Fratello Talks — Why Is Rolex Always Winning?

It's another week, and Fratello Talks is back! This episode is all about Rolex and, specifically, about the Crown's uncanny ability to always come out on top. RJ and Lex join Nacho to discuss Rolex's inability to lose, make mistakes, or create a bad watch. But wait, is that actually the case? Join us and share your thoughts in the comments below.

[nightwristwatchman]

I love the analogy that the Rolex Submariner is the Porsche 911. Die hard fans love the original classics of both but the modern versions are incremental improvements on what was needed to give a better experience. Love the podcasts on YouTube, now can choose between here and Spotify depending where I am. Keep up the awesome work 🙌🙌

[Griffin]

Regarding your brand conversation: I would say, that an equally ubiquitous. Luxury brand would be Apple because of their consistency, and wanting to perfect current technology, rather than innovate. Also, in parts of the world, Apple is treated as true luxury. That would be a reasonable comparison, I think

[LoopWerk]

they simply wear the best! lots of discussion everywhere about the specifications, etc. comparison with omega because of the co-axial movement, etc., but everyone forgets that rolex is about ease of use, they simply wear the best, are solid and sturdy, all proportions are right, texts are not too big, crowns are not too small, bracelets are excellent, etc. etc. and in addition, their catalog can simply be followed, it is actually for the most part only 1 model, the 'oyster', and it has several complications ;)

[Spook]

Its pretty simple, it’s just marketing. Rolex through their marketing & celebrities flexing their product have convinced the world if you are rich/successful you wear a Rolex. For example, for as great as Breitling or Omega are the avg person doesn’t see wearing one as an indicator of being rich & successful.

[miabeatz]

It's pretty hard to not notice Rolex prowess as a marketing powerhouse. Nevertheless, for any other watch brand to copy a similar formula would not yield similar results. Apple, and Porsche are two icons of their industry. The two brands that stay on top due to constant innovation. Meanwhile here is Rolex with slow and rather unimpressive invitation holding a top position. It's hard for other brands to compete who are constantly forced to take risks as well as innovate movements and designs. Tuff act to follow.

[VMIyanks]

Consistency and minimal risk, for sure. However, they get to use Tudor as their “Born to Dare” test bed of taking risks. Case-in-point, the Titanium Pelagos later became the Titanium Yacht-Master. In a few years, we may see a carbon-fiber Rolex now with the Tudor Red Bull out there!

[aarons.watches]

Fratello as always on point. Rolex will always be the 👑

[ItsNeverTooHotLeather]

Mercedes Benz has arguably been just as consistent (historically and currently) as Rolex as a luxury brand. If you ask most people to name a luxury car brand, they will likely say Mercedes.

[frasitopoquito]

You referred to the young German tennis player who was a Brand Ambassador for Rolex, could it have been Boris Becker?

[Kbo]

I think besides the marketing, it’s the maintenance period and COSC certification of their watches. Some brands have lower maintenance periods of 5 years and recently I read some news that the IWC Mark XX have accuracy issues. Some people care that they can bash their watches around and not have to worry about it keeping accurate time(for an automatic) and won’t have to worry about getting it serviced for a long while.

I don’t think Rolex Service Center is perfect, but Richmont and LVMH have some terrible reviews on their aftermarket service. Once you buy their watch, they treat post sales like an afterthought. I don’t know how long they can keep their aftermarket service like that if they intend to continually retain customers.

[ninjesus]

WTF, the Explorer 1 is probably one the best watch ever made, especially the 1016

[Ibowers]

I think Rolex has been a top brand for a while and achieved that status through keen marketing and consistency in quality. It seems what pushed Rolex into the stratosphere was the rise/thrust for vintage Rolex models over the past 10-15yrs. As the scarcity of vintage models increased, people who couldn't get a vintage model went for new and that upward trajectory took off.
For the past 8-ish years Rolex has been so white hot that anything they make can be, at the same time, criticized and sought after. Collectors look at anything they do through the vintage scope to delineate MK1 vs MK2 on today's models to perpetuate the same thurst. Tudor is following suit in making small tweaks and changes in the same way.
I think it's fair to say Rolex, just like all brands, make mistakes and questionable decisions with their watches, but they seemed to capitalize on the the more recent rise in vintage watches and watch collecting as whole. Now look what they are doing with Bucherer. One step ahead.

[mpw]

How about they are innovative along with being classic.

[CADAVREFILMS]

Aren't you guys ever bored???? God!

[bjoernaltmann]

It definitely is pronounced Porsch-uh. Not Porsch. Cheers

[robertrocha]

Marketing behind the brand. Brands mean something to people. There is nothing wrong with that but the same can be said for Tudor.

[phmwu]

Now go and read: " Selling the Crown " by Brendan Cunningham 🧐

[davidb]

Better format. I unsubscribed to the podcast because it was always 20 to 25 minutes of rubbish before any watch content

[anamisidro]

Rolex explorer is boring??? For me is perfect. 😉🥂

[stevenwebb]

Rolex may wait until the product is ready to announce but to be fair they don't have any made or ready to sell until 4 to 6 months later! Where are the new Daytona's and the titanium YM?