WatchUSeek Watch Forums banner

361 - 380 of 606 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,463 Posts
If you say so. You can only make those dives with a Rolex because A) Rolex bought the screw down crown patent from a guy name Perregaux and B) Rolex has blue collar roots and the men wearing PP, AP, VC and other high horology pieces were the ones paying the divers with Rolexes to go down and catch them dinner or weld the hulls of their freighters.

By your thinking, a Honda or Toyota is a better car than a BMW because it's more reliable and robust (like Rolex is vs high horology pieces according to you), but you own a BMW right? Maybe one day Rolex will catch up to the prices of AP, VC, and PP among others but not until Rolex itself starts thinking their watches are actually worth that. They have 100+ years of experience and still don't think that's the case now do they (just look at the MSRP aka the value Rolex thinks their watches are worth)?
You're all over the place today. Let's get focused:

You contend that PP, AP, and VC make better watches than Rolex, but Rolex exceeds those other brands on all performance metrics- movement reliability, timekeeping accuracy, power reserves, and exceeds those other brands on the most important metric of all- design.

You contend that the only reason someone would prefer a Rolex to PP, AP, and VC is social media and that Rolex owners are over valuing status. And yet there are millions more watch enthusiasts on Rolex waiting lists than those three other brands combined, and those wanting a PP, AP, or VC are willing to accept 20 to 50 year old designs that are well passed prime.

Conclusion? It's PP, AP, and VC that are overhyped and overpriced. Less performance, old design, and more expensive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,463 Posts
So that's proof (using your own logic) of the RO being a better watch as it's produced in higher numbers (according to you) and you STILL can't get one at retail anywhere without a "relationship" and it's still (what, 3x's?) more expensive than a Sub and double a Daytona? I guess the public demand is so high as to justify the production numbers?
Those were not production numbers. Those were 48 years worth of Royal Oak's available on the secondary market, in excess of 600,000 units. The watch is the same. You see someone on the street you don't know if they're wearing a 2021 or a 1975.

As for annual production, I estimated 500 of each of the 28 different steel references as it seems logical to me. That's 14,000 per year. Again, Pepsi is likely 3,500.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
14,750 Posts
Rolex is like Patek's more stout younger sibling. Rolex is more hefty, stronger, though not quite as bright. Patek is the more intelligent and sophisticated older brother.

So, would you choose to be brain or brawn?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
443 Posts
Those were not production numbers. Those were 48 years worth of Royal Oak's available on the secondary market, in excess of 600,000 units. The watch is the same. You see someone on the street you don't know if they're wearing a 2021 or a 1975.

As for annual production, I estimated 500 of each of the 28 different steel references as it seems logical to me. That's 14,000 per year. Again, Pepsi is likely 3,500.
Got it. So following your logic the RO is more in demand by the public, hence has higher production numbers, like Rolex is also impossible to find in stock at retail prices in spite of a MUCH higher price point (than the $13,150 for a steel Daytona which is less than a TT DJ41) for both AD and used sales.

The RO may be an old design, just like the Nautilus (both of which I find unattractive frankly) yet they are still is hotter than generic Rolex designs and sell for many multiples in spite of the "shiny bits" you refer to. Funny thing that huh? I see we're just gonna have to agree to disagree. Glad you like your Rolexes. I like mine too.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
443 Posts
You're all over the place today. Let's get focused:

You contend that PP, AP, and VC make better watches than Rolex, but Rolex exceeds those other brands on all performance metrics- movement reliability, timekeeping accuracy, power reserves, and exceeds those other brands on the most important metric of all- design.

You contend that the only reason someone would prefer a Rolex to PP, AP, and VC is social media and that Rolex owners are over valuing status. And yet there are millions more watch enthusiasts on Rolex waiting lists than those three other brands combined, and those wanting a PP, AP, or VC are willing to accept 20 to 50 year old designs that are well passed prime.

