Just browsing SC and there is a SS Daytona and a WG one too. Both about the same price!
For the record, I am not smearing either seller nor suggesting that they are over priced, it’s just a crazy indication of how mad the market has gone!
Printable View
Just browsing SC and there is a SS Daytona and a WG one too. Both about the same price!
For the record, I am not smearing either seller nor suggesting that they are over priced, it’s just a crazy indication of how mad the market has gone!
As Mick would say, this is the market price. I do agree with madness of it when the list price is £9k against £30k+ yet they end up with a similar market price today.
Having owned the steel version I think I would opt for the WG version. The steel watch is a £9k watch regardless of its market value and the excess is just bragging rights.
I hadn't looked at the price of a SS Daytona on the pre owned market until today, blew me away whats being asked.
Then again you pays your money and takes your choice!
On the face of it if you landed on this planet with no awareness of market forces or the Rolex brand it makes no sense. But, there is clearly higher demand and higher value to a stainless steel watch than a gold one.
I often wonder why people pay £500k for a shoebox in London when they can buy a 4 bed detached in Chester. The value is what the value is.
To think someone once bought that watch at £9.5k and I bet they are regretting today.
I thought I’d dreamt it. I saw both but couldn’t see the WG one when I went to check back. Unreal!
For the record I think the prices on Daytona's are insane.
However there must be less than £2k worth of gold material within a 18kt gold watch, so really when you think about it you're paying the same crazy premium on both the gold and steel more or less. It's just looks worse on the steel because the mad premium is built into the RRP on the gold version already.
Pretty sure I'm the original owner of the Daytona, and yes I sold it for £12.5k... no regrets, it was what it was worth at the time and I needed the money for a house move.
A very healthy way of looking at things.
It is pointless to say it is a 10k or a 15 kwatch or whatever.
It’s worth and value is the price it consistently and reliably fetches.
I don’t like it enough to buy at anything above the list price and am bemused by the price it fetches, it is what it is.
There are better Rolexes and better watches from other brands that I would spend the money on.
I agree the market price is what it is and dealers will ask that all day long. My point was that apart from market price, what are you actually getting for your money. Take the Omega Silver Snoopy for example, it had a standard £3.5k movement and case (at the time of release), a fancy dial, case back and some fancy packaging, so the original £4.6k list price was probably about right. What ever someone chooses to pay, you are still only getting in my opinion £4.6k worth of watch at best. We know people are actually prepared to pay £35k to £40k for one. Are they are paying the additional £30k to £35k for the bragging rights, the exclusivity of a hot watch, or the gamble that prices might continue to rise and therefore it is a good investment piece.
The winners as always are those who were lucky enough to get one at list price, but I still believe there is a percentage split between the value of the watch in watch terms and the reasons why the market price is considerably higher.
Or because they don’t want to live in Chester and need to live where their kids have grown up and have a support network of friends, and because the job they do is in London and not Chester. And because commuting from Chester to London would be expensive and tiring.
Believe me, I’d rather not be paying London house prices but we have little choice. We’ve discussed it and all our decisions were made with only one consideration - what was best for our children.
As for Rolex Daytona pricing, it’s not a game I’ll ever be in a position to play, partly because of exorbitant London house prices.
There’s also the upkeep to consider, a £500k four bed in Chester will cost considerably more to look after than a £500k shoebox in London.
So when the cost of commuting is added into the mix, the cost of living in the shoebox will be far less than the bigger place out of town.
And is there anyone who actually enjoys spending a minimum of a couple of hours each day crammed into a tube with a bunch of sweaty strangers?
I remember an old boss of mine in the ‘80s relocated from Sunningdale to the Wirral in order to work in the Liverpool office. He traded a three bedroom semi in Surrey for a detached bungalow in several acres of land on the Wirral. In fact when he retired a building firm bought his house for a huge price so they could develop the site. They demolished the bungalow and built about half a dozen large detached houses on the site. With the money he made he retired to Oswestry and managed to bag a huge country house with its own woods and river running through it. All from a three bed semi in the smoke!!!
Why would you pay £500K to live in Chester when you could live in some lovely country with a wonderful climate or near the sea or in the mountains?
There are too many parameters to consider to make the decision to live somewhere comparable to spending 3 or 4 times the RRP on a stainless steel watch JUST because of the logo on the dial.
I guess you can argue they're both a weighing of options and making a decision, but one certainly makes more sense than another and I'm not thinking it's the watch that wins here.
However, people spend their money however they want to and, clearly, a lot of people thinking owning a Rolex (any Rolex it seems to me!) is important!
