So far, Rolex turns tool watches into flashy jewelry pieces.

[Watchman001]

Originally Posted by MrRothstein

This is a hot take but to each his own.

Rolex has always made some over the top jewelry pieces - you may not like them but this is not really new. The Daytona has had Pave Rainbow, Eye of the Tiger, Saco…I mean hell there is a Daytona with a damn Leopard band and dial and orange sapphires/diamonds 😂. Did you think of that piece at all while wearing your SS ceramic?

These releases will be novelty and super rare and the average Rolex buyer will never even see them in person. Not exactly a shift in culture or anything.

A gold 18mm thick diver that goes down to 14,000ft is about as far from what I loved about the brand in the past as it gets. It signifies a shift that started with the two tone explorer and sea dweller and is now clearly their new direction. No thank you!

[DoubleDeac]

Replacing the tachymeter on the bezel of the Daytona and replacing it with diamonds is a shame, taking away an actual function of the watch for bling.

I guess there is a market for this kind of stuff

[JR16]

Originally Posted by INC

I don't think Rolex belongs in the luxury jewelry market. These are just expensive, overstuffed everyday watches. I understand that their models have outgrown the watch market in terms of price, but if they go this way, it is an admission that they are no longer interested in horology, only profit. And it is a problem, because in the same time the mass production is exactly what a real luxury product cannot be. I think these solid precious metals and added diamond "things", in fact only cheap mass-produced mechanical watches which are terribly far from the real luxury.

And in my opinion, if they decided to go this way, then they can say goodbye forever to ever being taken seriously as part of the holy trinity. It is not horology any more. It just profitology which in my opinion will last as long as they will be able to sell these mass produced expensive XXI. century "Midases".

Rolex was never considered part of the “holy trinity” nor would most call them “haute horology”. And they for decades and decades have had a catalog that includes some over the top jewelry type pieces. Their catalog is incredibly consistent and it’s well known that horological innovation is not Rolex’s forte. The company and its goals have not really changed much honestly.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[77T]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

I think the Rolex CEO just wants to make more money and the easiest way to do that is to make (and market) more high end jewellery timepieces.

I don't see it as an abandonment of the tool watch just an expansion with high priced timepieces with jewels and precious metals to direct those who have overly healthy bank accounts to spend a few of their dollars on a Rolex.

This makes a lot of sense, Steve. When you think of maximizing profits but your production is capped by the current factory capacity - then use PM to increase revenue with not much of an increase in raw materials. The SS mix will take a hit volume-wise.

When the new expansion increases capacity, Rolex could then return to making SS/PM mix% that they have had for years - just more of them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[77T]

Originally Posted by Watchman001

A gold 18mm thick diver that goes down to 14,000ft is about as far from what I loved about the brand in the past as it gets. It signifies a shift that started with the two tone explorer and sea dweller and is now clearly their new direction. No thank you!

Yeah, I understand your reaction.

When the first YG Sub hit the market in 1969 there was a similar hue and cry.

You know what? The sky didn't fall.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[123Blueface]

Rolex still has ample tool watches.
As to the new bling trend, companies that don’t evolve to suit the needs of the public become extinct.
So far to date, Rolex seems to regularly make wise decisions that strengthen the brand.
Who are we to second guess that success?

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by Etschell

well pot calling the kettle black with you having a platinum daytona eh?

What are you on about Elliot?

A Platinum Daytona may be expensive, but its not exactly flashy and it can at least be used for its intended purpose.

Sticking a precious stone bezel on a chronograph, sub or GMT on off catalogue pieces is one thing but when nearly 1/5th of production reference Daytona's are not fit for purpose that says a lot about where Rolex is headed.

[koronet-kid]

that has not been turned to jewellery, no gems or precious metal added hope Rolex keep it that way and long may it remain, never understood why its always been considered the bridesmaid.

[JSCP]

Why care? If too bling don’t buy if your offered any of bling models.

Keep your SS Rolex, and be happy, no stress

[joli160]

Originally Posted by JettyOne

Modern Rolex is no longer tool watch.

Neither were the old ones. The first DJ in full gold was introduced in 1945.
Even the older subs etc were always way too expensive for lots of people wanting to use them as tools and most were bought as jewelry, just as today

[Watchman001]

Originally Posted by Devildog

Sticking a precious stone bezel on a chronograph, sub or GMT on off catalogue pieces is one thing but when nearly 1/5th of production reference Daytona's are not fit for purpose that says a lot about where Rolex is headed.

I think those that say Rolex has always had bling offerings are missing the key point, which is very well put above.

[Jasb]

Happens to everything, look at the Toyota Land Cruiser, once the off road vehicle all others got compared to and now a soccer mom mall cruiser….

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by 77T

Yeah, I understand your reaction.

When the first YG Sub hit the market in 1969 there was a similar hue and cry.

You know what? The sky didn't fall.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

That’s possibly because a YG sub or deep sea (as ridiculous as that seems) is still a fully functional, fit for purpose (albeit unnecessarily expensive) item.

Arguably AU is better than stainless steel as it’s even more stable in salt water environments.

A Daytona with a diamond bezel is like using an Explorer to dive. You can do it, but why would you?

I’m absolutely fine with the concept that Rolex watches have not been tool watches for years. I’m absolutely fine with covering Day Dates with diamonds. And I’m absolutely fine with platinum Daytonas and solid gold Deepseas. They are all still fit for purpose and were still watches first and jewellery second.

And I’m absolutely fine with the off catalogue pieces.

