Rolex Theory: Controlled Pedigree
I'll buy it when I've earned it, not when I can afford it.
They’re the most easily attainable status symbol you can show off on a daily basis. Some of them are $2,000, some are $200,000, but a Rolex is a Rolex (to most people).
An immediate shining badge of success that will probably be worth more eventually. At face value, it sounds like a win. Most of the time, it probably is.
I’m not “anti-nice things”. I’m “anti-decisions that will hurt you”.
My father has worn his Rolex virtually every day of my life. He doesn’t think of it like this, but to me, it’s not a watch. It’s an extension of his thinking. He’s never worn a Rolex and $1,000 pants. He wore a Rolex, jeans and whatever shirt worked for the day across the 20+ years I watched him build his business.
He could’ve gone without it, but he likes it. Those are the types of purchases I’m just fine with: Buying luxury because you like it, for you. Not for others.
However, there’s a degree of show-off in every luxury brand, and I believe there’s a balance that makes sense. That balance comes down to a simple equation.
He has had the same exact watch for 26 years.
He could’ve bought a more expensive one from the jump, but he didn’t.
He could’ve upgraded at any point, he didn’t.
He could sell it right now, and profit, but he won’t.
He got the full value of the purpose of the watch, let it be the status symbol most people buy it for, and cut the cord there, with no lifestyle inflation.
The watch served the purpose I believe it should: Controlled Pedigree.
I do not wear a Rolex. I could buy one, but I couldn’t buy it without “feeling it”. I couldn’t buy one and not fear smacking it against a wall by accident. I wear an Apple Watch, and not even a brand new one, because it’s the most valuable watch for my wrist in the context of my life (and my goals).
A Rolex to me is a trophy. Don’t get me wrong, it’s on my list, but it’s attached to a number and a goal. When I see that number, I’ll go buy one myself. Until that day, the status it symbolizes is entirely unearned.
Vikings operated with a semi-similar mindset. Before a battle, they would plan, strategize, and prepare for the possibility of not returning. Those that did return were met with a massive party. A “drinking feast”, or in other words: If you won the war, you got hammered when you got home.
But:
They didn’t celebrate before they won the battle. They prepared.
They made sure to celebrate after the victory. They reinforced.
They reinforced victory, or the pursuit of it. There was always a reward, a north star. For the next battle also came with the possibility of losing, and they needed something to focus on beyond fear in order to win.
To me, it’s the idea behind buying, and owning, a Rolex.
To have a truly expensive watch that you cannot afford as a status symbol makes no sense to me. If you’re signaling wealth you do not have by wearing your net worth on your wrist, or neck, or wherever, what’s going to happen when the people you want to impress invite you to share in the trappings of that status?
And past that, are those people really the ones you want around you? That’s another topic entirely.
I am not saying to buy the watch, or not buy the watch.
I am saying that if you do, make sure it’s for the right reason. Treat it as what it is supposed to be. Simple missteps can compound fast, and lead to a life you’re living for other people that you can’t even sustain.
The same goes for the inverse, and that’s a much easier life to live authentically.
If you have a $1,000,000 net worth, buying the $25,000 watch is an easy win. A drop in the bucket. It won’t impact your life, so who cares. Buy it. It shows people quickly, subtly, what you’re working with. Not necessarily dripping in designer, but the watch is undeniable. You’re at a level it may matter.
If you have a $100,000 net worth, buying a $10,000 watch is just, kind of silly. 1/10th of your possible ammunition is now on a cute bracelet. Not working for you, not fueling you forward, and not impressing anyone that matters.
If you have a negative net worth, you should stop reading about fancy things entirely for the next few years. Your best guaranteed investment is technically paying off high-interest debt. You aren’t even playing the game yet, don’t let the shiny things distract you.
I get it. I want the watch too. I want to own one for 20 years and leave it to my kids that don’t exist yet. I think that’s a beautiful thing, but it’s earned.
The richest person I know walks around with a white t-shirt and wrangler jeans. You would have no idea he owns a plane, half a block in a big city, and can outspend the CEO of most Fortune 500 companies without thinking.
But he still thinks, that’s how he got there in the first place.
In the age of consumerism and status, this scares me for a lot of people.
If you buy things you do not need you will soon need to sell the things that you do.
Act your wage. For watches, cars, clothes and everything else.
This isn’t just about shiny things, it’s about how you think about what they represent.
These mindset tweaks matter, and they compound at scale. Like it or not.
Make them work in your favor.
As I was reading this, I thought the last ten-fifteen years is the first time in history when a majority of people carry with them every day an item that generally costs $500-1,000. This would be crazy in the 90s. We would all look millionaires back then.
Somewhat (not completely) unrelated to what you're writing here, but had to share the thought.
I like this - too many people in the world who let their wealth communicate insecurity in a way their words never would. I also respect and admire your description of how your father carried himself in this way.