closing tag is in template navbar
timefactors watches



TZ-UK Fundraiser
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 51 to 100 of 141

Thread: ROLEX: actually some of the most reliable watches or is it just marketing?

  1. #51
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    North
    Posts
    18,931
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by Rodder View Post
    Which are generally the worst out of interest?
    I cant say that they are the worst, but there are a lot of troublesome AP ROO's.

  2. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by Wandril View Post
    It's quite likely you could say the same of omega or another big swiss brand, if they're still here after more than a century, they must be doing something well indeed.
    And yet rolex seems to be the one mentioned as the absolute best. I'm aware of this statement, but I want to know facts about it, so it's more than just a battle of opinions
    I would say there are a few reasons for this, firstly Rolex have used the perception of a “luxury watch” for years it’s not something new. Omega have suffered from bringing out some utter eyesores over the years and no clear direction of what they are. Everyone knows what a datejust or sub or oyster perpetual will look like but other than the speedmaster most other Omega watches could be pretty much anything. I sometimes find myself giving up on trying to purchase an Omega watch having been lost in the mass of various confusing designs and over inflated prices.

    I don’t think it’s so much the absolute best it’s about someone buying exactly what it says on the tin. A good well made reliable watch with a timeless design.

    There are plenty of other brands that have at least one of the above but are always let down by lacking in another. Take JLC with the reverso, having read all the horror stories about servicing the watch and comments the quality is not what it was why would I waste 4 or 5K on one of them? As for Grand Seiko having seen the horrible base metal used on the batons on one of their watches (posted here) why would I waste several grand on one when Rolex use better materials?

    It’s not about Rolex it’s about if any other brand could match them in what they do then I would be interested.

  3. #53
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Wakefield, West Yorkshire
    Posts
    22,498
    Quote Originally Posted by Wandril View Post
    It seems like quite often, people are mentioning long intervals between two services, but so is the case for the seiko 7s26 movement for example.
    That would be interesting to know if such long term seiko owners have been noticing the accuracy was still there, or if it still runs but totally off the tolerances
    Any watch that isn`t serviced for many years will end up performing 'out of tolerance' as you term it. Amplitude will fall markedly and unless the watch is regulated to account for this (not advisable unless you're a dealer trying to avoid the cost of servicing the watch) the rate and consistency will be affected.

    Some movements show better isochronism and are inherently better at producing less variation of rate with amplitude, theoretically anything with a free-sprung balance will be better in this respect. Generally, a better quality movement will continue to perform better compared to cheaper ones if servicing is neglected but that shouldn't be interpreted as 'longer service intervals', it means the watch tolerates neglect slightly better.

    Not sure whether you're asking these questions with a view to buying a Rolex? Despite having experience as both a repairer and collector my advice is to buy what you like because you like it and not because you perceive its quality to be better than its rivals, all expensive watches are grossly overpriced for what they are, that's the nature of the game thesedays and you either play it or you don't. You also buy into the expensive servicing costs that come with the territory.

  4. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by robert75 View Post
    I would say there are a few reasons for this, firstly Rolex have used the perception of a “luxury watch” for years it’s not something new. Omega have suffered from bringing out some utter eyesores over the years and no clear direction of what they are. Everyone knows what a datejust or sub or oyster perpetual will look like but other than the speedmaster most other Omega watches could be pretty much anything. I sometimes find myself giving up on trying to purchase an Omega watch having been lost in the mass of various confusing designs and over inflated prices.

    I don’t think it’s so much the absolute best it’s about someone buying exactly what it says on the tin. A good well made reliable watch with a timeless design.

    There are plenty of other brands that have at least one of the above but are always let down by lacking in another. Take JLC with the reverso, having read all the horror stories about servicing the watch and comments the quality is not what it was why would I waste 4 or 5K on one of them? As for Grand Seiko having seen the horrible base metal used on the batons on one of their watches (posted here) why would I waste several grand on one when Rolex use better materials?

    It’s not about Rolex it’s about if any other brand could match them in what they do then I would be interested.
    It's true omega lacks a bit of consistency regarding their designs, apart from the classic speedmaster.
    Although they're starting to build something on the smp300, but it seems anything design wise created in the 1990's is not meant to be timeless

    But if you put the design on the side, could you argue a coaxial 2500 for example is not as well conceived as a rolex movement on the reliablility/durability aspect?

  5. #55
    Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Sussex, UK
    Posts
    5,128
    The most successful watch company in the world, and it can’t be due to marketing....because if so, rivals would just have to increase marketing budgets. Simple. It’s a formidable company in a whole bunch of ways....manufacture, sales, support, image, durability and so on.
    And it’s that complete package, spread over many decades, that has made them unrivalled. That may change in time, but not yet.
    Oddly enough, the sheer brand power of Rolex probably helps rivals by propping up the image of the Swiss watch industry. Rolex helps them all.

  6. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by Wandril View Post
    It seems like quite often, people are mentioning long intervals between two services, but so is the case for the seiko 7s26 movement for example.
    That would be interesting to know if such long term seiko owners have been noticing the accuracy was still there, or if it still runs but totally off the tolerances
    Re the Seiko 5 movement, I had one of those Seiko 5 watches years ago. Thing kept stopping and the accuracy was very poor.

    I do think sometimes people talk about these Seiko movements as though they have almost mythical properties. I think more realistically people tend to give more scrutiny to a more expensive watch and give far less attention to a cheaper watch.

  7. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by walkerwek1958 View Post
    Any watch that isn`t serviced for many years will end up performing 'out of tolerance' as you term it. Amplitude will fall markedly and unless the watch is regulated to account for this (not advisable unless you're a dealer trying to avoid the cost of servicing the watch) the rate and consistency will be affected.

    Some movements show better isochronism and are inherently better at producing less variation of rate with amplitude, theoretically anything with a free-sprung balance will be better in this respect. Generally, a better quality movement will continue to perform better compared to cheaper ones if servicing is neglected but that shouldn't be interpreted as 'longer service intervals', it means the watch tolerates neglect slightly better.

    Not sure whether you're asking these questions with a view to buying a Rolex? Despite having experience as both a repairer and collector my advice is to buy what you like because you like it and not because you perceive its quality to be better than its rivals, all expensive watches are grossly overpriced for what they are, that's the nature of the game thesedays and you either play it or you don't. You also buy into the expensive servicing costs that come with the territory.
    I might come to buy a rolex in the future, but if it was the case, it would be for the design and the durability, not for the rest.
    I'm aware it would mean paying for the brand and pricey servicing.

