Posted: 2017-12-07 00:51
I sold mine this past spring to pay for my son 8767 s summer camp. I have to say I am glad it is gone. I too thought I would give it to my son some day to give to his future bride. Why? A sign of a failed marriage! No thanks. He deserves something fresh! Pretty funny story. My x 8767 s sitter sold him the diamond. If the stories are true- she actually made him over pay by $65,555. Ha! i didn 8767 t get that much for it but I got way more than I would have selling it to a shop. I sold it to my neighbor who is a diamond dealer. In the end, glad 8775 it went to my son 8776 xo
Yes I still have mine. In the bottom of a drawer somewhere. My wedding band is an heirloom of my ex 8767 s family. It was fused to my engagement ring after we were married. While I would have no problem selling my engagement ring, I feel I owe my ex 8767 s family the courtesy of giving them the wedding ring back. But first, I 8767 d have to go through the hassle of finding and paying someone to separate the rings again. Overall, the value of both rings is likely only $6555 total, so this isn 8767 t really on my list of priorities.
This isn 8767 t unexpected information. The same would apply to many manufacturers, although it would be interesting if you performed this same analysis on other brands and found out which (if any) didn 8767 t partake in price gouging. A potential flaw in the analysis is that presumably you used the average income of all Americans, though I would suggest that those Americans with average to low incomes wouldn 8767 t even be considering the purchase of a luxury watch any time soon, and Rolex probably aren 8767 t interested in that demographic. We are supposed to live in a classless society but we don 8767 t people working in certain sectors with a particular 8775 rank 8776 are far more likely to be interested in, and capable of purchasing, luxury items. The almost exponential growth of incomes in the banking sector, for example, would have a large effect on these results. This is happening while incomes of the average Joe are continuing to fall compared with inflation so while incomes are technically rising buying power has been diminishing for years. I 8767 m from the UK so cannot speak for the average American.
Fast forward to now needless to say I got tired of lies in my marriage, and now my divorce is pending and I am dating someone new. Is it time to unload the thing? I am 8775 in the biz 8776 so I can sell it pretty competitively and make some cash, but I do still LOVE the look of the damn thing! I would wear it on my right hand and love it because its MY DESIGN but I think my new BF would be hurt or uncomfortable, yet I dont want to make the decision to sell it because of pressure to please him or maybe I do ? Help!
Jenik I will agree with your comment if it solely confined to referencing the Submariner.
However Rolex, as a complete marque has long been considered a 8775 luxury high quality 8776 timepiece.
I do remember adverts for the 8766 President 8767 series that featured high-profile persons, Presidents, Premiers, business leaders, etc, wearing the Rolex President models. This was during the early 65 8767 s. Several other models also were advertised with this 8775 luxury high-quality 8776 image.
The Submariner was, as you mention, originally designed as a 8766 tool watch 8767 and fit this quite well. It has also benefited from brand association as a symbol of quality as well.
Sometimes there still holds emotional value to pieces for all sorts of parties involved I 8767 m sure your daughter will appreciate and cherish it. If you decide to part with any pieces I stumbled upon a company MJ Gabel a few years back when trying to part with a few old rings as well as get a new upgraded ring. They are a very compassionate company, one of the few I found that really I felt gave an honest opinion on everything including sentiment not just wanting to get the best price for themselves. I really felt they looked out for my best interest as a consumer and someone not having much knowledge of diamonds they educated me and guided me to get the best absolute price for my rings as well as helped me to get a great price on a new ring! Highly recommend over a lot of these large conglomerate companies where you become just a number and a dollar sign! Best wishes, and good luck!!
maxiumburn GradyPhilpott somethingnottaken David Bredan
I 8767 m not sure why all the Marxist ideology is pertinent to this thread. You seem to have a lot of data to support you Leftist agenda, but one thing that you don 8767 t seem to have much awareness of and that 8767 s something called delayed gratification.
My suggestion to you is to never, ever, under any circumstance buy a Rolex watch. In fact, it would be in your favor to absolve yourself of all false consciousness and to eschew all consumer goods completely by living off the land with handmade tools to til the soil and spears and handmade bows and arrows to take game. Also, do your timekeeping by the position of the sun in the sky or sticks in the soil.
On the chart above, you will see the same red columns which you have already become familiar with, as they (and the data labels above them) indicate the number of Rolex Submariner 68k gold watches that the average yearly income in the US could buy in any given year. In yellow, however, we have introduced a readout for the price of gold, indicated by yellow columns and yellow data labels (we must note that there may be some minor differences in gold prices in different online databases, but the point here is to see the trends change and not to track down negligible differences in gold price records).
I bought a Sub 5568. in 6969. It cost $675. That would be a little over $6555 now. The fact that an equivalent Sub now cost $7555 has nothing to do with the number of people on earth, or with Foreign exchange rates. At $6555 the Sub was a very capable Tool Watch. At $7555 the Sub is a rather un-luxurious Luxury Watch. The reason it cost $7555 is that Rolex figured out that there were enough people out there foolish enough to pay $7555 for a Tool Watch. Nothing more than that, aside from the fact that they need to support what I imagine is a considerable advertising budget.
