspers

Well, the buck has to stop somewhere. As a buyer, you have a certain responsibility to treat a product well after purchase—you can’t apply for company warranty after having behaved reckless with the product. Now what constitutes reckless is a matter for debate, but tampering with a watch and changing out parts seems a pretty textbook case to me of a producer justifiably not accepting for repair under warranty. Outside of warranty: you break it you buy it.

Gav1967

think there may be some confusion. not sure the post you replied to was indicating a service under warranty just a paid service. once you have modified the watch the warranty is null and void anyway

Archer

In comparison, if Omega gets an altered watch in, they will offer to restore it back to it's original state if the owner is willing to pay. If the owner refuses to pay, only then will Omega refuse the service.

kingsrider

At what point does a watch cease to be a flip?. Is there a do not sell before date to avoid this epithet. I just sold a watch for three times what I paid for it. I got the watch very cheap, due to a really bad listing and even worse pictures. I took a risk. I had the watch for three plus years and only wore a handful of times because it was smaller than I thought it would be.
I think it qualifies for a FLIP, but did I show poor decorum in profiting? I don't think so. I priced it according to what my research told me it was worth on the open market.