Rolex pricing in 1969.

Discussion of Rolex Watches.
Post Reply
User avatar
JDC222
Demander of Intro Threads
Posts: 17677
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 7:30 pm
Name: Dave
Location: Canada

Rolex pricing in 1969.

Post by JDC222 » Sun Jul 13, 2014 9:59 pm

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 : )

Image

Image

Image


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.

User avatar
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.

Post by Terpits » Sun Jul 13, 2014 10:14 pm

Damn. That's awesome.
:rimshot:

User avatar
hoppyjr
HJ
Posts: 39781
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 9:05 am
Name: Hoppy

Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.

Post by hoppyjr » Sun Jul 13, 2014 10:15 pm

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.

User avatar
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.

Post by Terpits » Sun Jul 13, 2014 10:17 pm

6% of those statistics you mentioned are insane!!
:rimshot:

User avatar
foodle
Posts: 4166
Joined: Wed May 30, 2012 7:35 pm

Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.

Post by foodle » Sun Jul 13, 2014 10:17 pm

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.

User avatar
hoppyjr
HJ
Posts: 39781
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 9:05 am
Name: Hoppy

Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.

Post by hoppyjr » Sun Jul 13, 2014 10:18 pm

Terpits wrote:6% of those statistics you mentioned are insane!!
I'm 100% sure my dinner doesn't agree with me.

User avatar
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.

Post by Terpits » Sun Jul 13, 2014 10:45 pm

hoppyjr wrote:
Terpits wrote:6% of those statistics you mentioned are insane!!
I'm 100% sure my dinner doesn't agree with me.
Why? What did he say?
:rimshot:

User avatar
Sidheguitarist
Man of many calibers.
Posts: 10406
Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 4:16 pm
Name: Michael

Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.

Post by Sidheguitarist » Sun Jul 13, 2014 10:53 pm

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.
Just replicated your calculations. Looks like a 1016 explorer would be $1155. We are really paying for the 3mm larger case...

User avatar
lilhoody
Black Darin
Posts: 9018
Joined: Sat Oct 09, 2010 4:46 pm
Name: BD
Location: Phoenix

Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.

Post by lilhoody » Sun Jul 13, 2014 11:09 pm

Damn, you're old!
"Men are ruled by toys"
Napoleon Bonaparte

User avatar
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.

Post by hazmatman » Mon Jul 14, 2014 3:41 am

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.
Plus, if you were ever taken prisoner, you could hide the Rolex in your "safe". The enemy would take your Malibu.

Image
Image

User avatar
belligero
Posts: 1903
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2012 1:20 am

Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.

Post by belligero » Mon Jul 14, 2014 3:55 am

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.
:thumbsup:

User avatar
Heuerville
Posts: 4706
Joined: Sun Sep 01, 2013 11:09 am
Name: Stewart
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.

Post by Heuerville » Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:21 am

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"

User avatar
marchone
Capt. Obvious
Posts: 14806
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:30 am
Name: Wayne
Location: NYC

Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.

Post by marchone » Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:32 am

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)
Oh well. What is now? 5 to 6 months?
only accurate watches are interesting

User avatar
Heuerville
Posts: 4706
Joined: Sun Sep 01, 2013 11:09 am
Name: Stewart
Location: UK
Contact:

Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.

Post by Heuerville » Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:40 am

marchone wrote:
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)
Oh well. What is now? 5 to 6 months?
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%.
Stewart - Heuerville & Heuerville Straps
http://heuerville.wordpress.com/heuerville-straps/
"SOB get me a drink"

User avatar
JDC222
Demander of Intro Threads
Posts: 17677
Joined: Thu Feb 21, 2013 7:30 pm
Name: Dave
Location: Canada

Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.

Post by JDC222 » Mon Jul 14, 2014 4:58 am

Quite the literal bunch we have here...except Darin, he's just a
d!ck ;)
Whisky has killed more men than bullets, but most men would rather be full of whisky than bullets.
Winston Churchill.

User avatar
Slipkid
Posts: 1593
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 2011 9:17 pm
Name: AJ

Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.

Post by Slipkid » Mon Jul 14, 2014 12:19 pm

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.
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!
Cheers,
AJ
----
You do not need a parachute to skydive. You only need a parachute to skydive twice.

User avatar
four20
Posts: 3301
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 12:36 pm
Name: erik
Location: NE of disorder

Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.

Post by four20 » Mon Jul 14, 2014 12:43 pm



:grin:

User avatar
JP Chestnut
Posts: 17821
Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:40 am
Name: Jacob
Location: Ithaca, NY USA

Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.

Post by JP Chestnut » Mon Jul 14, 2014 5:58 pm

marchone wrote:
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)
Oh well. What is now? 5 to 6 months?
8.7 weeks if you make 60,000. Not too bad.

User avatar
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.

Post by Terpits » Mon Jul 14, 2014 6:09 pm

JP Chestnut wrote:
marchone wrote:
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)
Oh well. What is now? 5 to 6 months?
8.7 weeks if you make 60,000. Not too bad.
Huh?
:rimshot:

User avatar
JP Chestnut
Posts: 17821
Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:40 am
Name: Jacob
Location: Ithaca, NY USA

Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.

Post by JP Chestnut » Mon Jul 14, 2014 6:17 pm

Terpits wrote:
JP Chestnut wrote:
marchone wrote:
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)
Oh well. What is now? 5 to 6 months?
8.7 weeks if you make 60,000. Not too bad.
Huh?
If a sub costs $10,000, it's 8.7 weeks gross pay for someone who makes $60,000. :shrug:

User avatar
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.

Post by Terpits » Mon Jul 14, 2014 6:48 pm

JP Chestnut wrote:
Terpits wrote:
JP Chestnut wrote:
marchone wrote:
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)
Oh well. What is now? 5 to 6 months?
8.7 weeks if you make 60,000. Not too bad.
Huh?
If a sub costs $10,000, it's 8.7 weeks gross pay for someone who makes $60,000. :shrug:
Just wondered out loud. Your calculation made it seem so easy.
:rimshot:

User avatar
JP Chestnut
Posts: 17821
Joined: Mon May 27, 2013 10:40 am
Name: Jacob
Location: Ithaca, NY USA

Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.

Post by JP Chestnut » Mon Jul 14, 2014 7:23 pm

Terpits wrote:
JP Chestnut wrote:
Terpits wrote:
JP Chestnut wrote:
marchone wrote:
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)
Oh well. What is now? 5 to 6 months?
8.7 weeks if you make 60,000. Not too bad.
Huh?
If a sub costs $10,000, it's 8.7 weeks gross pay for someone who makes $60,000. :shrug:
Just wondered out loud. Your calculation made it seem so easy.
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.

User avatar
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.

Post by Terpits » Mon Jul 14, 2014 8:00 pm

JP Chestnut wrote:Still, less than I expected.
Yes. I am rethinking my 3-year plan. Thanks.
:rimshot:

User avatar
marchone
Capt. Obvious
Posts: 14806
Joined: Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:30 am
Name: Wayne
Location: NYC

Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.

Post by marchone » Tue Jul 15, 2014 4:22 am

Sure that works. Only if you don't have rent and other expenses to cover for 8.7 weeks.
only accurate watches are interesting

User avatar
watchdawg
Posts: 536
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 8:54 pm
Name: Vic
Location: Colo Spgs/ Abu Dhabi

Re: Rolex pricing in 1969.

Post by watchdawg » Tue Jul 15, 2014 6:18 pm

I paid $270 for my GMT in 1975 today it cost twice that much just to open it for service,

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 314 guests