All the great luxury brands...of which Rolex is a key member...have to pull-off a difficult trick. They need to project an image of luxury and exclusivity, while actually turning into mass-marketers. Thus we have Mercedes producing the best selling saloon in the UK (C class), while the BMW series 3, outsells the Ford Mondeo.
Same with Rolex. It sells around 800,000 watches every year, but must still seem hard to get and desirable. Quite a high-wire act. They are the masters at this game.
The 'brand' has definitely changed. I bought my first Rolex in 1984 and I have seen the company evolve from a small, exclusive watchmaker, to a global mass market status symbol.
OK, the whole marketplace has changed, but not everyone sees the appeal of chasing the latest 'must haves'. This is why the serious investments are from the vintage era.
Sorry. My quota of explaining obvious stuff was filled by my four year old. You'll have to find a way to figure out for yourself, what everyone seems to already know.Originally Posted by stefaulkner
Perhaps you could ask a parent?
My son tried to sell my watch?
Someone who lies about the little things will lie about the big things too.
Watchfinder listed one last week for £16,750.00 and it sold in a day or two. The latest one at £17,460.00 must be a PB for them, but it is brand new and fully stickered. I bet it's gone by the weekend.
In general finding one under £15k is not easy, so one in the £13ks is a great price and would be easy to sell and recoup the purchase price if necessary. Buy one at a premium and leave your name on the lists. If you get the call you can keep the new one and get your money back on the old one.
The 116500LN is very different to the 16520. I had the 16520 at the end of 2015 and sold it after a week, although in less than 12 months that has gained about £8k in value - typical.
It was intestesting to see the comments earlier in the thread about the cyclops. If you want a watch with a completely unnecessary cyclops that makes it look bloody aweful, get yourself a SD43, with that Rolex have clearly shown how to f**k up a perfectly good watch.
Last edited by Wallasey Runner; 11th January 2018 at 00:37.
You’re on fire Chestnut. Surprised you have kids though.
Economics 101!
M
Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk
Breitling Cosmonaute 809 - What's not to like?
When handled it does come alive and you realise just how perfect the dimensions and design are.
Our Lord HM has a few “cheap” (relative term) ones available at present. I am tempted to part ex my 116503.
The two whites have just been quite heavily reduced and must be two of the cheapest in the U.K. I would do it whilst the opportunity is there. He did have three, but the other one found a good home.
Last edited by Wallasey Runner; 11th January 2018 at 18:57.
Indeed.
If it’s just a watch why didn’t you buy a Casio
I would agree that Joe Public probably associate Rolex watches as having cyclops, but they weren't introduced on the Submariner until 15 years or so after the launch of the watch and the SD ran from 1967 until the SD43 in the last 12 months without a cyclops. Clearly adding a date and slapping a cyclops over it added some sort of mass market appeal, which Rolex are never slow to tap into.
I also like Rolex watches with a crown at 12 o'clock rather than a big white triangle, something that I feel gives the Daytona an added touch of class, just a personal opinion. The bigger the range, the more choice for the masses.
[QUOTE=Wallasey Runner;4628229
I also like Rolex watches with a crown at 12 o'clock rather than a big white triangle, something that I feel gives the Daytona an added touch of class, just a personal opinion. The bigger the range, the more choice for the masses.[/QUOTE]
I am the other way round. I think the crown makes it a bit too obvious that the watch is a Rolex. The lower the key the better.
And it's gone, it didn't even make it to the weekend. Haywood has today listed a third one at £13,999.00 which must be the cheapest in the U.K., excluding private sales and list price for the chosen few.
You on commission?
Personally I’d have saved £3.5k and had a day in Liverpool. Madness.
No, just as Ally says, why pay £17.5k in London when there's 3 in Liverpool for £14k. Southern softies with too much money.You on commission?
Have you got yourself one yet Ken?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote