It is pretty simple. The financial loss is the money paid for something that was falsely sold. There is a reason why it is no longer on sale.exHowfener wrote: ↑Sat Jan 16, 2021 6:23 pmJust picking up, not too seriously, on the comment that 600m should cost more than 300m. I'm more curious as to what financial loss people think that they've incurred as a result of WR being "only" 300m.Yes, but Rolex didn’t promise 600m
Maybe someone would be willing to pay more for 600m than 300m. The monetary difference is of course subjective, but would rightly exist.
There most likely is and should be an option to return, not just to replace the dial but for a full refund, regardless of any wear or 60/60. As a result, there would no longer be any financial loss at all and no debate.
That is unless they are willing to repair the watch to fix the defect that it is not 600m rated by providing proof that it is.
A Rolex doesn't have anything at all to do with this.