Conclusion? It's PP, AP, and VC that are overhyped and overpriced. Less performance, old design, and more expensive.
You contend those watchmakers are in direct competition with Rolex. They are not. They are in competition with each other and high end independents. They do not need to try to compete with lower level watches to still move all of their units they can produce. No reason to have insecurity issues about it. Millions more people are on Rolex waiting lists because Rolex prices are accessible for millions more people. Many can afford a $9k or $13k watch. The C8 probably has a longer waiting list than a Aventador too. Does Lambo try to compete with the Chevy C8? Nope.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,302 Posts
You contend that PP, AP, and VC make better watches than Rolex, but Rolex exceeds those other brands on all performance metrics- movement reliability, timekeeping accuracy, power reserves
How many do you own of these brands? Please show them here for us thanks.

Can you really make these sorts of comparisons if you haven't actually owned any? :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
6,494 Posts
You're all over the place today. Let's get focused:

You contend that PP, AP, and VC make better watches than Rolex, but Rolex exceeds those other brands on all performance metrics- movement reliability, timekeeping accuracy, power reserves, and exceeds those other brands on the most important metric of all- design.

You contend that the only reason someone would prefer a Rolex to PP, AP, and VC is social media and that Rolex owners are over valuing status. And yet there are millions more watch enthusiasts on Rolex waiting lists than those three other brands combined, and those wanting a PP, AP, or VC are willing to accept 20 to 50 year old designs that are well passed prime.

Conclusion? It's PP, AP, and VC that are overhyped and overpriced. Less performance, old design, and more expensive.
Hats off to you for sticking to your persona. HAHA

I do think the 5711 and 15202 are overhyped and overpriced (grey market pricing). The 4500v is started to follow this trend too. Nonetheless, I don't think you really believe that Rolex is superior to PP, AP or VC. It's not, at least not in terms of pure watchmaking prowess, but it doesn't have to be either and not Rolex's goal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
517 Posts
I appreciate the bracelet quality of Audemars Piguet‘s watches.

I believe movement is also important as other things may be mimicked with relative ease, but never movements.

However I believe Rolex is at a stage where they have the most refined and perfected, not perfect, watches.

Thus it is the prime choice for most while selecting a watch.
It’s one of the few watchmakers that produces watches that one could buy without trying it on, and they are almost guaranteed to be content.

Kind Regards
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,463 Posts
Rolex is like Patek's more stout younger sibling. Rolex is more hefty, stronger, though not quite as bright. Patek is the more intelligent and sophisticated older brother.

So, would you choose to be brain or brawn?
It's more like Rolex is an internationally known status symbol admired and inspiring billions of people, and no one but a handful of self-absorbed watch enthusiasts has ever heard of the Aquanaut or Royal Oak.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,463 Posts
I see we're just gonna have to agree to disagree. Glad you like your Rolexes. I like mine too.
What this thread has taught me is that the respect I had for PP, AP, and VC was unfounded. I did not know until the last few days how poor these brands are from a performance standpoint, and how old and tired their designs are.

So I thank you for that.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,463 Posts
No reason to have insecurity issues about it.
I'm not the one in a Rolex forum trying to convince a Rolex owner that the Holy Trilogy is still relevant.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,463 Posts
Oh the irony coming from a Rolex guy...most people couldn't tell a 1975 Sub from a 2021 Sub either.
Sure they can. The upgrades in quality, design, and function are obvious. Rolex isn't afraid like PP and AP are. I don't even know what VC is supposed to be, they make unattractive Datejust homages.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
443 Posts
What this thread has taught me is that the respect I had for PP, AP, and VC was unfounded. I did not know until the last few days how poor these brands are from a performance standpoint, and how old and tired their designs are.

So I thank you for that.
Ummmm, ok. See if you can swap out that Daytona or No Date for a 5711 since they obviously perform so poorly. Hahaha
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,463 Posts
How many do you own of these brands? Please show them here for us thanks.

