Anyone know when this policy was commenced by Aurum Group and whether it’s EVER been declared in writing in the vicinity of Rolex wares on sale?
Jim
Last edited by Jimmcb; 22nd June 2018 at 20:43.
Seems pretty common now. Rolex recommend ADs do it, but leave the decision up to the AD.Originally Posted by Jimmcb
There should be some type of agreement to sign I’d imagine prior to collection.
It’s all in the war against flippers and to most, I’d say it won’t be a problem to most people and if means the right people get the Watches it can’t be a bad thing.
I agree entirely it’s designed for exactly that. Thank you and I’m not selling now or in 13 months.
But I’m trying to tie down commencement date and the policy’s legal standing.
Jim
To what end ?
There won’t be a legal issue as long as the policy is made clear prior to payment.
Client can choose to accept the terms and have the Watch, or decline the terms and leave empty handed.
I’d imagine as soon as a customer becomes prickly about card retention, the AD would sniff flipping and decide to not sell the watch if it’s one of the desirable ones.
Really the policy should be made clear at earliest opportunity eg at enquiry/joining waiting list stage.
Last edited by Nairn1980; 21st June 2018 at 19:59.
Define vicinity.
1st May it was introduced, and from what I can see there’s zero discretion available to or exercised by AD staff at Aurum Group.
Not sure how I feel about it, but I think my overriding feeling is that it’s a really silly way to try and tackle the grey market when a lot of watches at greys are coming from overseas. That said, I haven’t seen a 126710 BLRO on Watchfinder yet, so I imagine Rolex would argue it’s working!
I was thoroughly enthusiastic about my Sub on arrival after "the call", asked for the stickers to be removed, and not a word was said about card retention. Left with said card in box.
This was three months ago, Fraser Hart though not Aurum.
Wearing today by the way.
Its pointless you buy one with the papers you sell it, you dont get the papers you still sell it, doesn’t stop anything just makes AD’s feel like they are doing something to combat a enemy thats actually its friend
RIAC
Btw I was at the Rolex Bond Street store yesterday. 4 year waiting period for the GMT master and no further names on the wait list.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Bought from Aurum a month ago and no card retention. I wonder if it’s only applicable to the models that can be flipped.
Just saw this on Chrono24:
https://www.chrono24.co.uk/rolex/gmt...-id8534024.htm
£10,000 mark up with only a photocopy of the warranty card included.
Maybe warranty card retention isn’t stopping flippers after all.
As above, 1st of May.
Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk
Only £16,000!
There are a couple showing on Chrono24 at £19,995. Complete madness.
thanks guys
great uncertainty here and I'm grateful for the input
Jim
I m on the list for both a Daytona c and the new Pepsi have been told that the cards will be held for both for a year. Tbh I haven't got a problem with it, AD's get in a lot of trouble with a risk of losing the AD status if desirable watches from them are found to be in the grey market so can see why they are doing this
How does the retention of a card stop them going to the grey market?
Cheers..
Jase
Doesn't stop it I suppose but does make it trickier. I m sure buying a watch at up to £10,000 over list price with a photocopy of a warranty card that there's no guarantee you will ever get appeals to some people.
Its been said many times, when this becomes the norm, which it appears to be, it will just become acceptable expected and standard practice and not unusual and therefore make no odds at all in the long run.
Cheers..
Jase
Just what this place needs, yet another new Rolex / Warrany Card thread. Two birds killed with one stone!
Do you mean make no odds to genuine buyers minding about the practice, or no odds to flippers / grey market?
I for one was tempted to buy a SS Rolex from the grey market when they were only £1000 or so over list (Hulk/Batman). I would 100% not have gone through with the purchase if there was no warranty card.
Luckily I had a bit of luck with a friendly AD and should get my hulk this year (6 month wait). I’m
Both.
Will you mind not getting the card when you pick up the Hulk if it is a condition of purchase ?
Obviously there will be individuals that will care and decide not to buy if there is no card, but my point is, as it becomes normal and well known that you probably won't get a card, brand new from a AD or the grey market, the more is won't matter.
