Reply With Quote........ and I get moaned at when I tell people never to sell a Rolex.
It seems hard to believe, but in February 1985 the UK price list tells us just how unpopular the manual-wind Daytona was.
Compare that price with some other models which seem to have been popular for ever :
Some of my colleagues used to work for main agents, one in particular recalling his time at Pykes in Birkenhead where the Daytona had been in stock so long that it was put in the general sale...
........ and I get moaned at when I tell people never to sell a Rolex.
Mad
Sent from my SM-G970F using TZ-UK mobile app
You are Marty McFly and I claim my £5!Originally Posted by Mick P
Figures. A hand-wound movement with screw-down crown and pushers. Who would buy that?
But then I guess value is a moot point if you never sell. Or do you mean your kids get to sell it when you die?
I’d be more annoyed at the high prices in regards to worry of it being stolen or lost (for replacing it)
IMO values of ceramic has to fall dramatically in long term, it’s almost getting impossible to get a nice 5 digit and when that’s gone there’s no artificial market for the new ones. Remember, the way we wear and keep rolex has changed hugely. People these days baby them and keep the full sets which is ironic when they’re harder wearing than the old ones.
Nowadays it’s news and millions of YT views for a bloke on antiques road show with a full set old Rolex. Imagine the queue for the watch appraiser at one in 30 years... “yeah go and stand over there with the other 200 people that came along today with their mint, boxed ceramic sub. Oh, sorry you’ve one that’s been worn and don’t have a box and it’s somehow developed patina on the bezel? John! Get the camera over here NOW!”
The other notable on that list for me is the 1019 Milgauss - you rarely see them offered for sale these days and are usually a £25k+ watch when you do.
Interesting that in 1988 the Daytona was beefed up with the new 165xx line and production of the full steel 16520 was purposely limited with the effort going into the PM models. That was the start of the modern Rolex waiting list which has now expanded to virtually everything.
Theres a 1019 for sale in Harrogate Ken.......I think a fair bit more than 25k.
Another Rolex that failed to sell in its day was the 1655 Explorer11.
This is my personal favourite Rolex but I know that I am in the minority on this one. It was sold in the 1970s for those who liked to spelunk. Of course, not many Rolex owners spelunk, so it appealed to an almost non existent market. It also had two design flaws, its GMT hand was fixed so it could not be used for international travel and even worse it had a 24 hour dial super imposed on a standard 12 hour dial which gave a confused appearance and makes it difficult to read quickly. It suffered from the derogatory term - the disco dial. I take about a week to mentally adjust to it before I can read it accurately.
Because they failed to sell, they are now very rare and command a high price. I have been told that our resident wise old owl (Haywood) is sitting on a pile of them.
My watch was bought by a GP from Portsmouth in 1980 for £550. The AD took a hit on that one.
Having said all that, I truly love it.
That's largely correct except for the anachronism. I myself coined its description as "the disco dial" in the early 2000s, long after its deletion from the range, but have been struggling to win wider acceptance for that pejorative title. Glad that you repeat it here, at least!
My holding of these is perhaps the worst excess of what many on tz-uk think unacceptable. I sit on five from memory and I wouldn't wear one of them. Don't blame the shark...
What a mess!
Last edited by Haywood_Milton; 26th November 2020 at 11:48.
For your pleasure, two thirds of my Milgausses --- the same, but very different when you look more closely :
Surprisingly large watches, which rarely comes across in pictures.
My experience suggests that the black dial is rarer, but I don't have one of those so :
Note the "frog's foot" coronet on both Explorers that I have just posted...but don't think they they must all have this :
Now, if only someone would restate the case that we "must never call it an Explorer 1"...
Last edited by Haywood_Milton; 26th November 2020 at 11:55.
Very Enjoyable when HM bring the goodies out. Some lovely watches.
Just need to confirm though that they are not fake:-)
Calling Jonathan Humbert! Calling Jonathan Humbert!
I fear that somebody may have taken over Haywood's account. I refuse to believe that there is anything which has emerged from the Rolex factory which he doesn't have at least one example of in his collection...
Ha! My focus is really very narrow. Mike Wood has a wider-reaching collection stretching further back to include Princes and old Oysters etc.
It's a simultaneously joyful and frustrating truth that the more you learn, you more you realise that there is to collect. Take those silver dial Milgausses.....there are so many different versions of them alone!
Yikes!Calling Jonathan Humbert! Calling Jonathan Humbert!
Great to see the pricelists from so far back, and those Milgauss variants have a great look.
Excellent pictures from Haywood, but why 5 of those Explorers unless they are all different, straight hand, rail dial etc then it makes good sense.
Love those Milgauss, didn't realise the silver dial had different markers on them.
Investment is an entirely sound reason to buy and own a watch. Haters gonna hate, but the proof is easy.
