Rolex Myths, Lies, and Almost-Firsts
Rolex is undoubtedly one of the great marketing success stories of our time. Rolex has cultivated an image of desirability that has led to an almost-transcendent level of demand for their watches. As naive as it would be to think Rolex would be enjoying its current position without the benefit of well-planned marketing, it’s equally misguided to think that Rolex is “all marketing.” The marketing would be nothing without legitimately high-quality products to back it up. And after all, the world of luxury goods (and wristwatches in particular) is full of fluffy half-truths, and Rolex is guilty of a couple of those. But there were also times when Rolex crossed the line into full-blown dishonesty. Let’s take a look at some Rolex myths and sneaky advertorial deceptions over the years.
First Automatic Wristwatch (Real First: Harwood)
Rolex made the first watch with a rotor automatic movement. But, there were bumper automatics before that, so Rolex can’t stake the “first automatic” claim altogether. Some Rolex ads from 1953 mistakenly (or perhaps, conveniently) omitted the “rotor” caveat and John Harwood, the true inventor of the first automatic wristwatch, successfully sued Rolex over it. Rather than punitive damages, Rolex had to publicly apologize. Here’s what Rolex printed in the June 10, 1956 issue of the Sunday Express London:
Mr. John Harwood of Harrow, Middlesex, was the inventor of the first self-winding wristwatch and we apologize for any injury to his feelings which may have been caused by our advertisement of 4th December, 1953, when the word ‘rotor’ was omitted.
Rolex Watch Co. Ltd.
Somewhat poetically (albeit self-servingly), Rolex ultimately used their marketing magic to paint Harwood as part of the Rolex automatic story. Perrelet’s self-winding pocket watch, John Harwood’s automatic wristwatch, and the Perpetual Rotor were presented as “three great landmarks in horological history” in Rolex’s court-ordered apology-ads. Although the rotor design is objectively superior to the bumper design, Mr. Harwood certainly earned his place among the titans of watchmaking history.
First Waterproof Watch (Real First: Depollier)
According to Rolex’s own advertisements from the Oyster’s early days, Rolex made the “first waterproof watch without the use of perishable materials.” If they were the first waterproof watch altogether, why would they add the “perishable materials” part? Well, by “perishable materials,” they meant leather gaskets. Rolex uses rubber seals, but they knew very well that waterproof watches with leather gaskets already existed before the Oyster debuted in 1926. That didn’t stop Rolex from making a proud declaration in the Daily Mail on November 24th, 1927, in an ad that can be found on Rolex’s website to this day:
As of 2023, Rolex.com still states that the Oyster is “the first waterproof and dustproof wristwatch.” But ironically, even the phrase “waterproof and dustproof” is ripped off from an American waterproof watch that came earlier–the Depollier. The United States military was ordering Depollier-cased watches by the thousands in World War I, and they were extensively tested–the book The Inconvenient Truth About the World’s First Waterproof Watch by Stan Czubernat firmly puts to bed any doubt that Depollier Field & Marine waterproof watches were in production by 1918.
Depollier watches were advertised as “waterproof and dustproof,” often using imagery of the watches resting in fishbowls. They also used testimonials from notable adventurers, with mountain imagery in the background. Rolex later blatantly copied Depollier’s advertising strategy and used it as their own: watches in fishbowls, pilot testimonials, Mount Everest in the background, and the phrase “dustproof and waterproof.” Mr. Czubernat compared a 1919 Depollier ad with a 1933 Rolex ad and it’s rather comical:
Rolex really should add the phrase “without leather gaskets” to the “first waterproof and dustproof wristwatch” claim on their website. It wouldn’t kill them to show Charles Depollier the same respect they were once legally forced to show John Harwood.
And in fairness, we should also give some acknowledgement to Fortis for the Aquatic waterproof watch they invented even earlier–1915. However, as David Boettcher notes in his excellent piece on the history of the waterproof watch, “the stem sealing gasket was the Achilles heel of this design.” So, the Fortis Aquatic was waterproof–at first–but its reliability and engineering weren’t quite up to par with the later Depollier and Oyster designs.