Can you really make these sorts of comparisons if you haven't actually owned any? :)
The performance data is available on all four brand's websites. Power reserve, warranty length, daily accuracy, depth rating, it's not like PP, AP, and VC's shortcomings are a secret.

I went to my local Rolex AD today to look at these brands and his assortment of 10 PP's were all dainty dress watches on leather straps, and if they weren't in a PP case I would have thought they were Michael Kors.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
443 Posts
I'm not the one in a Rolex forum trying to convince a Rolex owner that the Holy Trilogy is still relevant.
I'm not trying to convince you of anything. At this point, I'm just looking for some more amazing quotes from you about drive throughs or how Rolex inspires billions to make their baggers at the grocery store jealous. Oh and the OP was correct in stating the FF is a higher end watch than a Sub, getting back to the point of the thread.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,463 Posts
Nonetheless, I don't think you really believe that Rolex is superior to PP, AP or VC. It's not, at least not in terms of pure watchmaking prowess, but it doesn't have to be either and not Rolex's goal.
My point is that "watchmaking prowess" is immaterial. No one cares. These are status symbols for the rich. They're playful baubles for wealthy men with one job- to make us feel proud of ourselves.

Rolex, by virtue of its overwhelming recognizability as an internationally known status symbol, delivers more pride of ownership than any of these other brands could even imagine.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
443 Posts
The performance data is available on all four brand's websites. Power reserve, warranty length, daily accuracy, depth rating, it's not like PP, AP, and VC's shortcomings are a secret.

I went to my local Rolex AD today to look at these brands and his assortment of 10 PP's were all dainty dress watches on leather straps, and if they weren't in a PP case I would have thought they were Michael Kors.
It's almost like only the Pearlmaster and Cellini being available at the Rolex AD huh? It's like somebody scooped up all the hot PP models like they did with the Rolex ones right? 🤔 Give it a minute to sink in....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,463 Posts
Ummmm, ok. See if you can swap out that Daytona or No Date for a 5711 since they obviously perform so poorly. Hahaha
I'm not the one denigrating Rolex and promoting the Holy Family on the grounds of build quality! You are!

PP, AP, and VC are more expensive than Rolex. That's it. This thread and, specifically, this spirited debate with you has forced me to do my homework on these brands that I naively respected as horological royalty.

And what did I find? They have weak power reserves, they have short warranties, they trail in timing accuracy, they trail in depth rating, they suffer from human construction, and they are brands propped-up by one watch and endless special iterations no different than Omega with their Speedmaster albatross.

That, sir, is not a list of successes. That is a laundry list of fail. What you are paying for is marketing, branding, and a vibe that you are wealthy enough to own one (ironic). It's surely not the watches themselves. They are about as exciting as watching paint dry.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
443 Posts
I'm not the one denigrating Rolex and promoting the Holy Family on the grounds of build quality! You are!

PP, AP, and VC are more expensive than Rolex. That's it. This thread and, specifically, this spirited debate with you has forced me to do my homework on these brands that I naively respected as horological royalty.

And what did I find? They have weak power reserves, they have short warranties, they trail in timing accuracy, they trail in depth rating, they suffer from human construction, and they are brands propped-up by one watch and endless special iterations no different than Omega with their Speedmaster albatross.

That, sir, is not a list of successes. That is a laundry list of fail. What you are paying for is marketing, branding, and a vibe that you are wealthy enough to own one (ironic). It's surely not the watches themselves. They are about as exciting as watching paint dry.
I'm not denigrating Rolex. I own one. It's a fine watch, even with the speck of dust under the crystal that made it through QC. I am refuting your assertions that all other watches, and specifically high horology pieces, are lesser than Rolex because they are not Rolex. Big difference. Rolex is not at their level and the selling prices tell you all you need to know as proof. If Rolex was more in demand than high horology AP, PP, etc, the prices would surpass them. They don't.
 
361 - 380 of 606 Posts
Top