2014 Basel - Rolex

[pegasi]

Milgauss not as popular. But blue dial with green glass is a killer combi. I'm not surprise it will sell well

Really? A killer combi? The problem is, it is not blue+green but blue+green+orange...

[Mezz72]

Overkill liao

[adamsmith]

Also don't understand Rolex decision for a 40mm SD. And looking so similar also.

Rather get a Sub which is arguably more iconic, and cheaper too. The only gd thing the 4000m depth rating gives you in real life is 'bragging' rights to other watch lovers.

[pegasi]

Well, I agree with Ryuden that had the SD4000 be 42mm, it would kill the DSSD and probably also the Subs (dpending also on the price point of course).

I definitely prefer 42mm over 40mm, but part of me actually admire Rolex's persistence in keeping the size humble and bucking the trend...

[cultus68]

Really? A killer combi? The problem is, it is not blue+green but blue+green+orange...

Killer combi..it does kill my interest

IMHO, doesn't match well

[Oceanklassik]

Also don't understand Rolex decision for a 40mm SD. And looking so similar also.

Rather get a Sub which is arguably more iconic, and cheaper too. The only gd thing the 4000m depth rating gives you in real life is 'bragging' rights to other watch lovers.

"4000m"? I think it is 1,220m (4,000ft).

Well, I agree with Ryuden that had the SD4000 be 42mm, it would kill the DSSD and probably also the Subs (dpending also on the price point of course).

I definitely prefer 42mm over 40mm, but part of me actually admire Rolex's persistence in keeping the size humble and bucking the trend...

Looking at ROLEX's 'upsized' Explorer II (now at 42mm, from 40mm), has it been selling well? Has it gotten more popular and in demand?

[pegasi]

Looking at ROLEX's 'upsized' Explorer II (now at 42mm, from 40mm), has it been selling well? Has it gotten more popular and in demand?

That's a good point. That one kind of looks un-Rolex imo. Maybe it is meant as a testing stone but used the wrong model...

[Ryuden]

In this modern world of tech and Internet where WIS congregate to discuss and buy/sell their watches, brands have the upper hand in gathering market information and sentiments of their products...and they don't have to do the leg work of asking various or specific questions, it's all been provided to them by non other than WIS ourselves! How's that for new age...


If there is one model that Rolex could "experiment", the Explorer II is the safest bet I guess....Rolex divers has always been the more "popular" sports model...and the explorer being the "least"... To begin with, the Explorer II has always been at the rear of the pack in terms of "popularity" or resale value...so "upsizing" the case is just Rolex way of testing the "acceptance" of their new 42mm case... Make it, good for them...break it, well it's just an Explorer II...

They surely won't mess with proven and tested models Iike their divers or even their Daytona and Gmt II...

Some argue that the Deepsea is Rolex mistake and messing with their Diver line...to begin with, the Deepsea is not created to replace another model nor its created with reference from any of their pass commercial divers...it's a stand alone model to showcase Rolex extreme engineering capabilities...

Even if the SdC was not brought back, in my opinion, the Deepsea is still not a replacement model for the discon SD...

And with the help of modern tech and Internet, WIS specifically "requested" a return of the SD but in 42mm new case...Rolex answer their prayers but still being "conservative" not wanting to risk something tested and proven... Thus the new 40mm SdC was born...

Afterall, if we base on history, the Sub and the SD has been coexisting with each other all along...so new SdC at 40mm sounds correct after all...

Just not the PRICE.

Cheers.

[pegasi]

Thanks for the effort to share your WIS view in such details, Ryuden

I agree with most of the things you wrote, except the part on using Explorer II for experiment being a good decision. In term of minimizing the risk, as opposed to using the more popular/iconic Sub or GMT, yes. In term of really testing consumers' acceptance of the entire range of Rolex sport models, I would say no. My argument is that the Explorer II, though classified under the sport category, is appearance wise a half-sport-half-dress watch and looks quite differently on the wrist from the more "mainstream" Sub/GMT/SD which share similar design of a diver-style bezel, and therefore is not a good representation of the range of sport models Rolex has.

Granted the DSSD is a model to showcase Rolex extreme engineering capabilities. But whether that also served as a test on the acceptance on bigger size Rolex we will never know for sure. I tend to believe Rolex expected its design/size/thickness to be better received than it is.