First Watch to Everest Summit (Real First: Smiths)
Another questionable chapter of Rolex’s past is their fabricated claim (or at least implied claim) to be the first watch at the top of Everest. It is now clearly established that Sir Edmund Hillary wore a Smiths De Luxe watch when he became the first person to reach the summit of Everest. Right after he reached the summit wearing a Smiths in 1953 alongside Tenzing Norgay, Rolex did an advertising blitz congratulating the climbers–and their ads included quotes from Hillary from 1952 talking about how well his Rolex watch performed on “his climb.” That climb, of course, was an earlier climb–obviously not the climb everyone was thinking of. Perhaps Smiths didn’t react quickly or strongly enough to Rolex’s deception, because the glory-heist worked. Rolex is still largely associated with Mt. Everest to this day.
The book Selling the Crown: The Secret History of Marketing Rolex by Brendan Cunningham paints a picture of an Indian marketing intern named Ayaz Peerbhoy hustling from mountain to mountain in the early 1950’s, methodically attempting to get press/photo opportunities for Rolex watches with noteworthy climbers of any sort.
Cunningham presents a timeline that casts doubt on whether Hillary even received the Oyster Perpetual in question in time for his 1953 climb at all. That doubt is reinforced by Rolex’s own half-hearted apology that they printed shortly after their “erroneous” ads were released with the 1952 Hillary quotes. Rolex admits they weren’t even sure the watch made it to him! Thanks to Deaf Stan of the Rolex Forums for digging this up (emphasis mine):
We supplied Rolex Oyster Perpetuals for all members of the British Mount Everest 1953 Expedition but if by a fortuitous chance Sir Edmund Hillary’s watch did not reach him or if he was not wearing it in his ascent of the last few hundreds of feet, then we regret that our first advertisements in connection with Everest suggested the contrary, although we had every reason to suppose he received his watch.”
R.A. Winter, Director, Rolex Watch Co. Ltd.
BHI Horological Journal, October 1953
Did Mr. Winter really have every reason to suppose Sir Edmund wore a Rolex to the summit of Everest even though he hadn’t actually confirmed he even got the watch? People who saw Rolex’s ads in the aftermath of the Everest climb had every reason to suppose that Hillary’s quotes about the Rolex performing well on “his climb” were referring to the successful 1953 climb.
Rolex did send watches to the 1953 Expedition, so they can technically say they “supplied the Expedition.” Note how they say they supplied the watches “for” the climbers and not “to” the climbers. In any case, these watches have been proven to at least exist (unlike whatever Rolex Hillary’s 1952 quote was about), even though there’s no clear photographic evidence of them actually being worn by anyone during the Expedition.
These Rolexes have the name of the mountain, the recipient, and the year on the back. For example, George Band owned Rolexes with casebacks engraved “Kangchenjunga 1955 G.C. Band” and “Everest 1953 G.C. Band.” Alfred Gregory’s 1953 Everest caseback follows the same format. However, the back of Hillary’s supposed “Everest Rolex” is totally different: it says “To Sir E. Hillary from Rolex Bosecks Calcutta” and the engraving is cruder than the others. Also, Edmund Hillary didn’t become Sir Edmund Hillary until about a week after the 1953 Expedition. Odd.
Rolex, a company who for years had been systematically obsessed with getting on the wrist of whomever ascended Everest first, even had the gall to sorta pretend it wasn’t really a big deal who wore which watch, shortly before going out of their way to call the Smiths an “ordinary wind” watch:
In our view, it is quite unimportant as to which person was wearing which watch at the top…We congratulate Smiths on the fact that their Smiths de Luxe ordinary wind wrist watch reached the summit with Sir Edmund Hillary.”
R.A. Winter, Director, Rolex Watch Co. Ltd.
