We’re regarded to get a consistent progression of messages from our perusers. The vast majority of them requesting guidance on watch related issues. In this new week by week repeating theme, ‘You Asked Us’ we’ll answer one of these messages in public.
This Week’s Question, Rolex or Tudor
This week one of the inquiries we got came from peruser T. from The Netherlands. He asked us ‘Rolex or Tudor?’, and here’s his (deciphered) question:
“For me, Fratello Watches is a helpful site, containing free data which is pleasantly introduced. As far as web experience it’s a decent website from which, with joy, I took many data. Presently here’s my question:
I actually lament that, back in 1983, I didn’t straight away purchase a Rolex Submariner. Numerous watches further now, I’m of the assessment that at a similar expense I might have purchased a Submariner also. In any case, that’s still conceivable of course.
However, the new Tudor models look generally excellent also. Unquestionably the one with a champagne dial (Tudor Black Bay S&G). Or on the other hand the Pelagos, the left-gave form (so the crown doesn’t delve into my wrist when I’m wearing it to my left side wrist).
Or should I in reality presently purchase another Rolex Submariner. Incidentally, I colossally loathe the amplifying bubble, which the Tudor doesn’t have. Another favorable position. What is the correct decision? Don’t I have the danger that the Rolex eventually, in 20 years time, has acquired an incentive than a Tudor? Are the two watches, quality astute, in reality equal?”
Let’s begin to clarify that, albeit profoundly dove into looks for quite a long time consistently, we can’t investigate the future, similar to any other individual. We neither can respond to any close to home inquiry with assurance for anyone. We can just give our bits of knowledge, frequently fairly dependent on close to home inclinations obviously, in view of our numerous years’ inside and out experience. Our answers are to the most awesome aspect our insight, nonetheless, shouldn’t be confused with ‘the truth’. Which presumably doesn’t exist anyhow… 😉
Save up and purchase the Rolex
In this case, I would exhort our peruser T. to ‘save up and purchase the Rolex’, and here’s why. On the off chance that now for a very long time, you actually know without a doubt you need that Rolex Submariner, you should proceed to get it. Indeed, even with cyclops. What’s more, if not, there’s consistently the no-date (ref. 114060) model. From a specific age, which I can envision you’re getting to now, it gets hard to peruse a date on a watch – cyclops or not – anyhow.
Not sure on the off chance that you solely need to purchase another watch, yet in any case there’s the likelihood to procure a used Sea-Dweller also. Rolex destroyed the flow Sea-Dweller with one, however previous models had no cyclops. No cyclops, however with a date. Also, taking a gander at one you understand how utilitarian the cyclops is. Amplifying 2.5x does the job.
Aren’t Tudor watches any great then?
The Tudor models you referenced are wonderful and acceptable watches obviously! Also, you asked, “Are the two watches, quality shrewd, without a doubt equal?”. That’s an extremely troublesome inquiry to reply. What is quality in this specific situation? Will the Tudor keep going as long as the Rolex? I surmise along these lines, unquestionably in the event that you need it to last. Any of these watches will last ‘forever’ whenever taken great consideration of. That implies if it will be adjusted as expected. Rolex and Tudor watches can take pretty much a similar sort of maltreatment without a doubt. At any rate, they’ll take more maltreatment than you would be ever ready to deal with when wearing any of them. Eventually, reality regularly is that quality – regarding how long a watch endures, how precise it is, or how much maltreatment it can deal with – is no genuine choice point. Essentially any decent mechanical wrist watch can satisfy the majority of our genuine interest. Our choice frequently is a passionate one.
Then your inquiry concerning the acquiring of significant worth. I’m sure – well nobody is ever secure with what occurs later on, yet – Rolex will keep better esteem. Or on the other hand even will acquire esteem. Compared to the Tudor models as well as compared to for all intents and purposes all current watch brands. Let’s take a gander at the past to comprehend why I believe this to be reality. In 1983, when you were near the very edge of purchasing a Rolex Submariner the cost for that watch would have been near € 1.000,=. Besides obviously that there was no Euro around then. So my gauge is determined from German Marks, French Francs, Dutch Guilders and such. Today another Rolex Submariner (with a cyclops) will hinder you around € 7.850,=. That’s an addition of € 6.850,= in 35 years, which is an expansion of simply more than 6% each year.
Not just costs of new Rolex watches have risen consistently. The Rolex Submariner which you were going to purchase in 1983 would absolutely get a similar sum as a spic and span one these days as well.
These Tudor models were not around 35 years ago
The fundamental trouble is that the watches you’re comparing right now were not around 35 years prior. A Rolex Submariner has been around perpetually and isn’t probably going to leave the stage any time soon also. Tudor watches are around for quite a while also obviously, yet with less consistency in their model (strategy). Furthermore, the experience we have from late history is that the current Tudor models are not doing that well in keeping their worth. New models are frequently offered available to be purchased used after just a brief timeframe. They don’t appear to have a broad lapse date, numerous youthful used watches are accessible on the recycled market at alluring prices.
I trust the above gives you adequate data and backing to settle on the correct decision. Now, we would as of now praise you with your Rolex Submariner 😉