Apple Watch vs Rolex

[The-Real-Deal82]

I suppose the day Apple start sponsoring luxury events like Formula One, golf, tennis, horse racing etc, the likes of Rolex will slip out of sight of their target market. Rolex is a strong brand, and strong enough that they don't have to pay silly amounts of money compared to many companies to be associated with many events. This sort of exposure keeps the brand desirable and prestige. I can't see a £300 smart watch changing that to be honest but I'm bored of repeating that so i'll just state that my opinion is as strong as ever on this subject.

 

[douglasf13]

I suppose the day Apple start sponsoring luxury events like Formula One, golf, tennis, horse racing etc, the likes of Rolex will slip out of sight of their target market. Rolex is a strong brand, and strong enough that they don't have to pay silly amounts of money compared to many companies to be associated with many events. This sort of exposure keeps the brand desirable and prestige. I can't see a £300 smart watch changing that to be honest but I'm bored of repeating that so i'll just state that my opinion is as strong as ever on this subject.

Rolex spends more than any other watch company on advertising. In fact, they spent over 40% more than second place, last year. Their strong brand is directly related to spending silly money. They also sell around a million watches per year, despite being "exclusive" watches. They're the true definition of a Veblen good, so it'll be interesting to see if that house of cards falls, if smartwatches catch on.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Rolex are only exclusive to the average joe like me on the street. They are far from rare and I don't think anybody suggested that.

Citizen sell more watches than any other watchmaker too. How has that affected Rolex in recent years? I'm sure they've taken some sales off them along with the likes of Seiko and Casio but just how many? I think that would tell us a little more about what is in store for when the Apple watch takes over. How boring is that going to be when an affordable smart watch is in everybody's wrist?

 

[Zaft]

I have a Cartier Santos 100 that my dad gifted me. I tried an apple watch SS for several days and its no comparison. The quality difference is huge, the SS on the Santos looks and feels amazing.

I can stare at the Santos all day..

Its not fair to compare them.

 

[douglasf13]

Rolex are only exclusive to the average joe like me on the street. They are far from rare and I don't think anybody suggested that.

Citizen sell more watches than any other watchmaker too. How has that affected Rolex in recent years? I'm sure they've taken some sales off them along with the likes of Seiko and Casio but just how many? I think that would tell us a little more about what is in store for when the Apple watch takes over. How boring is that going to be when an affordable smart watch is in everybody's wrist?

Certainly, it's the $1000 and under watches that will be directly affected by smartwatch sales in the coming years. The higher end brands will take longer, and still only if smartwatches become ubiquitous.

Rolex is in an interesting spot, because they're still mass produced, albeit great, watches, but their price is also high. If anything, I can see the hand made watches from the likes of the big three surviving this, as they're for the real horology nerds, but Rolex is in an interesting middle ground.

 

[douglasf13]

I have a Cartier Santos 100 that my dad gifted me. I tried an apple watch SS for several days and its no comparison. The quality difference is huge, the SS on the Santos looks and feels amazing.

I can stare at the Santos all day..

Its not fair to compare them.

Sure. Many would feel the same way. The question is, when do the features outweigh the quality? Where is the middle ground? The Santos 100 has about a $200 ETA movement in it, if it's the automatic version, so you're looking at $6800 for a nice watch case, which they likely spent under $500 to make.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Sure. Many would feel the same way. The question is, when do the features outweigh the quality? Where is the middle ground? The Santos 100 has about a $200 ETA movement in it, if it's the automatic version, so you're looking at $6800 for a nice watch case, which they likely spent under $500 to make.

It seems quite unfair devaluing a guys watch that he is fond of because his father gave it to him. Products are always marked up and manufacturing cost is irrelevant because the market retail cost is what the watch is worth. An iPhone costs around £60 per unit to manufacture but demands 10 times that. Quality can be achieved at minimal cost too.

The Cartier Santos is a nice watch, enjoy it I say.

 

[damonbus]

Sure. Many would feel the same way. The question is, when do the features outweigh the quality? Where is the middle ground? The Santos 100 has about a $200 ETA movement in it, if it's the automatic version, so you're looking at $6800 for a nice watch case, which they likely spent under $500 to make.

Wouldn't a Rolex still be a better investment? A Rolex will never go down in value as an Apple Watch will be worthless in a few years when new updated models come out? What do you think?

