How long before Rolex watches are available to buy directly online?
Pictured here is a would-be Rolex buyer just like you and me. He read today's news too.
The poor lad is all sweaty-palmed and sitting on the edge of his seat, nervously excited at the thought of getting his hands on a lovely Rollie.
Help him manage his expectations by suggesting how long we all have to wait for Nirvana.
51 comments
Sort by
Orontius Fineus
Living the quiet life far from the madding crowd.
Member since
Last active: 3 months ago
6.75” / 17.15 cm
It won’t happen unless it is forced to happen
It won’t happen unless it is forced to happen
Exactly, There's no business case for Rolex themselves to do it.
It won’t happen unless it is forced to happen
Yep. Compliance and enforcement when decisions are handed down. They're not without their challenges.
I can foresee a schedule of some sort. I don't know if it's within the remit of regulators to set such a thing (probably not) so they may ask Rolex to put one together and make it known so there's observable change.
The current AD model does cost them a lot of money, which elevates the price. But the AD model is also a key piece of creating the exclusivity mirage, which is also requires to sell these at a high price. In the end I think the current model is key to the image that allows people to justify the price - it is the experience of it all.
The current AD model does cost them a lot of money, which elevates the price. But the AD model is also a key piece of creating the exclusivity mirage, which is also requires to sell these at a high price. In the end I think the current model is key to the image that allows people to justify the price - it is the experience of it all.
I agree that on paper this model holds together. But there's also a large reserve of frustration out there with this same model, because it freezes so many people out. That's not healthy. In fairness, Rolex probably doesn't think it's optimal either.
It looks like they may be forced to buckle up and do things at a pace set by regulators. I don't rate their chances in the appeals process if they go back with as lame a defence as they did during the initial proceeding. We'll see.
Exactly, There's no business case for Rolex themselves to do it.
There might be. Their brand is so recognisable that the could probably switch to online tomorrow and not loose one sale. In doing so they would cut out all ADs. They would just alter their marketing. No brainer for me.
They could easily slide it in in certain markets of the world to test.
Genuinely couldn't care less 🤣
Genuinely couldn't care less 🤣
I don't care because I'm not in the market for another one (had two, both gone, no more thank you). At the same time I'm interested because this is the biggest watch industry news for a very, very long time.
Never going to happen. Throw in the fact no one has managed to outsmart bots and syndicates that pay nothing for people to sit on releases. Sure, they could create a 15 step process to lowers the chances, but there is no incentive to do so.
Never going to happen. Throw in the fact no one has managed to outsmart bots and syndicates that pay nothing for people to sit on releases. Sure, they could create a 15 step process to lowers the chances, but there is no incentive to do so.
Hm. So no regulatory compliance?
Hm. So no regulatory compliance?
No. One cannot force a business to sell its wares online. If an AD wants to sell Rolex, they know the rules. All Rolex has to do is eliminate the AD. If I am an AD I know the rules. Can’t buy a Ferrari, Hermes, in demand art, and other luxury products online either. One, the ruling won’t hold up, two, they’ve already taken steps needed to get rid of ADs if it is somehow (extremely unlikely) enforced.
Edit, I love France, it’s one of my favorite countries on the planet, but Rolex, Patek, Ferrari, Hermes, and others could simply close down shops if this was enforced and not lose a cent.
Rolex are like De Beers. 😉
No. One cannot force a business to sell its wares online. If an AD wants to sell Rolex, they know the rules. All Rolex has to do is eliminate the AD. If I am an AD I know the rules. Can’t buy a Ferrari, Hermes, in demand art, and other luxury products online either. One, the ruling won’t hold up, two, they’ve already taken steps needed to get rid of ADs if it is somehow (extremely unlikely) enforced.
Edit, I love France, it’s one of my favorite countries on the planet, but Rolex, Patek, Ferrari, Hermes, and others could simply close down shops if this was enforced and not lose a cent.
The ruling pointed out that online commerce has been a norm for 15 years, and that Rolex' own CPO programme undermines the claim it made that it cannot do quality control through e-commerce. I haven't read the filings but, at face value, it appeared to be a stunningly inept defence.
