by GaryG
Once in a while on the collector forums, a question is posed: is there anyone in the collector community who has never, ever, owned a Rolex? As a general rule, respondents to these queries tend to express disbelief that such a creature could possibly exist given the quality and ubiquity of the brand’s watches.
Will GaryG feel the same way about Rolex?
Well, folks, I’m here to tell you that such people do exist, and that I’m one of them. And to be honest, when I suggested this article topic to Elizabeth, one reason that I did so was that I was pretty mystified about it myself: how could it be?
How it (didn’t) happen
In the beginning: The simplest explanations for why I didn’t start early with Rolex are simple: money and time. The first time I encountered the brand was during the Lucerne stop of a hard-earned student trip (more on this in an upcoming article).
I had $45 in spending money. One of my roommates had several hundred bucks that he promptly spent on what he described as, “The watch my Dad says is the best in the world.”
For me, it was too soon and too much. And even then, my spidey-sense suggested to me that my friend’s Dad’s absolute certainty and his son’s resulting zeal might possibly be misplaced.
A gaggle of Rolex Submariners (photo courtesy www.rolexpassionreport.com)
Other gateway drugs: Fast forward about six years of schooling, 15 years of 80-hour workweeks, and an increasing fascination with timekeeping. When I did turn to watches in a serious way, my attention was drawn to other brands.
Omega played a role (and to some extent filled the collection “spots” that might otherwise have been filled with Rolexes), but the big hitter for me was Jaeger-LeCoultre, starting with a steel Reverso Duoface and going from there.
It might actually be interesting to poll collectors and see whether there are two basic types: those who started with, and stayed with, Jaeger-LeCoultre and those who followed the Rolex trail.
A Partial View of GaryG and MrsG’s Collection of Jaeger-LeCoultre Watches
Now that I consider it, perhaps there are (now) Panerai and Omega Speedmaster branches to the tree as well; but that’s also a topic for another day!
Reverse snobbery: For a while, I had a pretty active disdain for Rolex, for what I now realize were three main reasons.
First, whether it’s watches, cars, or consumer electronics, I have a low tolerance for fan boys, those uncritical sorts who believe that every single feature of their favored brand is the best and also feel that is critical that you believe it, too.
For instance, at this point I’ve read way too many online threads in which Rolex’ use of 904L stainless steel is put forward as proof of the pitiful weakness of all other brands. What I came to believe was that any brand that needed such unthinking support might not be worthy of mine.
Vacheron Constantin Overseas Chronograph in stainless steel and titanium
The second reason was that I thought I had found “better” solutions than Rolex for my needs; for example, my Vacheron Constantin Overseas in the sports watch category.
Whether it was the Overseas or other watches like the Blancpain Fifty Fathoms with its wonderful and robust X-71 bracelet, I really didn’t see Rolex watches as world-beaters in their categories.
Finally, there’s the position of Rolex as one of the world’s leading, if not the leading, mass luxury brand. If you know me, you know that I’m not innately drawn to “mass” anything, even in luxury categories; part of the appeal for me is being a bit off the beaten path.
That whole vintage thing: For the record, I loved Paul Newman. Great actor, great race driver, great (it is reported) husband, great actor. Man’s man, philanthropist.
And, of course, wearer of Rolex, including what is popularly called the “Paul Newman” Daytona.
Back to that “too soon, too much” thing: when I first became aware of the “Paul Newman” watches, the prices seemed way too dear for my wallet; now that the prices have gone through the roof, it’s now “too late, too much” for me.
Rolex “Paul Newman” Daytona
In addition, the whole world of vintage Rolex seems to me fraught with peril. When a company makes many hundreds of thousands of watches per year (which, as far as I can tell from available serial number tables, was true for Rolex even in the 1960s) and has rabid fans, it stands to reason that some of those fans will attempt to find “unique” watches among the multitudes and bid up their market values.
The inevitable result: frankenwatches and outright fakes as well as astronomical values attached to minute distinctions (Double Red Sea Dweller, anyone?).
Don’t even get me started on the watches with so-called “tropical” dials that started their lives as black but now exhibit brown patina (or in plain English, corrosion).
Rolex GMT 6542 with “tropical dial” (photo courtesy www.richpatina.tumblr.com)
With the expert counsel of someone like my friend and Rolex maven Eric Ku, I could knock out the concerns about provenance and authenticity for any given watch; but I’m still not confident that the white-hot market for these desirable vintage pieces won’t crater sometime soon.
And, Rolex isn’t exactly helping with its reluctance (and in some cases reported refusal) to service watches more than 25 to 30 years of age.
