Man Worth Rs 500 Crore Reveals Why He Wears A First-Copy Rolex: "Bought It For Rs 10,000"

Luxury goods are often seen as symbols of success, but not everyone with immense wealth believes they are worth the hefty price tag. A recent LinkedIn post about a businessman worth nearly Rs 500 crore choosing a replica Rolex instead of the real thing has sparked a wider debate on whether luxury is about craftsmanship, exclusivity or simply perception.

Delhi-based entrepreneur Rohan Dhawan shared on LinkedIn that he recently met a businessman wearing what appeared to be a two-tone Rolex Daytona, a watch that typically sells for over Rs 25 lakh. After complimenting the watch, Dhawan was surprised to learn that it was actually the first copy purchased through an Instagram page for Rs 10,000.

According to Dhawan, the businessman explained that people in his social and professional circles never question whether the watch is genuine because of his financial status. Since the replica tells time and attracts compliments just like the original, he saw little reason to spend lakhs on the authentic version.

See the post here:

The conversation left Dhawan conflicted. While he said he personally prefers owning fewer but genuine luxury items, he admitted the businessman's reasoning made him rethink how people perceive expensive products.

He also reflected on how social status often shapes public perception. Someone wearing authentic branded products may still be assumed to be using copies, while a well-off individual carrying replicas is rarely questioned.

"I sat there confused, awkward, and lost in thought because I do not agree with him but  I couldn't fully disagree either. A guy on the street wearing genuine Nikes still gets a second glance, assuming that they're probably a first copy. But a guy who's earning Rs 2-3 lakh a month, wearing fake Jordans, gets a compliment and nobody checks twice," he wrote.

The post quickly gained traction on LinkedIn, with users debating whether luxury purchases are driven by superior craftsmanship and brand heritage or whether they are ultimately about the image and status they project. Many also questioned whether buying replicas is justified if the primary purpose is to enjoy the look without paying the premium.

One user wrote, "It's all about clarity on why you want to own it. As he rightly said, for him the priority was never to actually own the original piece, but to be known to own an original piece. With his net worth and reputation as mentioned by him, nobody would question him, so his purpose served. On the other hand, for someone very passionate about watches and really wanting to own it, the same solution wouldn't work. Your friend remained honest about it when you asked. That's the best part. Had he not said the truth, this conversation wouldn't even exist, isn't it?"

Another said, "Luxury has always been status signalling, the question is who still needs the signal. The Nike guy needs the shoes to be real because that's his only proof he's doing well. The ₹500 crore man doesn't need proof, everyone already knew who he was. And most of what we pay for at those prices was never materials or craftsmanship anyway, it's branding, so if a fake gets you the same signal for less, most people take it. The exception is anyone who's actually passionate about the thing itself, a real watch collector isn't buying status, he's buying the watch because he cares about it."