nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Rolex 01/09/2020 - predictions?

unkel

Just for a bit of craic. What do you expect? Here's a few of my thoughts. Some are more wishful thinking than expectations, but hey that's par for the course, innit?

- Milgauss to be discontinued
- new deep blue submariner - 42mm even? No date? (yeah I'm pushing it too much there)
- end of the maxi case?
- end of the hulk
- coloured Explorer 1?

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Oafley Jones

unkel wrote: »

Just for a bit of craic. What do you expect? Here's a few of my thoughts. More wishful thinking than expectations, but hey that's par for the course, innit?

- Milgauss to be discontinued
- new deep blue submariner - 42mm even? No date? (yeah I'm pushing it too much there)
- end of the maxi case?
- end of the hulk
- coloured Explorer 1?

There’s a render doing the rounds of a Kermit with a new case. Think the current sub is an awful yoke, but this “leak” seems too good to be true.

unkel

I saw a video from Paul Thorpe earlier, he coined the nickname "Shrek" for it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBgMnQllYyA

Kermit would never have been my choice. You're either dull and got the black sub, or you got balls and went hulk

Oafley Jones

unkel wrote: »

I saw a video from Paul Thorpe earlier, he coined the nickname "Shrek" for it

Kermit would never have been my choice. You're either dull and got the black sub, or you got balls and went hulk

Hulk always reminds me of a can of a Heineken, not a fan.

unkel

I like the hulk. It's bold. The wearer is showing off a strong personality. But I can only imagine you'd get bored with it soon enough, unless you own it as part of a larger collection of quality watches. And of course it has been ridiculously overpriced in the second hand market for the last few years. That will never last.

Northern Monkey

I’ve never really been into Rolex but a blue sub something along the lines of the blue BB58 would appeal to me.

893bet

I predict waiting lists and 1.8-2.5 x RRP on secondary market.

redlead

I'm not really a sub fan but the renders of the new one that people have put together looks nice. I think they may bring that in and discontinue the hulk. The black one is kind of the bread and butter sub, they'll never get rid of that. It will be just as unobtainable as the hulk, probably even more so because blue is in in trend dial. If they bring in a 42, they'll have to taper that massive case a bit. It will be interesting to see what changes are there because they could be big. A lot of people want a 42 sub so they'll have to give one at some stage.

I know there are always rumours of the Millgaus being discontinued. It still sells and is fairly unique amongst a lot of models that look very samey. I think they'll keep it.

The explorer and OP are kind of the budget Rolex and I think they want to purposely keep them a bit dull. Would be surprised to see a colour variant in them. I don't know, I don't think there is going to be as many changes as people think.

Rootsblower

unkel wrote: »

I saw a video from Paul Thorpe earlier, he coined the nickname "Shrek" for it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBgMnQllYyA

Kermit would never have been my choice. You're either dull and got the black sub, or you got balls and went hulk

“Dull” as in stupid or “Dull” as in lacking personality.

unkel

Dull as in the black sub is the BMW 520d of watches

Rootsblower

unkel wrote: »

Dull as in the black sub is the BMW 520d of watches

Nice car and nice watch(I have the watch and had the car)

Don’t know what this says about me.

Oafley Jones

redlead wrote: »

A lot of people want a 42 sub so they'll have to give one at some stage.

Rolex reminds me of Apple in a lot of ways; and one of those is in fulfilling customers wants. They both don’t give a **** (although Apple has softened somewhat). They tell the customer what they’ll desire. And it usually works.

I love that Kermit render. Again, it’s almost too good to be true. Not that it matters, given my one watch purchase in Keane’s I’m ****ed... wonder could I work the angle that did the leaving cert with the grand kids

Cienciano

unkel wrote: »

I like the hulk. It's bold. The wearer is showing off a strong personality. But I can only imagine you'd get bored with it soon enough, unless you own it as part of a larger collection of quality watches. And of course it has been ridiculously overpriced in the second hand market for the last few years. That will never last.

It's the fashionable one at the moment, I'd imagine it'll be the cheapest one in 10 years as the more classic colour schemes are the ones in demand

893bet

I think i it’s rather strange and I don’t no where the rhetoric that “Rolex lead from the front” and “tell customers why they want rather then be told” etc comes from.

