About the smug phrases “Poor Man’s Replica Rolex”, “Rolex of the poor man” & Co.

Anyone who likes to browse English-language watch communities, magazines and blogs will inevitably stumble across phrases such as “Poor Man’s GMT Pepsi”, “Poor Man’s Replica Rolex” or “Poor Man’s Nautilus”. Many German blogs and magazines have now adopted this smug idiom or use analogous translations such as “the little man’s Rolex”.

Behind it are watches in almost all price categories that are significantly more affordable than their role models – such as the new edition of the Timex Q, which in the Pepsi version is undoubtedly very reminiscent of the extremely popular (and extremely sold out) Rolex Pepsi. Or the Maurice Lacroix Aikon, which moves in the design atmosphere of famous creations by Gérald Genta. In general, cheaper homages are often given the “Poor Man’s” stamp, i.e. watch models that essentially imitate the design of a classic.

Admittedly, the “Poor Man’s” sayings are often used with a certain tongue in cheek, as in this “Poor Man’s Richard Mille”, which depicts the watch face on an Apple Watch. And yet I have to say that I just find them totally gaga – for several reasons, but especially considering the price tag of many watches that are so labeled.

The Poor Man’s designation appears in particular in connection with the Rolex subsidiary Tudor – as with the Tudor Black Bay Pro launched in 2022, which is undoubtedly based on the design of the Replica Rolex Explorer II 1655 “Freccione” and is therefore indirectly considered by Fratellowatches, for example Poor Man’s Rolex. Of course, one can see it critically that Tudor apparently very consciously doesn’t give a damn about cutting the umbilical cord from the parent company and, then as now, loved to rummage through Rolex’s design archive.

But honestly: how absurd is it that a watch that costs almost €4,000 on a steel bracelet is condescendingly dismissed as a cheap one? On the one hand, this undermines Tudor’s excellent price-performance ratio (manufactured calibre, great workmanship, etc.).

On the other hand, this also implies that €4000 is not a lot of money. And in this regard, you obviously have to shake up some bloggers, because €4,000 roughly corresponds to the average gross monthly salary of a German. Especially since in the case of the Tudor Black Bay Pro the model, the Replica Rolex Explorer II 1655 “Freccione” from the 70s, is easily traded for ten times the price of the Tudor Black Bay Pro and is therefore absolutely unaffordable.

Now imagine that someone worked for months and years and saved their ass to finally be able to proudly afford a Tudor – only to be confronted with the fact that it supposedly did not have the “elitist” status of the more expensive role model (because that’s what expressions like “the little man’s Replica Rolex” suggest).

I’ll let “Captain Obvious” hang out again: A watch in the Tudor price range is a luxury good (and there’s no need to start a discussion about that either). Point! And as a watch lover, the common joy in watches should prevail and not dismissing certain models as inferior, right?

The “poor man’s” term is also often used in the much cheaper area, but in my opinion it is absolutely misplaced here. Let’s take the MoonSwatch as a current example, a quartz Speedmaster that arose from the collaboration between sister brands Omega and Swatch and costs €250, a fraction of the “big” Omega Speedmaster Moonwatch.

Even if the MoonSwatch is very cheap compared to the Moonwatch, €250 is a lot of money for many watch lovers. Money that many people have to use in times of over 7% inflation and the war in Ukraine, for example for the gas bill, heating oil or the sharply increased prices in the supermarket. Here too: Now imagine that someone has been saving adamantly for months and has queued in the miserably long queues in front of the Swatch boutiques in order to somehow be able to afford a MoonSwatch. Why put the “Poor Man’s” stamp on it?

Another example is the Augsburg-based watch brand Steinhart, which specializes in imitating well-known Rolex designs and packaging them in affordable Swiss Made quality from around €400. You don’t have to think that’s good, of course – criticism is always allowed. With his assortment strategy, Günter Steinhart gives many watch lovers who cannot or do not want to afford the original access to popular design classics – and at the same time offers great value for money (see the test of the Steinhart Ocean One 42 ceramic, for example).

In view of these aspects, we should, in my opinion, avoid labeling watches and their buyers with phrases such as “Poor Man’s Rolex”, “Poor Man’s Moonwatch” etc. as much as possible.

What do you think? Please leave me a comment!

If you liked this article, I would be happy if you liked it on Facebook, Instagram, YouTube, Pinterest or Twitter. Oooooor…

Sign up for the CHRONONAUTIX newsletter – of course 100% free of charge and you can unsubscribe at any time