Community Stories

October 5th 2020 - Snoopy Celebration

cvalue13
Posts
3,979
Likes
8,988
L labwatch
Each Rolex AD is independently owned and operated and there are no set of rules from corporate on how they sell their watches.

this is undoubtedly false

unless you mean something by “no rules from corporate” that is unobvious
 
Pun
Posts
1,883
Likes
8,099
cvalue13 cvalue13
this is undoubtedly false

unless you mean something by “no rules from corporate” that is unobvious
I agree. Here in India ADs say that each sale to the customer has to be approved by the brand. They may be partly lying to cover their sales to gray market. But its a fact thar buying Rolex is near impossible.
 
L
Posts
83
Likes
75
cvalue13 cvalue13
this is undoubtedly false

unless you mean something by “no rules from corporate” that is unobvious

I know the owner of a Rolex AD. They own more than 6 stores. They have been selling Rolex for over 30 years. Sorry I should have clarified. Rolex USA has nothing to do with AD lists. Each AD is free to makes lists, not make lists, bundle, not bundle etc. Rolex USA does not approve or disapprove of individual buyers at ADs etc. They have nothing to to do with that side of the business.
 
L
Posts
83
Likes
75
Pun Pun
I agree. Here in India ADs say that each sale to the customer has to be approved by the brand. They may be partly lying to cover their sales to gray market. But its a fact thar buying Rolex is near impossible.

I don't know about India but in the USA, Rolex is not involved in vetting buyers. The AD's can sell the watches to whoever they want.
 
cvalue13
Posts
3,979
Likes
8,988
L labwatch
Rolex USA does not approve or disapprove of individual buyers at ADs etc.

Ok, this I have no view on.

But that’s different from:


L labwatch
Each Rolex AD is independently owned and operated and there are no set of rules from corporate on how they sell their watches.

I believe Rolex has many rules on how to sell. E.g., recently there was a thread on an AD that lost its Rolex sales because they showed a Rolex watch next to another brand and didn’t wear white gloves while presenting the watch. This and many other such stories of ADs losing their platform suggest that Rolex HQ has plenty of rules around retaining AD status
 
Newatch321
Posts
220
Likes
110
Csradawg Csradawg
I got mine today! So excited and humbled to be able to have something like this. I had my doubts at times, but it all worked itself out.
Where are you located?
 
L
Posts
83
Likes
75
cvalue13 cvalue13
Ok, this I have no view on.

But that’s different from:




I believe Rolex has many rules on how to sell. E.g., recently there was a thread on an AD that lost its Rolex sales because they showed a Rolex watch next to another brand and didn’t wear white gloves while presenting the watch. This and many other such stories of ADs losing their platform suggest that Rolex HQ has plenty of rules around retaining AD status

Which is why I said "Sorry, I should have clarified" Interesting you felt the need to point out the mistake a 2nd time. Feel free to go for a third if it makes you feel better 😀

The fact remains that Rolex USA has no say in who an AD ends up selling their watches too. Yes, Rolex and many other luxury brands have trainings on how to present their product to the customer. Porsche and Cartier are a couple that come to mind. Rolex owns exactly one store on earth and it's in Switzerland. The others are independently owned and operated.

Keeping to the topic, I placed a full deposit on release day in Oct 2020 with a US OB and I received my Snoopy a little over a month ago. Approx 18 months from deposit to delivery . My friend who placed a full deposit with the same OB got his watch a month later.
Edited:
 
cvalue13
Posts
3,979
Likes
8,988
L labwatch
Which is why I said "Sorry, I should have clarified" Interesting you felt the need to point out the mistake a 2nd time. Feel free to go for a third if it makes you feel better 😀

Since you appear to be fine with being frank, I’ll reciprocate: just as your first comment was drafted to be unclear, even your “clarification” was still not clear.

In any event, my comment was meant more to flesh out the distinction within and for the benefit of the thread as a whole, particularly given how unclear your drafting is.
 
texasmade
Posts
2,408
Likes
2,537
cvalue13 cvalue13
In any event, my comment was meant more to flesh out the distinction within and for the benefit of the thread as a whole, particularly given how unclear your drafting is.
Such a lawyer thing to do!
 
cvalue13
Posts
3,979
Likes
8,988
I should also note that the assertion that Rolex has no say over how and to whom AD’s sell watches isn’t altogether clear

In the lawsuit a couple of years ago now, wherein the plaintiff’s attorney dug up an old (2000-ish?) AD agreement:

(1) I concretely remember that Rolex was able to terminate the AD relationship at any time and for any reason whatsoever, which in effect means ADs must simply please the gods on whatever metric the gods find important

(2) while I remember this detail a bit less concretely, the reason the plaintiff’s attorney had submitted the AD agreement was to show that Rolex prohibited the AD salespersons to be selling to customers in the manner the complaint alleged

That said, a few around here have suggested to have info that Rolex has in more recent history come out to say they have no control over who ADs sell to. The majority assumption has been that these comments are merely convenient plausible deniability so as to insulate themselves from the complaints regarding grey sales, etc.