I’m a dress watch guy: If I went to the bank, took all of my watches out of the safe and snapped a group photo, what you would see is an array of dress watches with a few sports/utility pieces mixed in. I’ve been in business a long time, and my daily wear reflects that.
And while a “nice” bracelet watch can be perfectly acceptable for business wear, I suppose I’ve always favored a dressier look.
Why it might yet happen
At this point I’ve pretty much convinced myself that my Rolex aversion has explainable roots. But all the same, I continue to have the nagging sense that if at some point I don’t own one, I’ll be missing something.
So, why might I finally pull the trigger?
Some friends’ Rolexes as seen at a recent group lunch
Changing lifestyle: Finances permitting, I’ll be slowing down from my fanatical work pace a few years hence. And, as I’ve lived in California for 18 years now, I’m finally starting to discover the joys of casual dress. It seems only natural that adding high-quality sports watches to the mix will be a natural consequence.
Solid product: Say what you like about Rolex, but at the end of the day its products speak for themselves in terms of robustness and excellent timekeeping, both attributes that are important to me.
Rolex Oyster Perpetual Yacht-Master 40
Better bracelets: If you’d like an entertaining few minutes, do an online search for “flimsy Rolex bracelet” and read some of the comments from Rolex owners and non-owners alike.
From personal experience, I can say that the Jubilee and Oyster bracelets on my wife’s Rolexes are nothing to write home about. In recent years, Rolex seems to have stepped up its game.
Tired of being a hater: I must be mellowing in my old age! I may have reached a tipping point at which I’m willing to judge these watches on their merits rather than judge their owners as braggarts or wannabes.
Low-risk experiment: At least for the more popular models, pre-owned Rolex values are well established and fairly stable. So, there seems to be every opportunity for me to see what all of the fuss is about without too much risk of “getting hurt,” as my collector friends and I refer to the possibility of substantial economic loss on a particular piece.
So, which one?
After all of that, the happy news is that for me the choices narrow down quite quickly to three watches.
- Rolex GMT Master II BLNR: The “Batman” or “Bruiser” version of the second-generation GMT Master has a clean look and to my eye the combination blue/black bezel is just killer.
Rolex GMT Master II BLNR
- Rolex Cosmograph Daytona: For me it would be the stainless steel version with white dial. At 40 mm in diameter it’s big enough but not too big, I have a fondness for sports chronographs, and for me the Daytona is one of the landmark Rolex models.
- Daytona “Paul Newman:” Yeah, I know I said all of that stuff above about vintage Rolex. But if and when the price bubble on these watches bursts and they are back in the $25,000 range, count me in.
Rolex Daytona in stainless steel with white dial
If you’re curious to see whether I actually take the plunge, stay tuned here at Quill & Pad!
Trackbacks & Pingbacks
-
[…] The last time I wrote here on Quill & Pad about my relationship with the world’s greatest mass luxury brand was last year when I explained Why I’ve Never Owned a Rolex – And Why I Might Yet. […]
-
[…] article was first published on August 21, 2015 at Why I’ve Never Owned A Rolex – And Why I Might Yet. You may find the comments under that post […]
-
[…] GaryG, our resident enthusiast collector, had thus far managed to avoid a Rolex model in his collection (which he explained in Why I’ve Never Owned A Rolex – And Why I Might Yet). […]
-
[…] The last time I wrote here on Quill & Pad about my relationship with the world’s greatest mass luxury brand was last year when I explained Why I’ve Never Owned a Rolex – And Why I Might Yet. […]
-
[…] 原文链接：Why I’ve Never Owned A Rolex – And Why I Might Yet […]
-
[…] to own a Rolex. So I really appreciate GaryG’s article over at Quill & Pad about why he has never owned a Rolex. Like him, finances and timing have kept the watches out of reach, and if my fortunes were to […]
Leave a Reply
Want to join the discussion?Feel free to contribute!
Insert comments about how I liked the article here.
Thanks, Robbie! I am tempted to write a highly detailed and complimentary set of remarks on your behalf, but will instead simply express my gratitude.
Great article – however – for me it took 2 Sub’s and one Deep Sea to understand exactly what you wrote – as of now – I will never ever get a Rolex again – for the exact reasons you stated in the article. Today I am a “purist beginner” & proud owner of a JLC Deep sea and a Speedmaster “TinTin”…
What a fascinating read, Gary. I admire your taste and envy the relationships you’ve built with the likes of Dufour, Voutilainen, and Speake-Marin.