Yes, silver Milgauss display many differences. Not just the baton material, but look at the sizes and styles of ROLEX / SCOC text and the chapter ring markings.
Last edited by Haywood_Milton; 26th November 2020 at 12:47.
What I take from this thread is that Haywood has way hairier arms than I imagined.
And I love the Milgauss, and hate that Explorer II 'disco dial'.
WTF? That's my wife's arm and you and I are going to have words
Adjusting for inflation, were these prices much cheaper than today's prices for equivalent models?
I know it's not great to quote pictures but that is absolute perfection.For your pleasure, two thirds of my Milgausses --- the same, but very different when you look more closely :
Cant' resist Haywood 1985 ...wow how expensive inflation ehh ! check out 1980 (what a year)
Daytona 6263 for £ 493
Sub 5513 for £ 370
DD 18038 for £ 4411
SD 1665 for £ 483
Sub 16800 for £ 527
I love all these! Thanks Tim. Would you mind if I took a full scan of that price list next time you're passing on the way to the tanning salon?
of course H ...I have a few nice bits in the stash....I have a new tanning method got a tip from Donny lovely shade they also do eyebrows...I love all these! Thanks Tim. Would you mind if I took a full scan of that price list next time you're passing on the way to the tanning salon?
I prefer Scouse Umpa-lumpa shades of Orangeof course H ...I have a few nice bits in the stash....I have a new tanning method got a tip from Donny lovely shade they also do eyebrows...
The prices jumped again in 1991...
You saved me doing it. I've been staring at that first one too, it is an absolute gem.
I glanced at the first post and thought that Haywood was having a Black Friday clearout
Although no trees were harmed during the creation of this post, a large number of electrons were greatly inconvenienced.
Agree 100%,and yet I've sold many I wish Id not!,but were it not for selling those my collection wouldnt have grown and evolved to where it has.
I guess many have done the same and still doing it now as we see on sc!.But if you never sell you will never see that money they are now worth anyway,and whoever does end up with your watches never had their money invested in them,and unless they are wise enough to check the true values could just think a couple of ks for a watch is bloody great!,my kids know what I paid and what to do if they needed to sell them.
But the Rolex watches and 1 Tudor Sub are keepers at least for a couple of years,at which point retirement will dictate the sale.......
You are right tho Mick.
Last edited by P9CLY; 26th November 2020 at 21:19.
Aren't those old Daytonas just Valjoux chonrographs like any number of other makes?
Or am I missing something?
Interesting to see a Sea Dweller was cheaper than a Sub.
Yes, all hand wound Daytona’s were Valjoux Calibre 72. Till 1988 when self winding ones came.
Erm.....eh?
One of my favourite tv moments was a local man talking about the tans he encountered in a nightclub. “It’s like dancing with a member of the Terracotta Army.”I prefer Scouse Umpa-lumpa shades of Orange
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
Sorry, I was referring to the 1980 price list above.
SD 1665 for £ 483
Sub 16800 for £ 527
I assumed SDs always cost more than a Sub.
Ah, I see. Well, the 16800 Submariner introduced a 3000-series calibre movement (3035) and sapphire glass, while the 1665 Sea-Dweller (a low-volume, specialist piece of course) was still an acrylic glass model with 1500-series calibre (1575, badged 1570).
This was a short-lived anomaly, and you may be interested in Rolex literature of around this time which promotes the 1665 and 16660 Sea-Dwellers simultaneously (see last lines of text) :
H
Last edited by Haywood_Milton; 27th November 2020 at 12:52.
Haywood, is your business a bi product of your collecting or vice-versa? Not being cheeky, just interested.
Last edited by aldfort; 29th November 2020 at 13:09.
All because of that double red franken/fake!!Calling Jonathan Humbert! Calling Jonathan Humbert!
This thread had me digging in the safe as I have a 1996 catalog and price list, I know the original owner of my 14060 had a decent discount on the RRP and the watch was sat around for a while, different times that don’t seem that long ago!
1985, seems like yesterday. Meh!
Wasn't it always the case in the distant past?
I have a 1975 Rolex catalogue in front of me and the Cosmograph Daytona is £238, the Sea Dweller, £250.
Cheers,
Neil.
Thank you Haywood. I also didn’t realise helium mainly entered a watch through the crystal, I always assumed it was via the seals.Ah, I see. Well, the 16800 Submariner introduced a 3000-series calibre movement (3035) and sapphire glass, while the 1665 Sea-Dweller (a low-volume, specialist piece of course) was still an acrylic glass model with 1500-series calibre (1575, badged 1570).
This was a short-lived anomaly, and you may be interested in Rolex literature of around this time which promotes the 1665 and 16660 Sea-Dwellers simultaneously (see last lines of text) :
H
Posting Permissions
