Has Rolex ever commented on the ridiculousness of ADs?

Perrier

Sure, that's exactly what I do, but what I'm asking is has Rolex commented on this? It seems weird that they'd allow so many potential and existing customers have such bad experiences with their distributers. Maybe there is a level of incompetence at their executive level.

Ree

They did comment: https://news.yahoo.com/why-the-rolex-watch-shortage-is-a-perfect-storm-144250922.html
"The scarcity of our products is not a strategy on our part. Our current production cannot meet the existing demand in an exhaustive way, at least not without reducing the quality of our watches - something we refuse to do as the quality of our products must never be compromised. This level of excellence requires time, and as we have always done, we will continue to take the necessary time to ensure that all our watches not only comply with our standards of excellence, but also meet the expectations of our customers in terms of quality, reliability and robustness. Rolex does not compromise on what it takes to produce exceptional watches.

All Rolex watches are developed and produced in-house at our four sites in Switzerland. They are assembled by hand, with extreme care, to meet the brand's unique and high-quality standards of quality, performance and aesthetics. Understandably, this naturally restricts our production capacities - which we continue to increase as much as possible and always according to our quality criteria.

Finally, it should be noted that Rolex watches are available exclusively from official retailers, who independently manage the allocation of watches to customers."
--
Meanwhile, Patek's take on this issue was much more straightforward: https://swisswatches-magazine.com/b...nt-thierry-stern-and-wempe-ceo-kim-eva-wempe/
Thierry Stern: "I’ve closed a lot of doors in the last few years. Not because I felt like it - because I knew I wouldn’t have enough pieces. I can’t just increase my production like that. And I don’t want to, to be honest. So, unfortunately, the only way to help the retailers was to close some of them to help the others have a few more watches. That was a very difficult decision for us as well. Also, with a location like this [Wempe], you have to make a certain amount of revenue. As you can see, Wempe has highly professional employees who should also earn a good salary and I have always fought to keep the profit margin good for retailers. I don’t want to be like some groups who are maybe a bit tougher and whose profit margin is maybe too low at the moment. I’m not greedy in that regard. I think it’s a fair relationship that we’re going to have. I make money. Retailers have to make money, and the customer also wants to be happy. My job is also to protect the value of the watch that customers buy."
Is that the reason why you keep taking products out of the range?
Thierry Stern: "Yes, that is exactly the reason why we sometimes take references out of the program. The best example is certainly the Nautilus, but I’ve done it with many others. Why? Because I know that Patek Philippe has to constantly evolve. I don’t want to be a hero model brand. Secondly, it’s because that’s how the value of our customers’ collections will increase. I think it’s part of my job to help them do that. It’s as simple as that."
--
My personal opinion is that Rolex has been taking a page off Patek's playbook, they're just not as transparent about it.

gbesq

It may well be that Rolex is taking a page from Patek’s playbook, but in terms of their watches Rolex is NOT Patek - or AP, VC or JLC for that matter - and they’re never going to be.

Ree

Indeed. They're far from being Patek or any of the higher end brands. But I think they're certainly trying to go upmarket, with all the marketing jargons in their responses above (assembled by hand they said?). Tudor has been built to fill the other market.

The part of the playbook that I think some 'luxury' brands have finally learnt is that some products are best used as rewards to loyal customers. They want their main product lines to be available, but keep the harder to get items as rewards to their loyal customers.

Daytona? 'Pepsi' GMT? Speedy 321? Snoopy 50th? Hermes Birkin? Ferrari?
https://www.carexpert.com.au/car-ne...part-of-the-process-loyal-owners-get-priority
“For something that is special and good, people are willing to wait,” Ferrari Australia president Jan Voss told CarExpert at the Australian Grand Prix. “I suggest people make the waiting time a little sweeter by picking up a pre-owned Ferrari while they wait and either trade it back or hold on to it by the time the new car comes around.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...d-sent-ordinary-women-ask-Hermes-handbag.html
"This exclusivity and the subsequent mystique that surrounds the Birkin and Kelly has proved to be a phenomenally successful marketing trick."

gbesq

I generally agree with that assessment, but Rolex seems to want to convey the impression that its enitre annual production of watches - estimated to be somewhere between 850,000 to 1,000,000 units - is made by hand (by Swiss elves, no doubt, as part of the mystique). There's a big difference between made by hand and assembled by hand (credit to Rolex for at least using the word "assembled" in its statement). Machinery, albeit very sophisticated machinery, is used in the production process at Rolex just like so many other luxury Swiss watch manufacturers.

Perrier

Sure, that's exactly what I do, but what I'm asking is has Rolex commented on this? It seems weird that they'd allow so many potential and existing customers have such bad experiences with their distributers. Maybe there is a level of incompetence at their executive level.