    I am in general attracted towards everything which is durable, reliable, built well for its purpose, and overall fairly simple but effective in appearance.
    It makes me gravitate around brands like Sinn or omega for example, they are some designs I like with rolex but to justify the price I would really want something long lasting.

    Even if it wasn't about buying one, I am interested in separating the myths from the factual reality regarding rolex, and it seems like watchmakers are the best at that, regarding the experience they have on so many different brands and watches.

  8. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by walkerwek1958 View Post
    Any watch that isn`t serviced for many years will end up performing 'out of tolerance' as you term it. Amplitude will fall markedly and unless the watch is regulated to account for this (not advisable unless you're a dealer trying to avoid the cost of servicing the watch) the rate and consistency will be affected.

    Some movements show better isochronism and are inherently better at producing less variation of rate with amplitude, theoretically anything with a free-sprung balance will be better in this respect. Generally, a better quality movement will continue to perform better compared to cheaper ones if servicing is neglected but that shouldn't be interpreted as 'longer service intervals', it means the watch tolerates neglect slightly better.

    Not sure whether you're asking these questions with a view to buying a Rolex? Despite having experience as both a repairer and collector my advice is to buy what you like because you like it and not because you perceive its quality to be better than its rivals, all expensive watches are grossly overpriced for what they are, that's the nature of the game thesedays and you either play it or you don't. You also buy into the expensive servicing costs that come with the territory.
    That's an interesting point the better tolerance at being neglected you're mentioning.

    I suppose a better accuracy than let's say a 7s26 on a rolex movement in need of a service would be explained by tighter tolerances in manufacturing the gears and other parts, therefore delaying the bit of "play" in the mechanism created by the effect of time and helping it stay fairly accurate for longer?

    Which of course doesn't mean that the watch movement is not experiencing damage on the long run, provided that the oils dried out a bit and are thicker because of micro bits of metal created by friction between parts, am I correct?

    Would you be able to give an example of another/other brand(s) having such tight tolerances on manufacturing, making their movements less sensitive to wear and tear?
    Could you compare it with an ETA 2824-2 for example?

  9. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by robert75 View Post
    Re the Seiko 5 movement, I had one of those Seiko 5 watches years ago. Thing kept stopping and the accuracy was very poor.

    I do think sometimes people talk about these Seiko movements as though they have almost mythical properties. I think more realistically people tend to give more scrutiny to a more expensive watch and give far less attention to a cheaper watch.
    Your observation might be true yes.
    It seems older seiko movements have a better reputation than this more recent generation with plastic holders and plastic date gears

  10. #60
    Grand Master Sinnlover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    London
    Posts
    10,946
    Quote Originally Posted by robert75 View Post
    Re the Seiko 5 movement, I had one of those Seiko 5 watches years ago. Thing kept stopping and the accuracy was very poor.

    I do think sometimes people talk about these Seiko movements as though they have almost mythical properties. I think more realistically people tend to give more scrutiny to a more expensive watch and give far less attention to a cheaper watch.
    There are going to be outliers from every brand at every price level, I know a lad that has worn a seiko 5 every day for 30 years, never been serviced and it keeps good enough time for him. likewise the internet is full of stories about poorly made Rolex, Omega JLC etc. The cost of a seiko 5 means its more likely to be considered disposable, rather then something to look after and have maintained, servicing a 5 will likely double the investment in the watch.

    Seiko and Rolex are similar in lots of ways, they both make simple robust movements, their movements do not evolve quickly, they do not chase the latest must have invention / innovation in movement technology but develop in house over time, neither market large variations of mechanical chronographs or include pointless complications (unless its a special show case / top of the range watch) and they both case their movements in high quality cases.

    A comparison by an expert on a basic Seiko movement with a basic Rolex movement (both current and in production) would be an interesting read / view, if it could remain un biased.

  11. #61
    Grand Master Passenger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Cartagena, Spain
    Posts
    24,836
    Quote Originally Posted by Wandril View Post
    That's an interesting point the better tolerance at being neglected you're mentioning.

    I suppose a better accuracy than let's say a 7s26 on a rolex movement in need of a service would be explained by tighter tolerances in manufacturing the gears and other parts, therefore delaying the bit of "play" in the mechanism created by the effect of time and helping it stay fairly accurate for longer?

    Which of course doesn't mean that the watch movement is not experiencing damage on the long run, provided that the oils dried out a bit and are thicker because of micro bits of metal created by friction between parts, am I correct?

    Would you be able to give an example of another/other brand(s) having such tight tolerances on manufacturing, making their movements less sensitive to wear and tear?
    Could you compare it with an ETA 2824-2 for example?
    My memory might be playing me false but I seem to recall our host mentioning once how he´s had more returns of ETA powered watches for performance issues than the Miyota powered ones he´s transitioned to in recent years, which I think is interesting.

  12. #62
    Grand Master ryanb741's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    London
    Posts
    19,615
    Rolex marketing never subscribe to hyperbole or deceit. The reason Rolex is the best is because they made the first waterproof watch, the first watch worn on the moon, the first wristwatch, the first watch worn on Everest, the first automatic wristwatch, the most accurate mechanical watch and they also invented the chronograph. The Milgauss is the most antimagnetic watch in the world, way more antimagnetic than even a bog standard Omega.

    In the late 1960s Rolex went up against Seiko in mechanical accuracy tests and wiped the floor with the Japanese. This is why Rolex watches were selected to be worn by US troops in the Vietnam War.

    Rolex Steel is much better than normal steel. It can survive 10 years inside the stomach of a Tiger Shark, it reflects back gamma radiation and protects the user, Rolexes add around 3 years of life to the user (if worn for at least 7 hours a day) because of the health properties of the mechanical movement and impact on the body's lymphatic system.

    With stats like this there is no need for marketing.
    Last edited by ryanb741; 24th February 2021 at 14:00.

  13. #63
    Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Sussex, UK
    Posts
    5,128
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanb741 View Post

    Rolex Steel is much better than normal steel. It can survive 10 years inside the stomach of a Tiger Shark, it reflects back gamma radiation and protects the user, Rolexes add around 3 years of life to the user (if worn for at least 7 hours a day) because of the health properties of the mechanical movement and impact on the body's lymphatic system.


    .
    I assume this is a joke ?

