Rolex pricing in 1969.
- JDC222
- Demander of Intro Threads
- Posts: 17677
- Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 7:30 pm
- Name: Dave
- Location: Canada
Rolex pricing in 1969.
I stumbled upon this 1969 (my birth year) Rolex price guide. Would $255 for a new GMT Master, or $230 for a Submariner be relative to today's prices? Perspective, a new Chev Malibu convertible was $2783 : )
Kinda cool to look back!
Kinda cool to look back!
Whisky has killed more men than bullets, but most men would rather be full of whisky than bullets.
Winston Churchill.
Winston Churchill.
- Terpits
- Creepy Tudor Guy
- Posts: 6174
- Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 9:06 am
- Name: Peter
- Location: Hill Country TX
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
Damn. That's awesome.
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
If anyone actually wanted a Malibu today, a Sub would cost between 25-35% of the car. Back then it was less than 10%.
I'd rather have the Rolex.
I'd rather have the Rolex.
- Terpits
- Creepy Tudor Guy
- Posts: 6174
- Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 9:06 am
- Name: Peter
- Location: Hill Country TX
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
6% of those statistics you mentioned are insane!!
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
Internet inflation calculator says about 5.5x between 1969 and now.
So the Sub is about $1500 in 2014 USD.
And the car is about $20,000 in 2014 USD.
So the Sub is about $1500 in 2014 USD.
And the car is about $20,000 in 2014 USD.
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
I'm 100% sure my dinner doesn't agree with me.Terpits wrote:6% of those statistics you mentioned are insane!!
- Terpits
- Creepy Tudor Guy
- Posts: 6174
- Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 9:06 am
- Name: Peter
- Location: Hill Country TX
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
Why? What did he say?hoppyjr wrote:I'm 100% sure my dinner doesn't agree with me.Terpits wrote:6% of those statistics you mentioned are insane!!
- Sidheguitarist
- Man of many calibers.
- Posts: 10406
- Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 4:16 pm
- Name: Michael
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
Just replicated your calculations. Looks like a 1016 explorer would be $1155. We are really paying for the 3mm larger case...foodle wrote:Internet inflation calculator says about 5.5x between 1969 and now.
So the Sub is about $1500 in 2014 USD.
And the car is about $20,000 in 2014 USD.
- hazmatman
- DWC Tribal Council
- Posts: 8967
- Joined: Wed Dec 02, 2009 6:21 am
- Name: Der Brummbär
- Location: Where I am
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
Plus, if you were ever taken prisoner, you could hide the Rolex in your "safe". The enemy would take your Malibu.hoppyjr wrote:If anyone actually wanted a Malibu today, a Sub would cost between 25-35% of the car. Back then it was less than 10%.
I'd rather have the Rolex.
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
CHF vs. USD
1969: 0,231891
2014: 1,121877
Switzerland's currency has increased nearly five times in value against the United States' in the past forty-five years.
1969: 0,231891
2014: 1,121877
Switzerland's currency has increased nearly five times in value against the United States' in the past forty-five years.
— —
- Heuerville
- Posts: 4706
- Joined: Sun Sep 01, 2013 11:09 am
- Name: Stewart
- Location: UK
- Contact:
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
When I was doing some research for a write up for my '78 Sub, I found an article about this..
The Rolex founder, Wildorf, wanted to produce a high quality tool watch that didn't break the bank, costing an average of 2 weeks pay. (For a Sub)
The Rolex founder, Wildorf, wanted to produce a high quality tool watch that didn't break the bank, costing an average of 2 weeks pay. (For a Sub)
Stewart - Heuerville & Heuerville Straps
http://heuerville.wordpress.com/heuerville-straps/
"SOB get me a drink"
http://heuerville.wordpress.com/heuerville-straps/
"SOB get me a drink"
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
Oh well. What is now? 5 to 6 months?Heuerville wrote:When I was doing some research for a write up for my '78 Sub, I found an article about this..
The Rolex founder, Wildorf, wanted to produce a high quality tool watch that didn't break the bank, costing an average of 2 weeks pay. (For a Sub)
only accurate watches are interesting
- Heuerville
- Posts: 4706
- Joined: Sun Sep 01, 2013 11:09 am
- Name: Stewart
- Location: UK
- Contact:
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
Well.. dunno.. but certainly more that 2 weeks pay. I guess this is because the rich and now considerably richer. When I was a kid in the 80's, being a Millionaire was a big deal.. and the term 'billion' was like a made up word. Nowadays, you'll find Billionaires all over the shop, so I guess luxury items have tracked well above any 'average pay', and kept up with the 1-2%.marchone wrote:Oh well. What is now? 5 to 6 months?Heuerville wrote:When I was doing some research for a write up for my '78 Sub, I found an article about this..
