View Single Post
      03-09-2014, 11:00 AM   #72
RR-NYC
Lieutenant
66
Rep
525
Posts

Drives: 2015 X5 xDrive35i
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: NYC / Miami Beach

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorFunkyPants View Post
I don't think Rolex have earned a right to charge $10,000 for a $1,000 watch they are simply charging what they can get away with - how much how Rolex watches gone up in recent years?.
Its no different than paying $2000 for a designer handbag made in some Asian sweatshop for $50. You are buying the right to ostentatiously display your wealth by owning an expensive object whose value is defined by a combination of letters engraved on it.
If you owned a glorious piece of art for years and gained massive enjoyment from it and then found out it was a fake would you like it less? ie is the pleasure you get from owning something based on its intrinsic worth or its exclusivity and its monetary worth?
I have to say I couldn't bring myself to pay $$big for a watch....I think it must be the Scottish in me.
Just so I understand this correctly...

You don't think Rolex has earned the right to charge $10,000 for a watch so you buy counterfeits to fool people into believing that you paid $10,000 for a watch.

Is that correct?

There are plenty of watches that have a Rolex look that aren't counterfeit and don't infringe trademarks. Why not by those?

As far as your point about owning and enjoying a piece of art is interesting. There is a difference between buying a piece of art for the love of art and the artist and buying art as an investment. Below a certain value, there is no such thing as real or fake. In art, real or fake comes into play when an artist name is brought into it.

Let's say you paid $1M for a Picasso and found out its fake. Regardless of whether you bought it for the love of art or as an investment, its worthless because it's not art and has no value. So yes, I would like it less. In fact I would hate it.