  14. #64
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Wakefield, West Yorkshire
    Posts
    22,498
    Quote Originally Posted by Wandril View Post
    That's an interesting point the better tolerance at being neglected you're mentioning.

    I suppose a better accuracy than let's say a 7s26 on a rolex movement in need of a service would be explained by tighter tolerances in manufacturing the gears and other parts, therefore delaying the bit of "play" in the mechanism created by the effect of time and helping it stay fairly accurate for longer?

    Which of course doesn't mean that the watch movement is not experiencing damage on the long run, provided that the oils dried out a bit and are thicker because of micro bits of metal created by friction between parts, am I correct?

    Would you be able to give an example of another/other brand(s) having such tight tolerances on manufacturing, making their movements less sensitive to wear and tear?
    Could you compare it with an ETA 2824-2 for example?

    No. You’re completely missing the point, you’re trying to draw analogies with other mechanical items and it doesn’t work that way.

  15. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by paskinner View Post
    I assume this is a joke ?
    His post was a joke.

    Rolex has nailed the market as the luxury watch, very clever marketing. The average person has no idea what a JLC or Patek is but they will all know a Rolex and it is seen as the watch to have when you "make" it.

    Are they the best, no I don't think they are but they are very good at what they do.

  16. #66
    Grand Master wileeeeeey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Location
    N/A
    Posts
    19,008
    Quote Originally Posted by verv View Post
    I cant say that they are the worst, but there are a lot of troublesome AP ROO's.
    Rich people's G-Shocks and suffered hard lives or just high end and delicate?

    Do the regular Royal Oaks seem to be more reliable by comparison?

  17. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanb741 View Post
    Rolex marketing never subscribe to hyperbole or deceit. The reason Rolex is the best is because they made the first waterproof watch, the first watch worn on the moon, the first wristwatch, the first watch worn on Everest, the first automatic wristwatch, the most accurate mechanical watch and they also invented the chronograph. The Milgauss is the most antimagnetic watch in the world, way more antimagnetic than even a bog standard Omega.

    In the late 1960s Rolex went up against Seiko in mechanical accuracy tests and wiped the floor with the Japanese. This is why Rolex watches were selected to be worn by US troops in the Vietnam War.

    Rolex Steel is much better than normal steel. It can survive 10 years inside the stomach of a Tiger Shark, it reflects back gamma radiation and protects the user, Rolexes add around 3 years of life to the user (if worn for at least 7 hours a day) because of the health properties of the mechanical movement and impact on the body's lymphatic system.

    With stats like this there is no need for marketing.
    I like good sarcasm

  18. #68
    Quote Originally Posted by walkerwek1958 View Post
    No. You’re completely missing the point, you’re trying to draw analogies with other mechanical items and it doesn’t work that way.
    Aow... What do you mean then?

  19. #69
    Grand Master Wallasey Runner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2015
    Location
    Wirral - North West England
    Posts
    15,265
    Quote Originally Posted by wileeeeeey View Post
    Rich people's G-Shocks
    I like that and very true

  20. #70
    Grand Master Neil.C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    SE England
    Posts
    27,035
    It's simple really, just buy what you like the look of and what is in your budget.

    No need for a lot of soul searching disguised as research.

    I appreciate and own watches at many price levels but if I could only keep one it would be a Rolex.

    Buying watches should be fun not torture.
    Cheers,
    Neil.

    My Speedmaster website:

    http://www.freewebs.com/neil271052

  21. #71
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Wakefield, West Yorkshire
    Posts
    22,498
    Quote Originally Posted by Wandril View Post
    Aow... What do you mean then?

    The better watches are able to maintain isochronism over a wider range of amplitudes. They also have better precision due to the positional variations being smaller.

    Lets consider the Omega 1120 (aka ETA 2892), a favourite of mine. In good condition it’ll give 300 -310 degrees amplitude in the flat positions, falling to around 275 -280 in the hanging positions when fully wound. The rate will vary by around 5-6 secs between positions and the watch can be regulated to run very well. After 5-6 years the amplitude will drop by around 25 degrees in the flat positions but because the isochronism is good the watch will still run well and the rate shouldn't vary by much compared to when it was freshly serviced. However, in the hanging positions the amplitude will be down at 240 degrees and that’s getting into an area where the relationship between rate and amplitude veers away from isochronism. The owner may notice that the watch is less consistent in rate, it’ll be more sensitive to wear pattern. If the watch is used in a lower state of wind the amplitude will drop into an area where the deviations become more significant, but still not sufficient to alert the owner to have the watch serviced.

    A lesser watch won’t have the same isochronism and positional variation will be greater, but when in good condition it can be regulated to give very good performance. This will be more sensitive to wear pattern because the amplitude will have a greater effect upon rate. After a few years, when the amplitude drops, the disparity in performance between this watch and the better movement will be greater and the owner is more likely to perceive the drop in performance.

    Unlike car engines, watch movements have tiny parts with relatively large clearances; end- shake on wheels can be compared to end- float in an engine or gearbox but in a watch movement these clearances are huge relative to the diameter of the pivots. Wear on the teeth of train-wheels is almost insignificant and because the parts move slowly wear to the pivots only occurs over a long tine due to poor lubrication.

    My advice to the OP is to do some homework on how watches work, there’s lots of good stuff on the internet but the Donald DeCarle books are still a good source if you really want to get into the subject.

  22. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by walkerwek1958 View Post
    The better watches are able to maintain isochronism over a wider range of amplitudes. They also have better precision due to the positional variations being smaller.

    Lets consider the Omega 1120 (aka ETA 2892), a favourite of mine. In good condition it’ll give 300 -310 degrees amplitude in the flat positions, falling to around 275 -280 in the hanging positions when fully wound. The rate will vary by around 5-6 secs between positions and the watch can be regulated to run very well. After 5-6 years the amplitude will drop by around 25 degrees in the flat positions but because the isochronism is good the watch will still run well and the rate shouldn't vary by much compared to when it was freshly serviced. However, in the hanging positions the amplitude will be down at 240 degrees and that’s getting into an area where the relationship between rate and amplitude veers away from isochronism. The owner may notice that the watch is less consistent in rate, it’ll be more sensitive to wear pattern. If the watch is used in a lower state of wind the amplitude will drop into an area where the deviations become more significant, but still not sufficient to alert the owner to have the watch serviced.

    A lesser watch won’t have the same isochronism and positional variation will be greater, but when in good condition it can be regulated to give very good performance. This will be more sensitive to wear pattern because the amplitude will have a greater effect upon rate. After a few years, when the amplitude drops, the disparity in performance between this watch and the better movement will be greater and the owner is more likely to perceive the drop in performance.

