The thing is, in the case of Rolex, is that most people are buying Rolex for status. For that reason, Rolex charges an exorbitant markup and represents the worst value-for-money of all manufactures, in my opinion. As an example, I bought a Zenith El Primero chronograph about 12 years ago and paid about $2000 for it (brand new). At the same time, Rolex was charging around $9000 for a Daytona -- a watch that was an El Primero movement inside a Rolex case. What are you getting for that additional $7000? Status. Nobody knows Zenith (certainly back then), while everybody knows that Rolex is The Best Watch. A goddamn Jaeger-LeCoultre perpetual calendar and a Rolex Daytona are in the same price range. Because the Daytona is on par horologically with the JLC? Fuck no. It's because one is a status symbol and the other isn't. I own a non-fake Rolex too -- a Submariner, which is the Rolex everybody ought to buy. It's a durable, handsome, not-too-expensive watch. But I find it difficult to believe that there are people out there that collect Rolexes because of their exquisite workmanship. The joke is that when you open the case back of a Rolex, metal filings fall out. ETA makes movements considered comparable to Rolex. You chose Rolex because it's a status symbol. There's nothing wrong with that at all, but don't be disingenuous about it. This. The question is, how convincing is the fake? Are you likely to ever be called out on it? If so, would a comparably costed "low tier" watch like a seiko be a better option? If not, how much do you value the personal knowledge that you have a real vs. a fake? And will you ever find yourself 1000 feet underwater? There is no objectively right answer to this question (unless I am wrong in the assumption that a good knock-off would fool 99.9% of men and 100% of women), so I don't see why there is a need to insult the OP and insinuate that he is a terrible human being.