A Letter To Rolex: If the Pepsi GMT Is Leaving, This May Be the Moment to Reconsider

Everyone has an opinion. Ask about politics, religion, or Rolex, and people are rarely shy about sharing theirs.

I am opinionated too. In many areas of life, I know enough to understand part of the story, but not always all of it. When it comes to watches, however, and Rolex in particular, I speak from long experience. For nearly fifteen years, I have built accessories exclusively for Rolex owners, and much of my working life has been devoted to understanding the brand, its customers, and the emotional pull that surrounds both. So when I offer an opinion on Rolex, it is not casual. It comes from years of observation, countless conversations, and daily immersion in this world.

Recently, industry speculation has grown louder that Rolex may discontinue the GMT Master II reference 126710BLRO, better known simply as the Pepsi. Much of that speculation has been thoughtfully covered by Skyler in a detailed article examining the likelihood that this blue and red ceramic icon could be nearing the end of its run.

For years, collectors have heard the same explanation: the bezel is difficult to manufacture, and Rolex may eventually decide the effort is no longer worthwhile. At the same time, Rolex has also filed a patent related to the precise combination of black ceramic and red ceramic, a development that naturally fuels speculation of a future Coke GMT Master II. We have already seen Rolex apply this technical progress elsewhere, most notably on the 2023 Daytona Cosmograph 126529LN.

That leaves a very real question as Watches and Wonders 2026 approaches: if Rolex introduces a Coke GMT Master II and allows the Pepsi to disappear, would that be a brilliant move or a long term mistake?

Ceramic 'Coke' GMT-Master II Render

Based on personal experience, years of conversations with collectors, discussions with Authorized Dealers, and close observation of the secondary market, I believe the answer is more complicated than many assume. In the short term, yes, it would almost certainly work. Like virtually every major steel sports Rolex release, a new Coke would ignite immediate demand. Waiting lists would swell overnight, collectors would scramble for position, and jewelry stores would once again see buyers hoping a stronger relationship might improve their chances of allocation. The secondary market would respond with predictable intensity, just as it has with nearly every major sports release of the modern era.

But the short term is only part of the story, because Rolex must recognize that the Pepsi is no longer simply another GMT Master II reference. It is no longer just a product. The Pepsi has become culturally larger than the watch itself, and that distinction matters more than many product decisions account for.

The modern steel Pepsi has become one of the defining Rolex watches of this era. Since returning in 2018, it has never really faded the way many high-demand references eventually do. If anything, its position has only become stronger over time. Demand is still intense, but more importantly, the enthusiasm around it feels unusually durable. Unlike watches that surge because they are new, the Pepsi has developed something much harder to create: symbolism. For many collectors, it is not simply the GMT they want, but the Rolex they have in mind from the very beginning.

It is often the first watch people ask about once they begin to understand the modern Rolex market. It is the watch that keeps people engaged with the brand after years of waiting, and the watch that still feels like a true milestone even within a catalog filled with extraordinary references. I know this personally. I waited years to receive mine from an Authorized Dealer, and when it finally happened, it felt like one of the defining moments of my own collecting life. That kind of emotional pull is difficult to manufacture, and even harder to replace.

A Coke GMT Master II would create excitement, certainly. It would generate headlines, command premiums, and dominate watch conversations immediately. But excitement and permanence are not the same thing. A successful launch can control attention for a year, while an icon earns something deeper and far more difficult to manufacture than ceramic: emotional permanence.

That is where the Pepsi now sits. Its colors are instantly recognizable even outside the watch world. Its presence connects the modern Rolex catalog to one of the strongest visual identities the brand has ever created, while still feeling entirely contemporary. Very few watches manage to balance heritage and modernity this naturally, which is one reason the Pepsi continues to resonate so strongly across generations of collectors.

Rolex may understandably see an opportunity to refresh the GMT line, introduce something new, and capitalize on the inevitable excitement surrounding a Coke bezel. From a product-cycle standpoint, that logic is easy to understand. But from a brand standpoint, replacing the Pepsi outright could prove shortsighted, because the Pepsi is already doing what every great luxury product hopes to achieve: it has moved beyond specification, beyond reference number, and beyond the confines of the watch world itself.

At a certain point, a product stops being discussed merely for what it is and begins to represent something much larger. The Pepsi has reached that point. It belongs to a rare category of objects whose names immediately carry meaning far outside their industry. In the same way people instantly understand what a Porsche 911 represents, or what a Hermès Birkin signifies, the Pepsi GMT has become one of those references that needs little explanation. Saying “Pepsi” in watch culture now carries the kind of instant recognition reserved for only a handful of names in popular culture, names like Madonna, Cher, or Beyoncé. These are not simply products or people anymore; they are cultural icons.

Luxury brands spend decades trying to create icons that transcend product cycles. Rolex has already done that with the Pepsi. That is precisely why Rolex should think carefully before retiring it. To remove it entirely risks interrupting one of the strongest symbolic connections the modern catalog still has with collectors and with the wider world of recognizable design.

This is where discontinuing it becomes risky. If Rolex removes one of the most emotionally resonant watches in its current collection, it may create an unintended vacuum. Collectors do not wait years for just any GMT Master II. Many are waiting specifically for the Pepsi. If that watch disappears, some will simply redirect their attention elsewhere, while others may lose part of the emotional connection that kept them engaged with the Rolex journey in the first place.

Rolex Pepsi GMT-Master II 'Pepsi' 126710BLRO. Image Source: Wristcheck

That may sound overstated until you consider how central the Pepsi has become in the modern collector’s imagination. Since the COVID era, Rolex demand moved from impressive to frenzied and then back to something more sustainable, though still remarkably strong. Even in this more normalized environment, the Pepsi remains one of the watches enthusiasts mention most often. One retailer recently told me that requests for the Pepsi account for an enormous share of customer interest, rivaled only by references such as the steel Daytona. Whether the exact percentage varies by store is less important than the larger truth: the Pepsi continues to matter at a level very few modern watches do.

The smarter move may not be choosing between Pepsi and Coke at all. It may be allowing both to exist, giving collectors the freedom to choose between two powerful chapters in GMT Master history. One would bring novelty and immediate excitement, while the other preserves one of the strongest emotional anchors in the modern Rolex catalog.

Rolex rarely makes mistakes, and few brands understand long-term product strategy better. But if the Pepsi truly is nearing discontinuation, this is one decision worth reconsidering, because removing it would not simply end production of a successful watch. It would mean retiring a modern icon that has become far more important than the sum of its parts and, long term, may prove to be a mistake collectors remember for years.