flyback,
Very well put.
ROLEX and PP are very different watches. ROLEX is like Mercedes-Benz G-class for serious offroad. PP is more like a Porsche for high performance. You can't race a G-class while you can't take Porsche offroad. And, both G-Glass and Porsche are luxury cars.
In my humble opinion, I think that ROLEX has a great market position - touch like a rock, accurate, luxury, simple (no complications). It is very difficult for ROLEX to produce complications without losing its reputation for extreme environments. So, ROLEX sticks to what it can do the best. It produces watches that are very hard to be replaced. Quartz watches may fail in very cold conditions even though they keep time very accurately. Digital watches have many functions but most silicon inside may not last more than 10 years. Mechanical watches with complications can't survive deep in water or being hit by strong force.
Based on the simple idea of "tough and accurate", ROLEX adds luxury to its watches and put itself in a very unique position in the market. If you talk to the famous strategiest Michael Porter, he would confirm how clever ROLEX laid out its business. Who else can sell ~1 million watches and make a good 40% gross margin (other high-end watches make >50% gross margin)? BTW, due to the economics of scale, other watch makers simply can't produce the same quality at ROLEX prices. The prices that you pay for other good watches include not only the "marketing expenses for brand name" but also the "tuition" of the watch makers' learning curve. Many watch makers still can't make up their loss in the last decade or two.
Back to my car analogy, do G-class owners really go offroad or Porsche owners really drive very fast? Probably not. Most G-class are driven to shopping malls. And, most porsche are used to show off. Very similar situations to ROLEX and PP. There are only a few people who know what they buy. The rest, as you said, are buying images.
| 發表人 | 內容 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
|
Etacaa
中級會員   |
|||
|
flyback
歐美特派員   |
發表於: 星期二 2004-08-03 11:48
Etacaa,
I haven't heard people mentioning Michael Porter for a long time. Have you talked to him personally? 
I used to compare watches to automobiles. However, I've come to realize it doesn't always work that way. The automobile industry is a total different animal. Also, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. So when you think of it as a G class, some people may look at it with lessor respect. I personally feel that we should stay away from that comparison. One way or the other, Rolex did a great job in its market positioning, and they can just ride on it. From a business point of view, I think they are admirable. I simply admire the founder's wisdom--from finding its own market segment to simply just picking the right name. He did pretty much everything right, everything a b-school professor can dream of. And that was around 80 years ago. As a collector, however, I'm afraid it doesn't fit into my own philosophy. It is no doubt very accurate and durable. It sure holds a great resale value. It's certainly easier to repair and to service. And it's recognizable. However, I am a very strange man and it doesn't really interest me. What can I do? 
Anyway, I'm sure I represent the minority here, but it's sure interesting to know what everyone else thinks. my 2 cents. |
||
|
Etacaa
中級會員 |
發表於: 星期二 2004-08-03 12:38
flyback,
Nah, I asked a few questions in Porter's speech, but it didn't qualify as "talk to him personally". I spent my student days in another "佛" in the west cost. 
Anyway, yeah, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. Watch collection is more about art than about engineering. Otherwise, we all should wear modern digital watches! |
||
|
flyback
歐美特派員 |
發表於: 星期二 2004-08-03 22:34
Good for you man. Undergrad or MBA? |
||
|
蟋蟀
中級會員  |
發表於: 星期三 2004-08-04 00:43
勞力士其實一點都不會“俗”，但我覺得是被我們一些台灣人戴到變“俗”的
就像在路上不時看到的，開BENZ，然後再穿一條短褲外加拖鞋一雙，滿嘴嚼檳榔的阿伯，發現他手上是戴ROLEX，果然“俗”到不行。真是正港的標準配備。 _________________ 錢不是萬能，但沒有錢卻萬萬不能 |
||
|
tedwtw
進階會員   |
|||
|
rolex1016
白金會員   |
|||
|
hsiehhsiuchi
中級會員 |
發表於: 星期四 2004-08-05 00:11
勞力士不俗?那請問哪個品牌才算俗?雅或俗本來就是主觀判斷.但是有沒有心求進步卻是很明顯可以判斷的,大家會拿勞力士跟BENZ比較,可是你有看過BENZ車數十年如一日,車款都沒改嗎,這是心態上有沒有要求自己進步,或許R的機心很棒,但設計也是商品的一環,不求進步這是事實,因為目前賣的好,就不圖改變,說聲俗難道還過分嗎?大家常說手錶是工藝結晶,要看的是製錶人所灌注的心血,準不準並不是最重要,怎麼到了這又不適用了?那我想請問各位大大,到底應該如何看待錶,教教我吧????
|
||
|
Etacaa
中級會員 |
發表於: 星期四 2004-08-05 05:44
"有沒有心求進步卻是很明顯可以判斷的" ??
