Rolex

Baron - Mr Red
14613

• Show profile
• Show other posts

Whit...

I think you have reflected what i was getting at more eloquently than I managed. Let me be clear, I am in no way saying that "Rolex is the best make of watch in the world". I apologise if that has come across. In fact, I do not think there is a "best". Each maker does something special. Some makers do a lot of things special. its why we tend to own more than one watch, and often more than one brand.

On reflection, I also take up one of Nicolas's points. JLC, like many other superb makers, have also maintained a very distinct generic formula that has stood the test of time. JLC, like Rolex and many other makers can be categorised as maintaining a DNA that persists through time. That DNA can be altered over time to create improvements and enhance new technology. However, I would still argue that one of the key factors behind what draws people to Rolex (and i mean collectors) is that it has transcended time. The DNA of a Sub is instantly recognisable and perhaps more overtly than any other make. That is not saying that it is better. I am not making a value judgment in that sense. Merely an observation about what may explain Rolex's popularity and also why that might have arisen.

I am not trying here to arouse competitive spirits between owners of different makes. As i said to start with, I own several brands. Omega, JLC, PP, Breguet, Rolex etc. Each is beautiful in its own way. There is no "best". However, I am trying to get at this issue of watch DNA, why it has occured with Rolex, and why that might be a key factor behind its popularity amongst vintage collectors. It is no more than a questionable opinion.