Rolex can of course shuffle its pack, so to speak, to continue as is. However it cannot ignore a ruling once it's upheld. It will have to demonstrate good faith response.
Without reaching the level of concession, regulatory rulings can be framed and enforced in different ways to meet individual circumstances. But I think that Rolex would be overplaying its hand by claiming an exception for itself. The "luxury" veneer is just that - a veneer - when it comes to industrial, mass-produced products. The online auction world also explodes the claim that rarified offerings cannot be obtained that way.
What I would be thinking about now if I was at Rolex or the Hans Wilsdorf Foundation is the common denominator within France's regulatory framework and its equivalents across the EU. The level of harmonisation is such that if it is upheld in one jurisdiction, it can then fall under the purview of the EC for adoption across the Union.
Suddenly we go from a gross market of 65 million to one of 450 million. More relevant than those crude numbers are the number of sovereign nations lined up all saying the same thing to one watch company. Those odds do not favour Rolex, it likely won't want this matter to get to that level, and so it has an incentive to comply now.
The ruling pointed out that online commerce has been a norm for 15 years, and that Rolex' own CPO programme undermines the claim it made that it cannot do quality control through e-commerce. I haven't read the filings but, at face value, it appeared to be a stunningly inept defence.
Rolex can of course shuffle its pack, so to speak, to continue as is. However it cannot ignore a ruling once it's upheld. It will have to demonstrate good faith response.
Without reaching the level of concession, regulatory rulings can be framed and enforced in different ways to meet individual circumstances. But I think that Rolex would be overplaying its hand by claiming an exception for itself. The "luxury" veneer is just that - a veneer - when it comes to industrial, mass-produced products. The online auction world also explodes the claim that rarified offerings cannot be obtained that way.
What I would be thinking about now if I was at Rolex or the Hans Wilsdorf Foundation is the common denominator within France's regulatory framework and its equivalents across the EU. The level of harmonisation is such that if it is upheld in one jurisdiction, it can then fall under the purview of the EC for adoption across the Union.
Suddenly we go from a gross market of 65 million to one of 450 million. More relevant than those crude numbers are the number of sovereign nations lined up all saying the same thing to one watch company. Those odds do not favour Rolex, it likely won't want this matter to get to that level, and so it has an incentive to comply now.
I appreciate the well thought out reply. I stand by that it will not hold up in a larger EU court, because there are too many luxury brands impacted, this is not just a Rolex issue. Do you think VW is not going to throw its weight against this? Porsche has been on an allocation based for years. That is one of many examples. The shops of Paris will revolt if they are forced to abide by this ruling or risk losing AD status. All those luxury brands will sooner close shops than let their products be sold online.
It will be interesting to see whether this ruling will stand. Overall it shouldn't be too hard to make the case for an AD-only sales model. Rolex watches are not only watches, they are so widely recognized that they are pretty much barter. As such, you want to perform due due diligence, and that is not as easy online. A key aspect is that Rolex is not just another company, nor are their products just another watch.
We'll see I guess. In the meantime, it's fascinating stuff.
The issue is whether those other brands own their sales channels. Patek owns their shops. Rolex sells to resellers. Car dealerships have been able to advertise online sales for many years.
Here’s the thing, Patek doesn’t own their shops. A few? Sure, but most are ADs just like Rolex. ADs, until recently were not resellers (secondhand).
Rolex also advertises online, a lot. Car dealers, advertise online, but for those with allocation models, will not sell them to you either online or in store unless selected. IE, go into any Ferrari dealership on the planet and ask for the newest one. They will not sell you a car without a significant purchase history. Go into Porsche and ask for the new ST. Not going to happen. Birkin? Ditto.
This has been the case for decades. People don’t like it, but as posed earlier, define a better model as a business owner.
Stuff gets stolen everywhere all the time, right? It's the same whether you stash your gear at home or are taking a stroll around any big city anywhere in the world.