This article is very encouraging, as I realized that we had extremely similar starts to watch collecting. I started a few years ago with a Jaeger-LeCoultre Master Control Grande Taille, then sold it to partially fund my two Reversos, the TT1931 US edition and the Ultrathin Duoface Bleu. Along the way, I’ve thought many times to get a no-date sub, but never pulled the trigger for almost the very same reasons that you listed. Instead, I went for an old Omega 321 chrono, JLC 469, plus some finely finished pocket watches.
It will take many more work hours to get to where you’re at, but the journey has been (and will continue to be) so rewarding. Thanks for the great article.
Many thanks for the kind words, Peter, and I’m pleased that you enjoyed the article.
I’ve been working for over 35 years now, and it’s only in recent times that I’ve had the ability to acquire some of the pieces you mention, so as you say more hours working away is an important component of the aspiring collector’s life!
I took the plunge, in fact with the top two on your list. They are great watches for what they are: robust, accurate, comfortable and extremely well-made down to minute detail.
Not “the” Michael Friedberg! Welcome here, Michael — I absolutely agree with you that with recent improvements to the bracelets Rolex has brought all elements of their watches up to a high standard.
And, as you say, for movement robustness and timekeeping accuracy they have always been very hard indeed to match.
As a regular follower and watch enthusiast, it makes me upset to read such disparaging comments on Rolex. I don’t expect you to extoll the brand, neither should you throw out a flattery air, but why so obloquy against Rolex?
Why don’t you make a few words on Audemars Piguet’s exorbitantly overpriced steel chunk Offshore then? Sinn also boasts about utilizing German submarine grade steel, if Rolex has been using 904 Grade there must be good reason behind it and don’t forget Rolex invested many hefty amount of money to machine 904 in their models and Rolex never eschews using this material, even their the most affordable models not just diving watches or sport watches.
Hi Robert,
First of all, please accept my apology for any offense caused, as that was certainly not my intent.
Second, if you have a chance to glance through the article a second time, I hope that you will notice that my remarks were about my personal curiosity about why I had never bought a watch from what is one of the great brands in the business today — not some sort of anti-Rolex rant. In fact, I even conclude the article by specifying three Rolex watches that I would be keen to own!
Finally, while I quake a bit at being drawn into the Great Grade 904 Debate, my understanding is that 904 offers both benefits and limitations to the case maker in areas as disparate as hardness and brilliance of polish. Long ago in my engineering studies, I learned that there is no ideal material — only optimal materials that are best suited to particular sets of manufacturing and use criteria. Manufacturers who use 904 or any other grade do so for good reasons — because they believe that the material meets their particular requirements with acceptable tradeoffs in other areas.
Nice article. I started with Omega and fell into Rolex by accident (long and interesting story if you want, I can send it). I have been tempted by other brands so I only have a 1970’s Submariner in the Rolex “winder”. I do have a couple of Omegas (yes, one is a Moon watch), a couple of GPs, a bunch of Oris and two Breitling. But there is a Rolex Explorer out there with my name on it if I can find the cash…
Would love to hear your story! Thanks for your comments — and good luck on that Explorer…
A gaggle of Rolex Submariners? My first meaningful watch was a PX Zodiac that I purchased before a trip to Vietnam (DMZ and Khe Sanh). After 5 years I thought I would do the responsible thing and have it serviced. I took it to a jewelry store in San Francisco. A month later I went water skiing at Lake Tahoe. End of my Zodiac. Since then I have had numerous dress watches, but I still want to get a good sport watch. I walk my dogs at several ocean beaches in Marin county and don’t like to think about jumping in wearing one of my Pateks. I have always liked the simplicity of the No Date but don’t like the black/white versions. And then you showed a reference with a red “upside down pyramid” in the bezel and blue lettering. How do I get one of these beauties?
Not sure, James! Perhaps a visit to the website attributed in the photo caption will provide some clues.
By the way, while those red triangles are pretty convincingly colored, I’m guessing that the “blue” lettering may be due to poor white balance in the photo and in real life may actually be white. That said, I’m no expert!
Unfortunately, I think you are right. Bad lighting.
I enjoyed this very much. I collected for 15-years before I bought my first Rolex, for many of the same reasons you listed, but finally grew to see the Submariner as iconic if nothing else, and took the plunge. I’ve now aquired a “Batman” – just a knockout watch in all respects – and it is an entirely different animal quality-wise than my 80s Sub, but I enjoy owning both.
While Rolex might be the most recognized brand name in watches, I still find it amusing that the average person can’t identify one from ten feet away.
Terry