Community Stories

Interesting Time & Tide Article

spacemission
Posts
1,100
Likes
549
Rolex should give certification and forniture to independent watchmakers.
 
Evitzee
Posts
6,940
Likes
12,993
How many of the top brands allow third parties to sell their products online? Everybody likes to bash Rolex but how are their online practices different from Patek Philippe, Audemars Piguet, independents and other top level brands? Why couldn't Patek Philippe be sued too, or AP, most of their production isn't available at dealers either, much less online. This just seems like a targeted action against a big fish. The EU has a habit of doing this against Apple, Google, Microsoft and other big tech firms. When you can't compete against successful firms haul them into court and fine them. Counter productive.
Edited:
 
Walrus
Posts
9,898
Likes
47,200
Evitzee Evitzee
How many of the top brands allow third parties to sell their products online? Everybody likes to bash Rolex but how are their online practices different from Patek Philippe, Audemars Piguet, independents and other top level brands? Why couldn't Patek Philippe be sued too, or AP, most of their production isn't available at dealers either, much less online. This just seems like a targeted action against a big fish. The EU has a habit of doing this against Apple, Google, Microsoft and other big tech firms. When you can't compete against successful firms haul them into court and fine them. Counter productive.
Well the whole thing seems kinda dumb shouldn’t a company be allowed to sell their products how they wish if it’s not a monopoly or dangerous product. Seems kinda weird to me. Many people complain but Rolex is doing something right
 
D
Posts
886
Likes
470
Walrus Walrus
Well the whole thing seems kinda dumb shouldn’t a company be allowed to sell their products how they wish if it’s not a monopoly or dangerous product. Seems kinda weird to me. Many people complain but Rolex is doing something right

I'm inclined to agree.
Rolex goes to great lengths to protect their brand and online sales seems like opening a Pandora's box to everything that is put in place to working toward the protections for Rolex and the consumer by extension.

Yes, it seems like the EU has engaged in an exercise to slap a big fish like Rolex around a bit.
Just because they can and to show the world how much clout they have over them just for future reference of their doubters to make them think twice or something.

Not to get into the political weeds or anything, but it's no wonder that some want to leave the EU, not to mention the Brexit thing with soverenty as a core issue.
Then there's disenchantment with the WEF and the UN and so on.
What's changed, or is going on that is turning people away from these types of organisations besides the fact they're coming across as being leftist, or leaning into Marxism or something or other along those lines?
 
D
Posts
886
Likes
470
Evitzee Evitzee
How many of the top brands allow third parties to sell their products online? Everybody likes to bash Rolex but how are their online practices different from Patek Philippe, Audemars Piguet, independents and other top level brands? Why couldn't Patek Philippe be sued too, or AP, most of their production isn't available at dealers either, much less online. This just seems like a targeted action against a big fish. The EU has a habit of doing this against Apple, Google, Microsoft and other big tech firms. When you can't compete against successful firms haul them into court and fine them. Counter productive.

It just doesn't makes sense.
Rolex operates out of Europe don't they?

What was it supposed to achieve?
Are they trying to incentivise Rolex to go down the same path as Omega?
It's not like they're going to free up supply any more than is available now, or to push sales into the more obscure parts of Europe?

I would like to know more about who thought it up and who was geting behind it and why.
It takes the will and inclination and expertise to pursue this kind of thing👎
To what effect and who benefits?

As the T&T article suggests.
It will likely end up with online sales channels simply saying "Sold Out".
But I suspect the powers will come after them over that as well because they will think Rolex is manipulating the market in usual fashion.
The investigation will be far reaching if they(the powers) can gather enough evidence and gain enough momentum to prosecute their case.
Edited:
 
YY77
Posts
5,021
Likes
22,607
D Duckie
It just doesn't makes sense.
Rolex operates out of Europe don't they?
I understand there's a difference between Brussels and Paris.

What was it supposed to achieve?
Are they trying to incentivise Rolex to go down the same path as Omega?
It's not like they're going to free up supply any more than is available now, or to push sales into the more obscure parts of Europe?

I would like to know more about who thought it up and who was geting behind it and why.
It takes the will and inclination and expertise to pursue this kind of thing👎
To what effect and who benefits?
I was told it has to do with VBER;

https://www.gtlaw.com/en/insights/2...R, suppliers,reserved for itself (see article
 
D
Posts
886
Likes
470
YY77 YY77
I was told it has to do with VBER;

https://www.gtlaw.com/en/insights/2022/6/the-new-vber-and-vertical-guidelines-explained-key-takeaways#:~:text=Under the new VBER, suppliers,reserved for itself (see article

Many thanks😉

Quickly reading through it one can draw a limited number of plausible conclusions.

The one I take away from it is that it seems as though an organisation like Rolex and the way they need to operate is becoming incompatible with the modern way of doing things and they have been caught up in the ever changing legislation landscape.

Either way, Rolex will have to adapt or die a death of a thousand cuts.
This is potentially going to be a profound change for Rolex given the implications👎
 
D
Posts
886
Likes
470
Thinking about it some more.
It seems as though the legislative changes are designed to capture organisations that operate like Rolex do.
It may well be designed to cramp the Rolex business structure to force change in order to capture more tax(follow the money) and or drive toward more level industry playing fields so that other European watch manufacturers can better compete who aren't structured in accordance with "The Rowlex Way". Follow the money.

Of course Rolex is probably by far the biggest piece of fruit that's hanging the lowest on the tree, so a successful prosecution is going to have the biggest impact.
No doubt there are a lot of leftist lawyers in France that are celebrating their victory and slapping each other on their backs over this.

I'm geting worked up about this.
Then why should I care as I have all the Rolex watches I could want and as long as the servicing isn't impacted I will be fine anyway.
 
Sign up or log in to reply...

Similar threads

AESTime

DOXA SUB600T PACIFIC Time & Tide Ltd Edt.

AESTime Private Watch Sales
AESTime
AESTime
Posts
2
Views
2K
Zman4eva

GQ article - Why True Watch Heads Never Set the Time on Their Watches

Zman4eva Open Discussion
Aurelius
Aurelius
Posts
104
Views
9K
Tony C.

"When Tailwinds Vanish" – an interesting article on the business prospects of the Internet...

Tony C. Open Discussion
The Father
The Father
Posts
6
Views
945
Riviera Paradise

Time+tide video with RA announcing the Omega Basel 2017 collection

Riviera Paradise Modern Omega Watches
Jwit
Jwit
Posts
2
Views
1K
Faz

Rolex Zerograph...a very interesting article

Faz Rolex Watches
Andy K
Andy K
Posts
1
Views
1K
Andy K

NY Times article on Omega - Some interesting facts

Andy K Modern Omega Watches
Nobel Prize
Nobel Prize
Posts
23
Views
3K