 

[douglasf13]

It seems quite unfair devaluing a guys watch that he is fond of because his father gave it to him. Products are always marked up and manufacturing cost is irrelevant because the market retail cost is what the watch is worth. An iPhone costs around £60 per unit to manufacture but demands 10 times that. Quality can be achieved at minimal cost too.

The Cartier Santos is a nice watch, enjoy it I say.

That wasn't my intention. I'd say the same about my Rolex. My intent was to illustrate that that's quite a bit of money to play with, when making a watch case.

 

[Zaft]

It seems quite unfair devaluing a guys watch that he is fond of because his father gave it to him. Products are always marked up and manufacturing cost is irrelevant because the market retail cost is what the watch is worth. An iPhone costs around £60 per unit to manufacture but demands 10 times that. Quality can be achieved at minimal cost too.

The Cartier Santos is a nice watch, enjoy it I say.

Yes its very well made, I only wear it to formal events.
I have a nice Bulova as a daily driver.

I am thinking about trying out the new Gold Sport Apple watch. I didn't really like how the silver and black looked.

 

[douglasf13]

Wouldn't a Rolex still be a better investment? A Rolex will never go down in value as an Apple Watch will be worthless in a few years when new updated models come out? What do you think?

Rolex watches, especially non-sport models, do go down in value when purchased new, outside of maybe the Daytona and Sub, which take a smaller hit. Just like cars, it's still better to buy slightly used.

When buying used, they do tend to hold or increase their value. That being said, if the analog watch collector craze from the last couple of decades starts to wane, I'm not sure what will happen to watch value over the long term.

Another thing to think of is maintenance cost, as a $700-$1000+ service is require of a Rolex around every 5-10 years. If you start collecting more than one watch like this, that starts really adding up.

 

[damonbus]

Rolex watches, especially non-sport models, do go down in value when purchased new, outside of maybe the Daytona and Sub, which take a smaller hit. Just like cars, it's still better to buy slightly used.

When buying used, they do tend to hold or increase their value. That being said, if the analog watch collector craze from the last couple of decades starts to wane, I'm not sure what will happen to watch value over the long term.

Another thing to think of is maintenance cost, as a $700-$1000+ service is require of a Rolex around every 5-10 years. If you start collecting more than one watch like this, that starts really adding up.

I didn't realize it cost that much for maintenance and service. What does it include for that price?

 

[douglasf13]

I didn't realize it cost that much for maintenance and service. What does it include for that price?

They polish the watch up (unless you ask them not to,) replace any worn parts, pressure test it, etc. The last time I sent one in, they had to replace the crown and stem, outside of the normal stuff, so, if memory serves me correctly, I think it was around $800-900.

They're really no more "built for life" than a classic car that needs maintenance done over its lifetime.

 

[douglasf13]

As a Rolex owner, I also wanted to mention just how awesome the link bracelet is for the Apple watch. It clearly has DNA from the Ikepod Megapode, but it's even more refined, and it stands up to the bracelets from my other watches. It's just beautiful, and it's probably a major reason why I'm finding it easy to move from Rolex to smartwatch.

Even my wife, who teased me a little bit about wanting an Apple Watch, was surprised when I brought it home on the link bracelet. The first thing she said was, "Wow, I wasn't expecting that. The bracelet looks as nice as your Rolex."

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Can we get a side by side shot Douglas of the two purely for an aesthetic comparison? It would be nice for this discussion I think, if you wouldn't mind?

 

[douglasf13]

Can we get a side by side shot Douglas of the two purely for an aesthetic comparison? It would be nice for this discussion I think, if you wouldn't mind?

Sure. I'll try and get to it later today or tomorrow.

 

[JT2002TJ]

As many have stated, you can't compare the functionality of an Apple watch to the luxury of a Rolex. I doubt the are competing at all. Those who want a Rolex, will still get a Rolex, and the subset who want both, will get both. If anything, it gives Rolex owners, something nice to wear everyday, without the risk of damaging their Rolex. I see an AW as an everyday item (Toyota, Audi, Mercedes, Honda...) and a Rolex as an exotic (Ferrari, Lamborghini, Arial Atom,...), you don't drive the exotic everyday, but because you have an exotic, doesn't mean you wont have a daily driver...