I once moved to a country where the person I was replacing was on his way out. He popped into the office to say hi and bye. While he was in, burglars reversed a heavy-duty truck through his front gate, drove backwards 50 yards up his driveway, smashed open the reinforced front doors, and loaded his entire shipment into the truck and drove off. He had about sixty watches lol. The two security guards that were posted at the gate when this happened did a runner. At least he was safe and his wife and kids would see him again.
Contrast that with another country where I lived. There, daylight robbery and murder were trivially common. You'd get held up as you stepped out of a cab, have your stuff taken, and still be stabbed to death because life is cheap in some places. I buried a staff member who that happened to. Being at his funeral, consoling his family, was hard.
It's sad I know but it all boils down to risk readiness and risk tolerance. How much to spend to protect yourself. In my case it was causing me too much grief, so I sold all of my nice watches. It feels much better now. Plus i have tool watches that actually feel tool-y!
If I was in the market to buy another Rollie (I'm not), I don't care how it arrives so long as it's at retail, which is already a lot. If I fancied a trip into town to have a nice chat with the sales reps, I'd do that. If I thought I was being scoped and there was a chance of being done in - either at home or in town - I wouldn't bother. When I die it's not going to be over some effing watch. :)
Wow, that went a different direction. Well I going to stick to my budget end watches and never travel to those countries.
It won’t happen…on a Rolex sanctioned basis (I.e., at MSRP).
Otherwise, it already is. You can buy as many Rolexes as you want, on the secondary market. All Internet. Just gotta pay secondary market prices! 😂
https://youtu.be/hQmN5BJ_idE?si=B1lfumif0N0L04RL
Here’s the thing, Patek doesn’t own their shops. A few? Sure, but most are ADs just like Rolex. ADs, until recently were not resellers (secondhand).
Rolex also advertises online, a lot. Car dealers, advertise online, but for those with allocation models, will not sell them to you either online or in store unless selected. IE, go into any Ferrari dealership on the planet and ask for the newest one. They will not sell you a car without a significant purchase history. Go into Porsche and ask for the new ST. Not going to happen. Birkin? Ditto.
This has been the case for decades. People don’t like it, but as posed earlier, define a better model as a business owner.
Then Patek would be subject to these ruling if someone were to file a complaint.
Then Patek would be subject to these ruling if someone were to file a complaint.
It is not a matter of complaint, they are setting a precedence meaning other allocation models (in theory) would be in jeopardy. Patek, VC, AP, and a slew of other watch brands. Porsche, Ferrari, Hermes, Bugatti, and essentially every luxury brand that does not also distribute, which is why it has absolutely no chance of standing without a mass exodus from France, of luxury goods.
It is not a matter of complaint, they are setting a precedence meaning other allocation models (in theory) would be in jeopardy. Patek, VC, AP, and a slew of other watch brands. Porsche, Ferrari, Hermes, Bugatti, and essentially every luxury brand that does not also distribute, which is why it has absolutely no chance of standing without a mass exodus from France, of luxury goods.
Well, legal action requires a filing by an injured party. But I think that's exactly the implication you lay out. This has wider implications.
But the ruling is only on that specific clause in the Rolex AD agreement. And more specifically, if competitors can offer online sales why is Rolex uniquely permitted to ban it in their AD contracts? Especially when their own CPO program allows for online sales?
Rolex's legal defense was rather weak.
Many of the other brands have the same stipulations, Ie, Patek. While the case is against one, it would have broader reaching implications for the allocation model most of the brands use. Again, we’re talking a single court ruling in a country that represents a fraction of sales that’ll likely be overturned.
Not happening and hope it doesn't.
The socialists in the EU will demand it...and it will be so. They will do it through their association with Bucherer.
I think today’s decision will accelerate Rolex selling direct to customers through their own retail channels. If Rolex owns all of their own retail channels, then and only then will they be able to resist court orders requiring online sales.
Did you know about the court ruling when you posted this??
Did you know about the court ruling when you posted this??
Yes. I had just read the ruling. Rolex is arguing that the are protecting potential customers from counterfeit watches.
That’s probably true.
Rolex’s problem is the EU won’t allow retailers to selectively sell products (brands) online. It’s all or nothing…