San Martin vs Rolex

[Passenger]

I haven't owned a San Martin but have owned several nh35 powered Chinese watches (from companies half or even a third of the price of San Martin) and the timekeeping on all of them has been within a couple of seconds a day. Far better than a typical Seiko. Either these companies regulate the movements carefully, which seems unlikely or Seiko send out their unbranded nh movements better set up than the branded ones they put in their own watches.

Same experience with Nh movements...never had a Seiko for comparison purposes, though bought my Dad one.

[wildheart]

The timekeeping on any automatic watch is going to be subjective to some degree, how many hours worn, how active the individuals are etc. A G Shock that is regulated several times a day must be the logical way to go for anyone who requires 100% accuracy.

Your never going to beat a G Shock for accuracy as they are the ultimate tool watch. I don't think a few seconds either way concerns Rolex or Homage wearers, its the build quality that high end pieces like to boast, and unfortunately Rolex are being caught up. Seiko surpassed them years ago with the Grand versions, if the Chinese manufacturers get anywhere near that, then the Swiss watch makers will take a big hit, they must be feeling it already to a certain degree... Apple, Casio and now the Chinese homages must have cut well into their cake!

[Ruggertech]

Same experience with Nh movements...never had a Seiko for comparison purposes, though bought my Dad one.

Total crapshoot with Seiko's P. My Alpinist is about 5 seconds a day slow but that's a higher grade movement than a nh35 and a £2700 (rrp) watch. I've had Steeldive (£60-70), Pagani (£40-60), and Tandorio (£30-40) Chinese watches with nh35 that do better than that.

[walkerwek1958]

which seems unlikely or Seiko send out their unbranded nh movements better set up than the branded ones they put in their own watches.

Unbranded NH35 movements are definitely NOT regulated to a better standard than Seiko branded ones. The watch manufacturer is going to the trouble of regulating them properly, which any manufacturer should do.

Contrary to popular myth you cannot simply fit a new movement to a watch and expect it to run to time, some degree of regulation is highly likely, and in the case of Seiko/NH the beat error will almost certainly need correcting. Regulating a Seiko/NH takes around 20 minutes, even if you're used to them it still takes several goes to get them right owing to the lack of a fine adjustment for the regulator.

I treated my own Seiko, a Seiko 5 7S26 that's 20 years old to an upgrade by fitting an NH35 movement, thus providing hacking and hand-winding. This needed some adjustment and regulation but it now keeps time to with a couple of secs/day provided it runs in a high state of wind (v. important with Seikos). The 'upgrade' was necessary, I`d nicked the balance out of my old watch to use in a repair job!

Seiko/NH movements always benefit from being regulated and adjusted carefully, if only they had a fine adjuster for the regulator (ETA style) they would be far easier to set up. One benefit is the sheer robustness, they don't suffer from wear in the way that some far more expensive movements do.

[Ruggertech]

The watch manufacturer is going to the trouble of regulating them properly, which any manufacturer should do.

That's incredible considering some of these watches can land on your doorstep for less than £40 including delivery and vat! Guess Chinese labour rates help with that though.

[neuman356]

It's 25 grams of extra quality ;-)

I think these are great watches personally, and great as a 'try before you buy' before you shell out 10k on something they are copying. My main objection is the side-profie, and the thickness - they are always a bit slab-sided and usually a bit thicker than other watches as the NH35 they are all built around is quite a thick movement.

The 4R family movements have a height of 5.3mm, Rolex calibers have a reputation for being sturdy and also quite thick, the 3100 movements had a height of 6mm, compared to say a ETA 2824 with 4.6mm or a 2892 with 3.6mm they are both chunky.

[ColDaspin]

Whilst we are currently seeing a correction from the past few years of madness, I think they’ll always continue to rise (albeit at a much more realistic rate) as I can’t see Rolex either reducing RRPs or ADs discounting any time soon.

When I bought my 16710, GMTs were around £5.5k, they are now £9350 if you can get one. As they continue to rise, the used market will almost certainly follow suit. So if you buy wisely and keep the watch for a number of years, the selling price will probably be higher than your original purchase price thus making the watch a no cost ownership proposition.

You’ll definitely not get your money back selling a San Martin so the Rolex will ultimately be cheaper to own than the San Martin.

After you factor in servicing costs, insurance costs and, most importantly, cost of capital, that simply won't be the case unless you very strike lucky on the timing.

[Dave+63]

After you factor in servicing costs, insurance costs and, most importantly, cost of capital, that simply won't be the case unless you very strike lucky on the timing.

