Apple Watch vs Rolex

[douglasf13]

All true, although price of the "real high end" watches have also experienced what is likely a bubble.

True. They'll attempt to legitimize the prices, because, like Hermes, they're handmade and not sold in the millions per year. Rolex doesn't have that luxury, no pun intended. 🙂

 

[bjet767]

Nope I don't, but I did sell one to an enthusiast in New Zealand about 15 years ago. The buyer spent $1,500 for a used stainless steel model. My experience was Rolex owners have many of the same attitudes (and attributes) as Apple enthusiasts.

Why don't you Rolex fans buy a Breitling watch instead? Kind of like the same reason Merc owners scoff at Audi, I guess.

Wouldn't it be great to see little Rolex stickers on the backs of the owner's Mercs.

Please lighten up a bit, in the big scheme of things these are all just watches and cars.

 

[Newtons Apple]

Apple watches are not going to harm Rolex watches in the least. The cheapest Rolex is around $6k-$7k with them going well over $100k. Just a solid gold Rolex Sub will set you back over $30k.

The Apple Watch is not in the same league and do not compete with each other.

 

[douglasf13]

Apple watches are not going to harm Rolex watches in the least. The cheapest Rolex is around $6k-$7k with them going well over $100k. Just a solid gold Rolex Sub will set you back over $30k.

The Apple Watch is not in the same league and do not compete with each other.

They do compete with each other, simply in that they compete for the same wrist real estate. As I mentioned in previous posts, I own both, but the Rolex has been in a drawer for a couple of months, because it has little functional advantage over the Apple Watch, unless you're a diver. If smart watches become ubiquitous, the relatively recent phenomenon of a Rolex sports watch being considered a luxury item may be numbered, at least to the tune of the million watches per year they currently sell.

 

[Newtons Apple]

They do compete with each other, simply in that they compete for the same wrist real estate. As I mentioned in previous posts, I own both, but the Rolex has been in a drawer for a couple of months, because it has little functional advantage over the Apple Watch, unless you're a diver. If smart watches become ubiquitous, the relatively recent phenomenon of a Rolex sports watch being considered a luxury item may be numbered, at least to the tune of the million watches per year they currently sell.

No more competition for my wrist real estate! My Rolex is back while the AW now lives on someone else's wrist! I do not miss it a bit. Love my iPhone 6S+ and enjoy using it. The AW seldom saved me from pulling my phone as I had to answer it, reply to the email or text as my customers do not wait. All this and it never requires you charge it!

I know many will not understand but I like hearing my notification sounds again and I swear my Rolex is smiling!🙂

 

[douglasf13]

No more competition for my wrist real estate! My Rolex is back while the AW now lives on someone else's wrist! I do not miss it a bit. Love my iPhone 6S+ and enjoy using it. The AW seldom saved me from pulling my phone as I had to answer it, reply to the email or text as my customers do not wait. All this and it never requires you charge it!

I know many will not understand but I like hearing my notification sounds again and my Rolex is smiling!🙂

I think that selling one and going back to the other kind of does prove that they compete, and, in your case, the Rolex won. 🙂

 

[Newtons Apple]

I think that selling one and going back to the other kind of does prove that they compete, and, in your case, the Rolex won. 🙂

If it would have been all I was led to believe in the fitness category it would have had a better chance. Few good 3rd party apps out there and have my doubts about the developers jumping on board and doing too much for $.99 cents.

Time will tell, I can always go and get another AW if the bug hits me again.

 

[BarracksSi]

I think that selling one and going back to the other kind of does prove that they compete, and, in your case, the Rolex won. 🙂

Exactly.

In my case, the AW is winning, and my G Shock, Citizen, Seiko, Rado, Omega, Bulova, and Garmin are all patiently waiting to be worn again.

All gifts and heirlooms, remember, so I don't really want to sell them. I'm not planning on buying more watches, though.

 

[douglasf13]

Exactly.

In my case, the AW is winning, and my G Shock, Citizen, Seiko, Rado, Omega, Bulova, and Garmin are all patiently waiting to be worn again.

All gifts and heirlooms, remember, so I don't really want to sell them. I'm not planning on buying more watches, though.

I know. I've had a lot of watches go through my hands over the years, because, while they all basically do the same thing, they're of a different style.

Now I'm at a point where I gave my friend a Seiko and a vintage manual-wind watch, and I'm selling my Rolex and Omega, among other things. I'm going to keep my solar-powered/atomic clock G-shock for camping or the apocalypse LOL, and everything else is out the door.

Oddly enough, I do have a gold pocket watch that's an heirloom, so that stays. I never thought I'd keep a pocket watch over a Rolex and Omega, but I guess that could be a sign that mechanical wristwatches may be going the way of the pocket watch. 😱

 

[damonbus]

I know. I've had a lot of watches go through my hands over the years, because, while they all basically do the same thing, they're of a different style.

