Having spent the last month enjoying a Parnis Power Reserve on the odd day at work, I had to take the picture below before closing the safe.
How would you explain to a lay-person that the complicated one with a date, power reserve indicator, open heart dial and display caseback is worth £30, but the other one that just has a stopwatch, is worth £30,000?
Discuss....
Last edited by mr noble; 11th November 2019 at 12:50.
You are basically paying for a name...
The most basic approach would be to show them what both are selling for from a vareity of sellers.
I'd also discuss the history of both companies - Parnis nick other people's designs and put their name on them, no?
Then if I had done some homework, discuss the really quite challenging aspect of making an accurate 12hr chronograph, as opposed to something that shows how wound the mainspring is (PR) and something that needs to switch just once in 24 hours (the date indicator...but if it's a retrograde date indicator as it looks to be, that may need more explaining!).
Then the details of the finishing, which may need a loupe and again some homework on minute finishing details.
Or just scrap all that and ask which they think is worth which amount, going solely on the brand name
When speaking to a layperson I would just say they are both worth £30...problem solved!
It is a tough one. And you have your work cut out. 'Fancy' watches are not easy to justify without calling in emotion and ego etc.
The Rolex has more Cachet but that is a great deal of money for Cachet. Mechanically they are not equal but not as different as the price tags suggest.
You have hit the nail on the head really with respect to WIS world. I dare say it applies to Art (perhaps more)
People (including me I am afraid) are prepared to suspend rational logic and pay a premium in order to impress themselves and others.
Give the decision to a computer to solve and it would go for the Parnis…. depending on who wrote the code of course.
Just tell them the two different values and I'm guessing they'll know from the brand names which one is 30k.
Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.
I don't think you can. Like any luxury goods you are mainly paying for the brand name. Unless its something technically advanced which the Rolex isn't they its hard to justify.
I had similar feelings when I owned an Explorer 1, sitting it side by side with a black-dialled Seiko 5. One was worth over £3.5K, one was worth £35! I think that was the point where I decided to sell the Rolex, one year later I can`t say I`ve missed it.
Rolex have become too expensive over the past 10-12 years, but in recent years it's become silly. Most non watch enthusiasts would think you were mad for owning a watch worth over £10K, never mind £30K.
The whole Rolex thing has gone away from me in recent years, its all gone crazy. I`m happier with old watches worth a few hundred pounds, there's no pleasure with having several grands-worth of watch on your wrist when you're walking around.
I would not do so. There's no point.
Let them wonder. Tell them the difference if they ask.
I’d say it’d be hard to explain (and justify) to anyone why the Daytona is “worth” £30,000. It may be the market value, but I don’t think that means it’s worth £30,000.
If it sells for £30,000 then it is worth £30,000. That applies to any item or anything on Gods earth.Originally Posted by HookedSeven
It sells for £30,000 because lots of people are chasing after it and most people who are in a position to spend that sort of money are normally quite street wise.
If someone buys a normal £20 note for £30 quid does that make ot worth £30 ?
Sent from my SM-J330F using Tapatalk
If it was a rare demonination or could be proven to have once been held by some famous person, then yes it could.
It's all down to the market.
I wrote "normal".
Sent from my SM-J330F using Tapatalk
Yes it does, at market value at that time.
It may not be repeatable but it was undoubtedly and demonstrably worth £30 in that transaction.
It seems you agree that the sale at £30 is not representative of market value. It's likely that within a few minutes either side of that transaction that hundreds of other £20 would have changed hands, all for £20 value. The sale of the single original note doesn't represent the actual worth of the item. The only point I'm trying to make is that a sale value and "worth" are not the same thing.
Sent from my SM-J330F using Tapatalk
With a Parnis you’re paying for cost of manufacture plus small % markup for profit.
With a 30k Daytona you’re paying for a large % markup for desirability, which is far removed from cost of manufacture.
- - - Updated - - -
With a Parnis you’re paying for cost of manufacture plus small % markup for profit.
With a 30k Daytona you’re paying for a large % markup for desirability, which is far removed from cost of manufacture.
They cant be that streetwise if they are prepared to spend £30,000 on a watch that unless I am mistaken costs no where near this price to manufacture, these prices are pushed up my people who really have more money than sense. Of course it is up to each individual what they spend their money on but to say someone who spends 30K on a watch is streetwise, MMmmm not sure about that one lol
It's just not that simple, is it.
(a) If the person has £30K then they have £30K. They may or may not be streetwise but having and spending £30K is not a sign of not being streetwise (if you will excuse the double negative).