I disagree; with a service every ten years it’s not expensive when annualised out, insurance is optional and if you’re paying cash then there’s no cost of capital unless you specifically want to factor in the opportunity cost of having your capital tied up.

But it’s a watch at the end of the day and how many other things they you buy would you consider the opportunity cost of the capital when buying?

[Passenger]

I guess it's the 500 quid a year the 10k spent on the watch, that the 10K IS not generating you in interest in a cash ISA..or similar, more or less entirely risk, hassle free and likely accessible ...assume a wee bit of risk, accept say a short term commitment/ less instant access, the 10k might be making you a 1000 a year...in that hypothetical scenario you could keep your 10 k and buy a new San martin every couple of months...or roll over the interest and get the compound benefits, now that interest rates have returned to normalish, money is 'worth' something again. Not wishing/trying to teach anyone to suck eggs.

Coincidentally and somewhat of relevance, mrs P forwarded this to me the other day, I found the Rolex CEO's comments rather interesting, raised an eyebrow,

https://fortune.com/europe/2024/04/1...e-investments/

Apologies if it's old news, been shared elsewhere on the forum.

[ColDaspin]

I disagree; with a service every ten years it’s not expensive when annualised out, insurance is optional and if you’re paying cash then there’s no cost of capital unless you specifically want to factor in the opportunity cost of having your capital tied up.

But it’s a watch at the end of the day and how many other things they you buy would you consider the opportunity cost of the capital when buying?

People may not consider cost of capital when buying expensive goods but they're wrong to do so. But this discussion started as a result of saying that cost of ownership of a 10k Rolex would be cheaper than that of a 300 quid San Martin and it isn't, it's far more expensive. However, if you assume that the 9,700 quid you save up front on the San Martin would then have been spuffed on other goods that lose money I guess you can convince yourself that buying Rolex is a financially savvy choice!

[Dave+63]

People may not consider cost of capital when buying expensive goods but they're wrong to do so. But this discussion started as a result of saying that cost of ownership of a 10k Rolex would be cheaper than that of a 300 quid San Martin and it isn't, it's far more expensive. However, if you assume that the 9,700 quid you save up front on the San Martin would then have been spuffed on other goods that lose money I guess you can convince yourself that buying Rolex is a financially savvy choice!

We will just have to agree to disagree then.

Buy a £10k Rolex (new) or a pre owned Rolex at a reasonable price (not the vastly inflated over RRP prices of late) and a few years down the line, chances are you’ll get your money back.

Buy a San Martin at £300 and the chances are you’ll never see that money back.

[Passenger]

We will just have to agree to disagree then.

Buy a £10k Rolex (new) or a pre owned Rolex at a reasonable price (not the vastly inflated over RRP prices of late) and a few years down the line, chances are you’ll get your money back.

Buy a San Martin at £300 and the chances are you’ll never see that money back.

From the Fortune linky I posted, the CEO fella from Rolex offers a different opinion, HE is attempting to pour water on the idea a Rolex is an investment,

“I don’t like it when people compare watches with stocks. This sends the wrong message and is dangerous,” Rolex’s Dufour said in an interview with Swiss outlet NZZ earlier this month. Instead, Rolex’s watches are more akin to “products” than investments, he added.

Plus the 10 k on a Rolex isn't then available to earn a guaranteed 500 gbp to a 1000 gbp p.a....plus you'll probably need to insure it, buy install a safe another 500 to a 1000, plus a 1000 a decade on servicing...never mind if you actually wear as a GADA, the refinishing of the scratches on the softer rolex steel if you want it to always look minty and box fresh will cost too...so over a decade the thing's cost you somewhere between 6,500 to 11,500, conservatively, that's the cost of ownership additional to the purchase price...plus no guarantee's inflations not eaten away at the original 10k spent on the watch, so even if you do manage to sell it for what you originally paid, your purchasing power might have been reduced by a third to a half... Basically you need the Rolex to have at least doubled in value over the decade, when you sell it on, to not be a bigly loser...I think this is why the man from Rolex made the comment he did, the man himself trying to manage owner expectations as a hedge against their potential future disappointment.

With the san martin, the worst news is you've lost 300 gbp.

[Wallasey Runner]

Assets that can be turned into cash would be a better description.

[Passenger]

Assets that can be turned into cash would be a better description.

Perhaps assets that have the potential to be turned in to cash, if a buyer can be found, might be a better description. Subject to the usual considerations, timing, market conditions, broader economic outlook.