Now I'm at a point where I gave my friend a Seiko and a vintage manual-wind watch, and I'm selling my Rolex and Omega, among other things. I'm going to keep my solar-powered/atomic clock G-shock for camping or the apocalypse LOL, and everything else is out the door.

Oddly enough, I do have a gold pocket watch that's an heirloom, so that stays. I never thought I'd keep a pocket watch over a Rolex and Omega, but I guess that could be a sign that mechanical wristwatches may be going the way of the pocket watch. 😱

Which G-Shock do you own?

 

[douglasf13]

Which G-Shock do you own?

the Mudman GW9000A-1

Over 15 years ago, I sold G-Shock watches at a watch counter. When customers asked about them, I'd take one out of the display case, grab it by the end of the strap, and slam it into the counter as hard as I could, and the thing always kept on going without issue.

I sold a lot of G-Shocks with that unofficial sales technique. LOL


(not my pic)

 

[damonbus]

the Mudman GW9000A-1

Over 15 years ago, I sold G-Shock watches at a watch counter. When customers asked about them, I'd take one out of the display case, grab it by the end of the strap, and slam it into the counter as hard as I could, and the thing always kept on going without issue.

I sold a lot of G-Shocks with that unofficial sales technique. LOL


(not my pic)

Thanks, I'm looking for a g shock to wear when I go camping and stuff. any recommendations?

 

[douglasf13]

Thanks, I'm looking for a g shock to wear when I go camping and stuff. any recommendations?

Looks like your reply is blank, fyi.

 

[damonbus]

Looks like your reply is blank, fyi.

Check now.

 

[douglasf13]

Thanks, I'm looking for a g shock to wear when I go camping and stuff. any recommendations?

I wish I could be of help, but I've been out of the G-shock game for a while, so I'm not really up on what's cool and new, these days. I picked my model because it has good resistance to mud, it's solar powered, and it calibrates its time daily through the air from the atomic clock. It's a good kind of watch to have in an emergency, and I've had no issues with it.

I do know that Casio has introduced some G-Shock models with basic smartwatch notifications, but I don't know much about how well they work.

On the opposite end of the digital spectrum, if you want to spend essentially no money for a camping watch, the Casio F-91W is a legendary watch that handles about anything, and it has a 10 year battery. G-Shocks look cool and are bombproof, but the F-91W is probably all any of us really need. LOL It is small with a retro vibe, which some like.

p.s. judging by your user photo, I feel like I should mention that the F-91W has some terrorist ties, likely because it's so ubiquitous and inexpensive, so that may sway you away from that one.

 

[damonbus]

I wish I could be of help, but I've been out of the G-shock game for a while, so I'm not really up on what's cool and new, these days. I picked my model because it has good resistance to mud, it's solar powered, and it calibrates its time daily through the air from the atomic clock. It's a good kind of watch to have in an emergency, and I've had no issues with it.

I do know that Casio has introduced some G-Shock models with basic smartwatch notifications, but I don't know much about how well they work.

On the opposite end of the digital spectrum, if you want to spend essentially no money for a camping watch, the Casio F-91W is a legendary watch that handles about anything, and it has a 10 year battery. G-Shocks look cool and are bombproof, but the F-91W is probably all any of us really need. LOL It is small with a retro vibe, which some like.

p.s. judging by your user photo, I feel like I should mention that the F-91W has some terrorist ties, likely because it's so ubiquitous and inexpensive, so that may sway you away from that one.

Thank you so much for your help.

 

[barjam]

No more competition for my wrist real estate! My Rolex is back while the AW now lives on someone else's wrist! I do not miss it a bit. Love my iPhone 6S+ and enjoy using it. The AW seldom saved me from pulling my phone as I had to answer it, reply to the email or text as my customers do not wait. All this and it never requires you charge it!

I know many will not understand but I like hearing my notification sounds again and I swear my Rolex is smiling!🙂

For me the competition is apple watch or nothing. Having nothing on my wrist would offer me more functionality than having a Rolex or similar watch.

 

[maxsix]

My coveted and carefully selected collection of luxury and ultra luxury timepieces are not meant to be primarily used to tell time when worn. Nor did I buy them to impress anyone, I own / wear / and enjoy them simply because of the various aspects of horological history, method of precision manufacture (handmade by _one_ man), and beauty of materials they represent.

If I reference them by their brand and approximate dollar value alone, at the bottom of the barrel is just one brand, yet it's known world wide (again talking $$$ only) my two tone, Gold & SS Rolex Submariner, valued at under $10,000. A mere fraction of the true cash value of others that reside at the top of my collection.

