What is the true nature of the "watch sharing business" "Tokematch"?

I've been covering watches for about 30 years, since the early 1990s. During that time, one thing in the watch business that made me think, "This is completely out of line!" was the sale of counterfeit goods. Another was the watch sharing business. Then, on January 31, 2024, a service called "Tokematch," which advertised itself as such, was suddenly dissolved. Since February, it has been featured on television news. In this article, I'd like to explore the true nature of this business.

Targeting people who only consider watches as assets

　Let's start with the facts. On February 1, 2024, the Sports Nippon newspaper's news website, Sponichi Annex, posted an article titled "Watch sharing service 'Tokematch' suddenly dissolves as a corporation. Featured in a terrestrial TV commercial, leaving users confused: 'Give me back my loaned watch.'" This news became a hot topic on the social networking site "X (formerly Twitter)" and even on terrestrial TV, and it appears that a "victims' group" has even been organized on social media.

Tokematch, which billed itself as a "watch sharing business," was launched in January 2021 by a company called Neo Reverse in Chuo Ward, Osaka. The business accepts luxury watch owners' watches, uses them for rental purposes, and pays the owners a usage fee. When it first started, a magazine editor asked me, "What do you think? Can we write an article about it?" However, I immediately declined. This was because lending a precious watch to someone else would damage it, and the watch rental fees set by the company and the compensation paid to owners were both incredibly high.

　At the time, the "Rolex bubble" was in full swing, and TV variety shows were fueling the "Rolex boom." The idea that "buying a Rolex will make you money" was spreading throughout Japan. This business was likely conceived under such circumstances.

　The company explained that it was a combination of two popular services at the time: a subscription service that allows you to use luxury watches without having to buy them, and a sharing service that allows a large number of people to share a single watch.

　However, I felt that it was wrong to call this sharing, and that it was nothing more than a "luxury watch sub-rental service" that was being misled by the buzzword "sharing."

　To begin with, anyone who loves watches would not be comfortable letting a complete stranger use their watch. Furthermore, any watch will develop small scratches as it is used. The borrower may even drop it and break it. And while current models are different, used watches (especially discontinued models) can never be restored to their original condition after repair.

　If the rented watch gets scratched or breaks, Tokematch will provide maintenance such as polishing. However, for watch lovers, the idea of ​​"having your watch polished without your permission" is a horrifying idea. In other words, this is a business platform designed for people who view watches as "assets."

The rental fees and rewards are too high!

　When this service first began, there was another reason why I thought it was impossible and strange, beyond the aforementioned issue of maintenance for scratches and malfunctions during rental. That was the incredibly high cost of the watch rental fees, the compensation paid to owners who deposit their watches, and the watch deposit usage fees.

　The rental fees for Tokematch that have been left online are as follows:

Appraised value less than 30 yen → 9800 yen per month
Appraised value of 1.5 million yen or less → 39,800 yen per month
Appraised value of 1.5 million yen or less → 39,800 yen per month
Appraised value of 1.5 million yen or less → 39,800 yen per month
If the assessed value is higher than this, please inquire.

　Meanwhile, the watch deposit usage fees are as follows:

Appraised value less than 60 yen → 9900 yen per month
Appraised value of 1.5 million yen or less → 39,800 yen per month
Appraised value of 1.5 million yen or less → 39,800 yen per month
Appraised value over 150 million yen → Please inquire

　In the first place, if you are going to pay such a rental fee, you could buy a decent watch on a long-term loan from a watch shop. Even if you buy it at a premium price above the list price from a parallel import watch shop, it will eventually become yours, so it is ridiculous to go to the trouble of paying such a high monthly rental fee.

　Furthermore, it is a mystery why rental fees and deposit fees are calculated based on "market valuation." If they are based on fluctuating market valuation, then rental fees and deposit fees should also be adjusted in tandem with the valuation of the used watch market. Furthermore, who calculates this "market valuation"? There seems to have been no explanation for this point at all.

A business model that doesn't seem viable

　No matter how you look at it, this business model is unrealistic. I don't think it would work. Even back then, I couldn't imagine that anyone would go to the trouble of paying such a high rental fee to rent a watch.

　The operating company was suddenly dissolved. While there are online posts from owners who have donated their watches, there are no reports of users who have borrowed watches from Tokematch. There are reports that the watches rented out by owners are being resold. The company even ran a TV commercial at the end of the year, just before it was dissolved, in an attempt to increase the number of watches donated. Considering all these facts together, wasn't Tokematch a fraudulent business from the start? Were the donated watches not rented out to the general public, but used for other purposes? Suspicions are only deepening.

　Unfortunately, no media pointed this out at the time. In fact, some media outlets were fooled by the term "sharing service" and unfortunately "introduced" it. Those media outlets that introduced it should seriously reflect on this.

　If these allegations are true, it is unfortunate but the chances of the watches being returned are extremely low. Even if the owners of the watches who deposited them file a class action lawsuit demanding their return, it will be nearly impossible to track and recover them once they are resold on the gray market overseas. Reports of such cases are already pouring in, and according to an online community of depositors, there are over 700 watches that have not been returned, with a market value of over a billion yen.

　Anyway, as a true watch lover, this is something I absolutely cannot forgive, and I hope that something like this never happens again.