    Unlike car engines, watch movements have tiny parts with relatively large clearances; end- shake on wheels can be compared to end- float in an engine or gearbox but in a watch movement these clearances are huge relative to the diameter of the pivots. Wear on the teeth of train-wheels is almost insignificant and because the parts move slowly wear to the pivots only occurs over a long tine due to poor lubrication.

    My advice to the OP is to do some homework on how watches work, there’s lots of good stuff on the internet but the Donald DeCarle books are still a good source if you really want to get into the subject.
    Thank you for your clear explanation and advice!

  23. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by walkerwek1958 View Post
    The better watches are able to maintain isochronism over a wider range of amplitudes. They also have better precision due to the positional variations being smaller.

    Lets consider the Omega 1120 (aka ETA 2892), a favourite of mine. In good condition it’ll give 300 -310 degrees amplitude in the flat positions, falling to around 275 -280 in the hanging positions when fully wound. The rate will vary by around 5-6 secs between positions and the watch can be regulated to run very well. After 5-6 years the amplitude will drop by around 25 degrees in the flat positions but because the isochronism is good the watch will still run well and the rate shouldn't vary by much compared to when it was freshly serviced. However, in the hanging positions the amplitude will be down at 240 degrees and that’s getting into an area where the relationship between rate and amplitude veers away from isochronism. The owner may notice that the watch is less consistent in rate, it’ll be more sensitive to wear pattern. If the watch is used in a lower state of wind the amplitude will drop into an area where the deviations become more significant, but still not sufficient to alert the owner to have the watch serviced.

    A lesser watch won’t have the same isochronism and positional variation will be greater, but when in good condition it can be regulated to give very good performance. This will be more sensitive to wear pattern because the amplitude will have a greater effect upon rate. After a few years, when the amplitude drops, the disparity in performance between this watch and the better movement will be greater and the owner is more likely to perceive the drop in performance.

    Unlike car engines, watch movements have tiny parts with relatively large clearances; end- shake on wheels can be compared to end- float in an engine or gearbox but in a watch movement these clearances are huge relative to the diameter of the pivots. Wear on the teeth of train-wheels is almost insignificant and because the parts move slowly wear to the pivots only occurs over a long tine due to poor lubrication.

    My advice to the OP is to do some homework on how watches work, there’s lots of good stuff on the internet but the Donald DeCarle books are still a good source if you really want to get into the subject.
    In personal experience, I noticed that for example, a seiko movement like the 7s26/4r36/6r15 tends to be much more prone to variation depending on the position of the watch, in comparison of an ETA 2824-2/2893-2/sellita.
    Could it be then that the seiko movements will naturally keep less accurate time through the years if not serviced as the amplitude has a bigger effect on timekeeping?

  24. #74
    Master Templogin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Shetland
    Posts
    2,724
    People generally got to know Rolex through marketing, whether that be a shop window or an advert on TV, at a sports event or a magazine. I can't comment on their reliability, as I have never owned one.

    Like Mont Blanc and its plastic pens, they are both common High Street brands posing as luxury brands. Can I afford either brand? Yes. Would I buy either brand? No. I am not the sort that worries about residuals. I don't hide my watches in a safe, I wear them daily. Have I swallowed the "if you wear a Rolex you've made it" tosh? No, I have seen too many chavs and chancers wearing them or replicas of them. All this said, I have to admire their marketing for creating the hype over a High Street watch brand.

  25. #75
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Wakefield, West Yorkshire
    Posts
    22,498
    Quote Originally Posted by Wandril View Post
    In personal experience, I noticed that for example, a seiko movement like the 7s26/4r36/6r15 tends to be much more prone to variation depending on the position of the watch, in comparison of an ETA 2824-2/2893-2/sellita.
    Could it be then that the seiko movements will naturally keep less accurate time through the years if not serviced as the amplitude has a bigger effect on timekeeping?

    Yes, that’s true for Seikos in my opinion. Ideally, the rate would be the same at 230 degrees as it is at 280, but it always changes to a greater or lesser extent for any watch. In my experience Seikos and Miyotas etc show a bigger variation, even though the positional variation can usually be adjusted to the COSC range of 10 secs at high amplitude there isn’t much that can be done to improve isochronism. Generally, the ETA offerings are significantly better and watches such as the Rolex 3135 and Omega 8500 are better still........but you’re paying a lot of money for these! I can adjust and regulate a Miyota or Seiko to keep very good time on my wrist based on keeping the movement in a high state of wind , but as soon as that watch goes to an owner who is far more sedate the performance is likely to differ, its a lot easier regulating the better movements such as the Omega 1120 or the TAG or Breitling versions if the ETA movements provided they’re in good condition. They’re also very efficient self- winders so they’re more likely to remain in a high state of wind despite the relatively modest power reserve of 40 hrs.

    Not sure if the answers on this thread answer tge original question but hopefully they've proved thought- provoking. Mechanical watches are fascinating items, the technology should've died in the 70s with the advent of affordable quartz movements which are infinitely better at the job, but it didn’t. I’m struggling to think of another technology that has survived in this way despite being superseded by something better.

  26. #76
    Master M1011's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    3,223
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanb741 View Post
    Rolex marketing never subscribe to hyperbole or deceit. The reason Rolex is the best is because they made the first waterproof watch, the first watch worn on the moon, the first wristwatch, the first watch worn on Everest, the first automatic wristwatch, the most accurate mechanical watch and they also invented the chronograph. The Milgauss is the most antimagnetic watch in the world, way more antimagnetic than even a bog standard Omega.

    In the late 1960s Rolex went up against Seiko in mechanical accuracy tests and wiped the floor with the Japanese. This is why Rolex watches were selected to be worn by US troops in the Vietnam War.

    Rolex Steel is much better than normal steel. It can survive 10 years inside the stomach of a Tiger Shark, it reflects back gamma radiation and protects the user, Rolexes add around 3 years of life to the user (if worn for at least 7 hours a day) because of the health properties of the mechanical movement and impact on the body's lymphatic system.

    With stats like this there is no need for marketing.
    Haha, I 100% agree.

    Quote Originally Posted by paskinner View Post
    I assume this is a joke ?
    The man said it can survive 10 years inside the stomach of a Tiger Shark, I think your assumption is a safe one

  27. #77
    Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Sussex, UK
    Posts
    5,128
    Quote Originally Posted by M1011 View Post
    Haha, I 100% agree.