M
yet the much nicer,far cheaper and desirable (in my eyes) Zenith Tipo doesent sell.
People just like talking non stop about Rolex and money.
This isn't rocket science, it is purely market forces levelling everything out and it does a very good job of it.
First thing is not to kid yourself that a watch attracts bragging rights, it may do here but in the real world the topic hardly comes up. Cars and properties attract bragging rights and a watch is way down the list for most people.
SS Daytonas have a far too low RRP and hence with Rolex creating the waiting list, prices have risen to a more realistic level, in other words, the level that the market has created and the price that people are willing to pay.
WG has a far too high RRP and the levelling with SS prices is correcting this. I don't know the cost of the WG used in a Daytona but its only got to be a couple of grand and it is inevitable that the price gap will close on the pre owned market. The reduced numbers of WG will help keep the prices high but it seems to be failing to escalate in value.
So the SS buyer is a winner and the WG buyer a loser in the investment scenario.
It's not a crazy market, it is just an inevitable consequence of the market.
Some people are happy with this and others are not. I suppose the best advice is that if you are happy with the market, then all is well but if you are unhappy with the market just stay away and play about with something else.
some people buy watches because they like watches.
some people buy watches because they like money.
I do think we're missing the point that while both are similarly priced one listing seems to be more ambitious than the other but that doesn't make the market price of either any less crackers.
I don't see it calming down anytime soon. The Daytona is the Jumbo/Nautilus of Rolex and realistically the only of the super hyped trio still in production which pushes even more buyers towards it.
It’s like the numerous posts I’ve seen over the years where people say they wouldn’t ever buy another Rolex because the last one they bought in 2003 was only £2,000 or so. So would you never move house because the one you bought in 1985 was only £14,000 or buy a pint because it was £1 back in 1998? Or buy anything at all?
It’s all relative. There’s loads of things I won’t buy because they are overpriced in my mind, so I just don’t buy them. I don’t worry about it or get worked up over it and I think to whoever does buy it, good luck, enjoy it. If you can afford it, like it, want it and more to the point, will use it, then why not.
The biggest thing I notice is that all the people ‘not playing the Rolex game’ keep reminding everyone on every Rolex thread that they aren’t playing it. It’s like their life long crusade. That said, the Rolex threads would be sparse without them.
I see your point, but watches are different to houses.
You can buy plenty of watches that are pretty similar to each other.
If you were to say, I bought a Housebuilder 4 bedroom house in this town 10 years ago for £400,000 and now they're asking £1.6m, but the essentially identical Homebuilder one is now only £500,000, would it be sensible to buy the Housebuilder one?
Possibly if people were desperate to have a small gold crown on the door or they were convinced it will be worth £3m next year, but perhaps not if you weren't...
I'm sure plenty of people would be more than happy to see the Rolex threads hived off to a Bear Pit like sub-forum. I know the Bear Pit is there, but I don't frequent it.
When Rolex threads appear (or threads turn into Rolex ones...) in the Watch Talk forum, you can't really blame people for not always singing from the hymn book.
Some Rolex threads do invite ridicule, though - When the terms 'relationship with my AD' or 'I got the call' appear I can't help but laugh and I don't recall seeing them appear in relation to other brands.
M
Rather tactless, and one I wouldn't appreciate if I were the sellers - at least have the courtesy to wait until the watches have been sold or removed.
and there are even dumber people who get caught…
I don’t know the exact value of gold in a full gold Daytona. I can tell you as a documented fact that a DD40 has £5300 worth of pure 24k gold at todays market prices (which are prices generally not available to retail buyers). I guess the Daytona would not be far off that in weight.
This makes the Rolex percentage markup on steel much greater than on gold btw.
As a documented fact, Rolex use 18ct gold... just saying :)
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
It would be interesting if the sellers of the Daytonas on SC would weigh them. We could then get a good idea of toughly how much gold there is in a Daytona.
Can’t argue with that because value for money is subjective. For me, given a choice between a watch that costs approx £1k to make and sells at retail for approx £10k vs a watch that costs approx £7k to make and sells at retail for approx £30k.... I would see the second choice as the better value.
Reading this I think ….
You got to do what makes you happy - end of
If you want a £10k Rolex get it
If you want a £500k place in london do it
Source? Not saying it's not true, just genuinely interested.
By my math for there to be £5,300 worth of gold in the watch, the weight of the 18ct gold would have to be 176 grams at todays price. Of course the crystal, dial and most importantly movement aren't made of gold, so we can't include those in the weight. But I don't think both your calc on the value and the below total weight of 185 grams can both be correct.
