I did this - never ended up fitting it though. I did NOT need to surrender my Jubilee - I would not have done that. Keep shopping ADs.

 

Sounds to me like rolex is riffing on PPs ad: 'You never actually own a Rolex, we just let you borrow it for a little while'

 

Yeah I agree. There’s sensible brand protection and there’s this kind of nonsense.

 

Heck if I'm paying $2700 for the bracelet, I might as well tell the AD put me on the list for a new OP model with an oyster bracelet that matches the lug width. You've already made nearly a 50% down payment at that point...

 

I was told the same thing by my AD. We were having a conversation about the general Rolex madness and that was one of the better stories. I also know a jeweller (non AD) that sent a GMT master in for a service and they wanted to replace the bezel as it was faded etc. He asked if he could keep the bezel and they obviously said no. So he said "look, do I really need to ask you to return the watch to me, I remove the bezel and THEN send it back to you for a service. The watch is in your workshop now? Cant you just service it and let me have the bezel. Its pointless in you returning it to me for a round trip as I will just have to send it in again minus the bezel". They wouldnt budge so he had to go through all the hassle of waiting for it to be returned and removing the bezel himself. He then sent it in saying he had dropped it and broken the bezel?

I appreciate they need to control their parts etc but holding onto and presumably destroying an old bezel when its clear the customer owns that particular watch is a step too far.

 

You gotta wonder what they’re doing with returned bracelets. Can’t imagine Rolex selling anything refurbed but I hope they don’t destroy them. They play funny/shallow games.

 

This sounds crazy and yet not surprising at all. What is their motivation for such strict controls over replacement parts?

 

I can only guess that they want to prevent reselling. I get that but they could still achieve this by doing a part swap. The idea of getting nothing for a perfectly good Jubilee is nuts.

 

Was it always like that? Or is this a more recent Rolex policy?

Just curious as when I inherited my f-i-l's mid-80s Datejust it came with two jubilee bracelets (both stretched out pretty bad). And I know for a fact that he would have never purchased anything from a "gray" site.

At some point, probably in the 90s, he was able to buy a new jubilee without having to surrender his original one.

 

Back when watches sat in display cases unsold, perhaps they sold them back then but I’d be surprised.

On the GMT, the choice of jubilee or oyster is about a year old. Assuming you can get one, you can specify the bracelet.

 

never seem one in person, but it does look special

 

“a very Swiss thing to do”

LOL that's one way to say it... sounds more like a very Rolex thing to do.

Giving them your old bracelet AND $2700 to get another bracelet doesn't sound like a good deal to me. I could understand one or the other but not both.

 

Strikes me as an appalling deal. But I’m sure it’s fine with some buyers

 

It is a very 'Swiss' thing to do, as a once-frequent visitor that astonishingly beautiful country I can affirm to their oddness. You can go to Lake Geneva and order a drink in a café and they will happily argue that your request isn't 'authentic' (i.e. the way it is on the menu) and refuse to serve you.

I think some Rolex 'fans' are beginning to think the Rolex service model (part BDSM-style humilitation / part Japanese tea ceremony cosplay) is all part of the game and unique ownership experience.

My Rolex is going to a very respected indie watchmaker for service, I wouldn't trust the UK service centre with a nearly 20 year old watch nowadays. Nor will I be told what I can or can't do with my own property.

 

The thing is, up until very recently, the generation Rolex was servicing was almost entirely boomer/ gen X.

This points to a fundamental shift that is taking place in the overall public consumer psyche, and I think Rolex is failing in a serious way in recognizing this and pivoting to their next generation of customers, which imo are going to be the wealthy millennials and youtubers/crypto/silicon valley types.

If they didn't have the false veil of closing down for Covid none of this would even be happening.

We are in the throes of an era which is marked by the death of "legacy systems".

A lot of Dinosaur systems which we have been used to for our entire lives and even our parents' lives are dissolving at a rapid pace.

I think the disconnect and contention with the Rolex market is a microcosm for a lot of other things going on in our world today.

 

I just hope the "Right to Repair" movement continues to move ahead with gusto, as it has been in the US and EU. If I buy something from you, it is mine, I own it. I should be able to buy parts, that I would also then own, as needed to repair and maintain the purchased item. Especially wear items like bracelets, clasps, bezels, pushers, crowns, etc.