    The man said it can survive 10 years inside the stomach of a Tiger Shark, I think your assumption is a safe one
    Remember that Rolex has a tradition of surviving bizarre situations.....a Sub was found deep in the English Channel on a murdered man, still in operational condition. Long story, but it helped in the conviction of the killer.

  28. #78
    Master earlofsodbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    Tether's End, Lincs
    Posts
    4,852
    Quote Originally Posted by ryanb741 View Post
    Rolex marketing never subscribe to hyperbole or deceit. The reason Rolex is the best is because they made the first waterproof watch, the first watch worn on the moon, the first wristwatch, the first watch worn on Everest, the first automatic wristwatch, the most accurate mechanical watch and they also invented the chronograph. The Milgauss is the most antimagnetic watch in the world, way more antimagnetic than even a bog standard Omega.

    In the late 1960s Rolex went up against Seiko in mechanical accuracy tests and wiped the floor with the Japanese. This is why Rolex watches were selected to be worn by US troops in the Vietnam War.

    Rolex Steel is much better than normal steel. It can survive 10 years inside the stomach of a Tiger Shark, it reflects back gamma radiation and protects the user, Rolexes add around 3 years of life to the user (if worn for at least 7 hours a day) because of the health properties of the mechanical movement and impact on the body's lymphatic system.

    With stats like this there is no need for marketing.

    Truly, we are in the presence of greatness!

  29. #79
    Master
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    5,412
    Quote Originally Posted by walkerwek1958 View Post
    I’m struggling to think of another technology that has survived in this way despite being superseded by something better.
    Microsoft Windows.

  30. #80
    Master JPE's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,207
    I'm a car enthusiast and people sometimes say that comparing cars to watches is lame.

    I don't think so.

    Old Rolex Submariner is like an air cooled Porsche 911.

    They don't make 'em anymore.

    Take 911 SC and its cabin. It's like poor man's home but the Porsche enthusiasts wouldn't take it any other way.

    Take the old Oyster bracelet and the flimsy clasp. It's perfect for the Rolex enthusiasts.

    Take any GTI of today. It would run circles around the old Porsche on the track. Probably a Honda Civic family sport version would.

    That is not the point. Rolex Submariner is not the greatest watch or technically "superior". It's technically nothing special.

    It's an ICON. And that's why people want it.

  31. #81
    Quote Originally Posted by Wallasey Runner View Post
    Mass produced professional tool watches. They are desired because you can't buy them (human nature to want what we can't have) and they do have incredible residuals, in some cases double or more what you paid.

    Think of this, if you could walk into any AD and buy any Rolex at list price there and then and the minute you left the store the Watch lost 25% of its value - would people still be as keen to own one.

    Don't get me wrong, they are great watches, but there is better out there and most of the Rolex hype probably has little to do with the actual watches themselves.

    Numerous friends or colleagues who are first time buyers of expensive watches, ask for opinion of brands and nearly most of them come up with priories like these 1. Keep value, 2. might even appreciate in value over period of time, 3. that they can feel proud of wearing, i.e. easily recognizable........good looking............functional........keep time.....so what can you suggest..


    While people always says we don't need a piece of watch to tell time nowadays, then reliability in terms of accuracy and durability should not be used to value, judge Rolex or any other luxury brands.

    A piece of seemingly technically superior tourbillion made by Seagull could, however, never complete with a Datejust in term of pricing, market recognition...

    BTW, own few older Rolex models and generally keeping time is not an issue. For Seiko that even costs over 1,000GBP, accuracy is not my concern except those with the Spring Drive movement. If someone says his/her 7s/4s/6s/8s movements are up to chronometer performance, I could say you're very lucky and luck is all you have for that particular piece.
    Last edited by seikomatic; 25th February 2021 at 02:49.

  32. #82
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    5,205
    Quote Originally Posted by Neil.C View Post
    It's simple really, just buy what you like the look of and what is in your budget.

    No need for a lot of soul searching disguised as research.

    I appreciate and own watches at many price levels but if I could only keep one it would be a Rolex.

    Buying watches should be fun not torture.
    Neil is right mechanical things are just mechanical things they are not perfect remember "Timex takes a lickin and keeps on tickin" so in essence why buy a Rolex?

  33. #83
    Master pacchi's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Zürich
    Posts
    2,082
    Quote Originally Posted by RAJEN View Post
    Now that is irony well spotted:-)
    Laugh of the day! (no irony...)

  34. #84
    Quote Originally Posted by walkerwek1958 View Post
    Yes, that’s true for Seikos in my opinion. Ideally, the rate would be the same at 230 degrees as it is at 280, but it always changes to a greater or lesser extent for any watch. In my experience Seikos and Miyotas etc show a bigger variation, even though the positional variation can usually be adjusted to the COSC range of 10 secs at high amplitude there isn’t much that can be done to improve isochronism. Generally, the ETA offerings are significantly better and watches such as the Rolex 3135 and Omega 8500 are better still........but you’re paying a lot of money for these! I can adjust and regulate a Miyota or Seiko to keep very good time on my wrist based on keeping the movement in a high state of wind , but as soon as that watch goes to an owner who is far more sedate the performance is likely to differ, its a lot easier regulating the better movements such as the Omega 1120 or the TAG or Breitling versions if the ETA movements provided they’re in good condition. They’re also very efficient self- winders so they’re more likely to remain in a high state of wind despite the relatively modest power reserve of 40 hrs.

    Not sure if the answers on this thread answer tge original question but hopefully they've proved thought- provoking. Mechanical watches are fascinating items, the technology should've died in the 70s with the advent of affordable quartz movements which are infinitely better at the job, but it didn’t. I’m struggling to think of another technology that has survived in this way despite being superseded by something better.
    Yes that's amazing to see a technology which should belong to the past still being alive and pushed on!

    I think the point on isochronism is a good one for watches in general, and something interesting to get rid of myths.

    I find it more interesting to think that rolex is a good brand because their movements can show a good level of isochronism and performance, rather than just because everyone says so, and the value retention is great...

    As said before, I wanted to start the thread to raise this kind of answer, rather than what I hear all the time "if they're successful it means they're great", "they've invented everything", "I've had mine in its box for 40 years, it keeps great time",...

  35. #85
    And I'm not trying to torture myself, I just think part of the fun with watch collecting is the knowledge around it.
    I buy watches because I like the look of it and because they are well made. So I need to cut through the marketing stuff to actually understand why, what's inside, what is making it better than something else,...