[Ryuden]

My argument is that the Explorer II, though classified under the sport category, is appearance wise a half-sport-half-dress watch

Plus that could be the deciding factor among others why the Explorer II...

Cant mess with the Divers and Gmts...already "upgrade" the Datejust to Datejust II with bigger case size in that department...the Explorer II is the ideal, though not a perfect, candidate...

Granted the DSSD is a model to showcase Rolex extreme engineering capabilities. But whether that also served as a test on the acceptance on bigger size Rolex we will never know for sure. I tend to believe Rolex expected its design/size/thickness to be better received than it is.

Partially I think it's to fill in the bigger size watch department to attract some big size watch lovers who yet to purchased their first Rolex cause 40mm is too small , and thus having a slice of the pie among others big size watch brands.

Another part is due to the extreme depth rating of the Dssd, the thickness of the crystal and the ring lock system, the case have to be bigger...this is without a doubt... And if all of the deepsea features , packed inside a 40mm casing (which is impossible due to the ring lock system requiring more space), I would think it will look horrendously thick...to thick to even be worn... The deepsea proportions are exceptionally made to be able to be worn not only by professional divers but civilians too...

Cheers.

[ac_wong75]

Just my humble opinion, I think Ryden is correct to point out the DSSD was a model to showcase Rolex's extreme engineering capabilities to set the bar for dive watches as marketing tool to reinforce in people's mind that Rolex still make the best water proofing technology if we all think back the Rolex was made famous by their oyster case.

The DSSD serves as a marketing tool to support sales for their current submariner line, which I think is the core product line for Rolex. Rolex must have long realised the intense competition from other major and micro brands offerings competing directly with the popular submariner in terms of sales and having a DSSD marketing tool to keep sales going may not be sufficient.

Hence in my view the SD reintroduction is Rolex attempt to churn more sales by adding an additional product line to the divers range that they have. Putting it in a 40mm case means it is not tampering with a known product plus it is a safe and conservative way to ensure some success that the product will sell without having to put in a lot of investment.

Cheers

[pegasi]

Another part is due to the extreme depth rating of the Dssd, the thickness of the crystal and the ring lock system, the case have to be bigger...this is without a doubt... And if all of the deepsea features , packed inside a 40mm casing (which is impossible due to the ring lock system requiring more space), I would think it will look horrendously thick...to thick to even be worn... The deepsea proportions are exceptionally made to be able to be worn not only by professional divers but civilians too...

Cheers.

Fully understood the technical constraints/challenge. I was not saying Rolex could have made a smaller DSSD with the same specifications. I will however add the word "some" before the word civilians in your last sentence

Cheers.

[pegasi]

Just my humble opinion, I think Ryden is correct to point out the DSSD was a model to showcase Rolex's extreme engineering capabilities to set the bar for dive watches as marketing tool to reinforce in people's mind that Rolex still make the best water proofing technology if we all think back the Rolex was made famous by their oyster case.

The DSSD serves as a marketing tool to support sales for their current submariner line, which I think is the core product line for Rolex. Rolex must have long realised the intense competition from other major and micro brands offerings competing directly with the popular submariner in terms of sales and having a DSSD marketing tool to keep sales going may not be sufficient.

Hence in my view the SD reintroduction is Rolex attempt to churn more sales by adding an additional product line to the divers range that they have. Putting it in a 40mm case means it is not tampering with a known product plus it is a safe and conservative way to ensure some success that the product will sell without having to put in a lot of investment.

Cheers

Make a lot of sense to me

[Ryuden]

the SD reintroduction is Rolex attempt to churn more sales by adding an additional product line to the divers range that they have. Putting it in a 40mm case means it is not tampering with a known product plus it is a safe and conservative way to ensure some success that the product will sell without having to put in a lot of investment.

I will however add the word "some" before the word civilians in your last sentence .

Lol...

True...agree with you both...

Well there's always the new SdC...I am smitten with it actually...need to see one in the metal to decide...

[ac_wong75]

Lol...

True...agree with you both...

Well there's always the new SdC...I am smitten with it actually...need to see one in the metal to decide...

Me too...