 

True, but the difficulty is enforcing it. Rolex would rather not sell to the UK, then be told what to do be the UK. I suspect.

 

Do they accept an oyster bracelet and give me a jubilee + 2700$ In return?

 

I totally understand their policy to protect the brand. They can make a quick buck here and there, catering to current demands, selling bracelets, giving back all the replaced parts, etc. But the counterfeit, and franken watches will hurt the brand and Rolex has zero tolerance, or else they wouldn't be what they are right now. A vintage Rolex with all original parts wouldn't be so valuable if all the original parts were so easily available from Rolex, right?

 

Giving back replaced parts should be expected of ANY after-market service. They're my parts. I already paid for them.

Keeping vintage watches expensive is not my concern, nor should it be theirs really.

 

Hold my beer…

OP: Just say you lost your old bracelet in a fire while wearing your watch on a strap.

 

This has always been something that annoyed me with Rolex. Bring watch to RSC, they keep your old parts in "exchange" and charge you $$$ for the new bits. I always thought it was to keep these older parts off the market and prevent frankenrolex models or real parts mixed with fakes.

A well-known ,(Independent) Rolex service near me won't even take in a Rolex with an Everest strap. They are very strict and afraid of Rolex finding out so I would have to remove any aftermarket strap and bring them the Head only.

 

Jay Leno says this behavior is the reason he won't buy a Ferrari.

 

How many times are people going to post the Jay Leno video?

 

A quick search, albeit not all encompassing, says twice. Apparently one too many.....

 

Extortion.

 

The Rolex Service Center in Dallas will not make you surrender your bracelet to get a new one. I purchased an oyster bracelet from them for my BLNR in 2021 and kept the original one.

 

It certainly sounds like you are getting the short end of the stick here. I would not do the "swap" as Rolex calls it.

 

No I won't be doing that 'deal'.

 

ADs are becoming increasingly annoying and ridiculous. I wonder if this is an AD thing or Rolex thing. Sounds like an AD thing to me

 

Yeah, I’m about done tolerating Rolex’s preciousness.

You want the bracelet? Buy it. In cash. Make sure that at the actual point of sale, your original bracelet is attached to the watch. Ask to inspect the new bracelet before it is installed. And then walk out of the store with both bracelets.

Rolex has ZERO legal standing here without a veritable mountain of paperwork for you to sign, and I would almost guarantee that they are too arrogant to actually have that paperwork- relying instead on people’s continual suffering of their preciousness.

Essentially they are asking you to give up something you own in order to buy something else... something which, by law, becomes your property the moment money is exchanged, because this is not a trade-in situation… insomuch as no credit or even valuation has been affixed to the old bracelet. Legally, it’s two separate transactions “Give us money for this new bracelet” which is legally enforceable, and “give us your old bracelet”, which, having no valued or monetary involvement with the first transaction, is not legally enforceable.

I’m not saying that no legal ways for retailers to do what they are doing exist; limited-number exotic cars are often sold with similarly unusual purchase agreements. But again, it’s a tricky point of sale, particularly in the United States, and without the necessary pages of boilerplate acrobatics, completely unenforceable. And again, I’d be shocked if Rolex has bothered to have their legal department put together the paperwork or apprised their dealer network of how to implement it.

The AD will definitely try to reverse the sale, hence the cash payment. You can refuse a return, and they won’t be able to force one by refunding a credit card.

My advice is to go in there with the intention of f__king Rolex on this. It’s about time people started pushing back.

 

What are you getting worked up about? Respectfully, you are incorrect on both accounts.

1. You don’t have to give up your bracelet to buy a second one.
2. You can have your dials and bezel inserts back. If you don’t want them back they give you a discount. The discount price is the offered price at the time of the service. You have to tell them if you want the parts back, then you don’t get the discount.

Again, it seems like some ADs don’t get this concept.

 

definitely ask another AD.... you shouldn't surrender the current one.

 

.

 

Ok newest rules with the new GMT IIs, oyster band is only in exchange for a defective oyster band at the moment. The plan is that in summer you can buy an additional band of the other type (Oyster/Jubilee) for your GMT.

 

Honestly I think it just varies AD to AD. If the AD can be bothered they'll do it. otherwise they'll make up some random 'policy' to make the brand seem more exclusive and restricted.

 

I think you are right. There are specific and set rules but if a sales person knows them, that’s another question.