Why is the Yacht-master so unpopular?

[Brushpup]

Originally Posted by Dove37

Have had a 1603 Datejust for 35 years.

Looked at a 16623 TT YM in comparison to a new sub and found the YM much closer in profile and fit to my DJ.

Sub was to sharp and angular.

However from looking at a comparison pic on the bobswatches link the YM and older sub seem to have the same case?

Larry

One of the things I love about the YM is the sculpted case. It's the same thing I love about the DJ or DD as well. To me, it truly makes the watch and based on your post and past experience, I would really encourage you to give a hard look at the YM for this reason alone. You'll also feel very much at home with the little bit of extra Crystal sticking up. It will wear heavier than the DJ for sure, but it rides well, pretty low, and super comfortable. I'm partial to the Blue and if you get it you'll be amazed at how beautiful it is on the wrist. Truly a stunner. I think Rolex really hit a home run with this watch and I'm so happy to be wearing one. Just a couple of months into it now, and I'm still over the moon with it.

Originally Posted by Speed

It's a good looking watch to be sure. It has a great movement shared by a few iconic Rolex watches.

My opinion is just that it is a bit silly and not really the choice of Yachtsmen from what I know. That's all.

Fair enough.

I think there is a model or two that is silly myself, and just don't get.

We all love what we do though.

[Dove37]

Brushpup....agreed.

Looking at a 16623 TT with a Champagne dial.

LA

[Marco14]

I am actually looking to purchase the TT with either the mother of pearl dial or the champagne dial. I was also looking at a Sub, but I just love the feel and look of the YM on my wrist.

[style88]

I always look at the YM as a luxury, dressier version of the sub.

It is for people who loves sub, but wanted a version that matches well for formal functions or expensive events. A sub that looks classy, elegant and not too sporty looking.

IMO, I don't think it was a confused watch. The purpose of this watch is quite clear to me.....a luxury, dressier version of the sub meant for certain group of buyers who wants a dressy elegant looking sub rather than a sporty looking sub which has that divewatch look.

[Dove37]

Style88 bang on.

Looked again at the TT With Champagne dial and it fits like a glove with one glaring issue.

The SS winder should be gold like the Sub and GMT TT.

Will have to source if I dont go all gold due to weight and bling quotient.

L

[Catyack]

I can't believe anyone would think the YM is a "silly" ref when there's things like the SDDS with a pointless 12,000' depth rating, 18mm tall x 43mm behemoth case, and a monstrous, over-engineered clasp. Throw in 7 lines of writing on the dial as well as big letters advertising its "Original Gas Escape Valve" and "Ring Lock System" on the chapter ring, and I think you'll see a better definition of what's "silly" than the svelte YM.

In my opinion, of course.

[Speed]

There can be more than one silly watch...

[zama]

Originally Posted by T. Ferguson

It's obviously a great watch but it is rarely the pick for a first Rolex so right there it isn't going to be one of the most popular.

Aside from that, functionally it's a Sub without less water resistance for more money. So for the average guy unless they particularly like the look of the YM they will probably go for the Sub, especially if they don't already own one.

I think there is a lot to this, most of us fumble our way into a Sub first and it is hard to see a reason to add a YM or replace a Sub when they look and behave similarly. Time over and I only had one the Blue YM might get the nod over a Sub for me and that is a big call.

[Brushpup]

Originally Posted by Dove37

Brushpup....agreed.

Looking at a 16623 TT with a Champagne dial.

LA

Whoa....Upscale!

[GEZ7ch]

It's a great gorgeous watch. Popular or not


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rollerball]

Actually the YM is quite popular. I don't own one but I know at alot of rich (very) business owners who own one. Mostly TT or full gold. Usually, the reason being, that's the only couple sport watches from ROLEX. One thing common about them is that most of them don't really visit forums. They just buy what they like and can't be bothered about the so called losses if they were to sell off. Hence, I would say that the YM is unpopular BUT only in the internet world. There is a whole wide world out there that doesn't care about Submariner, black SS Daytona etc

[Scholar]

Originally Posted by rollerball

Actually the YM is quite popular. I don't own one but I know at alot of rich (very) business owners who own one. Mostly TT or full gold. Usually, the reason being, that's the only couple sport watches from ROLEX. One thing common about them is that most of them don't really visit forums. They just buy what they like and can't be bothered about the so called losses if they were to sell off. Hence, I would say that the YM is unpopular BUT only in the internet world. There is a whole wide world out there that doesn't care about Submariner, black SS Daytona etc

Yep, the target audience is the stereotypical flashy Rolex owner who doesn't know anything about watches. (This doesn't mean that they are the only ones who buy it, but they're the ones who it's aimed at.)

[JJL]

Originally Posted by Scholar

Yep, the target audience is the stereotypical flashy Rolex owner who doesn't know anything about watches. (This doesn't mean that they are the only ones who buy it, but they're the ones who it's aimed at.)

uhh..

So is that the same target audience Rolex had in mind when releasing TT and 18k versions of the other sports models? Seems a bit harsh.

[Scholar]

Originally Posted by JJL

uhh..

So is that the same target audience Rolex had in mind when releasing TT and 18k versions of the other sports models? Seems a bit harsh.