The Rolex founder, Wildorf, wanted to produce a high quality tool watch that didn't break the bank, costing an average of 2 weeks pay. (For a Sub)
Stewart - Heuerville & Heuerville Straps
http://heuerville.wordpress.com/heuerville-straps/
"SOB get me a drink"
http://heuerville.wordpress.com/heuerville-straps/
"SOB get me a drink"
- JDC222
- Demander of Intro Threads
- Posts: 17677
- Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 7:30 pm
- Name: Dave
- Location: Canada
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
Quite the literal bunch we have here...except Darin, he's just a
d!ck
d!ck
Whisky has killed more men than bullets, but most men would rather be full of whisky than bullets.
Winston Churchill.
Winston Churchill.
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
Unfortunately, I think that it is just that the USD has decreased against the world's currencies (except maybe the ruble...nah, even that.). Something about making it easier to export US goods...bah!belligero wrote:CHF vs. USD
1969: 0,231891
2014: 1,121877
Switzerland's currency has increased nearly five times in value against the United States' in the past forty-five years.
Cheers,
AJ
----
You do not need a parachute to skydive. You only need a parachute to skydive twice.
AJ
----
You do not need a parachute to skydive. You only need a parachute to skydive twice.
- JP Chestnut
- Posts: 17821
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:40 am
- Name: Jacob
- Location: Ithaca, NY USA
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
8.7 weeks if you make 60,000. Not too bad.marchone wrote:Oh well. What is now? 5 to 6 months?Heuerville wrote:When I was doing some research for a write up for my '78 Sub, I found an article about this..
The Rolex founder, Wildorf, wanted to produce a high quality tool watch that didn't break the bank, costing an average of 2 weeks pay. (For a Sub)
- Terpits
- Creepy Tudor Guy
- Posts: 6174
- Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 9:06 am
- Name: Peter
- Location: Hill Country TX
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
Huh?JP Chestnut wrote:8.7 weeks if you make 60,000. Not too bad.marchone wrote:Oh well. What is now? 5 to 6 months?Heuerville wrote:When I was doing some research for a write up for my '78 Sub, I found an article about this..
The Rolex founder, Wildorf, wanted to produce a high quality tool watch that didn't break the bank, costing an average of 2 weeks pay. (For a Sub)
- JP Chestnut
- Posts: 17821
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:40 am
- Name: Jacob
- Location: Ithaca, NY USA
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
If a sub costs $10,000, it's 8.7 weeks gross pay for someone who makes $60,000.Terpits wrote:Huh?JP Chestnut wrote:8.7 weeks if you make 60,000. Not too bad.marchone wrote:Oh well. What is now? 5 to 6 months?Heuerville wrote:When I was doing some research for a write up for my '78 Sub, I found an article about this..
The Rolex founder, Wildorf, wanted to produce a high quality tool watch that didn't break the bank, costing an average of 2 weeks pay. (For a Sub)
- Terpits
- Creepy Tudor Guy
- Posts: 6174
- Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 9:06 am
- Name: Peter
- Location: Hill Country TX
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
Just wondered out loud. Your calculation made it seem so easy.JP Chestnut wrote:If a sub costs $10,000, it's 8.7 weeks gross pay for someone who makes $60,000.Terpits wrote:Huh?JP Chestnut wrote:8.7 weeks if you make 60,000. Not too bad.marchone wrote:Oh well. What is now? 5 to 6 months?Heuerville wrote:When I was doing some research for a write up for my '78 Sub, I found an article about this..
The Rolex founder, Wildorf, wanted to produce a high quality tool watch that didn't break the bank, costing an average of 2 weeks pay. (For a Sub)
- JP Chestnut
- Posts: 17821
- Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:40 am
- Name: Jacob
- Location: Ithaca, NY USA
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
Gotcha. It was surprisingly reasonable. Of course, $60,000 net (which is what really matters) would be a good deal more before taxes, SS, medical. Still, less than I expected.Terpits wrote:Just wondered out loud. Your calculation made it seem so easy.JP Chestnut wrote:If a sub costs $10,000, it's 8.7 weeks gross pay for someone who makes $60,000.Terpits wrote:Huh?JP Chestnut wrote:8.7 weeks if you make 60,000. Not too bad.marchone wrote:Oh well. What is now? 5 to 6 months?Heuerville wrote:When I was doing some research for a write up for my '78 Sub, I found an article about this..
The Rolex founder, Wildorf, wanted to produce a high quality tool watch that didn't break the bank, costing an average of 2 weeks pay. (For a Sub)
- Terpits
- Creepy Tudor Guy
- Posts: 6174
- Joined: Sat Apr 26, 2014 9:06 am
- Name: Peter
- Location: Hill Country TX
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
Yes. I am rethinking my 3-year plan. Thanks.JP Chestnut wrote:Still, less than I expected.
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
Sure that works. Only if you don't have rent and other expenses to cover for 8.7 weeks.
only accurate watches are interesting
Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.
I paid $270 for my GMT in 1975 today it cost twice that much just to open it for service,
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 232 guests