( don't misunderstand me, Im against the practice on principle, but in reality its not going to stop anything )
Cheers..
Jase
What happens in a scenario where a person buys a watch, the warranty card is withheld for twelve months by the AD but the person sells the watch within that twelve months. Will the AD deliver up the warranty card to the new purchaser? I'm struggling to see on what grounds they could seek to retain it.
Three other 'what if' scenarios: for a Friday:
1. What happens if the AD manages to lose the card in the 12-month period?
This would cause a material drop in the value of the watch if the original owner needs to sell - does the AD indemnify against the subsequent loss in value?
2. What happens if the original owner dies in the 12-month period?
How would the AD track down the original owners estate executors to hand over the Warranty Card?
3. The original owner needs to realise some money, say for an emergency such as an operation?
Does the AD hold firm and say no, meaning that resale plummets preventing the owner from realising the true value of their asset?
All highly speculative but this seems like a poor piece of crisis management to solve a short term supply shortage - or a cheap PR stunt to boost demand through panic buying: 'I'm so lucky my AD let me wait for 12 months after leaving my deposit to pay full list for my watch'!
Sorry if I'm being cynical but this is all nonsense IMHO.
Cut the waiting lists - buy another brand :)
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Yawn, Here's another:
What if someone dies whilst their watch is in for repair? How would the AD track down the owners estate executors to hand over the watch?
I’m sort of scratching my head on the warranty card issue.
It would be a deal-breaker for me buying from an AD if the card was retained. I have purchased a package and as far as I am concerned, i can do what i wish with the watch and the entire package. My contract is for a watch and not to assist Rolex or the AD in controlling their problems.
However, - and someone help me out here in case I’m missing something, i cant see what the fuss is about if you are buying from a Grey. Ditto the stickers etc.. I mean is this a Corgi Toy thing where it will be boxed and preserved forever in pristine condition in a safe?
To me, the box and papers are part of the property of a new watch, but one that has been registered before - then that virgins been done over. I see only the watch as value and RSC have the histories anyway for warranty. Certainly, a piece of plastic and a box (L/M/S) is no real basis for providence of a watch?
What am i missing?
Last edited by Guycord; 22nd June 2018 at 12:47.
A grey dealer was offering to buy a sought after steel sports watch (not for sale!), and said they would buy without the warranty card.
Absolute madness
Just to expand that further, do Buyers who buy at the Grey Dealers or online or via private seller, do you see more value in the papers or a copy of the original sales receipt?
I keep every one of my sales receipts in a safe for insurance. Box and Papers - under the bed taking up too much junk space.
With a receipt, to me, checking providence is marginally more secure than some plastic or paper with a swirly pattern.
I’d prefer to have the card, but it isn’t going to stop me purchasing. It would stop me from a grey because I’d fear I’d never get it, or may even lose warranty cover.
If the process stops just some flippers from purchasing in the first place, and puts off some people from purchasing from greys then it will bring the grey price down.
I would think that Rolex are trying to protect genuine purchasers with this policy (even though so people seem very offendended).
The Rolex lack of supply is a very deliberate tactic (there is no way a company like Rolex couldn’t ramp up production if they wanted). I’m glad they have kept prices relatively low.
In London and the South East (where I have spoken to the most ADs) they could double supply of most SS models, increase price by 10-20% and they’d still be a waiting list.
Why don't ADs register the owner's name and details with Rolex when the watch is sold, to validate the warranty. If the watch is sold the seller and new owner have to register it as such with Rolex. Rolex then decides which customers it wants to blacklist.
"A man of little significance"
It doesnt Jason.
It just creates a folder of photocopied warranties and a spreadsheet to track cards that will be sent on to customers in a year.
I still don't understand what possible loss the ADs / Rolex have. They sell their watches - whatever happens afterwards, they will still sell their watches and have waiting lists. If someone else sells the watch at a premium - that doesn't affect them at all. Still the same amount of watches around, and they are still selling at their RRP.
So what exactly is the problem?
Because the warranty is for the watch (not the owner). I repeat what I say in every thread like this.
