Reply With QuoteI saw one for the first time a couple of weeks ago,very nice I thought.
Too dressy (and expensive) for me though.
Any one had the pleasure of trying on or seeing one of the new Rolex Cellini moon phase watches released this year? At 39mm, size wise it appears to be a nice size for a smart dress watch. I think the dial is a lovely looking design. Seems to be the first moon phase released by Rolex in 50 years! Still, it is a Cellini....(just realised you could have almost two steel skydwellers for this one complication albeit this is rose gold on alligator strap).
I saw one for the first time a couple of weeks ago,very nice I thought.
Too dressy (and expensive) for me though.
In the blue corner - PA 'Rockefeller' Skinner and in the red corner - Haywood 'The Haymaker' Milton. Seconds out, round 1!
Not a moonface but still a good buy for someone - Rolex Cellini Time 39mm PreOwned Unworn White Gold Watch
https://www.leonarddews.co.uk/watche...ld-watch-p1274
LOLOriginally Posted by SimonK
Best way to burn money ever.
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
Who was the subject of Draft Thread post #44392 ?
I remain confused, but
Last edited by Haywood_Milton; 29th December 2017 at 01:57.
I got to handle this and I also really like it. It has a bit of charm due to the enamel moon display. Good size but it is a little thick (for what it is) so check it out.
Agree that this will fall like a stone (well maybe brick) so buy used if you can.
I am a fan of the modern Cellini. And why not? They are handsome watches and, in 18k gold, fairly priced . Of course they depreciate poorly compared with steel Rolex sports watches. But so do all gold watches. The world can't just revolve around a very few 'safe' watches.Too boring.
The moonphase looks nice, but puzzles me. I wouldn't buy one, although it is pretty on the wrist.
The perspective of those in the Trade will always be different because the goals are different. My only financial perspective in the hobby is not to lose too much. A dealer acting like that would go bust.
Last edited by paskinner; 29th December 2017 at 11:01.
I remain confused, but
Notwithstanding Draft Thread post n° 44392 which, incidentally, was written in good faith and with the best of intentions, anent the desirability of the Cellini you and the good Skinner are the Churchill and Attlee, the Martin Luther and Pope Leo X of the forum; so whenever the merits of this particular bibelot are up for discussion I expect you both to come out swinging, as it were.
Taken as such and thankyou, but it rather dissuaded me from participating in this thread.
As for the grand comparisons, I am reminded of Eric Idle's "He's not the messiah...!"
Loved it in the pictures, and love it in the flesh! As a collector of gold Patek moonphase watches (which generally retail for about twice the price of the Rolex), I thought the Rolex would make a nice great addition to my collection. Unfortunately I can't quite get over the unavoidable fact that Rolex have badged it as a Cellini, and Cellinis are notoriously unsaleable and lose money for fun.
I will own one, but as they are available from most Rolex stockists, I'm happy to bide my time until prices have softened...
MW
Which is a shame as I’d love to hear your opinion...
No kidding.
Rolex is a good make but there are better dress watches out there than the Cellini.
While I used to dislike pointer dates, my diminishing ability to read the date in windows is starting to make them more appealing. I also quite like the abstract way the moon phase is displayed, as one of my bugbears about traditional moon phases is that they show the incorrect shape during the gibbous phases.
While fancy-looking watches aren't my style, the ownership and wearing prospect of one from Rolex seems more relaxing than most of its less-robust-movement-having counterparts — very few of which are anything special these days. And unlike the time and date models, the moonphase version does have the substantial benefit of not saying "Cellini" on the dial.
That said, you'd have to really be into the idea of having a Rolex moonphase to choose one over a comparably-priced FP Journe, Lange, or even high-end Nomos for that type of watch. But I probably would take one over a modern Calatrava. :)
Can I be Martin Luther, please ? Although I assume being an original Protestant in approach, he would not approve of gold watches. As for the Pope.....do they even wear watches?
A used Cellini Moonphase is probably a fair buy, but I have never seen one come-up. I suspect it would be more rugged and reliable than some of the competition. And Rolex complications are pretty rare. Which might help prices.
Incidentally, I doubt that modern Cellinis depreciate any faster than their rivals such as JLC. They are excellent watches. In my opinion, maybe the best dress watch at the price.
And I may just be the only person on TZ on spend his own money on one, daft or not.
Last edited by paskinner; 29th December 2017 at 15:41.
Aren't the numbers on the pointered section of the dial smaller than those of a date window, especially a cyclopsed one?
I agree 100%. There's so much wrong with Cellini besides their terrible resale value. These new ones got a nice water resistant case which increased thickness... for a dress watch on a leather strap - uh, OK. I wish they offered a single watch in their catalog that was equivalent in looks and design to a classic Calatrava because I'd much rather deal with Rolex for service than PP and they're a huge bargain used.
You quickly learn to tell the date from the position of the pointer/hand, just like on a watch with no numbers on the dial.
Are they a 'dress watch'? I think they are more 'all round' watch than that. You can wear them every day, for all sorts of activities. And name a gold watch of similar type and price with better depreciation. I don't think such a watch exists. It certainly isn't the Calatrava which costs twice as much and is far more fragile. Very lovely watch, but far less versatile. All gold watch are a bad buy in terms of depreciation.
I find they feel slim and elegant on the wrist. And I suspect they outsell their rivals by a large margin, but probably not to enthusiasts.
Am I the only fan of Cellini on TZ? That would be a shame. The American Rolex Forum is just as disparaging. Lovely watches ...to me anyway.
Last edited by paskinner; 29th December 2017 at 16:56.
Historically? Absolutely. Cellini exists to be the dress watch compliment to Rolex and always has. I agree that the new ones are less "dress only", which only adds to the confusion as to the point of Cellini. I'm not a "hater". I'm exactly the sort of person Rolex should want to sell these watches to. Almost every watch I own is a Rolex and I'd vastly prefer a Rolex designed and serviced dress watch. They just don't produce any that come anywhere close to matching what's out there. If they make something like this:
I'd happily buy it.
Fair enough, and the JLC is very elegant. But I think Rolex is aiming for a wider audience , with a design that is still a 'gentlemans' watch but offers more versatility. You really can wear them to the office and on a walk through a forest. That involves design choices which won't suit purists. But my guess is that the Cellini is the most successful ever in terms of sales. You never get everything.
Id like a Cellini, but wouldn't buy any current Rolex without the new 32XX movement. Id want that extra elegance both inside and outside...
Good point. Strange that the new movement wasn't fitted to this range, given that it was already in production for other models when these low-volume models were introduced.
Posting Permissions