Another thing said in the Fortune article is that folk should see the watch as an achievement in itself, the ''trophy'' , not an investment, to an extent this is a solid point. Almost half of Brits , 46 percent have less than a 1000 gbp in savings and the average person has only 11, 500 gbp in savings...ergo to wear a wrist watch costing 10k up front, and then to be able to shrug off / absorb the cost of ownership, well that's something when taken in context...Peak bourgeoise in a sense, maybe?

[adrianw]

The more fakes that get produced, the more desirable the real thing becomes, with the effect of increasing residuals

[Dave+63]

From the Fortune linky I posted, the CEO fella from Rolex offers a different opinion, HE is attempting to pour water on the idea a Rolex is an investment,

“I don’t like it when people compare watches with stocks. This sends the wrong message and is dangerous,� Rolex’s Dufour said in an interview with Swiss outlet NZZ earlier this month. Instead, Rolex’s watches are more akin to “products� than investments, he added.

Plus the 10 k on a Rolex isn't then available to earn a guaranteed 500 gbp to a 1000 gbp p.a....plus you'll probably need to insure it, buy install a safe another 500 to a 1000, plus a 1000 a decade on servicing...never mind if you actually wear as a GADA, the refinishing of the scratches on the softer rolex steel if you want it to always look minty and box fresh will cost too...so over a decade the thing's cost you somewhere between 6,500 to 11,500, conservatively, that's the cost of ownership additional to the purchase price...plus no guarantee's inflations not eaten away at the original 10k spent on the watch, so even if you do manage to sell it for what you originally paid, your purchasing power might have been reduced by a third to a half... Basically you need the Rolex to have at least doubled in value over the decade, when you sell it on, to not be a bigly loser...I think this is why the man from Rolex made the comment he did, the man himself trying to manage owner expectations as a hedge against their potential future disappointment.

With the san martin, the worst news is you've lost 300 gbp.

At no point did I suggest that the Rolex be treated as an investment and the safe/insurance has been covered earlier.

I’ll spell it out simply; If you want buy a watch to wear and enjoy, the Rolex is a good option as the chances are it will be worth more than you paid for it in ten years, the San Martin will be a fiver at the car boot sale.

If you’d rather not have the Rolex then by all means invest the rest of the cash elsewhere but just remember you can’t take it with you and HMRC will try to get their hands on as much of it as they can once you’re gone.

[Passenger]

The more fakes that get produced, the more desirable the real thing becomes, with the effect of increasing residuals

I´m not sure that will hold true in all circumstances, though in fairness that´s about only death and taxes which do...and the latter's more malleable depending.

[adrianw]

I´m not sure that will hold true in all circumstances.

I think so, and that video was very superficial, nothing about the materials used, the hardness of the materials used, the accuracy or performance of the watches, he mentioned the bezel gap but obviously it's not an accident or manufacturing defect, it's how Rolex chose to design it, he admits to hating Rolex.

[Passenger]

At no point did I suggest that the Rolex be treated as an investment and the safe/insurance has been covered earlier.

I’ll spell it out simply; If you want buy a watch to wear and enjoy, the Rolex is a good option as the chances are it will be worth more than you paid for it in ten years, the San Martin will be a fiver at the car boot sale.

If you’d rather not have the Rolex then by all means invest the rest of the cash elsewhere but just remember you can’t take it with you and HMRC will try to get their hands on as much of it as they can once you’re gone.

I reckon we´ll have to agree to disagree Dave. These are volatile times, plausibly forecast to only worsen thus I think your optimistic, broad assumption isn´t in tune with the current conditions, furthermore the tune the Rolex CEO himself is deliberately now playing contradicts your assumed position.

[Passenger]

I think so, and that video was very superficial, nothing about the materials used, the hardness of the materials used, the accuracy or performance of the watches, he mentioned the bezel gap but obviously it's not an accident or manufacturing defect, it's how Rolex chose to design it, he admits to hating Rolex.

Was a while since I watched the video but doesn´t he state he´s NOT gonna get into the accuracy- performance, cos obvs one is a cheap watch the other´s 20 or 30 times more expensive thus you´d assume-expect in that area the SM´s not gonna be in it.
Yeah you could be right, Rolex are after all masters of marketing and brand, narratives, perception- control, strategy... and the house does always wins.

[adrianw]

If you’d rather not have the Rolex then by all means invest the rest of the cash elsewhere but just remember you can’t take it with you and HMRC will try to get their hands on as much of it as they can once you’re gone.

It's funny every time I don't buy something because I think it too extravagant my wife reminds me that I can't take it with me.

