Reply With QuoteWell that's about £2800 in today's money, so... Wait actually yes I see what you mean.
was 210 dollars plus tax. Yes just about £160. Someone explain what happened since then. Its the same watch, same company, same methods of production. Just that the advertisers got in through the door and the world became a mug?
Well that's about £2800 in today's money, so... Wait actually yes I see what you mean.
I might be interested at £2800!Originally Posted by jimmbob
M.
Not entirely the same watch, originals had Valjous movements then Zenith along the way and now in-house
doesn't justify it though... @ 6K+ for an entry level SS Daytona these days -
using an inflation calculator and assuming wikipedia is right on the year of introduction of the cosmograph daytona being 1963, means £160 = £3,054.92 in today's money
Actually its more like 1700 dollars in todays money. Ie £1400. Yes we are mugs to pay the price.
A waiting list for the watch is clever marketing. There is no shortage of these watches. Its an artificial shortage to justify the sky high pricing. In the modern world there can be no company even in switzerland that cannot ratchet up the production. They make them, store them and sell them very slowly.
Gosh, how clever of you. You seem to know everything.
Hey i am always happy to show you the light....sucker
One hell of an investment piece for anyone lucky enough to have bought one in the early days. The Paul Newman dials are six figure watches these days and even the normal big red dial is £30k+
I somehow doubt that the Daytonas sold today will reach those heights in years to come.
How exactly am I sucker? I sold my Daytona almost doubling my money a few years back.
What's your story?
Another 'luxury watches are too expensive' shocker, we all have the choice to buy or not to buy, there are many worse offenders though
Id like one :)
And the rest a Cosmograph Daytona is £7950 and was introduced in 1965
Your inflation math is way off, the price today would be around £2900 as a straight inflation increase.
And your point being?
All companies, especially luxury companies use the wait and feel special method. All part of the 'glamour', if you could just walk into any AD buy anything you want (funds allowing) and just walk out again the luxury market would fail.
I've had one, great piece of kit.
As to the luxury watches too expensive? Rubbish.
The poor chap doesn't seem to get the point of luxury items, the pricing is all part of it. If luxury items were inexpensive, they'd just be....... well, items
- - - Updated - - -
As you stare down a tunnel at the oncoming train
He's made 93 posts since May of this year, and is trying hard to make a point about Rolex values, the next thing he may just start suggesting that Bulova are every bit as good.
Firstly, yes we're mugs in the sense that the sales price of the product cannot be justified by taking the cost of production and allowing a sensible profit margine. But that's just a factor of buying expensive watches - they're jewellery as much as they're functional, and we all know that when we buy anything remotely in this area.
Secondly, do you really think that Rolex makes loads of these watches, then trickle them out of the door? I can assure you that ain't the case; they instead have invested heavily in the brand over the last decades to ensure that when anyone other than the most watch-obsessed snob thinks "luxury watch", the next word in their mind is "Rolex".
This is capitalism in action; if others are prepared to put as much effort into establishing and maintaining a brand, they can potentially threaten Rolex's position. But they'll need to be very good, and have extraordinarily deep pockets.
Not values as such, but prices.He's made 93 posts since May of this year, and is trying hard to make a point about Rolex values, the next thing he may just start suggesting that Bulova are every bit as good.
Some do forget that Rolex SA doesn't make a profit, so it can't profiteer.
All the money is either reinvested into the company or to the foundations and their many charitable works
Rolex is one of the very few that does all of its production independently in Switzerland, starting with raw materials.
Here's what the Swiss franc has done compared to the US dollar since 1963:
And here it is compared to the GBP:
This doesn't include inflation, either.
Anyone want to re-do the analysis in light of this cold, hard fact-ery?
This doesn't include inflation, either.
...but what do I know; I don't even like watches!
A big increase in swiss franc since 1963. I quoted Dollar prices though.
Did other basket of items increase in Switzerland since 1963 as the daytona did. Thats the real calculation.
- - - Updated - - -
Maybe or maybe not. As a trust their finances are hidden and never published.
If you don't know the answer, take up another hobby. Like knitting, for example.
Or you could always buy a Seiko monster or Sumo and not have to stay up at night wondering how the prices go up so much.
Oh yes.... You my friend have answered the question......
I bought a SS Rolex Daytona Cosmograph in Askeland (Norway) for £300 in 1981, to put things in perspective at that time a Bi metal DJ was £900 in Norway and approx £1500 in the UK.
I wish I could go back in time and buy more. LOL
Irrelevant that you quoted dollars, apart from inflation the strength of your local currency against others also has an effect on price, do you not know how international money markets work?
There is no maybe / maybe not. The Wilsdorf foundation is a charitable non profit organisation.
One of their main benefactors is a local horology school, helping teach the next generation of watch makers the skills needed to keep the industry going.
They also sponsor may sporting events like F1, sailing and polo
I love it that rolex - sorry, the Wilsdorf foundation - have as a "benefactor" what most companies would call their training department. And their charitable organisation sponsors such good, needy, causes as F1, sailing and polo - presumably only asking for the minor favour of having their logo plastered all over the events in return for their generousity to those starving drivers, sailors and polo players...
Incidentally, there is no sarcasm when I say I love it - its all very clever stuff... and certainly not bent at all...
Which was what? This, like most of your posts, seem to have no point?
I would say to Nansbread that, as my last post, I hope, indicated, the majority of the forum are very aware that rolex watches are, taken as the sum of their parts, ridiculously overpriced. I would also say that the forum, by and large are aware of the nature of rolex as an organisation.
For a variety of reasons, ranging from denial to acceptance, with many in between, we really don't care.
