CNN recently did a simplified customer profile of what a typical customer for a Rolex is versus one who would wear a Patek Philippe. It was enough of a lightening rod to spark a mini debate in its comment section that was mildly entertaining:
“Since when Rolex is compared with Patek? You can only compare Patek with AL&S, AP, VC and JLC.
Rolex is E-class (mass produced, flashy, industrialized and easily recognizable) while Patek is Maybach (exclusive, high attention to details, great craftsmanship, not easily recognisable).”
“The Patek may be just as good as the Rolex but just the name Rolex means so much today, a name everyone heard.”
“I do agree with you, but in my opinion, the Rolex design is different. It is a bit “flashier,” but that’s not necessarily a bad thing. A lot of people like that kind of design. There are also two schools of thought on the Rolex movement vs more complicated luxury watch movements. The Rolex movement is purposely simple, not highly sophisticated like that of other manufacturers. Again, that’s not necessarily a bad thing either.”
“After owning a Rolex Sub LV and a Rolex Air-King. I wish I just went for a Patek Calatrava (yes it would have costed about 20 thousand and my cost for the 2 Rolexes was 10 thousand, however It would mean more to wear the Patek. One thing that came unexpected was the way other people and coworkers would take the Rolex. Suddenly I was considered different whereas the Patek nobody would know what in the fuck I was wearing. But I would know kind of like the thrill of being drunk on the job and only you know. But I would not know that feeling. It’s just an example. ”