 

[douglasf13]

Can we get a side by side shot Douglas of the two purely for an aesthetic comparison? It would be nice for this discussion I think, if you wouldn't mind?

Ok, so I managed a few quick snaps of the watches together. My Apple Watch model is the 38mm SS, and the Rolex is a 16610. Because screen/dial size affects the way a watch reads in size on the wrist as much or more than actual case dimensions, I found that the 38mm Apple Watch reads closer in size to my Rolex than the 42mm Apple Watch. The 42mm version is just too much computer screen, unless you're very large, IMO. The bracelets and bands of the 42mm version are also much wider, which I don't like. In fact, the 38mm bracelet is already wider than my Rolex bracelet.

I no longer have my DateJust and AirKing, or I would have thrown them in, as well, because they're even smaller. I think a lot of people unfamiliar with Rolex are surprised when they find out just how small so many of them are, which is a major attraction of the brand, to me.

While the Sub is an all time great in watch design, and I'd imagine nearly everyone would prefer it in the looks department, as I probably do, I think the Apple Watch gives a confident showing in both quality and design. The Sub is classic, if not THE classic, 50s diver aesthetic, while the Apple Watch has a bit of a 2001: Space Odyssey vibe, and the integrated bracelet reminds me a little bit of something Gerald Genta would have designed in the 70s.


I think the bracelet clasp on the Apple Watch is actually much nicer than the Rolex, although the newer Submariner remedied this, albeit at the cost of more size/weight (and Rolex purists aren't big fans of the other major changes to the shape of the newest Submariner.)

While I think Newson's Ikepod designs, which clearly influenced the Apple Watch design, and a lot of the watch designs from the 70s are fantastic, I do think the Sub is the best one-watch analog design to own. If both of the watches below had the same functionality, I'd probably pick the Sub...However, the functionality of the Apple Watch is pushing it over the edge for me, and, if the functionality continues to be useful to me, I think I will eventually sell my Rolex and other mechanicals.

It should be mentioned that my model of Rolex goes for around $6K on the used market, as opposed to the Apple Watch new at around $1K.

p.s. to answer the post above that came in right before I posted this, I see the steel Apple Watch as more of a Tesla to Rolex's high end Mercedes. If you want Ferrari/Rolls Royce quality, you go with Patek Phillipe, AP, etc. They're the true watchmaking artists for the wealthy.

 

[JT2002TJ]

p.s. to answer the post above that came in right before I posted this, I see the steel Apple Watch as more of a Tesla to Rolex's high end Mercedes. If you want Ferrari/Rolls Royce quality, you go with Patek Phillipe, AP, etc. They're the true watchmaking artists for the wealthy.

Ferrari/Rolls aren't even the highest end cars... So to continue with the analogy, Rolex = Ferrari\Porsche (High end but common), Patek Phillipe = Bugatti Veyron (High end + rare), AW = High end daily driver (Mercedes, Audi, BMW). On my way to work communing on the Long Island Rail Road, I usually see 3-4 Rolex's.

 

[douglasf13]

Ferrari/Rolls aren't even the highest end cars... So to continue with the analogy, Rolex = Ferrari\Porsche (High end but common), Patek Phillipe = Bugatti Veyron (High end + rare), AW = High end daily driver (Mercedes, Audi, BMW). On my way to work communing on the Long Island Rail Road, I usually see 3-4 Rolex's.

Nah, I'll stick with my analogy. Richards Mille watches are Bugatti territory, although Pateks do have a very wide price range, so it depends on the model.

 

[ultravisitor]

to have a Rolex owner impressed by my space grey AW gives me anecdotal evidence it really does have appeal in the upscale watch market that Apple is aiming for.

Rolex wearers in general tend to be watch fanatics, so it's really not much of a surprise that your uncle liked your Apple Watch. Myself, I have a Rolex and several other watches. I'm considering an Apple Watch, as well.

However, speaking as a Rolex owner, there really is very little comparison between the two, and personally I would never value an Apple Watch more than I value my Rolex. Of all my watches, my Rolex gets the most wear, and it is the most special. I would be fine losing any of my other watches, and I would be fine with losing an Apple Watch if I had one. But my Rolex? I go into panic mode whenever I misplace it.

An Apple Watch will be dated in a year or two. My Rolex, on the other hand, is timeless.

