Originally posted by kTK
View Post
Nav Ad Widget - Mobile
Collapse
Nav Ad Widget - Desktop
Collapse
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Jun 2012 Rolex List price (page 124/125)
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
I just bought a daytona for $12,200 before the price increase.
It's abt $14k now, 6 months waiting list. Won't see anymore price increase this yer cos
They Inc 5-10% in june2012.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by marvick View PostI intend to buy Daytona (116520)
What will be the price now?
Leave a comment:
-
The reason for diff in resale price could be ss looks better than tt and hence more popular
Btw a 10yr old 116523 asking 16k?
14k seems to be the market price for a 10yr tt daytona mint with full set
Full paper refer to the original cert, not the authentication receipt
Leave a comment:
-
Thanks all for your advice.
Did some more research on the 'net. Indeed the Daytona S/Steel models depreciates much less than the half gold versions.
Can someone enlighten what is the reasons behind? Is it as simple as there is a high premium when buying a new half gold model?
e.g. I saw a 10yo 116523 asking for $12k-$16 (w/o and w/ cert), in contrary to what my friends been telling me that Rolex will appreciate it's value over time. Ok there might be other reasons that caused the drop in value like scratches but still a surprise to me.
Is the certificate mentioned in the pre-owned ad mean a cert from Rolex after the shop / previous owner has brought the watch for authentication?
Leave a comment:
-
Sorry, should have mentioned pure gold vs pure platinum
Pure gold is 10% more ex than pure platinum
Originally posted by newbie09 View PostBro, platinum is more ex then white gold, as the content is more pure. White gold is a mixture of yellow gold plus other materials...
Leave a comment:
-
Bro, platinum is more ex then white gold, as the content is more pure. White gold is a mixture of yellow gold plus other materials...
Leave a comment:
-
Wow, a lot of questions, let me attempt to answer some of them
14060m and 116610 do not belong to the same generation
14060m should be compared with the 16610
The new 116610 intorduced in 2010 has a number of upgrades which makes the sub looks more modern now
Eg enlarged case, lugs, maxi dial, blue lume, solid clasp, etc
Some prefer the 14060 as it does not come with the cyclops, looks cleaner
Some prefer the cyclops look as it is unique to rolex
Among the 3 models, 14060, 16610, 116610, i would go for the latest model 116610 for the upgraded features
As for the face of a watch, its call the dial
Between a sub and a daytona, i would buy both because both are legendary rolex sports models
If budget is a concern, get the sub first, the sub c now retail at 11,200 and the daytona 15,750
Both with no discount and the daytona almost always with a 1-2k premium
White gold is not platinum, they are different materials
White gold is Au, platinum is Pt (referring to chemical symbols)
Au is more expensive than Pt
Originally posted by McLeod View PostSorry guys, more questions from me....
I am revising my plan and explore the option to get a s/steel sports model for myself.
I see 14060M and 116610 have the same spec except the latter has date display.
In terms of preserving value, which model (with date, without date) is better?
Honestly I prefer a daytona but it is stretching my budget a bit (166520).
BTW in one of the catalogue it shows two versions, one white and one black 'face' (sorry not sure what is the proper term .
I am referring to the background of the display area). Are they differentiated by a suffix or else how to identify them?
between daytona and and submariner s/steel models (those mentioned above), which is better choice ?
One side question. In the PDF datejust 31 catalog from Rolex site, it says "white gold" for 178279 and "platinum" for 178246.
What is the difference in the material (not the design)? I always thought white gold == platinum.
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by McLeod View PostMy bad. What I really meant was that I don't feel like spending $10k+ on a S/Steel model. Gold at least has gold price as indicator, but steel, the value is all in the workmanship and the brand, which are less tangible.
Leave a comment:
-
Sorry guys, more questions from me....
I am revising my plan and explore the option to get a s/steel sports model for myself.
I see 14060M and 116610 have the same spec except the latter has date display.
In terms of preserving value, which model (with date, without date) is better?
Honestly I prefer a daytona but it is stretching my budget a bit (166520).
BTW in one of the catalogue it shows two versions, one white and one black 'face' (sorry not sure what is the proper term .
I am referring to the background of the display area). Are they differentiated by a suffix or else how to identify them?
between daytona and and submariner s/steel models (those mentioned above), which is better choice ?
For my wife, can someone advise the prices for 178245, 178274 and 178279.
I want to get her the 178341 but some post in 2010 already indicate the price at $17k before discount.
Given the gold price I suppose this would be above $20k before discount by now so is out of my range.
Based on earlier replies, I am hoping to find something around $15k range for her.
Please advise.
One side question. In the PDF datejust 31 catalog from Rolex site, it says "white gold" for 178279 and "platinum" for 178246.
What is the difference in the material (not the design)? I always thought white gold == platinum.
BTW the PDF yacht master catalog shows steel + platinum 16622, but I cannot find this in the price list on p.124/125.
Only see model numbers like 169622. Is 169622 newer/older brother of 16622? If so, what is price of 16622?
Leave a comment:
-
Originally posted by McLeod View PostMy bad. What I really meant was that I don't feel like spending $10k+ on a S/Steel model. Gold at least has gold price as indicator, but steel, the value is all in the workmanship and the brand, which are less tangible.
Leave a comment:
Footer Ad Widget - Desktop
Collapse
Footer Ad Widget - Mobile
Collapse
Leave a comment: