-
Money laundering is certainly a thing, it was quite a problem in auctions for a while, especially the art market, and I think I heard the Swiss authorities started clamping down on it.
But there are other things too, you could see it as essentially a capital gains free investment, which is what a lot of the current hoovering up of any and all Rolex at retail looks like. And of course there is also the ability to wear an easily liquidated high-value watch across a border rather than carry large amounts of cash. But I really don’t know what is and isn’t happening, I’m just assuming if it’s plausible then it’s probably going on.
Well the allocation/access shenanigans in Rolex’s case is down to how their ADs decide to handle it. The ADs can’t be charging more than retail price or they’d lose their status for sure. But what they get given, they have to sell. So they ask people to buy the gold stuff to get “priority” on the steel pieces they actually want.
AP own their boutiques so are in total control and that tactic is absolutely what they do. They decide who gets pieces based on whatever criteria they want - who’s the right sort of person to be seen wearing AP? That is on them as a brand far more than it is for Rolex who are a lot more distant.
Patek, I have no idea but it’s probably similar to AP. They know what is hot and deliberately stoke the market.
None of this is any different to, say, Ferrari. It’s that same old luxury game, whatever it is, if anyone can have one, it’s far less desirable. Not surprising. I just question these auction results being the brands themselves manipulating prices. While I’m sure that has happened in the past this looks more like HNWIs needing/wanting to dump cash into something for some reason or other. Maybe the charity auction was a good tax write off or something. Or just Bitcoin billionaires willy-waving.