: Sadly, I must admit that I don't know enough
: about the technical details of Rolex
: in-house movements to comment on their
: quality. I do, however, has other issues
: with Rolex that keep me from buying them.
: The pathetically cheap clasp is inexcusable
: for a $4000+ watch. The cyclops date
: magnifier is an eyesore. I don't want a big
: pimple on the top of my crystal!!!! I also
: dislike the fact that Rolex doesn't use the
: anti-reflective coating that Omega and
: Breitling use on their crystals.
: As you pointed out, I also dislike the snobbery
: that accompanies the Rolex marketing
: campaign. That attiutude of "we're the
: best so if you want one of our watches, pay
: retail or there's the door" just rubs
: me the wrong way. Not only are their retail
: prices MUCH higher than a comparable Omega
: or Breitling, but they won't discount from
: MSRP at all, while Omegas and Breitlings can
: be had at 30% off or more. So, any way I
: look at it, that Rolex in-house movement has
: to be something REALLY spectacular to be
: worth paying a several thousand dollar
: premium for.
I think it can be attributed to the attitude of some Rolex Owners more than something else.
Rolex also introduced many innovations like the screw down crown,perpetual movement, gas helium valve on the dweller in 1971, which somewhat justifies this somewhat arrogant marketing policy.
I heard also that the Rolex after sales service is exceptionnal but it is true that the price tag is higher than the competitors and the Rolex bracelets are not so greatly finished. For some models, you have to order them and wait six months for a seadweller and two years or more for a Daytona. It also can be something that can refrain people for buying a Rolex.
But I will agree that Omega has no equivalents in terms of quality for the price.