BHI Horological Journal, October 1953
Some “bitter ex” vibes going on, right? Today, Hillary’s Smiths watch resides in a museum in Britain, properly acknowledged as the first watch to reach the summit of Everest. In a twist of ironic and cruel fate, the Smiths brand has now been reduced to making Miyota-powered homages of the Rolex Explorer, the very watch that stole its valor over 70 years ago.
First Date Window (Real First: Marlys, Mimo or Vertex)
Now we’ll move on from the more egregious deceptions of Rolex’s past and look at some things that could be described simply as “savvy marketing.” Many casual watch collectors are under the impression that the Rolex Datejust, launched in 1945, was the first wristwatch with a date window. In Rolex’s own words, the Datejust was the “first self‑winding wrist chronometer to indicate the date in a window on the dial.” That’s true, but you couldn’t blame a layperson for interpreting “self-winding wrist chronometer” as “wristwatch.” But watch nerds know that means the Datejust was merely the first wristwatch with a date window and an automatic movement that was chronometer-certified.
The first wristwatches with date windows came about 15 years before the Datejust. As is often the case with wristwatch history, several inventors were developing similar concepts around the same time. The Adie-Marlys Date Watch and Mimo-Meter were both on the market by the early 1930’s, and there’s also evidence that Vertex had a patent for a date window even earlier. Helvetia even had a big-date movement on the market by 1932, but none of them were ever able to catch the marketing magic of the Rolex Datejust.
First 24-Hour Bezel (Real First: Glycine)
It’s true that Pan American Airways came to Rolex in the 1950’s with a special request: they wanted a watch that could clearly indicate a second time zone. Rolex is justifiably proud that Pan Am came to them. They just leave out the part of the story where Pan Am said, presumably, “y’know, like the Glycine Airman!” Indeed, the Rolex GMT-Master debuted in 1954, but it wasn’t the first watch to indicate a second time zone with a rotating 24-hour bezel. That honor belongs to the Glycine Airman that debuted the year before.
Admittedly, the Rolex design is superior: the Airman has no separate 24-hour hand, thus its regular hour hand is forced to be on a 24-hour scale. By adding a 24-hour hand, Rolex provided second-time-zone functionality while maintaining the legibility of a typical watch.
Mercedes Gleitze’s Rolex “Crosses” the English Channel
Rolex also loves to tell the story of the time a young athlete named Mercedes Gleitze, who had previously successfully swum across the English Channel (the first woman to do so), wore a Rolex Oyster around her neck on her next attempt. This attempt would be known as the “Vindication Swim,” because there were some doubters that didn’t believe Gleitze ever really crossed the Channel the first time (other swimmers had lied about it before). She wanted to prove the haters wrong and ensure her record stood as legitimate.
In 1927 a Rolex Oyster crossed the English Channel, worn by a young English swimmer named Mercedes Gleitze. The swim lasted over 10 hours and the watch remained in perfect working order at the end of it.
Rolex.com
The Rolex was indeed working just fine after 10 hours of swimming–quite an accomplishment at the time! However, Miss Gleitze did not completely cross the English Channel on that particular try. She was attempting the feat when it was quite cold, in conditions that most people would never dream of attempting such a swim in. So, the Vindication Swim was still a “win” for her reputation. We can hardly blame Rolex for not emphasizing the fact that Gleitze didn’t make it all the way, especially since she was on the brink of hypothermia and almost made it anyway. So we’ll give Rolex a pass on the Mercedes Gleitze story.
Rolex is far from the only watch brand to inflate the grandiosity of their history. What do you think of Rolex’s marketing past? They often walk right up to the line of truth–and sometimes step over it–but are they “habitual line-steppers,” excellent marketers, or both? We’ll leave that for you to decide.
More on Rolex:
Rolex Bezels: The Ultimate Guide
How Does The Rolex Waiting List Work in 2023?
Best Alternatives to the Rolex Daytona
Can You Get a Rolex Under 1000 Dollars?
The Rolex Supply Chain: Does Demand Really Exceed Supply?
Leave a Reply