Let's Settle this Debate: Is Tudor the Poor Man's Rolex?
Tudor was conceived in 1946 as “a watch that our agents could sell at a more modest price than our Rolex watches, and yet one that could attain the standards of dependability for which Rolex is famous” said by Hans Wildorf. With those words, he started a debate that still occupied watch enthusiasts and collectors 77 years later. Is Tudor the ‘poor man’s Rolex’?
I see this argument come up time and again. We've been arguing about this for so long. Well, today, I'm going to settle this debate once and for all. What? Who do you think you are? What gives you the final say? Ok, so it's not me saying this. I'm looking at market data to prove my point.
Yes, as an economist, I have some particular things to say about consumer behavior and market position. Can we really solve this debate? Well, let's look at the data.
You can see that the overall market, Rolex and yes, Tudor benefited from the pandemic lock down. But hey, look at the spike for Rolex! No wonder they have been so hard to get! But poor Tudor has seen nothing like it. It rose a bit, but never got that pandemic demand spike, and now, it's sitting down on the market by about 10%. Unlike Rolex, the loss in value in the secondary market is pretty high.
Wow, it makes you wonder why people even buy Tudor at retail. Wait a few months, and get an almost new watch at 40% discount! It's sad but true.
And that's the problem. Economist will talk about the Substitution Effect. If two products are true substitutes, people will buy one or the other depending on price. It's similar to Coke and Pepsi.
But looking at those drops in value. And Tudor was never blessed with that massive demand spike. So what does this mean? The market consensus does NOT regard Tudor as a true substitute good. The majority of collectors do not hold the brand in the same esteem as Rolex. Not even as a poor man's alternative!
The truth is that Tudor would have done much better even as a poor man's alternative to Rolex. It would have experienced higher value retention due to spill over demand. What do you guys think? Does this make sense?
So what is the 'true alternative' to Rolex? Let's look at the data again. It tells a lot.
Tudor has actually done worse than comparable Omega and Cartier. Especially Omega. It looks like there was some spill over from the Rolex hype. Most likely both. Omega and Cartier probably benefited, depending on the type of watch collectors were seeking.
Still, what the data really shows is that there is no real alternative for Rolex. That's especially true for the non-collector public. Amongst ourselves, we could be perfectly happy with an Omega Seamaster and never look at Rolex. But the Rolex brand is powerful among the public at large. I'm guessing it more about flex culture. What do you guys think? Have you turned away from Rolex to Omega specifically? Maybe got a Cartier for a dressier occasion?
Now, the real question is why? Why is Tudor NOT considered an adequate replacement for Rolex. That's further analysis that I go into in the video. This post is already long, so I'll leave it there.
What do you think? Given this market position, where does Tudor go from here? I talk about this in the video, but would love to hear your thoughts.
@PoorMansRolex I thought you would enjoy this one :-).
Son of a watchmaker. Artsy farsy dude.
Sorry, just read the title and came to say it’s not the poor man’s Rolex. Tell me a poor man who can spend $3k on a watch? Brands evolve and change from how they came into the industry. Just like Rolex has evolved from being a tool watch, to more jewelry, Tudor has evolved too.
Sorry, just read the title and came to say it’s not the poor man’s Rolex. Tell me a poor man who can spend $3k on a watch? Brands evolve and change from how they came into the industry. Just like Rolex has evolved from being a tool watch, to more jewelry, Tudor has evolved too.
That's a good point; but the argument is more whether Rolex and Tudor are interchangable as watches and brands. If you are fortunate to be in that bracket, does one brand matter more than the other?
I'm looking at market data to answer this question.
Its hard to make comparisons as Tudor doesn't make too many solid gold jewl incrusted pieces. And I'm not sure if the first graph is units sold or $ sales. If comparing base model SS Rolex you could possibly argue the only difference is supply and demand and that isn't always market driven. Just ask De Beers.
That's a good point; but the argument is more whether Rolex and Tudor are interchangable as watches and brands. If you are fortunate to be in that bracket, does one brand matter more than the other?
I'm looking at market data to answer this question.
The brand matters more to certain people, than others. When I got my first luxury watch, it mattered. Mainly because I went with what I knew, which was a Rolex. Even prior to COVID, Rolex was ingrained into the culture, via their advertisements, songs, music videos, sports, etc. Not the case with Tudor.
I’m currently commuting and will get back to this later this evening.
I rather have a Tudor diver than Rolex submariner....just me
Its hard to make comparisons as Tudor doesn't make too many solid gold jewl incrusted pieces. And I'm not sure if the first graph is units sold or $ sales. If comparing base model SS Rolex you could possibly argue the only difference is supply and demand and that isn't always market driven. Just ask De Beers.