Which brings me back to point (1) above: Rolex has complete power to care about whatever it wants, and direct ADs to do whatever it chooses; so the “we can’t do anything” line from Rolex is rather rich
 
E
Posts
25
Likes
62
Turkey also got 2 pcs. from the beginning. Something is wrong with Omega on Snoopy deliveries.
 
L
Posts
83
Likes
75
cvalue13 cvalue13
Since you appear to be fine with being frank, I’ll reciprocate: just as your first comment was drafted to be unclear, even your “clarification” was still not clear.

In any event, my comment was meant more to flesh out the distinction within and for the benefit of the thread as a whole, particularly given how unclear your drafting is.

OP post I was replying too "Rolex plays games.....pretend to take names... never deliver but they NEVER keep someones money for 2 years then return it."

After you chimed in and pointed out where I was not clear, I replied below.
Sorry I should have clarified. Rolex USA has nothing to do with AD lists. Each AD is free to makes lists, not make lists, bundle, not bundle etc. Rolex USA does not approve or disapprove of individual buyers at ADs etc. They have nothing to to do with that side of the business.

That is pretty clear to me.

Rolex can't "play games and pretend to take names" RUSA will not sell you a watch. You cannot buy a watch from RUSA or get put on a list or leave a deposit. They aren't involved at the dealer level as to whom the AD chooses to sell the watch too. RUSA is a distributer for Rolex Switzerland. They own zero stores in the US. Omega boutiques are corporate owned so when they take names and deposits, that is Omega corporate holding your deposit and your name on the list.

Hope that clears it up for you.
 
cvalue13
Posts
3,979
Likes
8,988
L labwatch
Rolex can't "play games and pretend to take names" RUSA will not sell you a watch. You cannot buy a watch from RUSA or get put on a list or leave a deposit. They aren't involved at the dealer level as to whom the AD chooses to sell the watch too. RUSA is a distributer for Rolex Switzerland.

The fact that Rolex doesn’t directly own its ADs says little of how Rolex can require their ADs to behave.

For just one example, has anyone ever heard of an Rolex AD taking a deposit for a Rolex? I’ve never heard of it.

So do we believe that every single *independent* AD has individually and coincidentally decided to never take deposits for watches?

Seems plausible there (seemingly) are no Rolex ADs that take deposits not because of independent but convergent decision on the part of each AD, but instead because Rolex has various “collars” on how their ADs behave, including facing customers.
 
L
Posts
83
Likes
75
cvalue13 cvalue13
The fact that Rolex doesn’t directly own its ADs says little of how Rolex can require their ADs to behave.

For just one example, has anyone ever heard of an Rolex AD taking a deposit for a Rolex? I’ve never heard of it.

So do we believe that every single *independent* AD has individually and coincidentally decided to never take deposits for watches?

Seems plausible there (seemingly) are no Rolex ADs that take deposits not because of independent but convergent decision on the part of each AD, but instead because Rolex has various “collars” on how their ADs behave, including facing customers.


Actually I know of two Rolex US AD's that take deposits. Each are in major US cities, Chicago and LA, and unrelated to the other. I have friends with deposits at each of them now. LOL. Now I am one person with a small network of watch collecting friends. If I know of two ADs that take deposits, I'm guessing there are more. For clarity, the AD my friend owns does not take deposits, but they could if they wanted too.

I know for a fact that RUSA does not vet customers at the individual AD level in the US. I know for a fact that they don't want to be involved in that end of the business. My source is someone in the business for over 30 years and sells multiple thousands of Rolex watches a year. Until you prove me wrong, I guess we will just agree to disagree.
Edited:
 
Martin_J_N
Posts
1,396
Likes
2,705
chadeaux chadeaux
Ehm… Who cares about Rolex?

This thread is about Omega Snoopy.

Quite right, it’s a Snoopy thread

😀
 
1118 More Posts...
Sign up or log in to reply...