Reality is Rolex have very little innovation. But have a couple of classic designs that they have been careful not to **** up, as their customers has told them they are classics as evidenced by sales year on year. They ignore requests for changes to these designs (as why change when they sell?) and move very slowly........why? Well look at omega. They only have one classic design in the speedmaster that they have just held on to but **** all over it 6 times a year in limited editions and variations.

I fail too see the innovation from Rolex. I mean really is putting a blue bezel and dial in the submariner really worth getting worked up over? How long did it take them to come up with it I wonder? Prob in development for 10 years plus...I mean the amazing change from the oyster to the jubilee bracelet on the BLNR was crazy enough so had R&D tied up for years.

I mean **** me lads, I think Rolex make very solid watches, they are basic but well made. Ugly movements and plain finishing but rugged in general and a good value store but innovative (in the last 10 years I mean)? Leading from the front?

Nah.

Oafley Jones

893bet wrote: »

I think i it’s rather strange and I don’t no where the rhetoric that “Rolex lead from the front” and “tell customers why they want rather then be told” etc comes from.

Reality is Rolex have very little innovation. But have a couple of classic designs that they have been careful not to **** up, as their customers has told them they are classics as evidenced by sales year on year. They ignore requests for changes to these designs (as why change when they sell?) and move very slowly........why? Well look at omega. They only have one classic design in the speedmaster that they have just held on to but **** all over it 6 times a year in limited editions and variations.

I fail too see the innovation from Rolex. I mean really is putting a blue bezel and dial in the submariner really worth getting worked up over? How long did it take them to come up with it I wonder? Prob in development for 10 years plus...I mean the amazing change from the oyster to the jubilee bracelet on the BLNR was crazy enough so had R&D tied up for years.

I mean **** me lads, I think Rolex make very solid watches, they are basic but well made. Ugly movements and plain finishing but rugged in general and a good value store but innovative (in the last 10 years I mean)? Leading from the front?

Nah.

Eh?

Also, unless I've missed it, I don't think anyone is claiming "they lead from the front" here?

unkel

893bet wrote: »

I mean really is putting a blue bezel and dial in the submariner really worth getting worked up over?

Yes.

Agree there is very little innovation there though

redlead

That's a glorious rant 893 :‐) I couldn't put it any better but you're spot on

To be fair to omega, its a bit harsh to say they only have one classic though. The seamaster 300 is pretty much a classic these days now . I know they mix the dial up a bit but it hasn't changed radically over the last 25 or so years.

Oafley Jones

unkel wrote: »

Yes.

Agree there is very little innovation there though

I’d argue Rolex’s real innovation is mostly in the vertical integration of suppliers and the manufacture side of things rather than the actual product. Otherwise it’s slick marketing, oft quoted miss truths (Rolex invented the XYZ) that people who follow watches should know better.

It occurs to me, that a lot of what 893bet charges Rolex with could be levelled at current Patek. How does he compare the two?

893bet

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Eh?

Also, unless I've missed it, I don't think anyone is claiming "they lead from the front" here?

You had kind of inferred it but I am more talking about the nauseating YouTube’s that have posted over the last week or so from the likes of timeless, bark and jack and Thorpe etc.

893bet

unkel wrote: »

Yes.

p

I am a sucker for blue also. I am just trying to not want it.

Oafley Jones

893bet wrote: »

You had kind of inferred it but I am more talking about the nauseating YouTube’s that have posted over the last week or so from the likes of timeless, bark and jack and Thorpe etc.

Genuinely curious as to how you arrived at that from what I wrote.

893bet

redlead wrote: »

That's a glorious rant 893 :‐) I couldn't put it any better but you're spot on

To be fair to omega, its a bit harsh to say they only have one classic though. The seamaster 300 is pretty much a classic these days now . I know they mix the dial up a bit but it hasn't changed radically over the last 25 or so years.

Wasn’t meant to a rant but I guess it was. I have no skin in the game and will likely not purchase another Rolex (I say likely so that I can reserve the right to change my mind in an instant) in the next 5 years (unless it’s a delish price that I can profit on the next week). Mostly the reason for me not purchasing is I don’t like the designs. I have fairly specific requirements these days and there are no Rolex that really fit those requirements.. But some of the reason is also the nature of the Rolex market. Too much investment talk. Too much worry about residuals. Too much bull**** at the AD.

