The Rolex Submariner's Hollywood Breakthrough
Hello the Crunchers, we keep the same topic for this second article ! Hope you will love it.
The Rolex Submariner, first introduced in 1954, wasn't just a watch; it was a revolution in waterproof technology and design. Its appearance on Sean Connery's wrist in "Dr. No" (1962) was unplanned but propelled it into iconic status. The Submariner model 6538, with its distinctive dial and robust design, was personally chosen by Connery for its blend of elegance and functionality. It marked the beginning of the Submariner's long-standing relationship with the James Bond franchise, even though later films switched to digital models. The Submariner’s appearance in the Bond films not only cemented its place in cinematic history but also highlighted its durability and timeless design, influencing generations of watch enthusiasts.
Do you think that with its incredible performance but without its visibility, the Submariner would have become as iconic? ?
Golden Ticket CEO 🚀 - History and Watches lover...
In a word, no. Rolex is 99% marketing and 1% watch. Always has been, always will be.
Without visibility it would undoubtedly have been less inconic. But being one of Rolex's best-selling models, is it possible not to be iconic?
In a word, no. Rolex is 99% marketing and 1% watch. Always has been, always will be.
I do not agree ! Rolex is category king. When 99% of people on earth think about watch, they think about Rolex. And this is the result of history (all the things they did first) but also for the product. You can't be category king with a shitty product.
I do not agree ! Rolex is category king. When 99% of people on earth think about watch, they think about Rolex. And this is the result of history (all the things they did first) but also for the product. You can't be category king with a shitty product.
Actually, most people nowadays think of the Apple watch, and second to that Casio. I hadn't even heard of Rolex until I was offered a fake one in Rome 24 years ago. LOL Looks like you fell for the marketing hook, line, and sinker. IThe zeitgeist must obviously be a lot different in your country to mine.
There are much better watches available.
Without visibility it would undoubtedly have been less inconic. But being one of Rolex's best-selling models, is it possible not to be iconic?
I Agree this watch is incredible by itself
In a word, no. Rolex is 99% marketing and 1% watch. Always has been, always will be.
I don't think so. Rolex has a lot of historical and technical chops on them, they've been around for a while, and have done a lot and made great tool watches
In a word: No.
There's plenty of brands and watch models with engineering, heritage, or features that are just as good or better. But none of them enjoyed the success or renown of Rolex, which is partly due their marketing. The main reason is that as a company they remained focused on their core products and they they are well managed. Rolex would not achieve their dominance if it was managed by idiots.
Hans Wilsdorf claims a little genie whispered in his ear and said he should name his new watch brand Rolex. I think what he thought was a genie was actually a demon and he sold his soul that day. The Rolex is an amazingly built watch, but I never understood why it's on the pedestal it is.
Obviously, this is tongue-in-cheek, but hey you never know.
Another off topic fun fact. Timex Group USA, Inc. Thomas Olsen purchased the Waterbury Clock Company in New York in 1941 and renamed it Timex, a portmanteau of the names of Time magazine and Kleenex.
I thinks its part of the lore but there are so many icons that give rolex visibility as a brand i think people would still have bought many just because they are interested in a rolex and that sports watches/ divers got more popular as time went on. In short a rising tide(rolex) lifts all boats and a sports watch that offers much would still do great.
Side note im reading the original bond books. No mention in the orinal books of what rolex it is but with Ian flemming being a explorer owner I consider the 1016 the “bond watch”
Hans Wilsdorf claims a little genie whispered in his ear and said he should name his new watch brand Rolex. I think what he thought was a genie was actually a demon and he sold his soul that day. The Rolex is an amazingly built watch, but I never understood why it's on the pedestal it is.
Obviously, this is tongue-in-cheek, but hey you never know.
Another off topic fun fact. Timex Group USA, Inc. Thomas Olsen purchased the Waterbury Clock Company in New York in 1941 and renamed it Timex, a portmanteau of the names of Time magazine and Kleenex.
I have nott ear about this story before ! I love it and specially the demon part 😂
I thinks its part of the lore but there are so many icons that give rolex visibility as a brand i think people would still have bought many just because they are interested in a rolex and that sports watches/ divers got more popular as time went on. In short a rising tide(rolex) lifts all boats and a sports watch that offers much would still do great.
Side note im reading the original bond books. No mention in the orinal books of what rolex it is but with Ian flemming being a explorer owner I consider the 1016 the “bond watch”
Yes, that doesn't surprise me because the partnership between the James Bond films and Rolex wasn't contractual; it was improvised during the filming.
I have nott ear about this story before ! I love it and specially the demon part 😂
lol. I made up the part about the demon. lol
In a word: No.
There's plenty of brands and watch models with engineering, heritage, or features that are just as good or better. But none of them enjoyed the success or renown of Rolex, which is partly due their marketing. The main reason is that as a company they remained focused on their core products and they they are well managed. Rolex would not achieve their dominance if it was managed by idiots.
Quite right. Marketing is an art form and Rolex are masters of it.
To the specific question, looking at Rolex’s body of work, I think they would have succeeded regardless.
Omegas are on the wrist of Bond today, Rolex hasn't been there for decades. You can't really say the Sub is technically better than the Seamaster. (Or a Fifty Fathoms) Yet we talk about Rolex. THAT is mastery of the art. (Which I appreciate at least as much as a METAS certification)