The Yacht-Master by its very nature is a blinged out Submariner that is less robust. I am not saying that all Rolex tool watches get used for their intended purposes, but the Yacht-Master does not even pretend to.

[Mystro]

Oh really.....and how would you know this????

Originally Posted by Scholar

Yep, the target audience is the stereotypical flashy Rolex owner who doesn't know anything about watches. (This doesn't mean that they are the only ones who buy it, but they're the ones who it's aimed at.)

[Scholar]

Originally Posted by Mystro

Oh really.....and how would you know this????

Because of what I just said in the post after.

[Scholar]

(Also, it's become a bit of a hobby to people watch what the Russian oligarchs and the like go for at the watch boutiques in London!)

[Mystro]

There are too many backhanded complements slid into your statement above.
I think you are asserting your opinion and passing it off as a Rolex fact.
How could you possible know the targeted audience of any Rolex watch and their background knowledge??

Originally Posted by Scholar

Because of what I just said in the post after.

[chieftd]

I like the look of the Yachtmaster. I have a TT model with mother of pearl dial and I bought my wife a new blue dial Ladies model for Christmas this year.

[Scholar]

Originally Posted by Mystro

There is too many backhanded complements slid into your statement above.
I think you are asserting your opinion and passing it off as a Rolex fact.

I think you are taking the post as being quite a bit more serious than it was.

[submariner123]

I love the blue face, but the bezel puts me off. On the blue face version the bezel looks too big.

[engin33r]

Originally Posted by chieftd

I like the look of the Yachtmaster. I have a TT model with mother of pearl dial and I bought my wife a new blue dial Ladies model for Christmas this year.

Stunning... both of them.

[Mystro]

That MOP Serti dial is stunning!!

Originally Posted by chieftd

I like the look of the Yachtmaster. I have a TT model with mother of pearl dial and I bought my wife a new blue dial Ladies model for Christmas this year.

[Catyack]

Originally Posted by Scholar

Yep, the target audience is the stereotypical flashy Rolex owner who doesn't know anything about watches. (This doesn't mean that they are the only ones who buy it, but they're the ones who it's aimed at.)

The target market for the YM are people who own boats, who like boats, who dream about boats, who hang around at marinas or live on boats. Owning boats means having money and the desire to spend it on boat things. They have no need to engineer the YM for a high WR rating like a Submariner because most those boat-lovers don't own a boat for the purpose of flopping over the side into the water with air tanks on their back. Rolex calls it a "Yacht Master" because it sounds better than a "Boat Master", just like "Submariner" sounds better than calling it the Rolex "Frogman".

Why you think people who like boats automatically have less knowledge about watches than those who dive or wannabes who only pretend to, beats me.

[Catyack]

Originally Posted by Scholar

The Yacht-Master by its very nature is a blinged out Submariner that is less robust. I am not saying that all Rolex tool watches get used for their intended purposes, but the Yacht-Master does not even pretend to.

It's intended design is for boat-loving people who stay on the boat, and yet is perfectly fine for swimming, snorkeling, and your average shallow dives. The YM is rated to 100m, and 99% of Sub owners will never have their watches more than 100m underwater either, so where is the pretending really happening? And the term "tool" watch is a vague, frequently mis-applied term that has been rendered mostly meaningless through misuse, like you're doing here. And of course the YM is blingy, it's supposed to be by design. Cruising around on a private yacht is a blingy activity. Don't hate yachts or YMs just because they're beautiful.

[Rags]

Love the new blue YM..

[Ken B]

I'm keen for the blue dial version.

[Scholar]

Originally Posted by Catyack

It's intended design is for boat-loving people who stay on the boat, and yet is perfectly fine for swimming, snorkeling, and your average shallow dives. The YM is rated to 100m, and 99% of Sub owners will never have their watches more than 100m underwater either, so where is the pretending really happening? And the term "tool" watch is a vague, frequently mis-applied term that has been rendered mostly meaningless through misuse, like you're doing here. And of course the YM is blingy, it's supposed to be by design. Cruising around on a private yacht is a blingy activity. Don't hate yachts or YMs just because they're beautiful.

Not all of us like the rapper aesthetic.

You do understand that someone can engage in a hobby that costs a lot of money and still dislike blinginess, right? There's a reason the IWC Portuguese remains so popular among people who do yachting.

The YM series is divisive even among people who like nautical watches. I say this as just such a person.

[Scholar]

Originally Posted by Catyack

It's intended design is for boat-loving people who stay on the boat, and yet is perfectly fine for swimming, snorkeling, and your average shallow dives. The YM is rated to 100m, and 99% of Sub owners will never have their watches more than 100m underwater either, so where is the pretending really happening? And the term "tool" watch is a vague, frequently mis-applied term that has been rendered mostly meaningless through misuse, like you're doing here. And of course the YM is blingy, it's supposed to be by design. Cruising around on a private yacht is a blingy activity. Don't hate yachts or YMs just because they're beautiful.

Not all of us like the rapper aesthetic.

You do understand that someone can engage in a hobby that costs a lot of money and still dislike blinginess, right? There's a reason the IWC Portuguese remains so popular among people who do yachting.

The YM series is divisive even among people who like nautical watches. I say this as just such a person.

[Brushpup]

Boat Master