Give it up.
Wow what a cynic!
Name one other luxury watch company that not only invests in itself (sponsorship/advertising) and also invests in the future of its own industry? And who's to say those trained end up at Rolex anyway.
I don't know.... Try to do something good!
Ding dong.
The only thing I would add is that they are not the only watch brand that are ridiculously overpriced. All the major brands are. I never understand why they are singled out.
Those guys...
It gives members like Bongo Bongo a cause. Look at his posts - nothing else there...
I think its because theyre the most well-known and successful player of the game - at least that's why I single them out - when I choose to criticise them, and also when I choose to admire/defend them...
Yes, it probably is that simple.
And on the subject of members with recurring post themes...
- - - Updated - - -
Id say so. Its only when members get bitchy or take things personally that it kicks off.
I like to moan.
You slag Rolex.
Sorted.
I also compliment them. Ive stated, many times, that the seadweller and submariner (without date) are my favourite watches of all time for instance...
I think they are perhaps the best manufacturer of steel "sports" watches in the world. I say this quite a lot...
... in fact, only a couple of posts ago, I acknowledged rolex's success and popularity.
Edit - I hate gushing fanboyism - but who doesn't?
Last edited by Umbongo; 29th August 2015 at 09:59.
Not Rolex, but this chap took a look at another long lived standard of the watch world, the Omega Speedy. . He used Swiss wages and real estate prices as a gauge. The upshot being that yes the Speedy is more expensive today than it was in the late 60's, 70's and 80's. The Rolex would be similar.
A lot has changed in the market since then of course. The "quartz crisis", the rise of the Swiss Franc(which really hurt them), the return of the Swiss as conglomerates holding many brands(not Rolex of course), the rise of the mechanical watch as luxury and the rise of the "tool watch" as luxury with it. On the latter front if we look at adverts and prices in say 1970 for divers watches, Rolex Subs were and had to compete for the same market as Omega, Zenith, Longines et al and unlike today their prices were pretty much in line with each other. Some brand divers were more expensive, Certina for example. Rolex were more a "working man's luxury" watch. Consider the tales of one owner Subs and the like where a military chap bought one in a PX in 68 or whenever. Few enough military lads are buying Rolexes like that today. Consider the UK MOD who bought in Rolex Subs and Omegas for their divers, I really doubt the MOD would have stumped up anything like the price new ones are today no matter how we adjust for inflation etc. Rolex and the perception of them* and the range of their market has changed too. Especially in the US of A. When one reads 50's and 60's American periodicals mentioning watches Rolex are notable by their absence in that market. Cracking that market really put them into the stratosphere. The other aspect to consider is that back in the day they were made in far smaller numbers, so today there are more of them and they're more expensive. That's pretty impressive marketing to pull off and fair play to them. One factor why original Daytonas go for big money is that they weren't made in large numbers and I've read elsewhere they weren't great sellers at the time.
In the end though it boils down to this; your money, your choice. Buy what you like and sod the begrudgers.
*The perception of them as chronometers has also changed in a big way. In the 20th century chronometer trials Rolex were either entirely absent from the prizes or also rans.
Good post there.
+1000. They're not close to being the worst for this. Never mind that they are an amazingly well bolted together bit of kit and don't nosedive in value the second you walk out of the shop, indeed will keep, even increase in value. That's not too shabby. If we were discussing a brand like Hublot on the other hand Even a brand like Patek can be quick to ladle on the bull when it suits. QV claiming a history in aviation off the back of just two one off prototype examples from the 1930's. While their fans can sometimes go overboard, Rolex themselves are pretty BS free in a market that tends to be full of it.
Yes, I think so. People (who can) who are prepared to pay (say) £22,000 for a wristwatch are paying mainly for the price.
So you believe that somebody who buys your fictitious "£22k" watch is largely influenced by the price rather than the looks, case material, movement or brand?
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
What a nonsense.
Someone who lies about the little things will lie about the big things too.
Certain people would not spend that money, when fakes are available for a fraction of that cost.
In this case, the statement is made by a supporter of said fakes, as I understand, making the statement void.
I dont own either Rolex or Omega watches prefering more left field offerings such as Dornbluth , sinn, JLC. however i appriciate those brands and some of the models , Both Rolex and Omega have invested huge amounts on marketing to keep them in the public eye and in the general publics mind the brands to aim for !. In a way perhaps we have those brands to thank for the currently healthy state of the mechanical watch market , in spite of a world where we all know watches are no longer needed , those companys have spend huge amounts convinceing us that wearing a SMP will make us feel just a little "bond" or Rolex constantly bombarding us at Grand Prixs , Polo matches , or yacht racing making the general public believe that a Rolex has huge glamor and is something to aspire to !!. Marketing is where it is in the modern world ! Not something that i personally think is a good thing ... But that is the way of the world ..
As Frank Williams said when CVC took a major share in F1 , Formula 1 has been hijacked so get used to it .... My opinion is that Basically it is a world full of marketing bullshit , we cant change it so better get used to it !!!
I thought that during the Zenith movement era of Daytonas there really was a limited supply of watches. I can't recall where I heard/read it it but I was led to believe it was thus:
Zenith supplied a limited amount of movements to Rolex, Rolex in turn wanted to put the movements in their higher profit precious metal watches, thus limiting the amount of movements available for their SS models. Supply and demand. More people could afford the SS models but the number of SS watches were less, hence genuine albeit exaggerated waiting lists.
I have a Rolex Daytona purchased 2004 and have the original sales receipt of £3670 ( I wish was my purchase price) and current RRP £7950 so watch has gone up £389 a year for 11 years silly money
Posting Permissions
