It doesn't take a genius either to work out that for every Submariner or Daytona that Rolex make, there are two or three people on waiting lists.
I don't suppose that occurred to you as a possible reason you don't see them on dealers' shelves.

 

We're not just talking Subs or other sought after models. We're talking entire stock. You literally see display cases that support 20-30 watches with just 4-5 watches in them. Do you realize how many buyers you need have to do that to a manufactuer with supposed close to 900k produced each year? Just think of how much demand there needs to be for you to walk into an Omega Boutique and see empty display cases...The more likely scenario is that Rolex produces nowhere near 900k+ watches a year. At least they no longer after 2015.

 

Well that just tells me that there are more people that want a Rolex for one reason or another, than people who want an Omega.
If Rolex doubled their production of S/S sports models you still wouldn't see them on shelves until the people on waiting lists got their watches.

 

Due to the lack of ‘Rolex stock’ is one of the major reasons that it is unlikely that you discount. Compare to Omega where discounts from list are achievable.

 

Rolex has been around since 1905. They’ve had 115 years to figure out how to produce enough stock to satisfy demand. There are only two plausible explanations for the paucity of Rolex watches at the point of purchase. First, that Rolex just can’t keep up with demand year after year. If you believe that to be true, then you also have to believe the Rolex is incompetently managed as a going concern. Second, Rolex artificially limits supply to keep demand high, keep retail prices high, keep resale value high, and to create an aura of unobtainable luxury surrounding their products. Ultimately, they’re selling status first and watches second. That’s why there are so many wannabe Rolex owners on waitlists worldwide. In my view, it’s very much a COMPANY centered approach rather than a CUSTOMER centered approach. And that is why you’ll never see a Rolex on my wrist. They make good watches, but so do many other companies that readily have stock to sell, Omega included.

 

I personally don't understand the hype for some of their watches. I find the Daytona dial to be pretty confused and not very legible and many of their other sport watches just seems to be derivatives of the iconic design that is the Submariner. I do like that design and I would buy a GMT Pepsi if I could find it at retail prices but that just won't happen so unlikely that I end up buying one.

 

Bingo!

It really started around 2015. That also happens to be the same year that Rolex got COSC to stop breaking down their numbers so people can't estimate Rolex production numbers. They knew that they wanted to start reducing their production to create an artificial shortage. The plan has worked brilliantly.

https://www.cosc.swiss/sites/default/files/annual_report/RANN2015.pdf. Check out page 13. Rolex had almost 800K movements certified.

Also, remember back in 2015 the displays were full of Rolex watches just like Omega shelves are now.

For those people who still claim that the Rolex shortage is due to demand please take a look at some actual statistics. Here's the Swiss watch industry published numbers on watches exported each year from 2000.

https://www.fhs.swiss/scripts/getstat.php?file=histo_gp_200707_a.pdf

As you can see from the rightmost column, the numbers increased by about 3 fold up until 2015. That's when overall demand stopped growing. Up to that time, Rolex had no problems keeping up with demand. In fact, the demand dropped the years after as Richmont had to destroy €500m in 2018 due to not enough demand / too much supply.

https://www.theguardian.com/busines...m-of-watches-in-two-years-amid-buyback-policy

2015 also happens to be when the Apple Watch was introduced. If you don't think that the Apple Watch has eaten into Rolex demand you are fooling yourself. I think Rolex realizes what Apple Watch represents and they're adjusting to a world scenario that accounts for it. Mainly, by reducing production to stay ahead of the curve.

Sadly, Omega has seen how well Rolex's strategy has worked. Unfortunately for them, they can't use the exact same strategy since they are part of a public company. They can't lie to the public that they're increasing production and doing everything they can to meet demand at the same time as they're actually reducing production like Rolex. So, they came up with some story as to why they should charge 3 times for the same watch, a la 321. Even though the act of assembling a watch by hand adds very little to cost. But the effect is the same which is to build an aura while limiting supply by artificial means.

I think that there's a lot of risk to Omega following Rolex's footsteps in the coming decade as prices move up tremendously while supply gets cut. In other words, people should probably stock up on Omegas while they're still reasonably priced as they will trail Rolex into the stratosphere someday soon.

 

I take a more empathetic approach, maybe because I run businesses. I wouldn't say I'm "turned off" from the Rolex brand. They make great products. Yes, they're overpriced, but I can't name one Omega that isn't. Though Rolex is "more overpriced" there are many many more brands even more egregious. Value retention is also the best. Almost like buying a home in California.

Their practice of limiting supply to go higher upmarket, I can't get mad either. Why wouldn't I do that? Swiss watches have been a symbol of wealth for decades now. If they want to gun for Patek, why not?

I hate how the ADs are trying to bundle gold pieces with hard to get ones. But, if I ran that business, I'd try that too, esp for people who just randomly walk in my door asking only for the models we all know are going for a premium online.

All in all, I think the consumers and are to blame maybe even more than the retailers. Don't buy them and they won't be sold at that price.

Can't stop certain Rolex owners from being D*CKS though. That one I have no solution for.

 

The level of D*CKINESS may be highly correlated to the model purchased. Look at this one - understated, elegant, would fly under most radars, therefore probably low-associated snob appeal and therefore low on the D*CKHEAD meter:

 

I was surprised by how big the Rolex bubble had become when I quite fancied a Datejust to only be told that there was a waiting list, for a Datejust!