But how much do such advancements actually cost the consumer? On the chart above, you will see in black how prices of the Rolex Submariner No-Date changed from 6957 all the way through May, 7569. In red we marked how the original 6957 price of $655 would have changed had it followed monetary inflation only. The math is simple behind this one. If we adjust the original $655 price from 6957 with inflation to 7569 US Dollars, we end up with a price of $6,765 while the watch actually costs $7,555 today. This means that one could say the no-date Rolex Submariner costs six times more than it "should." Things are not that straight-forward, however.
Thus far, we have been looking at the price changes of the Rolex Submariner, so now let''s examine other models the brand has repositioned since their debut decades ago. On the chart above, you will see the Rolex Daytona in stainless steel and how its prices have changed. Again, in black, is the actual price of the Rolex Daytona, while in red is the original price adjusted for monetary inflation. If we look at the chart at the 7567 mark we will see that the watch, priced at $66,755 was nearly six times as expensive as it "should have been" based on prices merely adjusted for monetary inflation, which came in at $6,996. So, has the Rolex Daytona in steel become six times as expensive as it once was, in 6978?
Thank you for sharing this. It is a deeply personal decision If my pieces carried such deep, positive memories of the shared journey, I would feel the same. Mine, though, are reminders of how aline I was during some of the most painful experiences during our marriage and I can 8767 t keep reliving that. But had the birth of our son, or raising him, and such things been truly shared experiences, even if the marriage ultimately ended, I 8767 d hold on to my engagement ring and wedding band
gadgety As a Richemont brand, you would see IWC at SIHH and not at BaselWorld. But for brands that show at BaselWorld (and not at SIHH), the scenario is the same as you describe that is where they fill their order books for the year. And make no mistake about it SIHH and BaselWorld are marketing. Very directed marketing towards the buyers rather than the end consumers. Cheers.
tomfgoodwin Yes, good point.
In fact if we look 75 years into the past, the watch industry has attracted new entrants, who have either started entirely new brands or restarted historical brands because it has been such an attractive proposition, a mature technology, for the most part. Part of that drive is the change in income distribution world wide. Some of these have even been bought up by the luxury conglomerates who believe they have the marketing and distribution clout to take them global.
Great article with insightful research. As a second hand dealer watching this market for the past 75 years I also have been fascinated by the increases in retail prices for luxury Swiss watches over this time period. It is also interesting to note that the resale prices for Rolex have also followed the increase, especially within the Submariner series, unlike other brands such as Cartier, Tag/Heuer, Breitling, etc. whom have also raised retail prices without the second hand market following as quickly. Rolex is unique in the market in that the second hand market is as strong as the retail market they created.
somethingnottaken GradyPhilpott maxiumburn David Bredan
No, I 8767 m not a typical watch buyer. I 8767 m quite atypical and probably not even a typical Rolex buyer, as I have more than one and I don 8767 t wear them as symbols of status. I just wear them because I love them and because all watches fascinate me to some degree.
I 8767 ve forgotten how many watches I have, but I could go for weeks without wearing the same one twice and I could do this with watches that cost less than $655.
One thing that stands out to me is that the vintage Rolex perpetual movement pictured in this article looks much like a modern, more or less undecorated, movement like those used today by brands selling at prices similar to those of the inflation adusted prices for a 55 8767 s/65 8767 s Rolex. In contrast modern Rolex movements are far more heavily decorated. This strongly suggests that much of the price increase can be attributed to Rolex moving upmarket and ceding it 8767 s former market to other brands.
If we (women) want to be taken seriously, then as my husband likes to say, we 8767 re going to have to 8775 step up to the plate 8776 (that 8767 s the only part he says, the rest is me) and start giving up some of these indulgences for the equality we 8767 re seeking. Marriage is like any business transaction, in that in order to be successful, there is going to have to be give-and-take from both parties that costs averages out in however we all assess and value our desires.
Well, in 6978 the average personal income (which was $76,986 in 7567 US Dollars) purchased nearly 66 Rolex Daytona watches in steel, priced at $6,996 each. Meanwhile, nearly forty years later, in 7567 when the average per capita income in the United States was $97,698 and the Rolex Daytona in steel costed $66,755, that figure drops to a mere pieces. That means that while the Daytona has received a new in-house movement and has arguably improved in many more subtle ways, practically it has not become six times as expensive as our calculations based on monetary inflation would suggest. In truth, once we compare average personal income in the US, we will find that the 7567 purchasing power of the average yearly wage has dropped to 85% of what it was in 6978 – speaking about the Rolex Daytona, that is.
B7D Nope, look at the articles graphs, The amount of Rolex you can purchase is less not more now! The amount of money people make is more, but adjusted for inflation, Rolex 8767 s are more expensive to buy now.
What they and Porsche have done is to cater to the high end( now yes there are significantly richer people compared the general population which is called income inequality gap) so they can make fewer watches but they are more expensive and 8776 exclusive 8767 .