(b) So what if it costs nowhere near the retail or common market price to make? I agree, it is frustrating that the selling price is completely disconnected from the cost price but these are luxury items and so cost and retail price being disconnected is par for the course. It is what luxury effectively means.
(c) You say that such people have more money than sense and that is a perfectly reasonable personal view but it is not objective. If they have enough money then, for them, it would seem to make perfect sense.
Being able to spend, and then actually spending, that much money really does not seem to be indicative of any objective evidence on this matter one way or the other, as far as I can see.
Not long back a friend of mine wanted a Speedy Snoopy. They cost around £9k then, and you may have been right to think that anyone buying one may have had more money that sense. But you could also sell that watch today for £18k, so buying it would have made an awful lot of sense in hindsight.
Streetwise doesn't come into predicting the future value of an item, nor does cost of manufacture. Art, furniture, stones and stamps can all have very little manufacturing cost but be worth vast sums of money today.
Well, there are so many ways to answer to this question, my favourite one would to be to not discuss the price difference at all. This could shock people, in a bad manner I mean.
When non watchlover person want to see some of my timepieces , I just give them a eye magnifying lense with the watch (to see Grand Seiko details e.g), if the person asks for a price, I always have the same answer : "I don't remember exactly".
So much for asceticism, eh.
I smoked but did not inhale.So much for asceticism, eh.
I wore Rolex but did not flash it around.
I wouldnt, nothing you say will justify spending 30k on an obsolete technology masquerading as man jewelry.
Just look at the in depth discussions here discussing minute details such as polishing, hand finishing, decorated movements etc, we all enjoy it, but its crazy when you think about it, way up there on the top of maslows pyramid.
There are lots of things people do that i dont understand, but if they are causing no harm then let them have at it.
Just say the silver one pays part of Roger Federer's salary...
Compare it to cars or something else more relateable for a lay person.
I'd say cars aren't really comparable. Spend more and you tend to get something objectively more. Maybe more speed, more off road ability, more comfort and refinement, and so on.
Handbags might be more comparable, but who really thinks a Birkin is actually "worth" one hundred times more than a £100 one from the high street.
Good analogy👍 Few people baulk at, say, a series one e-type selling for £100k more than a hot-hatch with comparable performance.
So let’s say that’s 10x more than the hot hatch. In the watch example we’re talking 1000 times more. A lot of people would baulk at a mass produced car being worth 10 million.
quite true
Just say there are a lot of people out there with more money than sense.
Like the odds of you still wearing that Rolex after losing your wallet, cash, getting arrested in some forrin clime etc c'mon. maybe if you've 'hidden' it about your person
I think a lay person would be shocked to learn the Rolex costs £30k, most would say about £3k I reckon
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
They used to cost £3k!
Think I paid less than £7k for the Zenith Daytona back in the day.....
Has all gone a bit daft now, which was the reason for my post. I think most people are taking it a bit too seriously. For the record, I would never tell anyone what either is worth unless they really wanted to know......and even then I doubt I'd say the full value of the Daytona.
All very ostentatious these days, which is a shame.
Tongue in cheek time, just say “Rolex ennit”, lol
You can't tbh,No watch is worth the astronomical amounts they sell for really,but marketing and the fact some brands pay huge sums of money to celebrities has to be paid for by someone.Break down a Rolex or similar value watch to its component parts and there can't possibly be a huge amount difference to have such higher values!.......IMO.
We have all become accepting of certain values on certain watches,I'll be the first to say I'm happy with my Rolex watches in terms of what I paid and what they are selling for now,but the fact remains I often think they aren't worth these high prices even so,whether comparing like for like or not.
In order to enhance their brand image, Rolex don't want those who are concerned about price to buy their products. They want the "if I want it I will jolly well buy it" brigade.
It’s no doubt true to an extent, but I’d wager a lot of Rolex buyers would be PP/AP/RM or whatever buyers if they could afford it. A lot will truthfully be in the “concerned about price” brigade, but want others to think that they’re in the “... jolly well buy it” brigade.
None of that answers the OPs question though...
Last edited by HookedSeven; 11th November 2019 at 20:23.
