Quote:
Originally Posted by saxo3
Yes, but I draw different conclusions than you and others.
The intention of the OP and me was to have a data-based discussion on the 32xx topic, which was heavily bombarded by some prominent member who did not deliver one single fact, others joined him as well.
Correct, because it depends on (what I call) the 32xx defect rate, which is not known to us.
About the poll numbers: in my view these numbers are totally misleading since many of the "no-problem voters" did not participate with one single post in this thread and also never proofed that their 32xx watches have NO problem with loo low amplitudes. It's easy to vote "no problem" and move on without any contribution and without any data input.
Therefore, I believe that the defect rate is MUCH higher than the 29.6 % taken from the poll as of today.
Let's take your approximate 75 % of "good" 32xx movements and about 25 % of "bad" 32xx movements.
Now have a look at my post 3860 and explain how one member (Easy_E) can own 6 (out of 8 *) watches with the well-known 32xx low amplitude issue.
Explain that to me, with numbers, assuming that the defect rate only is about 25%.
*6 out of 8 was in April 2023. As of today, Easy_E had owned 7 defective 32xx watches (out of 9 in total so far), see his post #43 in another thread. |
I know where you are coming from. Don't get me wrong.
I actually agree with your analysis and if you go way back in this, you may well find that I was the very first on the forum to put that possibility forward.
I was the first to attribute dog status to the 32xx movement.
I was also the first to put forward that only a 33xx movement could provide some kind of salvation, and that was assuming The Mothership could get their house in order.
It's just that 25% is an incredibly high number for a failure rate to start with in any ones language, that if it were cars, electric kettles, microwaves or hammers that had the handles breaking off it would normally spell the end of the brand. With the reality being that Rolex is literally too big now to fail as far as the industry and general public are concerned.
Except that with just about every report in the media about shady people, crime syndicates or big international drug busts and the name Rolex always being mentioned along with very flash cars and illegal weapons, one may think Rolex invented Teflon and perfected protection rackets around the brand.
There certainly are willing influential conspirators that have more sway by their silence than a few faceless people shoved aside and into a cupboard within an obscure corner of the internet.
I think those of us who have had a good many Rolex watches with movements dating back a number of decades and have grown to admire and respect how reliable they can be would probably find any number north of 5% utterly incredulous for any consumer goods let alone 25% or potentially more.
Probably way more as you and i suggest, as EasyE is a prime example of an unimaginable worst case scenario that it's difficult to fully comprehend and I have communicated with another from the forum with equally disastrous experiences as EasyE.
It's not good either way
For me, communicating with a member who is potentially a bit on the fence, I had determined that 25% was a good number to put out there that would make an ordinary person truly take stock and motivate them to move in a direction which is in their best interests.