ROLEX did keep improving its movements, compared to other watch makers. I guess that you were referring to the looks of ROLEX Oyster series. Yes, ROLEX didn't change them much. But, it's exactly what ROLEX fans love about. The market studies showed that most ROLEX fans would like the changes to be limited to "functional improvements", not "cosmetic". All Oyster Professional models have their heritages. For example, Explorer reached the top of many high mountains. Submariner/SeaDweller was used by many ocean adventures. GMT was used by NASA, major airlines, etc. All these heritages made ROLEX fans proud of their watches. Do you know how many ROLEX fans were criticizing a tiny change like replacing "see-through lug holes" to "non-see-through lug holes" late last year? They blamed ROLEX for making the look better in tradeoff of the stronger link of "see-through lug holes". ROLEX is aware of its own market and tries to keep its fans happy. Otherwise, with its top profit, don't you think that ROLEX can introduce a new model every week? Of course, ROLEX is trying to capture other market segments. That's why it also has brands like Cellini and Tudor. Cellini introduces many new models each year. "No change" = "俗" ?? How about Lotus Esprit, Tiffany Classic Engagement Ring, and many other "original" designs? It is very difficult to create "timeless designs". Most of them were by luck. Isn't it amazing that many people in 2004 still like the designs from 1950 while the people in 1950 didn't think those designs too weird back then? How many designs can survive more than a decade? Well, I got to admit that it is kind of "俗" if you put lots of gold, diamonds, ruby, etc on a watch. But, all high-end watches have models with lots of gold, diamonds, ruby, etc. Do you know how many diamonds that PP puts on its most expensive Twenty-4 lady watch? How about the porno watch from Blancpain? Should we say that Blancpain is for perverts? Those diamond gold ROLEX watches are far less popular in other places than in Taiwan. Under the strong "market demand" in Taiwan, ROLEX needs to produce more and more those diamond gold watches to satisfy this special segment of its market. Whose fault is it? Should ROLEX give up the profit from this segment? No. Otherwise, its executives violate their duty to their shareholders. Do you think that any other watch makers will give up the opportunity if they can make more money? Other watch makers won't think a bit if they can swap their positions with ROLEX. "準不準並不是最重要"?? Well, I can't speak for other people. But, "準不準" is the very fundamental thing to me. If a watch is not accurate enough, it is a piece of jewelry instead of a chronometer. Nothing wrong about a "jewelry watch". Many people love watches from Cartier, Gucci, Movado, etc. "手錶是工藝結晶,要看的是製錶人所灌注的心血" ?? Yes, I agree with the spirit. However, it is often not what you see from the outside. All high-end watch makers spend tone of money in marketing to build up their images - exclusive, arts, lifestyle, super talents of the watch masters, etc. It is the era of advertising. The best selling high-end watches are the simple models because of the prices. Most “心血” is on a few showcase models, not on what most people buy. "大家會拿勞力士跟BENZ比較,可是你有看過BENZ車數十年如一日,車款都沒改嗎" ?? If you compare all auto makers, Mercedes-Benz introduces new models much slower than others. When did Mercedes-Benz change its G-Class? The electronics inside a Mercedes-Benz are much less fancy than Lexus or even Nissan. Mercedes-Benz is known for its engines, transmittion, and other critical "transportaion-related" designs. When many cars adopted digital climate controls, Mercedes-Benz still used manual knobs. In fact, both ROLEX and Mercedes-Benz are known for "durability, performance (in keeping time or transportation), and luxury". Both companies face many similar characteristics, positionings, and challenges in their markets respectively. BTW, even though all of us were making fun on those "土財主" who wear shiny diamond gold watches, I do like to say something for them - at least, some of them. I had a few chances to talk to a few "土財主". I asked them about their ROLEX. Obviously, they didn't know much about ROLEX or any other watches. But, they admitted their ignorance on watches. What they wanted was a piece of jewelry that they could put on their wrists. What they wanted was also the assurance that they could get their money back in a raining day. In a way, they DID know what they were buying. So, when you see a "土財主" wearing a gold ROLEX, think that he wears a nice piece of Jewelry. It just happens that the piece of Jewelry has an accurate and durable chronometer inside. On the other hand, there are many rich people that buy PP, Lange, Blaincpain etc with the same ignorance on watches. (Remember the story of my PP friend?) They buy those high-end watches because they want to show off their wealth and "sophistication" that they don't really have. Compared with this kind of people, I would say that those "土財主" are more lovable. Don't you think so? |
||
|
as893
中級會員  |
發表於: 星期四 2004-08-05 05:45
Nice article. Rolex is a really sturdy - utility watch. |
||
第5頁(共16頁)
您 無法 在這個版面發表文章
您 無法 在這個版面回覆文章
您 無法 在這個版面編輯文章
您 無法 在這個版面刪除文章
您 無法 在這個版面進行投票
您 無法 在這個版面上傳附加圖檔
您 可以 在這個版面下載已上傳之附加圖檔
您 無法 在這個版面回覆文章
您 無法 在這個版面編輯文章
您 無法 在這個版面刪除文章
您 無法 在這個版面進行投票
您 無法 在這個版面上傳附加圖檔
您 可以 在這個版面下載已上傳之附加圖檔