But the 2024 Iced production Daytonas are absolutely now jewellery first and watches almost as an afterthought. And that’s a fundamental shift for Rolex.

I don’t remember Rolex ever placing “form” before function on a regular production reference in this manner before.

[77T]

SARU & SABU variants have always been jewelry.

More power to those who want them - and why not let Rolex produce them - without judging the entire brand?

Ferrari produces exotics few will ever own - it doesn't devalue the brand for the other models that drivers wish to own.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[East of Eden]

Originally Posted by JRique

Yes, each watch there is like 125g of gold, like 8k usd, they sell for 50k, on SS the same watch is like 18k, so they charge 32k more for 8k usd of gold. Movement and dial and other parts are the same.

And it costs what, $1k to make a Rolex?

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by 77T

SARU & SABU variants have always been jewelry.

More power to those who want them - and why not let Rolex produce them - without judging the entire brand?

Ferrari produces exotics few will ever own - it doesn't devalue the brand for the other models that drivers wish to own.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Absolutely. I tried on a 116759 SANR and my God it was beautiful. I'd have and wear a RG Rainbow Daytona in a heartbeat.

My point is that these are now regular production models making up nearly 1/5th of Daytona references. They represent form over function.

I'm not "judging" Rolex. I'm saying its a big shift in Rolex philosophy which goes against what the core "brand" has been about until now.

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by joli160

Neither were the old ones. The first DJ in full gold was introduced in 1945.
Even the older subs etc were always way too expensive for lots of people wanting to use them as tools and most were bought as jewelry, just as today

A DJ was never a "tool watch" though

[77T]

Wasn't calling you out at all.

1/5th of the listed models on the website but 1/50th of Daytona production methinks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Devildog]

Originally Posted by 77T

Wasn't calling you out at all.

1/5th of the listed models on the website but 1/50th of Daytona production methinks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I know Paul - all good

I was just continuing the discussion

[Tylerlsu2008]

Originally Posted by harvey

…they stopped being tool watches when the aluminium bezels went.

My Explorer II says otherwise

[roks]

just like all modern productions, you reach a stage where your innovation comes to a halt.
At that point you start making small changes to justify the item you will be releasing.
So that's what's going on.

[kilyung]

I like to think that it’s up to the owner to decide if a watch is ornamental or a tool. I know plenty of vintage owners who chose to treat their watches as jewelry rather than the tool watches they used to be. I wear all my PM pieces while doing everyday activities (mowing the lawn, painting, traveling, swimming, etc). Funny thing is my steel Pateks are more ornamental than my PM Rolexes.

[JimSnyder]

My wife is right, she says just be happy with what you have

[dtwer]

I agree with the observation of where Rolex is headed, but I don't believe that by adding a few more blingy references Rolex is making their watches more of jewelry pieces than they already are.

Like a diamond ring to women, Rolex has been the equivalent of that to men. Nobody who spends upwards of $10K on a watch to do a job that a $20 Casio can do better at can convince anyone they are doing it for the tool watch reason, unless the utility of such tool is to display wealth. Rolex has always been about displaying wealth, which is the primary utility of jewelry pieces.

[worldofoyster]

Rolex intentionally releases less SS models this year to free up the waitlist.

what's the point of announcing more SS models if they can't even fulfill the existing SS demands. Rolex also tries to push more PM models sales.

[TuRo]

Originally Posted by Lol-x

I think the Rolex CEO just wants to make more money and the easiest way to do that is to make (and market) more high end jewellery timepieces.

I don't see it as an abandonment of the tool watch just an expansion with high priced timepieces with jewels and precious metals to direct those who have overly healthy bank accounts to spend a few of their dollars on a Rolex.

There is truth to that Steve - That puffed-up popinjay twerp Brian Duffy, the CEO of Watches of Switzerland group, bemoaned the fact that profits were down as not enough precious metal / fancy pants watches coming through to them.... and instead they are getting too much (presumably low margin - my emphasis) stainless steel stuff (what of course most sane buyers want).
This is diametrically opposed to what all dealers were saying to me twenty years ago....when all they wanted was steel and they couldn't shift Spanglefest Liberace pieces without 20,30 even 40% discounts.

[Mystro]

Originally Posted by harvey

…they stopped being tool watches when the aluminium bezels went.

Yea, it’s just now our modern “tool watches” are more solidly built and expensive and owners don’t use tool watches as beaters anymore.

The owners have changed more than the dna of the watches.

[KatGirl]

Originally Posted by NachoNeal

Not my cup of tea, to be sure.
But I'm old school.

I’m a female, and not my cup of tea, either. I do like some of the Day Dates, and the Skydwellers, but wouldn’t/couldn’t buy them. My Wimbledon will always be my blingiest Rolex.

Kat


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[thenewrick]

Rolex is a Swiss based international company. They are trying to sell to the entire world. Tastes are different around the world. These PM gemset pieces aren't really American market pieces. They're more for middle east and asian markets. If you really only want steel sports watches you got one of those as well.

[TinFoilCat]

Agreed, sometimes it’s easy to forget that not all markets demand the same things in the same ratios, it’s noticeable that tastes differ when you travel away from the US and Western Europe…. But it is a clear sign of where Rolex see their growth coming from over the next few years.

Originally Posted by thenewrick

Rolex is a Swiss based international company. They are trying to sell to the entire world. Tastes are different around the world. These PM gemset pieces aren't really American market pieces. They're more for middle east and asian markets. If you really only want steel sports watches you got one of those as well.