The chart shows $$$ volume. And that's a good point about precious metals. My assumption is that total sales will net out those effects. We do know from market data that precious metal demand is much lower than SS.
As for De Beers, they are a pseudo monopoly. The luxury watch market does not function in the same way. But the funny thing, is that people are in fact treating Rolex as a pseudo monopoly. They have a monopoly on Rolex; and it seems people are saying there is no real substitute. It's incredible that brand strength is creating this situation.
I rather have a Tudor diver than Rolex submariner....just me
That's perfectly valid choice of course. I personally think Tudor makes great watches and offer incredible value. I was speaking more to the general demand curve from the public at large. Us watch collectors are a bit more savvy about these things.
The brand matters more to certain people, than others. When I got my first luxury watch, it mattered. Mainly because I went with what I knew, which was a Rolex. Even prior to COVID, Rolex was ingrained into the culture, via their advertisements, songs, music videos, sports, etc. Not the case with Tudor.
I’m currently commuting and will get back to this later this evening.
Rolex's brand positioning in the watch market is unlike anything I've seen in looking at the data. It's truly incredible what they have created. In my video, I talk about the differences in their brands and why it turned out that way. It's fascinating to trace the origins of the marketing.
Even though I’m not interested in the money side of watch collection this was a worthy read I think with what drove the Rolex market (flex and quick buck among others) the perception of Tudor as a poor man’s Rolex would hurt it especially in the flex culture that is huge in the culture
When having a Rolex became for so many a signal of look at me and how well I’m doing anything else is judged as a failure. The further Tudor can be from being the poor man’s Rolex the better for them. They can be judged on their own merits and enjoyed by those who own them
Great article thanks
Even though I’m not interested in the money side of watch collection this was a worthy read I think with what drove the Rolex market (flex and quick buck among others) the perception of Tudor as a poor man’s Rolex would hurt it especially in the flex culture that is huge in the culture
When having a Rolex became for so many a signal of look at me and how well I’m doing anything else is judged as a failure. The further Tudor can be from being the poor man’s Rolex the better for them. They can be judged on their own merits and enjoyed by those who own them
Great article thanks
Thanks! That's the irony. Telling people Tudor is the 'affordable alternative' to Rolex is exactly why people don't consider it the alternative to Rolex. As I note in the video, it's the origin story.
The chart shows $$$ volume. And that's a good point about precious metals. My assumption is that total sales will net out those effects. We do know from market data that precious metal demand is much lower than SS.
As for De Beers, they are a pseudo monopoly. The luxury watch market does not function in the same way. But the funny thing, is that people are in fact treating Rolex as a pseudo monopoly. They have a monopoly on Rolex; and it seems people are saying there is no real substitute. It's incredible that brand strength is creating this situation.
De Beers control the whole market but Rolex control Tudor as well as Rolex. Not sure of the numbers but if they're making 4 million Tudor's and 1 million Rolex's it will effect the resale even with identical demand as the other half of the equation isn't equal.
De Beers control the whole market but Rolex control Tudor as well as Rolex. Not sure of the numbers but if they're making 4 million Tudor's and 1 million Rolex's it will effect the resale even with identical demand as the other half of the equation isn't equal.
The chart shows % change over time in secondary market value. So it does speak to the relative strength of Rolex vs Tudor. It's a second derivative. So the total volumes do matter, but I'm using % delta as a proxy.
I do agree that more data would be beneficial for analysis. But I would need to see internal sales numbers. And we'll never get those.
Thanks for this. One of the questions that I have been thinking about is a little different. Namely, to what degree is Tudor a brand at all vs a fancy allocation ticket for eventually getting the Rolex you actually wanted from the AD? Afterall, my Tudor AD and my Rolex AD are the same guy and I am sure that is often the case. With its retro styling and self conscious call backs to Rolex history Tudor seems to position itself as an "enthusiasts brand." But for those same enthusiasts it is beyond useless to buy a grey market Tudor as it was never the watch you really wanted and it does nothing to help move you up the line with the AD. So do you see anything the trend data to suggest something like this is going on? Does this explain their terrible secondary market values?
The only Rolex I want is a no date Sub'. The rest do nothing for me. I bought my BB58 full set pre-owned in near mint condition less than 12 months old for 2/3 RRP. I wouldn't buy new unless I win the lottery. Not a poor man's anything, Tudor is just a damn good value watch.
