I just wanted to get your take on it...? I'm in the market for my first waterproof professional watch and I'm torn between Omega and Rolex. Both have their good points, but what doyou guys think about the 2.5 Magnification otherwise known as the "Cyclops...?"

 

I can take it or leave it - it can be difficult to read the date on a Rolex at certain angles. Although relatively small, the Omega date is easily readable on their gents models. Which watches in particular were you looking at?

 

Not a cyclops fan here, but I think you got a line from the salesperson.

 

I don't care for the cyclops. I can read the date just fine and I think it makes the dial look weird when viewing. I like a clean surface.

 

I like the Planet Ocean as well as the Yachtmaster. I think the PO is very clean and has a smooth ceramic bezel and no Cyclops... Just looks more modern. But it bugs me that most people say rolex has higher resale value. The clean surface is really desireable.

Then the Omega Boutique doesn't want to negotiate at all!

 

Neither did most Rolex dealers and they weren't boutiques. Used to be you couldn't expect a discount on the brand, especially on the popular stainless models like the Daytona.

 

I like Rolex, but I don't like the cyclops and personally I think Rolex continue with it because it is an intrinsic part of their styling, it's always been there and Rolex do not make major changes.
I would guess that a new Rolex would depreciate less than a new Omega, but I havent looked too closely and this may come down to individual models.
If you are buying to wear, I would buy the watch i like the look and feel of most.

 

when it comes to resale - the old adage has been that 'friends only let friends buy Rolex for re-sale'...

I think this is true right now...however - you have to give things time to evolve..If you look at Omega - the novelties, the advances in movement, some of the limited productions, and the boutique model designed to keep prices fixed...in time the resale will increase...

looking at Rolex - a datejust does not have as great resale becaue the modern ones look a heck of alot like the vintage ones that can be had for 1/5th the price...and ....worse yet ...the movement is very similar as well...

gievn the extreme mass production of Rolex ( almost 1 million watches per yr) the supply/demand ratio will also change...

the up and coming generation are already starting to make comments akin to Rolex being an old man's watch... so a shift is coming...
Rolex is trying to buck the old man trendd with bigger cases and following watch 'fads'...BUT - they are pricing them up such that most ADs I know are either diverting inventory to the Grey market, or 'secretly' discounting...when it becomes common knowledge ( and in the age of the internet - what isn't common knowledge) that a model is actually 'worth' 30% less MSRP - that devalues it's Veblen status...


I think the omega approach will eventually pay off...but will be determined in years, maybe decades... not moments...

As far as the Cyclops goes - I think the sales lady was trying to subliminally reinforce the notion that Rolex is an Old man's watch -

I think the cyclops is a trademark, and I wouldn't have any of my Rolex without it (except for my Daytona) -
Truthfully - if you want to talk innovation and practicality - my Ulysse Nardin Diver has the Cyclops UNDER the crystal - which creates the magnification without the bubble that could be struck/scratched or knowcked off....that is brilliant innovation -

the Fact is...can you really imagine an Omega with a bubble cyclops like Rolex?... Shite hit the fan enough when the 'new' AT bracelet bore a striking resemblance to the oyster....

 

Superdoc explain it very well. Rolex holds value very good. But NOT Yachtmaster. If you want to bet Daytona, Submariner and GMT are the ones to go. If I were you I will try to find 1-2 year old Planet Ocean (with 2-3 years warranty intact). The resale value will not go down too far from your purchase value and you will get the watch with young and modern model rather than old Oyster case looking.


Seriously, high end mechanical watch build was so good that they can stand 40-50 years of wear, so buying 1-2 year old high end watch is almost indistinguishable from the new one (except some very fine surface scratch that you will get within a month of wearing it anyway).

 

Funny, my nearly ten year old Rolex yacht master seems as if it's worth more than I paid for it. I don't know how it's value compares to the Rolex models, but its been a better investment than my last house.

 

I believe it is different country by country. In general they still hold value better than other watches (except some rare pieces PP). In Jakarta the favor in term of market perception and demand is: Submariner, Daytona, Seadweller/Deepsea, GMT2, Milgauss, GMT, Datejust (1or2), Yachtmaster then Airking. Yachtmaster 2 and Skydweller is still rare 2nd hand, so the price is not yet stabilized.

 

I'm not a fan of the cyclops at all either - it's always bothered me. On the other hand, I think that the Submariner No-Date looks great, and a big reason of why it may appeal to me is the lack of a cyclops window.

Although I think the Rolex Deepsea looks decent given that it has a date and no cyclops window, but side-by-side, I find the styling of modern Rolexes to be a little awkward while the comparable Omega Planet Ocean (and Speedmaster) both appear more classic and timeless, and just feel better to ear.

For the record, I do think that the vintage Rolex Subs, like the 6538 look classic.

cheers,
Mark

 

Having an 1980's datejust, I can say I think the cyclops takes away from the beauty of the dial and generally prefer watches without it. That said, what do YOU think? This whole watch game is personal preference.

If you are looking for good resale value, (outside of rolex), look for a limited edition Omega, they go for a similar amount if not less than a comparable Rolex and are more unique.

Best of luck.

 

I'm sure it only seems that way...

The value is only what some one will pay... it may seem like it is going for XX on ebay/on line...but try selling, and you will find the difference between seems like and the reality....

especially if your Yachtmaster is 10 yrs old - that means old clasp, no engraved rehaute - and no blue parachrom spring...so even if it 'looks' like the Yachtmasters commanding a higher price...it just isn't...not to a serious buyer.

 

rolex has a highly organized and efficient used market. trading a rolex is like trading Apple or GE. For example: I know exactly how much an average condition 1994 full size, steel Yachtmaster is worth right now, within one or two hundred bucks. You probably know as well.

we would need to know how much the other poster paid for his Yachtmaster to know if it's worth more than he paid for it. It certainly could be worth "more".

here's the rub: 99.9% of all swiss wristwatches will never be worth more than their new retail price. That said, most watch buyers will be motivated by stories of a few lucky people who impulsively bought a 1956 Subie while on their
honeymoon in the Bahamas and then left it in their sock and underwear drawer for 30 or 40 years.

 

No argument here about how well Rolex holds its Value -
I'm illustrating a point about some of the 'mystique' of that value - something that some dealers may try to fully exploit.

You see it all the time - sellers listing their 1990's Datejust(for example) for $2000, with a statement akin to "compare at Current MSRP of $6500!"

which is an inappropriate comparison-
in no universe is the decades old watch actually worth current MSRP - but it might seemthat way...especially to most Rolex buyers who aren't horophiles or enthusiasts, and just want a 'Rolex'...


However - It is amazing in and of itself how an item as such could hold value - if you hold onto it long enough, it will be worth more than what you paid...
but I wouldn't expect to retire on the profit...