    I'm not a SAS or anything so I'm not going to test the watches to their very limits, but I like my watches to be able to go through pretty much everything without failing, and without having to take off the watch, so I enjoy well designed, well made, well thought about watches

  36. #86
    Grand Master oldoakknives's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    20,046
    Blog Entries
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Itsguy View Post
    Microsoft Windows.
    Wicked. But true!
    Started out with nothing. Still have most of it left.

  37. #87
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    North
    Posts
    18,931
    Blog Entries
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by wileeeeeey View Post
    Rich people's G-Shocks and suffered hard lives or just high end and delicate?

    Do the regular Royal Oaks seem to be more reliable by comparison?
    Their movements are the calibre 3120 with a DD module bolted on. 3120 is found in some of their "dress" watch range and the standard RO.
    Its high end but the pay-off is that there's more that can go awry, particularly when sold inside a "sports" watch thats supposed to be able to take a few knocks.
    Theres something like 370 odd parts on the go in the AP vs 200 that go into the Rolex 3135.
    170 more things to worry about when skiing or whatever you do in them.

    I guess regular royal oaks get a bit more care taken with them as they're 50m rated and people perhaps treat them with more care than they would the offshore which gives the aura of brute to a higher degree. Although ive seen some RO's that have suffered with water ingress and gone rusty.

  38. #88
    Master Templogin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Shetland
    Posts
    2,724
    Quote Originally Posted by seikomatic View Post
    Numerous friends or colleagues who are first time buyers of expensive watches, ask for opinion of brands and nearly most of them come up with priories like these 1. Keep value, 2. might even appreciate in value over period of time, 3. that they can feel proud of wearing, i.e. easily recognizable........good looking............functional........keep time.....so what can you suggest.....snip.....
    I will just pick a few words out of there that they can feel proud of wearing, i.e.easily recognizable. I on the whole agree with the rest of the sentence.

    Rolex has sold an image for those that need to project the image that Rolex has invented around its product, in the same way that Mont Blanc, another common High Street brand has turned a plastic pen into a precious resin pen, and somehow made it a must have thing. I suggested in another thread that if you want to write with a Mont Blanc, the cheapest way of doing it is to buy a refill, chop a few millimetres off the back end, then put that refill in a cheap Pilot G2. No-one seemed interested in that idea. I can only imagine that the Pilot G2 doesn't project the image that they want. If you want to know the value of Mont Blancs precious resin, melt it down and then try to sell the result. It will be worthless. The image will have disappeared in a cloud of smoke.

    Getting back to watches, Rolex could be the most accurate, longest lasting watches in the world , and I still wouldn't buy one. It's the image that turns me off. I would feel like I had been bent over by the marketing department. Then again my last car was a Citroen C3, so I obviously have nothing to prove. I saved like mad for a BP FF, because I wanted to have something that wasn't recognizable. In the end I just realised how ludicrous it was to spend that much on a watch.

    I wouldn't want any Rolex owner to be offended by my opinions, as I am sure that none of you were sucked in by the marketing hype, and that you all bought Rolex purely out of you interest in horological history, their competence as a manufacturer, and the huge range of diverse designs.

  39. #89
    Grand Master Mr Curta's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Mainly UK
    Posts
    17,287
    Good posts, Temp.
    Don't just do something, sit there. - TNH

  40. #90
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    North
    Posts
    18,931
    Blog Entries
    2
    There is no brand that doesn't present or market an image. Not one.

    Why the F people revert to stuff like "projecting an image" when it comes to Rolex alone baffles me.

    Okay Omega wearers who want to be Buzz Aldrin Ed White or Piers Brosnan slash Daniel Craig.
    Okay BPFF wearers who think theyre Jacques Cousteau and wouldnt be seen dead wearing the dive watch that everybody else wears because theyre different and float under the radar like a French marine combat swimmer.
    Okay Rolex wearers who fancy themselves as Sean Connery and like to lisp at the ladies. I touch my shelf.
    Fair do's Smiths wearers who will tell you daily that they were up the peak first while channeling Hillary or Norgay and making you aware that Rolex is a lying abominable snowman.
    No trouble Heuer wearers who would set fire to the later Tag part because they want the McQueen Monaco vibe without being sullied by Leonardo Di Caprio.
    Up to you IWC wearers who want to hark back to the Luftwaffe while reading the little prince and enjoy the kind of power reserve that means you can leave it as a bedside clock for a week after making a wayne-kerr sign at an Audi for five seconds.
    No drama Panerai and the sea pig Italian navy Sylvester Stallone's libido luminor.
    Do your thing Dirk Pitt Doxa wearers who like the laid back Matt Mcconaughey vibe and the idea of pulling Salma Hayek.
    If you want to sign with a Mont Blanc then do so but just know that afficionados prefer Pelikan and those who know, know.
    Those who know better than the Pelikan users sign their names with a Namiki while wearing the Nudies that havent been washed in a year because RAW, MAN! and turn up the cuffs over the Trickers while carrying the Belstaffs and wearing the Barbours with the Ray-Bans and driving the Porsches with the BMW's for touring and the Triumphs for playtime while paying for it all out of the Goyard rather than the LV because everyone knows Goyard is under the radar higher quality and LV has been overrun by tourists...

    ...or let all the folks know know that you've transcended brand fashion by wearing something knocked up by Matalan with shoes from the Catalan and walk to the beat of your own unpredictable and unswayed by marketing veblen branding and contemporary fashion drum.

    Everything anyone does whether its buy into brands or buy into eschewing brands is a projection of an image, the image depends entirely on the individual but every action is designed for a reaction whether its conscious or not.

    (NB, this was not an aggressive rant, I just enjoyed writing it to illustrate the point!)

  41. #91
    Grand Master SimonK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    19,497
    Quote Originally Posted by verv View Post

    Okay Omega wearers who want to be Buzz Aldrin Ed White or Piers Brosnan slash Daniel Craig.
    Slash wears a Hublot and sometimes a Kermit.



    Last edited by SimonK; 25th February 2021 at 15:37.

  42. #92
    Grand Master Mr Curta's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Mainly UK
    Posts
    17,287
    Quote Originally Posted by SimonK View Post
    Slash wears a Hublot

  43. #93
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    North
    Posts
    18,931
    Blog Entries
    2
    He'll never double wrist a Hublot like Maradonna tho!