Before I returned the SS Apple Watch I bought upon release, but didn't care for, (just personal opinion) at no time did I think...Gee.. it would be fun to compare my Rolex to my AW. That's not even something that enters into the mind of any serious horological connoisseur.

Nothing, not one single thing about any "smartwatch" causes it to be considered as something that one would lay alongside a luxury timepiece for comparison, or even speculation. They are two completely different objects.

 

[maxsix]

Exactly.

In my case, the AW is winning, and my G Shock, Citizen, Seiko, Rado, Omega, Bulova, and Garmin are all patiently waiting to be worn again.

All gifts and heirlooms, remember, so I don't really want to sell them. I'm not planning on buying more watches, though.

I have (respectfully) never quite understood why ones possessions are labeled with the data point known by some as "winning." Furthermore, even if true, what makes them any more valuable or relevant.

Perhaps it's the intrinsic validation some people experience.

 

[junglesnake]

I can 100 percent tell you a Rolex will get you laid by itself! An Apple Watch won't even get you a number! It's like comparing a Lamborghini vs a Volkswagen!
Personally I wouldn't buy either but if I did...I like p***y!

 

[douglasf13]

I can 100 percent tell you a Rolex will get you laid by itself! An Apple Watch won't even get you a number! It's like comparing a Lamborghini vs a Volkswagen!
Personally I wouldn't buy either but if I did...I like p***y!

Hardly. Most people can't or don't notice the difference between my Submariner and a $400 Seiko dive watch, just like most people can't tell the difference between a 1976 Porsche 930 worth six figures and a 1976 911 worth $30K.

 

[junglesnake]

Hey he's comparing a Rolex and Apple Watch! Seriously! I'm old enough to know a Rolex will always increase and the Apple Watch will be worth it's weight in scrap in a year! Just like the original iPods! And a Porsche is a porshe! I own a 2013 Camaro so and a 69 Camaro z28 and people think the new one is more valuable! Not even close!

 

[BarracksSi]

I have (respectfully) never quite understood why ones possessions are labeled with the data point known by some as "winning." Furthermore, even if true, what makes them any more valuable or relevant.

Perhaps it's the intrinsic validation some people experience.

I suppose it's "winning" as they're "competing" for the same wrist space.

 

[douglasf13]

My coveted and carefully selected collection of luxury and ultra luxury timepieces are not meant to be primarily used to tell time when worn. Nor did I buy them to impress anyone, I own / wear / and enjoy them simply because of the various aspects of horological history, method of precision manufacture (handmade by _one_ man), and beauty of materials they represent.

If I reference them by their brand and approximate dollar value alone, at the bottom of the barrel is just one brand, yet it's known world wide (again talking $$$ only) my two tone, Gold & SS Rolex Submariner, valued at under $10,000. A mere fraction of the true cash value of others that reside at the top of my collection.

Before I returned the SS Apple Watch I bought upon release, but didn't care for, (just personal opinion) at no time did I think...Gee.. it would be fun to compare my Rolex to my AW. That's not even something that enters into the mind of any serious horological connoisseur.

Nothing, not one single thing about any "smartwatch" causes it to be considered as something that one would lay alongside a luxury timepiece for comparison, or even speculation. They are two completely different objects.

While I understand the sentiment, we're talking about Rolex, not Patek Phillipe, and a connoisseur such as yourself must also realize that a Rolex Sub was little more than a tool watch a number of decades back, but its fantastic design, alongside Rolex's great marketing and rhetoric, has created a Veblen good that has been in quite a price bubble for a while.

Plus, any horological connoisseur is going to love and respect a wide range of watch styles, innovations and price points. If you only love the high end, it's being less of a connoisseur, and a bit more of a snob. Even John Mayer, who likely has more invested in watches than all of us in this forum combined, can appreciate a Seiko magic lever or the Hamilton Khaki as much as he can appreciate his watches that go for six figures plus.

Whether we're talking about a Submariner, a Richard Mille, a Swatch Sistem51, an Apple Watch, or a Patek Supercomplication, there's a lot to love about watches. My problem is, I find the Apple Watch so useful that I don't want to take it off, so it leaves me with nice, mechanical desk clocks, essentially.

 

[douglasf13]

Hey he's comparing a Rolex and Apple Watch! Seriously! I'm old enough to know a Rolex will always increase and the Apple Watch will be worth it's weight in scrap in a year! Just like the original iPods! And a Porsche is a porshe! I own a 2013 Camaro so and a 69 Camaro z28 and people think the new one is more valuable! Not even close!

Rolexes "always" increasing in price is a relatively new phenomenon over the last few decades, and a million of them are made per year, so they aren't exactly rare. It remains to be seen how the smartwatch will effect their value down the road.