[adrianw]

Was a while since I watched the video but doesn´t he state he´s NOT gonna get into the accuracy- performance, cos obvs one is a cheap watch the other´s 20 or 30 times more expensive thus you´d assume-expect in that area the SM´s not gonna be in it.
Yeah you could be right, Rolex are after all masters of marketing and brand, narratives, perception- control, strategy... and the house does always wins.

I've got a few Rolex's and sold a few, so far I've never lost money, I buy them because I like them, so far they have always been free watches, they have cost me nothing, so great marketing, but compared to PP they are amateurs , so why the hate.

[Passenger]

I've got a few Rolex's and sold a few, so far I've never lost money, I buy them because I like them, so far they have always been free watches, they have cost me nothing, so great marketing, but compared to PP they are amateurs , so why the hate.

Hate seems rather a strong, surely wrong word for questioning an orthodoxy, while highlighting the costs of opportunity, ownership, and that change is the only constant...? Why the extreme sensitivity?

Good, very happy for you btw, getting back what the watch owes you. Have you had to liquidate one out of financial necessity or have you always been able to pick and choose your time...? Have you taken inflation into account, loss of potential income- interest earned on the cash tied up in the asset, in your determination that they were free watches?

[adrianw]

Hate seems rather a strong, surely wrong word for questioning an orthodoxy, while highlighting the costs of opportunity, ownership, and that change is the only constant...? Why the extreme sensitivity?

Good, very happy for you btw, getting back what the watch owes you. Have you had to liquidate one out of financial necessity or have you always been able to pick and choose your time...? Have you taken inflation into account, loss of potential income- interest earned on the cash tied up in the asset, in your determination that they were free watches?

In absolute fact I've never sold a watch in my life, only traded, and so far with Rolex I have always come out ahead all factors taken into consideration, saying that I did buy a nearly new bluesy just because I really like they, if I ever had to sell it, I doubt I would get my money back.

On the other hand it is a hobby not an investment, I've probably lost a fortune on JLC and Panarai

[gregory]

Damn these bloody Swiss horological watchmaking pioneering companies and their 'established and proven over several generations' reputations, and the fact that they have designed watches themselves and stood the test of 'time' for decades... and their ridiculousness at charging a lot of money for something that they actually designed and created... and their watch movements that they have honed to be reliable within seconds of perfection per day.

Damn them and their evolution... and accuracy...


How dare they factor that into pricing... when somebody can come across with a 'similar' watch that isn't obviously a rip-off replica, and can charge peanuts for something that some guy on the internet says is as good as / better in some elements... how dare the Swiss brand take the liberty of being more expensive.


Disgusting.

[Passenger]

In absolute fact I've never sold a watch in my life, only traded, and so far with Rolex I have always come out ahead all factors taken into consideration, saying that I did buy a nearly new bluesy just because I really like they, if I ever had to sell it, I doubt I would get my money back.

On the other hand it is a hobby not an investment, I've probably lost a fortune on JLC and Panarai

Appreciate your candour, perspective.

[monogroover]

The more fakes that get produced, the more desirable the real thing becomes, with the effect of increasing residuals

I used to hold that opinion. If imitation is the sincerest form of flattery (that mediocrity can pay to greatness, as Wilde had it) then Rolex, like Fender and Gibson, is an abundantly flattered brand. But this last couple of years the quality of manufacturing and finishing of the better homage brands, certainly including San Martin, has become so good that I suspect a watershed moment has been reached and they're actually more of a deterrent to buying a luxury watch.

[Nealywheelie]

Maybe the genie out of the bottle. At last cheap homages/fakes from China can really create the engineered, manufactured finish that buyers have accepted from the real deal for all these years.


Sent from my SM-A515F using Tapatalk

[RAJEN]

If one wants a cheap well made copy, San Martin and the likes are a good choice.
No comparison to original.
I own a few San Martins but I find I don’t wear them and have stopped looking at them.

Copies are certainly getting better though.
These days if I am going to buy a copy prefer the well made homages to vintage Rolex.

[Passenger]

The SM's are always readily available to buy, to anyone, any time, no lists, AD rituals or courtship dance required.

[robert75]

SM do have a few of their own designs, a GMT year of the dragon recently sold out (so yes they do have wait lists you need to sign up for the next batch). They have another one coming out soon.

[adrianw]

The SM's are always readily available to buy, to anyone, any time, no lists, AD rituals or courtship dance required.

