Re: Rolex warranty myth?

Yes the DeBeers analogy is very apt. You are not the first to mention it.
Likewise a lot of the value of Rolex, Patek, etc. comes from careful
management of supply and demand. Patek is known to frequent antique auctions
in order to buy its own watches back & prevent the price from dropping if
the watch threatens to go cheap. Also the emphasis on posterity - DeBeers -
a diamond is forever, Patek - you don't own a Patek you only take care of it
for the next generation.

But the analogy is not perfect - DeBeers controls the diamond market so
much that they don't worry about branding - you don't need to buy a DeBeers
brand diamond because basically every diamond is a DeBeers diamond.
Branding is very important to watches. In this way, watches are more like
other designer items - Prada shoes, Armani suits, Vuitton luggage, etc.
where the brand name itself creates the value.

Watches make a funny kind of jewelry in that most of them are not precious
metal, so they are very expensive costume jewelry and the ones that are gold
are priced at a huge premium to precious metal value, so that the sum is
much greater than the parts in both cases. In other words $3,000 stainless
Rolex + $3,000 worth of gold = $18,000 gold rolex. Likewise, $30 quartz
movement +$60 stainless bracelet & case = $1000 Ebel or Tag watch. Jewelry
(while itself marked up from precious metal value - just try selling a gold
chain and see how much you get for it) is not sold on brand name as much
as watches are.




"Longfellow" <not@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:11on0ur97ia8j55@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> On 2005-11-27, Jack Denver <nunuvyer@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> Yet try to have that same model peddle Super-8 movie cameras and you can
>> guess the response. There is something special about a watch - perhaps
>> that
>> it is attached to your body, that gives it emotional resonance almost
>> unlike
>> any other object, except for cars (another device that unites man and
>> machine). In today's NY Times, in honor of the holiday shopping season,
>> there are several full page watch ads (one for Ebel - in case you are
>> wondering why they are so pricey, Flycaster). A full page NYTImes sunday
>> ad
>> costs upwards of $100,000 just for the placement, not to mention the
>> production costs of the ad itself. And that's just one newspaper on one
>> day.
>
> Conspicuous consumption, I think. Wearing one's wealth is a very
> ancient tradition, and the purpose is now as it has always been:
> intimidation. It's an assertion of personal value independent of
> character and those kinds of virtue. At least that is true of the
> majority of wearers, given today's interpretation of that ancient
> tradition.
>
> Those here are not of that sort, because you guys appreciate the devices
> as having intrinsic value in their own right. But all that's preaching
> to the choir, of course.
>
> The standards have been set by DeBeers, perhaps, where they've managed
> to parlay one of the commonest of elements into the status of
> pricelessness. Value is in the eye of the beholder and unrelated to any
> intrinsic property of the item. Diamonds and Rolexes: cost unrelated
> to any reasonable standard of value.
>
> So the question is, given the emotional resonance you cite, does Rolex
> qualify? If ostentatious display is the source of the resonance,
> obviously so; if real value, OTOH, arguably no.
>
> That said, jewelry needn't have any discrete function other than the
> value of its appearance: it serves as a personal accessory of
> self-presentation. So how about a wristwatch as jewelry only?
>
> Check out a recent (latest?) National Geographic. African tribe with
> vast resource of gold have done gold as personal jewelry for centuries,
> and the tribal chief is tasked with wearing the tribe's "stash". But
> the styles change with the years: now, bracelets that reproduce the
> appearance of wristwatches are amongst the collection of at least one
> tribe. Chief wears a real watch on the other wrist, if he requires the
> time available at need, that is...
>
> Might be said that those folk know the real value of the items they
> portray, at least as far as most wearers are concerned.
>
> Now, about cars... ;) Maybach?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Longfellow
>


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Ebay Diamonds
    ... DeBeers line of control. ... many diamond sellers, it doesn't make too much sense to work outside of DeBeers, ... since often they'll simply get the best prices through them... ...
    (rec.crafts.jewelry)
  • Re: Elementary WSOD
    ... would probably be worth less than cubic zirconia without DeBeers ... secretary to the diamond buyer and assistant buyers. ... which was most of it -- the cubic zirconias were ...
    (rec.arts.sf.written)
  • Re: Traditional methods of diamond identification:-
    ... everyone thought were imitation pearls at auction... ... As all the 'blood diamond' stories are busy fading away as law and order ... the mainstay of DeBeers control. ... market plans as much as might otherwise be the case. ...
    (rec.crafts.jewelry)
  • Re: Engaged
    ... a solid carat would have cost me around ... a one carat diamond can cost a wide range of amounts. ... Well since the price of diamonds is artificially held high by DeBeers, ...
    (rec.gambling.poker)