Using the figures supplied, the weight of gold is 122g (if my maths is correct after all these years!) and at today’s price of £30.44 per Gramme of 18kt gold, there’s around £3700 worth of gold in a Daytona.
That’s assuming that the non gold elements are of equal weight in both watches and not taking the weight of the ceramic bezel into account. So not entirely accurate but close enough.
Simultaneous equations! knowing the relative densities of the two metals and assuming that the movements and crystal weighed the same in both watches.
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...30bf7d776f.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...05128ee1f3.jpg
Sgg= density of gold
Sps= density of steel
X= weight of non case materials
Y= volume of hold or stainless steel in case
It’s a bit scrappy and wouldn’t score me an A* but I think it’s about right!
That made for an interesting read! :encouragement:
Still not totally sure the calc makes sense though, i.e. by your number the weight of 18ct gold is 122g and the movement/crystal is 63g, so we can work backward that the steel watch sans movement is 85g (148-63). If the watches are equal in size, it doesn't seem to make much sense that the gold would only weigh 43% more than the steel, despite having 2.4x the density.
Little out of my depth, but trying to make sense of it. Two things I think are wrong with this - (1) shouldn't we use 16.5 (best estimate) as the density of 18ct gold given that's what the watch is made of, and (2) isn't X the common weight across both calcs (i.e. X equates to the weight of the movement + crystal, not the weight of the bracelet + case).
Just accounting for (1) would drop the X figure to 113g per the prior calc, or £3,450 gold value. Still only leaves the gold weighing 49% more than the steel of same size, despite having a density of 2x though, so I'm still not comfortable.
Adding in (2) on top as well doesn't make any sense - i.e. if the movement + crystal weigh 113g, that'd leave the steel bracelet/case weighing only 35g - clearly can't be the case so I'm not comfortable with that result either.
So I figured either I'm missing something (very possible), or the source data is simply wrong - i.e. we're working off two equivalent size watches weighing 148g (steel) vs 185g (gold), if those numbers are off then the rest is not going to stack.
Did a bit of digging on the latest Daytona for arguments sake, comparing a steel 116500LN to a 18ct gold 116509 - these seem to be as close as possible to match in the current catalogue. Rolex unhelpfully don't list the weight, but I found a source for the Steel weighing 132 grams (https://millenarywatches.com/rolex-daytona-weight/) and the gold weighing 205 grams (https://www.rolexforums.com/showthread.php?t=430040). That's quite a different story to the previous figures, with the steel now weighing a fair chunk less and the gold weighing a fair chunk more.
Running the same calcs and taking 16.5g/cm3 as our 18ct gold density now yields an X of 64.5, as the presumed value of the movement / crystal (as you previously mentioned it won't be quite right given the bezel situation, but nowt we can do about that). Applying points (1) and (2) above would leave us with 140.5 grams of 18ct gold in one watch and 67.5 grams of stainless steel in the other. Our expected ratio of roughly double (2.08 to be precise) 18ct gold to stainless steel ratio is maintained - at long last, a number I'm comfortable with!
So in a modern gold Daytona 116509, I'm estimating that leaves us approximately 105 grams of pure gold, which at todays price has a value of £4,266.
Maybe :playful:
That all sounds right, I’d just done a quick and dirty calc. Your, more accurate figures clearly give a much better answer.
It clearly shows that Rolex are charging about £20k for £4K worth of gold!
Doing the same for platinum will no doubt show an eye watering mark up!
And yes, X is the weight of the movement and crystal.
This has been debated hundreds of times before. The actual cost of gold in a gold watch and the price difference.
Ofcourse margins are higher, much higher but there is more or less an industry standard for the price differential between a gold and a SS watch. A brand that sells a SS version for $3000 will sell the gold version for 15,000. It is not unique to Rolex. Production costs are some what higher given making a steel watch is different than a gold watch, numbers are fewer and obviously there is some wastage of raw material. There are costs involved in raw material storage and transport of finished product and security which is different. Gold is perceived to be more exclusive and this gets reflected in price as well. That is luxury and exclusivity for you. The difference between an economy class and a first class fare on an airline is not just the cost of use of extra space and proper silverware and free drinks and candies and an extra smile from the stewardess. Reducing the debate of price difference to amount of gold in the watch means one has completely missed the essence of the hobby.
The original point was much more valid- it is crazy that SS and gold watches are selling at same price when there is such a huge difference in their retail prices.
I don’t disagree with any of that Rajen, although the gold waste is generally salvaged and reused whereas the steel is just discarded.
I was primarily interested in the value of gold in the watch and whether I still had it in me to do the maths! [emoji846]