I'll be watching a journalistic program and to my surprise they claim that Rolex is some kind of non profit organization. True or false? Rolex protects the penguin (and more). They have become a status symbol because of their looks and the high prices, but as a Rolex wearer you can also be proud of where this company's profits are heading. Rolex has no shareholders and returns its dividends through an NGO to employee training, environmental research, and arts and culture. For example, Rolex has a mentoring program in which they connect young artists with renowned artists. The foundation annually presents awards to which they link sums of money. This also applies to Pablo García Borboroglu, founder of the Global Pinguin Society. The money received was spent by this biologist in research into endangered penguins in Argentina, and training for people in the area. The biologist was able to increase the number of penguin nests from six to eleven hundred.
No, they are owned by a charitable trust. How much of the money they make is given away, only they really know.
Do they publish their accounts? Not sure how a charitable trust work. But in UK it would be regulated and accounts would have to be published for that size of organisation.
Lack of transparency is kind of a huge problem for any organization claiming to be a non profit. That would make me highly suspicious.
Would surely be interesting to know how they do reinvest the majority of their earnings into charitable projects. Surely, it is the sole reason of their dealer business model
The finances and extent of charitable giving of a charitable trust formed under Swiss law are cryptic at best. There is no financial transparency on a level comparable to that required of an IRS 501(c)(3) charitable organization under U.S. law. You’ll find far more financial disclosure, including the extent of charitable giving, in the for profit Swatch Group’s annual report to its shareholders. Another reason that I’m not a fan of Rolex.
Wilsdorf also spoke out against the Nazis during ww2 and helped allied POWs by sending them Rolex watches after their own watches had been confiscated by the Nazis. One such was a chronograph used in the “great escape” to measure the time taken for guard patrols. https://www.warhistoryonline.com/world-war-ii/rolex-watched.html
Any attempts to find charitable projects yields surprisingly small amounts. They posted it a few years ago...
“The foundation annually presents awards to which they link sums of money” - however, to access these awards one has to first be presented some similar, cheaper, less desirable awards, and then join a long list to be able to access the desired award
Considering the huge amount of money they must be making, you’d think they could do more than just do mentoring programs for artists and protect the penguins. Maybe protect the polar bear too? I like the bit about Wilsdorf speaking out against the nazis, but that’s a different point.
They sure make a charitable donation to F1 and the Golf Majors each year plus Broadcast slot donations so they can’t be all bad can they!!!! Just imagine how charitable they could be if they had watches people wanted to buy all the time in their chosen retailers. Utter bull, small controlling board insular and totally controlling who make a large fortune each year. Think Spectre when they are in Rome at the big table when Bond is outed. Fantasy? Maybe.
https://hanswilsdorf.ch/ Here is an official website of the said foundation and here are 'Rolex' records from the Swiss Trade Register; ROLEX SA https://ge.ch/hrcintapp/externalCompanyReport.action?companyOfsUid=CHE-105.962.823 Rolex Holding SA https://ge.ch/hrcintapp/externalCompanyReport.action?companyOfsUid=CHE-102.844.305 Rolex Promotions SA https://ge.ch/hrcintapp/externalCompanyReport.action?companyOfsUid=CHE-101.604.810 Those won't tell you lots interesting things, names of the members of managerial board, the dates of the fusions, names of the auditor - stuff like that, but no Statutory Accounts (which is fine - companies which are not listed do not have to public their Accounts). I do taxes for a living, open secret in our environment says that it's great idea to set up a foundation high on the top of your structure, as a 'mother company' let's say. Under certain circumstances, foundations are exempt from the corporate tax (pretty much in every OECD country). The foundation in a homeland is a very decent alternative to an aggressive tax optimization in one of those exotic countries you probably never been to. IKEA is another, even more known, example of the company held by a private foundation(s).
Anything they give IMO is a great thing. I’m not going to bash them when my own charitable efforts don’t come anywhere close to theirs. Some people seem to automatically assume they are not at par with others or their non profit status because they don’t disclose. I am sure that, no matter how different the regulations may be, they DO exist in some shape or form. Otherwise every organization in Switzerland, including Richmond, would be non profit. we should always take a look at ourselves before being too vocal. Glass houses and all that jazz.... Of course even being not for profit it doesn’t not mean the officers, executives and employees are not getting paid, or that a portion of the profits does not go to business development in one form or another. It normally means that what is left AFTER, operational costs, fixed costs and any affiliated cost ( which would include leases, mortgages, travel and other expenses that can be attributed to the business, is donated to charity. So ( not knowing Swiss law) there is certainly room for gray and even dark areas on the equation but, unless any of us actually knows, then we may as well also consider the positive possibilities. Bottom line, they could keep all the money. Right?