  44. #94
    Grand Master Neil.C's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    SE England
    Posts
    27,035
    Quote Originally Posted by verv View Post
    There is no brand that doesn't present or market an image. Not one.

    Why the F people revert to stuff like "projecting an image" when it comes to Rolex alone baffles me.

    Okay Omega wearers who want to be Buzz Aldrin Ed White or Piers Brosnan slash Daniel Craig.
    Okay BPFF wearers who think theyre Jacques Cousteau and wouldnt be seen dead wearing the dive watch that everybody else wears because theyre different and float under the radar like a French marine combat swimmer.
    Okay Rolex wearers who fancy themselves as Sean Connery and like to lisp at the ladies. I touch my shelf.
    Fair do's Smiths wearers who will tell you daily that they were up the peak first while channeling Hillary or Norgay and making you aware that Rolex is a lying abominable snowman.
    No trouble Heuer wearers who would set fire to the later Tag part because they want the McQueen Monaco vibe without being sullied by Leonardo Di Caprio.
    Up to you IWC wearers who want to hark back to the Luftwaffe while reading the little prince and enjoy the kind of power reserve that means you can leave it as a bedside clock for a week after making a wayne-kerr sign at an Audi for five seconds.
    No drama Panerai and the sea pig Italian navy Sylvester Stallone's libido luminor.
    Do your thing Dirk Pitt Doxa wearers who like the laid back Matt Mcconaughey vibe and the idea of pulling Salma Hayek.
    If you want to sign with a Mont Blanc then do so but just know that afficionados prefer Pelikan and those who know, know.
    Those who know better than the Pelikan users sign their names with a Namiki while wearing the Nudies that havent been washed in a year because RAW, MAN! and turn up the cuffs over the Trickers while carrying the Belstaffs and wearing the Barbours with the Ray-Bans and driving the Porsches with the BMW's for touring and the Triumphs for playtime while paying for it all out of the Goyard rather than the LV because everyone knows Goyard is under the radar higher quality and LV has been overrun by tourists...

    ...or let all the folks know know that you've transcended brand fashion by wearing something knocked up by Matalan with shoes from the Catalan and walk to the beat of your own unpredictable and unswayed by marketing veblen branding and contemporary fashion drum.

    Everything anyone does whether its buy into brands or buy into eschewing brands is a projection of an image, the image depends entirely on the individual but every action is designed for a reaction whether its conscious or not.

    (NB, this was not an aggressive rant, I just enjoyed writing it to illustrate the point!)
    Well said C.

    Plenty of people like to think they are above marketing and enjoying their virtue signalling but at the end of the day, as you say, every brand presents an image of some sort.
    Cheers,
    Neil.

    My Speedmaster website:

    http://www.freewebs.com/neil271052

  45. #95
    Master M1011's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Location
    London, England
    Posts
    3,223
    Quote Originally Posted by Templogin View Post
    I will just pick a few words out of there that they can feel proud of wearing, i.e.easily recognizable. I on the whole agree with the rest of the sentence.

    Rolex has sold an image for those that need to project the image that Rolex has invented around its product, in the same way that Mont Blanc, another common High Street brand has turned a plastic pen into a precious resin pen, and somehow made it a must have thing. I suggested in another thread that if you want to write with a Mont Blanc, the cheapest way of doing it is to buy a refill, chop a few millimetres off the back end, then put that refill in a cheap Pilot G2. No-one seemed interested in that idea. I can only imagine that the Pilot G2 doesn't project the image that they want. If you want to know the value of Mont Blancs precious resin, melt it down and then try to sell the result. It will be worthless. The image will have disappeared in a cloud of smoke.

    Getting back to watches, Rolex could be the most accurate, longest lasting watches in the world , and I still wouldn't buy one. It's the image that turns me off. I would feel like I had been bent over by the marketing department. Then again my last car was a Citroen C3, so I obviously have nothing to prove. I saved like mad for a BP FF, because I wanted to have something that wasn't recognizable. In the end I just realised how ludicrous it was to spend that much on a watch.

    I wouldn't want any Rolex owner to be offended by my opinions, as I am sure that none of you were sucked in by the marketing hype, and that you all bought Rolex purely out of you interest in horological history, their competence as a manufacturer, and the huge range of diverse designs.
    It seems your final sentence may not be entirely in good faith

    People talk a lot about the marketing of Rolex like it's not real and valuable, but rather some sort of trick. I could understand 'feeling bent over' if you were being individually upsold by a swanky salesman touting a pipe dream, but with Rolex the reality is that they've spent an absolute fortune on branding to the masses, and it has value. It makes the watches recognisable to the bulk of the population, they maintain their value, they are easy to move on and they are seen as a benchmark of quality to the masses etc. Of course many people won't value any of that, but let's not pretend it doesn't exist - intangibles matter, we all know this.

    I found the Montblanc example interesting, but if we melt your BP FF what'll that be worth? What about an art piece? A cake? A pet labrador? It seems most things are not worth much once melted down to raw materials.

  46. #96
    Grand Master Sinnlover's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2014
    Location
    London
    Posts
    10,946
    Quote Originally Posted by verv View Post
    He'll never double wrist a Hublot like Maradonna tho!

    Even he might have a bit of trouble doing that now!
    Last edited by Sinnlover; 25th February 2021 at 16:17.

  47. #97
    Master Templogin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Shetland
    Posts
    2,724
    Verv, I agree with most of what you say, and after decades of cheap watches I came to buy my first >£100 watch relatively recently, a Seamaster 300 ceramic, I was really struggling to press the buy button because of the James Bond association. I didn't buy a limitied edition because I think that is a load of tosh, which Omega milk to death. Who remembers the Franklin Mint limited edition plates in colour supplements that used to come with newspapers of decades ago? Perhaps they still do? I am more likely to find out that the marketing department message turns me off their brand than encourages me towards it. I bought a Citizen BN0118-55e after months of not wanting one because Ray Mears is associated with it. I bought it because I wanted a titanium watch. The CWC G10 I bought here was due to having one issued in the Army. The Omega X33 bought here again was because I wanted a watch with alarms that I could set. Funnily enough I was reading a website last night that was talking about watches in space, and I realised that I had absolutely no idea if NASA had taken the X33 to the moon. I read the back of the watch to find out that it had been certified and tested by the ESA. I hadn't bothered to read to read the back before because I was more interested in the front.