So to quote one of my friends “stop acting bitter and start acting better”.

893bet

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Genuinely curious as to how you arrived at that from what I wrote.

The below really about the comparison to Apple and that they tell the customer what the want etc.

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Rolex reminds me of Apple in a lot of ways; and one of those is in fulfilling customers wants. They both don’t give a **** (although Apple has softened somewhat). They tell the customer what they’ll desire. And it usually works.

Oafley Jones

893bet wrote: »

The below really about the comparison to Apple and that they tell the customer what the want etc.

Which I find odd ,given that you said the same thing regards “not listening to customer requests”.

As to my “J’accuse Thierry Stern’s patek”?

893bet

Oafley Jones wrote: »

Which I find odd ,given that you said the same thing regards “not listening to customer requests”?

I didn’t meant it that way though. Rolex are listening very carefully to the market in that they don’t make stupid mistakes and do massive revamps of pieces. Why change the design when it sells like hotcakes. While at the same time ignoring the typical market requests of “wouldn’t it be great if Rolex did x” type requests you see from the market e.g the complaining about the size of the lugs over the last 10 years has been ignored.

Look at the predictions

Ooooh a blue sub
Get rid of the hulk and maybe make it white gold instead
A coke GMT.

Hardly ground breaking stuff.

Oafley Jones

893bet wrote: »

I didn’t meant it that way though. Rolex are listening very carefully to the market in that they don’t make stupid mistakes and do massive revamps of pieces. Why change the design when it sells like hotcakes. While at the same time ignoring the typical market requests of “wouldn’t it be great if Rolex did x” type requests you see from the market e.g the complaining about the size of the lugs over the last 10 years has been ignored.

Look at the predictions

Ooooh a blue sub
Get rid of the hulk and maybe make it white gold instead
A coke GMT.

Hardly ground breaking stuff.

I think we may be arguing the same thing.

Seriously, Patek?

893bet

Oafley Jones wrote: »

I think we may be arguing the same thing.

Seriously, Patek?

Perhaps we are. Patek have also kept their core designs intact for an extended time period.

Patek does at least pretend to still be a watch company and make serious complications. Decoration on a Rolex is measured in diamonds.

njburke

To me one of the things that Rolex do, and to me it's a rare talent, apple don't have it for example is;
Rolex manufacture, and might sell to you , a consumer product that you get to wear and enjoy neither of which seem to devalue the product. That's like magic smoke, if I ever get a box of Rolex I'm going to open it slowly to see if the magic smoke escapes.
Can they keep putting the magic smoke in the product? Yes, is my prediction based on past performance. If I buy a Rolex, I get a dull, dated, uninspired watch chocker block with magic smoke.

Tudor on the other hand, seem prepared to take a risk. That blue pelagos is nice, if I get one I won't bother to look for the magic smoke.

redlead

njburke wrote: »

Tudor on the other hand, seem prepared to take a risk. That blue pelagos is nice, if I get one I won't bother to look for the magic smoke.

What risks do Tudor make? Their whole collection is either vintage inspired stuff that everyone does (the safe bet), or the Rolex sanctioned glorified rolex knock offs which all the rolex fan boys lap up (the even safer bet). The "blue" bay is a classic example of this. Everyone going wild over a blue dial diver that everyone else brought out 5 or 6 years ago. You'd swear they invented a radical new movement or something. That's not to say I don't like them, I do, but I don't see the riskier, edgier reputation they seem to have developed.

njburke

I was thinking of their new in-house movement for the pelagos. They could have stuck with buying the ETA 2824 or whatever they were buying in. They then produced the version with an in house movement, the power reserve went up, one advantage in a rotation. The spring loaded tensioner on the bracelet is another.

As for old styles, if demand reappears for bell bottom jeans, Levi's will respond and knock them out. I don't expect Levi's to force bell bottoms on us all just cause they think that's what we should wear. If black bays sell in numbers, it's because that's what people want. One thing I'm sure of when it comes to watches, we have a staggering range of choice. A grand will get you a thousand choices.

unkel

njburke wrote: »

Rolex manufacture, and might sell to you , a consumer product that you get to wear and enjoy neither of which seem to devalue the product. That's like magic smoke

This is exactly it. If it wasn't for the magic smoke, I would not own a Rolex.