I took my Rolex SD4K to RSC St James for regulation under warranty. Forgot the warranty card. They checked the watch was under warranty on their system and updated me to be the current owner. No problem.
Makes this all nonsense issue.
Martyn
Would you be happy if salespeople in ADs bought them all? Wouldn’t affect Rolex, still selling their watches.
I honestly couldn't care less who buys them. However this issue has been done to death (and then some) over the past few months.
Put up with this nonsense and buy a Rolex - or move on to another brand.
Easy!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Many here do care and have moaned previously.
“It was certainly not a decision that was taken lightly by the business, however as Rolex are a key part of our brand offering we must work to protect our relationship with the brand and prevent these items appearing on the grey market. Rolex are aware of the procedure that we have implemented and they support Aurum Holdings with this as it helps to reduce the chances of their models appearing on the grey market.
This policy is part of the condition of sale of these high demand watches, and we ensure to communicate verbally prior to purchase, giving clients the option to proceed with the sale therefore agreeing to the conditions or decline the opportunity to purchase if these conditions are unsuitable. Usually, clients would make a note of their interest in this model, and wait for stock to become available and it is at this point we provide written communication of this policy.
Whilst I appreciate the inconvenience and disappointment this may cause you, we will continue to retain the guarantee card. The Management Team in store will hold your guarantee card for the next twelve months and you should have the scanned copy of your guarantee card should you require this.
Alternatively if you are not happy to wait 12 months for the card, you are very welcome to return the watch in pristine condition, to the showroom to arrange a refund.”
So there you are! I made the author aware I would be sharing the above note
Jim
Will you be returning it ?
If they were in a position to do so I think I need to change jobs... And this analogy doesn't make much sense.
The letter stating Rolexes preference was sent on the 1st March. Copy below:
I’d assume the OP meant to flip to greys
To prevent resale, wouldn't it just be easier if they held on to the watch ffs
Good luck everybody. Have a good one.
Isn't that capitalism?
Why should Rolex and the AD both take a (very healthy) margin and then seek to prevent their customer from doing likewise?
If Rolex have a problem with this they should increase either prices or production to better balance supply with demand.
This issue of card retention is merely playing games in order to create fake news in their ongoing bid to move up to become a luxury brand IMHO.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Aren’t Rolex acting in the ‘most capitalist way possible’ or at least taking advantage of the capitalist system we live in? They are keeping demand above supply to ensure they can command high prices, they are protecting their brand (and residual values) to ensure profits are maximised in the longer term.
I’d imagine an ideal situation for Rolex is a small percentage of their watches available on the grey market at a modest premium, to keep up the hype and value of their watches.
I did!
Posters claim it doesn’t matter who Rolex ADs sell to - taken to the extreme they sell to their staff and public get none.
They can flip them so don’t have to be on fantastic salaries either.
This is where I get confused; whenever I take my car for a service or warranty work, the dealer looks at the chassis number and knows if the car is in warranty etc. They never ask for the service book that details the warranty.
I'm sure Rolex determine whether a watch is under warranty or not in a similar way using the serial number of the watch. Lack of the warranty card should not stop the watch being under warranty nor having warranty work performed.
OK, it's nice to have a "full set" (whatever that actually is), but it should make no difference to whether the watch is under warranty by Rolex or not.
Absolutely, so why are they so keen to then deny others the right to do what they choose with their own property - which includes flipping for a profit - if it doesn't cost Rolex or their AD network anything?
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Because it absolutely would cost both Rolex and their network in the longer term?
How?
Cheers..
Jase
I know this has been done to death but why cannot Rolex and AD’s be satisfied with their substantial profits from sales instead of poking their unwanted and unwelcome noses into buyers business? I buy something, it is mine, what the hell business is it of the seller what I subsequently choose to do with it?
I for one will not buy ANY further Rolex whilst they have these ridiculous rules in operation and once out of the habit of buying Rolex, likely I will stay that way and I doubt that I am alone. One fine day this Rolex arrogance will bite them in the arse via lost customers!
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
