Parts restrictions

Nobel Prize · Jul 27, 2015

Archer
You are confusing theory with the way things actually work.

Perhaps so, but only as much as you're confusing common law with actual law. I get and disagree how things work and affect both your trade and my ability to get my current GMT serviced as I want it to. But if the conversation is about law then you have to go to that level of theory because the current laws support their practices, even the ones you quoted.

So, as someone said before me, the pledge to Congress etc ( and the one I made on the 3 letters I wrote) is for the law to be reviewed under the actual consequences it created, and amended or a new law created to protect consumers, collectors and independent watchmakers. But as it stands now they are doing what they can to run their business however they want to. Which is their right.

When you say contrary to belief....I don't know how you a certain my belief. Of course they are controlling it, but thus far it appears they're doing so legally. If you actually have records or proof of direct action taken by then against you or other watchmakers as retribution for your resale and free trade of parts then you certainly have a case on your hands. That however is an action that should be taken by watchmakers directly affected as it would most Likely be a civil action suit that could or could not have an effect on law. It is a very legitimate action to take though.

gatorcpa · Jul 27, 2015

Nobel Prize
They can absolutely not sell their parts directly if they don't want to, as for anyone Re selling any parts they may have they cannot control that. So you can resell parts used or new, but they don't have to provide such parts to you.

My point exactly. It's not about the resale of parts by a parts house or a watchmaker, it's about who Rolex would sell to in the first place. Al's point is also well taken about the way things really work with Rolex. My issue is more about the certification process and the heavy-handed way Rolex decides who's in or who's out and why.

Then again, since the 2006 case is only involving Rolex and the 1960 Decree covered 12 companies (11 of which I don't know right now), it is not clear if DOJ decided to put all the other companies on the same footing. Swatch is trying it, others are too.

Rolex in the USA has always been treated differently, as they have a rather unique corporate structure and also are the most litigious of the Swiss companies. For example, they are the only company that I know of that will not allow Rolex to be mailed into the USA. They have an army of lawyers and will legally grind most opponents into dust. Ask the AWCI. $750K isn't even tip money for Rolex.

Which is why no one, including the DOJ or Congress wants to fight them.
gatorcpa

Archer · Jul 27, 2015

Sergio - I'm sure if we were sitting having a real conversation over a beer, it would be easier to come to an understanding. Just like in the last thread, this has become a series of points and counterpoints that misses the big picture. It's a fact that Rolex has more control than you suggest they do with what you have written (since I won't again say what you believe). Rolex is not dumb enough to give a watchmaker any evidence to file a suit with - they simply close your account. Here is the actual text from a letter to someone getting their account closed (I have removed the name of the business):

"Dear Mr. XXXXXX,

After careful review of your spare-parts account, we are herewith informing you of our decision to discontinue our business relationship. Your Rolex spare parts account has been officially closed as of today's date.

For more information, you may refer to your agreement, which provides in the Policy Statement, under General Policies, 4th item, that "Both the parts account and Rolex are free, at any time and for any reason, to discontinue their business relationship, without cause and without prior notice."

In compliance with this agreement, we will not discuss the details of our decision.

Sincerely,
ROLEX WATCH SERVICE CORP.
/s/
Khaled Elrawi
Spare Parts Manager"

As you can see, no warning, and no reasons given as a matter of policy. If you don't agree to these terms, you don't get an account in the first place - they have you held hostage.

Anyway, I hope you can get your GMT fixed...

gator - the certification process is a bit of a joke. The AWCI went all in and lost the bet, which is why their membership is shrinking at an alarming rate. They have enough money in their trust to keep them going for years and years, but I don't believe they speak for even a simple majority of watchmakers in the US any longer. Rolex is backing away from the CW21 as a requirement, and despite promises made, no other brand has ever picked it up as a standard that is in any way part of getting a parts account. Even the AWCI school is having trouble getting Swatch parts for their classes and CW21 exams.

The Rolex part of it - having to buy a ton of equipment, having the correct shop layout, keeping proper records - I don't have a problem with any of that. I do have a problem with the fact that even if you meet all of their requirements, it's not a guarantee of anything, and you can be dropped without cause.

Cheers, Al

Nobel Prize · Jul 27, 2015

As well you should have issue with it. So do I, but as long as they stay on that murky line of legality there's little we can do. If the law changes they good for all!!

I somehow don't seem to be able to get my points across without somehow being perceived as a supporter of the Rolex cause. I read my posts and feel I'm clear on what in relying to say but it seems I'm not.

Anyway, border point is right or wrong you can't beat them at their own game so unless the game changes everyone is screwed.

Took the GMT toy favorite guy but the shop was closed. Maybe on vacation.....hopefully.

ulackfocus · Jul 27, 2015

This is EXACTLY why we need AMERICAN watch companies.

Well, it's similar to why we need American manufacturing in all industries - but it won't happen because Americans want to be paid a decent wage yet want cheap products that only China, Mexico and similar countries can put out because they have no standards to protect their workers.

The difference is the luxury watch industry can support decent wages and the average mechanical watch customer is ALREADY used to paying high prices. It would be a great place to start bringing back industry to the US..... but what the f🤬 do I know?

ulackfocus · Jul 27, 2015

Nobel Prize
As well you should have issue with it. So do I, but as long as they stay on that murky line of legality there's little we can do. If the law changes they good for all!!

The US courts have changed the US laws. The watch companies are Swiss and don't have to comply - only in the US, and we've seen how they thumb their noses at the US courts. This exact same cat & mouse bullshark will continue because nobody will tell the Swiss how to run their business.

gatorcpa · Jul 27, 2015

Archer
gator - the certification process is a bit of a joke.

U ulackfocus
The watch companies are Swiss and don't have to comply - only in the US, and we've seen how they thumb their noses at the US courts.

Nobel Prize
Anyway, border point is right or wrong you can't beat them at their own game so unless the game changes everyone is screwed.

The whole affair reminds me of the following movie quote from the movie "Atlantic City":

"This is a very tight town. I only do business with the people I do business with.
The people I do business with find out I do business with the people I don't do business with...I can't do business with you."

I wish I could find this in a clip, but no luck there either.
gatorcpa