The most I ever paid for a Rolex was £3350 for a 16610LV and I thought that was ludicrous! I must have gone through about 20 Rolex ‘sports’ models - as you say they were a lot cheaper. I had a couple of 14060M’s at £1500 and Speedmasters for the same, all brand new. That wasn’t all that long ago, they’re all long gone and for a reason - I got bored and moved them on, they’re not precious handmade objects to be obsessed over - they are nice but not worth £thousands in my opinion, and I don’t get the obsession now. I feel like I had the nice Rolex watches when they were affordable, moved on to a point where I’m interested in watches but don’t spend much money on them at all. I think when you’ve had the thrill of an expensive new watch 30+ times, all of which you end up flipping within a couple of years, you realise the hunt is what it’s about, and I can’t afford £10k a pop on a watch I know I’ll grow tired of and sell, rinse repeat!
I also don’t want the ‘responsibility’ of that kind of cash on my wrist, not worth getting your head kicked in over a bit of jewellery- I’ll leave ostentatious displays of wealth to those braver than me , with the fighting skills of Bruce Lee!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My sentiments exactly and all very sad indeed.
I could happily explain the price difference, just can't give it any form of justification. Happily left Rolex to it a few years back. Never liked the mercedes hands anyhow
Supply & demand.
Maybe worth and value are similar to mass and weight.
The the mass is always the same, the weight depends on whose planet your standing on.
The only mass that matters is that of planet earth and right here the watch is worth what it will fetch.Maybe worth and value are similar to mass and weight.
The the mass is always the same, the weight depends on whose planet your standing on.
Aim your product at the right customers who have the right amount of cash and you are onto a winner.
This is it in a nutshell.
Very good. :-)Maybe worth and value are similar to mass and weight.
The the mass is always the same, the weight depends on whose planet your standing on.
Supply and demand is just code for the market based manipulation of consumers. A sensible consumer would go elsewhere and the market would immediately collapse. Rolex buyers, however, elect to feed off of each other in a never ending cycle.
I think the whole idea of a high value wristwatch is a sort of anachronism. Nowadays you can get a highly reliable, very nicely made and finished, robust wristwatch for £150 or so. A bit more for a mechanical one. A lot less than four figures, anyway. But we honour the tradition of phenomenally expensive things for the glamour, the prestige. I've just googled the cost of buying an Aquanaut, something that is ultimately a steel wristwatch and not different from a Steinhart in any conspicuous respect, and certainly not function. I'm afraid the Emperor is not wearing any clothes.
No, I cannot agree with that. Consumers are as much participants in the market as are vendors and thus play their part in setting market prices.
Every market participant, be they customers, resellers, manufacturers, etc. is always doing their best to maximise their benefit (be it to obtain the best price or pay the lowest price). Everyone is trying to get the best deal for themselves in terms of their preferences and choices, whether those be business ones or possession/experience ones.
That's your definition of sensible. It's a perfectly good subjective definition but people want what they want for all sorts of reasons. Their choices are their own and so other, equally valid, definitions can and do exist.
Cool. Some want to play that game, some do not. I am guessing you don't. ;-)
Most people wouldn’t spend on watches what we spend on watch services so you’re fighting a losing battle and I wouldn’t bother.
I think with watches you either get it or you don’t. For me a watch is art on your wrist, I appreciate the work that goes into the tiny mechanics, I believe every modern man or gentleman should have at least one “nice watch”. I believe that passing on to my son a nice watch which is a part of me and my character is a fathers legacy. I’m quite old fashioned though I suppose.
Old fashioned maybe, but lm with you on this. However...
When l first took a serious interest in watches and joined forums the prices were mad enough - and complained about just as much as they are today but, at £3500ish for a submariner, they look like bargains now.
They're not so much about telling the time anymore - well, the brand we're talking about anyway.
Justifying the price isn't a debate l enjoy getting into nowadays - as said in an earlier post, it usually turns into a situation where l end up appearing foolish, or flash, or pretentious in the face of overwhelming opposition - in a group of 20 or so people ld say 99% think that a rolex is ridiculously priced unless you have "more money than sense"... though lm sure if l offered mine for free they'd all have my arm off for it ,if only to sell on!
A good friend of mine tries to get a rise out of me with the "bubble will burst" angle... l just tell him l can't wait because it means I'll be able to buy myself a load of rolex watches at a fair price!
I love the watches and l think more people should be able to enjoy them.
We all know these watches are at daft prices at the moment - even rolex agree - they don't ask nearly as much as the grey dealers do, but they're very careful to maintain the current situation.
Wish ld bought more rolex ten years ago... this is what happens when you listen to your wife...
This, every time.[
QUOTE=Satori;5245769]Supply & demand.[/QUOTE]
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
