Investments are stocks, bonds or real estate, something that doesn’t only appreciate in value but also cash flows. People use gold as sort of an insurance for bad times but I think that’s not great either, especially because there were many occasions in the past where different governments actually made owning gold illegal for private households. Rolex watches as ‚investments‘ are comparable to certain luxury sports cars, it’s not really an expense like food or clothes which will have no value after being used , watches might hold their value, they might gain some but it’s going to cost you to own one and if you use it it’s resale value will decline. Also there were thousands of different Rolex models made in the past decades and only very few have exploded in value. There’s no way for anyone to know which of todays models are going to be desirable in the future and which will be forgotten
Both are bad investments in the truest sense. Even a long term bond from the 80s would have way outperformed both combined. Let alone putting that money in the s&p
S&P was dead for an entire decade though, it's recency bias that makes it seem like s&p is great. The difference is a Rolex is far more fun to own even if you would have done much better off the Magnificent 7 alone.
@@xx-----------xx873 you're cherry picking. Which rolex model beat out the S&P since the 80s? The S&P is at all time highs paying a dividend . Is rolex? I'm not against owning rolex. I have 2. But it's not a investment
@@jchong416 No but you can wear a Rolex but you can't wear an S&P500 or global all cap fund. You would have a better life spending your money on the watch, then getting out of S&P 40 years later. That's my point, not the semantics of whether it's an investment or not. And I just sold my last Submariner, doubled the money but underperformed compared to S&P with no regrets.
@@jchong416 That wasn't why I commented. S&P has been better. I just said a Rolex is more fun and made decent money, above inflation. Have a good day mate, I need sleep.
It depends on the model of Rolex, you shuld do the same comparison but swap the nice looking but kinda boring DJ to a 1988 Daytona and do the math. Don't forget the cost of service though.
Investments are stocks, bonds or real estate, something that doesn’t only appreciate in value but also cash flows. People use gold as sort of an insurance for bad times but I think that’s not great either, especially because there were many occasions in the past where different governments actually made owning gold illegal for private households.
Rolex watches as ‚investments‘ are comparable to certain luxury sports cars, it’s not really an expense like food or clothes which will have no value after being used , watches might hold their value, they might gain some but it’s going to cost you to own one and if you use it it’s resale value will decline. Also there were thousands of different Rolex models made in the past decades and only very few have exploded in value. There’s no way for anyone to know which of todays models are going to be desirable in the future and which will be forgotten
So i have a gold day date. They both went up. 😂 just buy a gold rolex
Both are bad investments in the truest sense. Even a long term bond from the 80s would have way outperformed both combined. Let alone putting that money in the s&p
S&P was dead for an entire decade though, it's recency bias that makes it seem like s&p is great. The difference is a Rolex is far more fun to own even if you would have done much better off the Magnificent 7 alone.
@@xx-----------xx873 you're cherry picking. Which rolex model beat out the S&P since the 80s? The S&P is at all time highs paying a dividend . Is rolex? I'm not against owning rolex. I have 2. But it's not a investment
@@jchong416 No but you can wear a Rolex but you can't wear an S&P500 or global all cap fund. You would have a better life spending your money on the watch, then getting out of S&P 40 years later. That's my point, not the semantics of whether it's an investment or not. And I just sold my last Submariner, doubled the money but underperformed compared to S&P with no regrets.
@@xx-----------xx873 the whole point was to talk about what is a good investment friendo. I don't follow you logic.
@@jchong416 That wasn't why I commented. S&P has been better. I just said a Rolex is more fun and made decent money, above inflation. Have a good day mate, I need sleep.
It depends on the model of Rolex, you shuld do the same comparison but swap the nice looking but kinda boring DJ to a 1988 Daytona and do the math. Don't forget the cost of service though.
Anything that is valued solely according to supply and demand and does not produce any dividends is not an investment.
Compelling argument for Rolex. If you are going to buy a luxury watch, one that holds or increases in value makes sense to me!
Goldigging women pay attention to a mans watch and his shoes.
Proper way to compare is to figure out how much gold you could have bought for the same money. Gold wins big time!!
Not always. Several watches appreciate faster than many investment vehicles.
nice clickbait title. the answer is no
It worked...
Better yet buy gold Rolex
I like the way you think!!
Only if it's one of the desired ones but to flip quickly. The watch market is dead.