    Now I am not saying that I am totally unaffected by marketing. The projecting an image comment isn't about Rolex alone. Brands print their names on the outside of their goods for a reason. Free cars and watches are given to celebs who can easily afford to buy their own for a reason. Why do women buy Le Boutin (sp?) shoes and how do they get them noticed, by the red sole? Why do we allow ourselves to walk about like advertising hoardings? I remember giving Alpkit some feedback, makers of outdoor gear, saying that I liked their gear but not the huge logos. This was years ago, and undoubtedly without a thought to my comments, the logos have got smaller.

    We have all worked with someone who dressed in all the right labels, and tried to impress us with them. Bound to be seen in a Barbour jacket, with the Barbour badge attached, so that no-one mistook it for a cheapie version. The suit jacket had a Mont Blanc pen in the breast pocket, because no-one would see the MB snowflake if the pen was carried in an inside pocket, and so on and so forth.

    Added to the above, when a person is too frightened to wear their watch outside because a nasty man might take it from them, I can't help but think that they have bought into the wrong brand.
    Last edited by Templogin; 25th February 2021 at 16:39.

  48. #98
    Master Templogin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Shetland
    Posts
    2,724
    Quote Originally Posted by M1011 View Post
    ...snip...

    I found the Montblanc example interesting, but if we melt your BP FF what'll that be worth? What about an art piece? A cake? A pet labrador? It seems most things are not worth much once melted down to raw materials.
    Whilst I was making the Mont Blanc comment I was looking at the silver fountain pens that I own, so I was comparing like with like. The diffence with the BP FF, art piece, cake and labrador is that the "maker" is not claiming that they are made of precious resin.

  49. #99
    Grand Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    North
    Posts
    18,931
    Blog Entries
    2
    I do see your point Temp.
    But I think that the fall-down comes with the assertion that people try to "impress" with certain brands.
    I dont deny that theres an element of that permeating life, but it isnt the rule.

    I openly admit that I'm a very specific brand buyer if I have a certain requirement to fill, whether thats new watch, new bag, new hoodie, new sneakers, new boots, food for dinner, oil for the car etc.
    I buy specific brands because I associate them with longevity, and partly because im a bit set in my ways at 40+and like what I like so have remained brand loyal by default for decades sometimes.

    The accusation that people buy things to impress is often repeated but perhaps not often thought through as thoroughly as it could be.

    Rolex / MB / Barbour et al are popular because they're as reassuring as John Lewis IMO. This doesn't make them the pinnacles of their craft, but it doesn't have to.

  50. #100
    Master Templogin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Shetland
    Posts
    2,724
    Verv - accusation of buying to impress. I am disinclined to agree with you here. The reason that I come to my conclusion is based on life where I used to live in the south of England, compared to where I now live, in Shetland. It could well be the sort of people that I generally met: sales and marketing or management types.

    I remember one day a salesman visiting to try to sell me something. He was dressed smartly. At the end of the conversation I needed a break from the building so I told him that I would walk him to his car, his face looked drained, he was flustered. I wasn't taking no for an answer, and walked him towards his car. He apologised to me that he was actually driving his wife's car that day, a beaten up Fiat Panda. I couldn't have given two tosses if he had arrived on a uni-cycle in a clown costume. My interest was in the products he sold and whether they would be of any use to us.

    There were so many people that I came across trying to portray themselves as "better" than they were. Perhaps a flash car on the drive that they could barely afford to insure and run. Or hocking themselves into debt for some bauble to flash about. We lived in a 3 bed council house, but were not short of money. Two doors away we had a neighbour who was running a banger of a car (I was running a newish Astra - I know how to impress). Every time they came out of the house the man had to lift the bonnet and fiddle about underneath until he managed to get it running. The difference between us was that they had bought (mortgaged) their council house. One day I asked my then partner if there was anything we could do to help them when it looked like he wasn't going to be able to start the car this time. Perhaps the offer of a lift somewhere might dig them out of the hole. The response my other half got form the woman was "I'm sorry we don't speak to council tenants, we have bought our council house".

    I had moved there from a village where I lived in a road of mixed houses. The road had originally been bulit around council houses, then extended in later years and private housing had been built. The rent rises under the then governemt were crippling and it was cheaper to buy the council house than rent it. We got a mortgage of £30,000, a 40%-ish discount, and made the low monthly payments to the building society instead of rent payments to the council. One day I was walking around the village and happened to bump into an ex-colleague. He asked how long I had lived in the village, then about 2 years, and where did I live. I told him the name of the road (half coucil, half private, and his question was "yes, but which end". It is rare that I come up with a good answer straight away, but this time I did, "the question says more about you than the answer will ever say about me".

    Even my own son once said to me that as I lived in a council house I probably had a car up on blocks on the drive. He quickly apologised afterwards.

    I won't bore you further with a long list of anecdotes.

    When I moved to Shetland I couldn't believe how different the attitude was. In roughly 20 years I have seen one Bentley; a visitor's, and one Porsche. There are the very odd Mercedes usually old and one M series BMW. The Berlingo used to be the car of choice here. I think that it's becoming the Yaris now. There are a few Range Rovers, but many of the vehicles are pickups. No-one cares if you live on a council estate. You are very much treated for who you are. There seems to be an unwritten rule that being flash is not a good thing. Being charitable is seen as good, and the latest example of charity is the community paying for an MRI scanner. We only have a CT scanner at the moment, also bought with charitable donations. Suits seem to be worn either at weddings or the top council staff. It really is laid back. A fantastic place to live, without the constant one-upmanship with the neighbours. I have never seen anyone here wearing a Rolex, but then again I am not looking for outward signs of that type.

    Many years ago (late 80s) a merchant seaman relative gave me a fake Rolex that he bought for £7 in the Far East. I wore it to work as it was a cheaper watch than the one I was wearing, and my job as a mobile service tech meant that my watch got bashed on occasion. I always used to try to do the best job I could and clean the customer's equipment so that they could see a definite improvement after servicing. It was not unusual to get a tip of a tenner from the customers. I remember one day a customer going through the invoice that I had given him, and him saying "I would normally give you a tip, but if you can afford a Rolex you don't need my money". It struck me as ironic that I was wearing a £7 watch to save my probably £35-ish watch. A week later the bezel and glass fell of whilst I was having a pee. I retrieved the parts, rinsed and dried them, then re-assembled the watch. Within a week the bezel and glass had fallen off again, but this time I didn't notice and the watch was consigned to the bin, my first and last fake watch.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Do Not Sell My Personal Information