 

[ultravisitor]

Besides using it to see the time, my understanding of why people buy automatic watches (as jewelry):

• Status/exclusivity/fashion
• Looks/beauty/elegance
• Heritage (i.e. Moonwatch went on the moon, having James Bond (or Ian Fleming)'s watch, etc)
• Heirloom

One thing that is always missed when people post reasons like this is that many, many people buy expensive mechanical watches, like Rolexes, to commemorate special events or achievements in their lives. A mechanical watch will basically last forever and will always be able to be worn and serve as a tangible memory of the event.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see the same thing happening with an Apple Watch because, as a piece of technology, it lacks the timeless aspect. Sure, someone might be able to pull out their Apple Watch in 15 or 20 years, but is it going to work as well as the day it was bought, like a mechanical watch? Doubtful.

 

[ultravisitor]

Another thing I'd like to mention is that the wearables category is new, so I think it's somewhat easy to argue that the Apple Watch will disrupt and displace the traditional mechanical watches from Switzerland. I think that view is ultimately very short-sighted, though.

Remember that this is TECHNOLOGY that we're talking about here.

Do you really think that Apple will simply be satisfied with having a device that remains on the wrist, especially in 25 or 30 or 50 years? Don't you think that they'll want their product to leave the wrist and become more advanced, like with contacts or earpieces that we can wear or implantable devices or whatever the hell else engineers and designers will dream up and invent for us?

I really think Apple will eventually move on and leave the watch category. The mechanical watch industry will be safe, as they're not trying to be anything more than what they are now and what they've been for the past century.

 

[douglasf13]

Rolex wearers in general tend to be watch fanatics, so it's really not much of a surprise that your uncle liked your Apple Watch. Myself, I have a Rolex and several other watches. I'm considering an Apple Watch, as well.

However, speaking as a Rolex owner, there really is very little comparison between the two, and personally I would never value an Apple Watch more than I value my Rolex. Of all my watches, my Rolex gets the most wear, and it is the most special. I would be fine losing any of my other watches, and I would be fine with losing an Apple Watch if I had one. But my Rolex? I go into panic mode whenever I misplace it.

An Apple Watch will be dated in a year or two. My Rolex, on the other hand, is timeless.

One thing that is always missed when people post reasons like this is that many, many people buy expensive mechanical watches, like Rolexes, to commemorate special events or achievements in their lives. A mechanical watch will basically last forever and will always be able to be worn and serve as a tangible memory of the event.

Maybe I'm wrong, but I don't see the same thing happening with an Apple Watch because, as a piece of technology, it lacks the timeless aspect. Sure, someone might be able to pull out their Apple Watch in 15 or 20 years, but is it going to work as well as the day it was bought, like a mechanical watch? Doubtful.

You're absolutely right. Nice mechanical timepieces moved away from functional tools to jewelry and commemoration quite a while back.

The thing for me is, if the Apple Watch provides enough extra functionality to be become indispensable, we may eventually start using something else as jewelry/commemoration that doesn't compete for the same wrist space. How about commemorative bolo ties? As you say, Apple may move away from wrist based devices, someday, but we may be too far gone from mechanicals for them to make a comeback. They barely survived quartz, and smartwatches are a much more interesting threat.

In the age of laptops, there are still writers who prefer to type on an actual typewriter, but that number is relatively small, and, if someone would be kind enough to send most writers an engraved Hermes 3000 to commemorate a writing achievement, they'd appreciate it, but it would probably sit on a shelf while they bang away on a Macbook for their work.

Of course, the horror of all horrors to me will be those who decide to wear a Rolex on one wrist and an Apple Watch on the other, thinking that's the best of both worlds.

 

[BarracksSi]

Most of my mechanicals have been gifts and heirlooms—the one that wasn't, was won in a giveaway, so I'd feel sleazy if I sold it—so they're all nigh impossible to get rid of. But again, they're trying to use the same wrist space. I posted this earlier today on WUS:

I'll add another post as I'm thinking about it this morning…

I'm close to parking my autos in a drawer.

As I said in a previous post, I've only taken off my AW after filling all the Activity rings, and then put on one of my other watches. Here's the thing: I had to reset my 009 to the correct date and time, while my solar-atomic Citizen was spot-on.

As a pick-up-and-go watch, the Citizen is simply the better option. I realize that this may change years down the road when the battery finally starts to wear down, but the mechanicals' oils would be all crusty by then, too.