But you could get even cheaper available fakes from the looky looky men

[Passenger]

But you could get even cheaper available fakes from the looky looky men

On the rare occasions we´ve strayed into a looky looky zone I just politely verbally wave them off, just not worth it whatever their wares du jour, for cometh one, come all looky looky men thereabouts...I once made the mistake of a lunchtime giving some money to a particularly annoying accordion player whilst enjoying a lunch on the gulf of Mazarron to encourage him to drift on, I kid you not that very evening he found me again in Cartagena, how I did have to laugh...TWICE in the same day

[adrianw]

On the rare occasions we´ve strayed into a looky looky zone I just politely verbally wave them off, just not worth it whatever their wares du jour, for cometh one, come all looky looky men thereabouts...I once made the mistake of a lunchtime giving some money to a particularly annoying accordion player whilst enjoying a lunch on the gulf of Mazarron to encourage him to drift on, I kid you not that very evening he found me again in Cartagena, how I did have to laugh...TWICE in the same day

In puerto banus, Duquesa and Estopona they are everywhere at the moment, African Mafia

[Griswold]

But you could get even cheaper available fakes from the looky looky men

Nah, you're better off buying the genuine fakes rather than the cheap ones from the looky looky man, got to be much better quality....

[Passenger]

In puerto banus, Duquesa and Estopona they are everywhere at the moment, African Mafia

They go like flies to where the money, low hanging fruit is perceived to be I guess, well you would, like in any business...Thankful they´ve not been as numerous round hereabouts, really not too persistent in all honesty, guess being a 2nd, 3rd tier kinda region´s has it´s advantages, mind you as noted we generally avoid the tourist, LL zones like the plague anyway, especially in the Summer, too crowded.

[Daddelvirks]

Damn them and their evolution... and accuracy...
.

Certainly true, look at the ETA2824 and its evolution….

Would you say the same about the likes of TAG-Heuer and Breitling?, using that movement for decades now in several models?

The Rolex caliber might be more refined and in-house, but still mass produced.

[adrianw]

Certainly true, look at the ETA2824 and its evolution….

Would you say the same about the likes of TAG-Heuer and Breitling?, using that movement for decades now in several models?

The Rolex caliber might be more refined and in-house, but still mass produced.

It's not even close to a Rolex movement, even in its best version

https://calibercorner.com/eta-caliber-2824-2/

[Daddelvirks]

It's not even close to a Rolex movement, even in its best version

https://calibercorner.com/eta-caliber-2824-2/

Wow, point missed by a long way.
Thanks for the link, every day is a learning day…..

He’s talking about Swiss pioneering horological watch making companies, not Rolex specifically, hence my question.

[wileeeeeey]

These days if I am going to buy a copy prefer the well made homages to vintage Rolex.

You must have a decent Tudor collection.

[neuman356]

It's not even close to a Rolex movement, even in its best version

https://calibercorner.com/eta-caliber-2824-2/

There are pros and cons to everthing but both are proven movements. Rolex movements did feature a free sprung balance on from the 60s (that's IMO a most undeniable plus) and are more nicely decorated, also they are famously sturdy movements and quite a bit thicker, they also came around to implement a ball bearing rotor in the late 2010s but never suffered from sticking reverser wheels.

[RAJEN]

You must have a decent Tudor collection.

I do.
Will add to it when you buy and then sell the new Tudor Submariner.-)

[wileeeeeey]

I do.
Will add to it when you buy and then sell the new Tudor Submariner.-)

First thing I saw when I unlocked my phone this morning. Must have fallen asleep reading a review!

[RAJEN]

First thing I saw when I unlocked my phone this morning. Must have fallen asleep reading a review!

Ha!

[oldoakknives]

A lot of people who don’t like Rolex seem to buy cheap watches that look like them. Odd that.

[Daddelvirks]

A lot of people with more money than sense seem to buy Rolex, odd that.

[adrianw]

A lot of people with more money than sense seem to buy Rolex, odd that.

Why is that ?

[robert75]

A lot of people who don’t like Rolex seem to buy cheap watches that look like them. Odd that.

Cant comment on why people buy or dont buy a watch but what I do find strange about these brands is they do actually have some of their own original designs but they get considerably less interest on forums.

[oldoakknives]

Cant comment on why people buy or dont buy a watch but what I do find strange about these brands is they do actually have some of their own original designs but they get considerably less interest on forums.

Could it be they just aren’t as popular maybe? I don’t know, and am only guessing as to why, because some of them are great looking watches.

[oldoakknives]

A lot of people with more money than sense seem to buy Rolex, odd that.

I’m sure the many Rolex owners and enthusiasts on the forum will be impressed with your insight.