Pagani is the true poor mans Rolex. Tudor is the ugly stepchild.
Haha good for them. Every teenager is embarrassed by their dad. I know I was at the time.
Only now do I appreciate what he did.
Lol my girls are grown living their own lives but I think they still sort of dread when the old guy acts up. They have become watch enthusiasts as long as they are not paying. They give me suggestions knowing that one day my stuff is their stuff.
Lol my girls are grown living their own lives but I think they still sort of dread when the old guy acts up. They have become watch enthusiasts as long as they are not paying. They give me suggestions knowing that one day my stuff is their stuff.
Don't tell them about Richard Mille lmao!!
Don't tell them about Richard Mille lmao!!
WHO?? Lol
I would trust Watchbox. And I would agree, the Tudor bracelet is one of the best in the business.
Btw, I did a video on how to place a special order with Rolex. Lots of people don't know it. Good luck!
Thanks 🙏
Longines is absolutely killing it lately. They actually sell more units than Rolex.
And wtf, cut off access to Rolex?! I've never heard of such. Such arrogance! No wonder people are walking away!
It’s not like they just came out and said “no Rolex for you”. LOL. But I know they are getting regular deliveries. They just aren’t offering me anything I’d like to buy in the past few years.
They offered a 36mm Explorer last year knowing I already have one. It’s feels like a trap. Buy it and sell one of them but then get cut off for being a flipper or not buy it and be viewed as an unreliable buyer. I didn’t buy it because I prefer the older one.
They also offered a pink OP34 but my wife doesn’t want that one. I’m not going to buy their scraps because they can’t find anyone else to take them.
They have known that I want a no date Sub for years but they haven’t offered that. I’d even consider a 40mm Explorer, Milgauss, Air King, Sub or GMTII but I’m not holding my breath on that. One day, my interests and theirs may coincide again. I’m not too worried if or when that happens. In the meantime, it still feels like they’ve cut me off from any meaningful access.
It’s not like they just came out and said “no Rolex for you”. LOL. But I know they are getting regular deliveries. They just aren’t offering me anything I’d like to buy in the past few years.
They offered a 36mm Explorer last year knowing I already have one. It’s feels like a trap. Buy it and sell one of them but then get cut off for being a flipper or not buy it and be viewed as an unreliable buyer. I didn’t buy it because I prefer the older one.
They also offered a pink OP34 but my wife doesn’t want that one. I’m not going to buy their scraps because they can’t find anyone else to take them.
They have known that I want a no date Sub for years but they haven’t offered that. I’d even consider a 40mm Explorer, Milgauss, Air King, Sub or GMTII but I’m not holding my breath on that. One day, my interests and theirs may coincide again. I’m not too worried if or when that happens. In the meantime, it still feels like they’ve cut me off from any meaningful access.
What you describe is horrid. I asked for a no date sub and my ad said 8 months. I'm sure he's working on it.
Hopefully with the downtown things will ease up for you.
Good video
As an aside an AP asked what my wish list Rolex was. “ Daytona black dial” I replied. The response “thats a10yr wait, can I show you a Tudor? “.
I then proceeded to try on a BB Chrono reverse panda & fell in love with it.
Is it a poor man’s Rolex? No way. Absolutely one of my favourite watches.
Good video
As an aside an AP asked what my wish list Rolex was. “ Daytona black dial” I replied. The response “thats a10yr wait, can I show you a Tudor? “.
I then proceeded to try on a BB Chrono reverse panda & fell in love with it.
Is it a poor man’s Rolex? No way. Absolutely one of my favourite watches.
I received the same 10 year guess when I inquired about an Omega Silver Snoopy. A younger enthusiast friend said he was told 15-20 when he inquired, wait lists are mostly bogus or convenient statements to end further discussions about watches that are destined for other customers.
If you own a nice rolex and meet someone with a tudor, in that very second they are poorer then you.
If you own a nice rolex and meet someone with a tudor, in that very second they are poorer then you.
That's really it isn't it, even tho it should not be that way. There's this unspoken word that the Tudor is somehow less. Even tho the technical specs might be nearly identical. Sad.
That's really it isn't it, even tho it should not be that way. There's this unspoken word that the Tudor is somehow less. Even tho the technical specs might be nearly identical. Sad.
You gotta pay extra to get the key in the locker room.
Is it really a debate?
Is it really a debate?
Not for me. I consider this debate settled. The market data is pretty definitive.
Or is Rolex the insecure man's Tudor? ;)
@KoreanAllfather Saw your post and I did a deep dive on this using market data. I thought it might interest you to see this.