zOwie Omega Discussion Forum

I almost never "respond to responses", but I must at least give reasons for why I say what I do:

You're paying for A LOT more than the name. You
: are paying for a rock solid in house
: mechanical movement.

Is it any more reliable than any fine, modified, ETA "kit" movement? Any watchmaker I have spoken to says "no". The "in-house" concept is fuzzier than you make it out to be. Read the 1st 2003 issue of WatchTime for more on "in-house" marketing. Rolex has/had plenty of parts made for them by specialty manufacturers (crystals, hands, crowns, rubies, and yes, some movements...Zenith El Primero in the Daytona.)

: "Stuck in a design rut" really
: depends on how you look at it. I like the
: simple unchanged design. Why change what
: works so well?

A few examples of what I mean by "rut":
1) Rolex was slow to convert entire line to all saphire crystals compared to other high-end watches in the 1980s.
2) Rolex does not offer ANY of the following on ANY current watch: moonphase, pointer date, power reserve, display-back, split-seconds chrono.
3) The jubilee bracelet is a flimsy, easily stretched, hairpulling bracelet. In all fairness, the oyster is a great bracelet, but clasp system is not what it should be for a $3-4K watch.
4) To call the Masterpiece or Yachtmaster "new designs" is downright silly. The Yachtmaster is a less legible, more expensive Sub.

The Rolex Oyster 'look' is
: the most replicated in the watch world.

Yes, and this is because Rolex spends more on advertising than any high-end watch in the world. The name "Rolex" was developed by Wilsdorf and Davis (founders) solely for marketing purposes. It is read/write/pronunciation - friendly in ALL major languages.

: Too many people think Rolex is about making a
: flashy status symbol.

Admittedly, they got started on their quality reputation, but their sales of NEW watches is MOSTLY to people that know nothing and care nothing for horology. Hang around the counter of a big retailer and listen to the questions that get asked of the jewelers, and even more interesting, watch someone make a "snap" purchasing decision at a Rolex retailer. These are "status seeking" buyers,...mostly.

Rolex is about making
: the most durable mechanical watch.....

Many watchmakers would say they are "even" with MANY other fine time pieces.

that not
: only performs well, but looks great too.

No debate with that last statement, but again, why pay a 2x to 4x premium for a watch that is no more durable, and is more COMMON than any other fine watch in the world. I assume you know that they make about 1 million watches per year. Don't think I am a Rolex basher, I had an early no-date Sub, GMT 1, Explorer 1, and others. I liked them all.

To me, Rolex has fooled the public into thinking a few things:
1) "Rolexs are rare" - Enough said about this...go to ANY big mall in the USA. Patek Philippe is rare.
2) "Rolex is the quality leader" - Yes, they make a great watch, but not 3-4x as good as Omega, Brietling or several others.
3) "Rolex is so expensive because of the quality" - If this were true, many other watches should cost as much, but they don't...WHY? Simply because of the laws of supply and demand.

MMC