Someone recently posted an advertisement from the 60’s saying we will buy your Rolex (no Daytona’s). I wonder if the anti-Daytona attitude was because of possible service issues or just a lack of consumer interest. Tastes do change.
The "Newman" dial Daytonas are indeed quite rare and the craze is certainly due to Mr. Newman himself. This gentleman has a gold mine in his possession!
Manual wind Daytonas were not a popular watch back in the day due to the engineering put into the screw down pusher crown Daytonas. A manual wind chronograph with screw down pushers and crown? Hardly practical. I guess it's unpopularity was directly related to that design especially that most sports models of the brand were automatic. The "Oyster Perpetual" branding was and still is tremendously popular. I wonder is you removed Paul Newman from the equation, if these watches would generate the same interest?
Due to the immense popularity of the Submariner! The early Sea-Dwellers were also subject to being somewhat unpopular back then as they were, for the common man, basically expensive and over engineered Submariners designed for very the very few who happened to be professional saturation divers.
Yesterday's unpopularity resulted in collector appeal and big $$$. Today, run of the mill references like the later 1675s, 5513, 1680 and now the matte dial transitionals have followed suit over the last 10 years. Although I wonder about the collector appeal of these models (yes, made in the millions) they certainly are marvellous and appealing watches but they have unfortunately become objects used for speculation in my view and this due to their connection with the more desirable models and references.
The "Newman" dial Daytonas are indeed quite rare and the craze is certainly due to Mr. Newman himself. This gentleman has a gold mine in his possession!
Manual wind Daytonas were not a popular watch back in the day due to the engineering put into the screw down pusher crown Daytonas. A manual wind chronograph with screw down pushers and crown? Hardly practical. I guess it's unpopularity was directly related to that design especially that most sports models of the brand were automatic. The "Oyster Perpetual" branding was and still is tremendously popular. I wonder is you removed Paul Newman from the equation, if these watches would generate the same interest?
Due to the immense popularity of the Submariner! The early Sea-Dwellers were also subject to being somewhat unpopular back then as they were, for the common man, basically expensive and over engineered Submariners designed for very the very few who happened to be professional saturation divers.
Yesterday's unpopularity resulted in collector appeal and big $$$. Today, run of the mill references like the later 1675s, 5513, 1680 and now the matte dial transitionals have followed suit over the last 10 years. Although I wonder about the collector appeal of these models (yes, made in the millions) they certainly are marvellous and appealing watches but they have unfortunately become objects used for speculation in my view and this due to their connection with the more desirable models and references.
Did Rolex have the habit of buying out old collections and destroy them like many brands do nowadays to "preserve" exclusivity ?
Please tell me which brands do this so I know to never buy one of their watches- that’s actually almost depraved- to destroy history like that.
I think this also speaks to how Rolex was viewed back then versus today- it was a status symbol, but one of quality and precision, not necessarily wealth. My boss bought his GMT not because it was expensive (it was to him but not outragous), but because he actually traveled internationally for business and wanted the GMT feature- it was a tool. Sure, their precious metal watches were expensive, but their tool watches (like the Airking, Explorer, Submariner, GMT) weren't horribly more expensive compared to other quality brands of the time.
You are right, these watches were intended to be useful tools and not super valuable iconic items. I think we need to stop and consider the fact that these watches are only valuable because we say they are. Aside from the fact that they are coveted by certain people, these watches have no real value on their own. They can just as easily be valueless tomorrow if the interested individuals lose interest or move in a different direction. History is full of examples of things that were considered extremely valuable by one generation only to be discarded by the next. While this is a beautiful example of a coveted Daytona, it would make me very nervous to plunk down over half a million on such a watch in hopes that in the decades to come people would continue to consider it in the same light.
Ahhh, my full mint condition collection of Pete Rose baseball cards from every maker from Rookie to last year- went from $$$ to 000 overnight...remember watching the news and saying “oh shit”.
Been there brother. I’m still holding my baseball card collection hoping that some day it will return to its former value. I remember telling myself when I was younger that selling these would take me around the world in my retirement. Ha! Thank goodness I don’t have a bunch into them. This is why I just smile and shake my head whenever I hear or read about someone buying watches as an investment. Caveat emptor!
I actually still have the bulk of my collection and haven’t looked at values in years- are baseball cards worth nothing these days? Haven’t seen a baseball card store in years.
alot of wear on that decal for never being worn,
Unfortunately, they are pretty much valueless except for the most highly sought and best condition cards. As an example, the Dwight Gooden Topps rookie card is selling for about six dollars. A Don Mattingly rookie card is about nine dollars. A Cal Ripken rookie card commands a little more but not much. These days for a baseball card to be worth over $100 it has to be extremely rare and in fantastic condition.
Sorry for the semi hijack of the thread but the issue in the last few posts is sort of relevant. It is a cautionary tale!
Unfortunately, they are pretty much valueless except for the most highly sought and best condition cards. As an example, the Dwight Gooden Topps rookie card is selling for about six dollars. A Don Mattingly rookie card is about nine dollars. A Cal Ripken rookie card commands a little more but not much. These days for a baseball card to be worth over $100 it has to be extremely rare and in fantastic condition.
Sorry for the semi hijack of the thread but the issue in the last few posts is sort of relevant. It is a cautionary tale!
Totally relavent- although many here would argue otherwise as watches and baseball cards aren’t even in the same sphere- but as far as “investments”- yup- 100%. In the late 80’s a Gooden or Mattingly was serious money! Trade shows and stores were devoted to these pieces of paper and I knew people with collections worth hundreds of thousands. I hope they sold back when they were still hot
