ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Monte Cristo · 17 September 2012, 06:43 AM

IMO the OP has asked for feedback as to if it is real or not. Members have chimed in with their opinion. Next step for the OP is to find an AD or RSC to confirm its authenticity and asking for more information (and members discussing this information) on why it's a fake is against the rules, as Mon has mentioned.

Problem is by discussing what is wrong on a fake watch actually by default tells people/counterfeiters what should be changed on their fakes, not something any TRF member condones.

I guess you could say this is not a Rolex authentication site.
I'm sure one of the Mods will chime in shortly with the correct protocol.

17 September 2012, 06:43 AM	#32
Monte Cristo "TRF" Member Join Date: Apr 2012 Location: Sydney Watch: ing you... Posts: 3,775	IMO the OP has asked for feedback as to if it is real or not. Members have chimed in with their opinion. Next step for the OP is to find an AD or RSC to confirm its authenticity and asking for more information (and members discussing this information) on why it's a fake is against the rules, as Mon has mentioned. Problem is by discussing what is wrong on a fake watch actually by default tells people/counterfeiters what should be changed on their fakes, not something any TRF member condones. I guess you could say this is not a Rolex authentication site. I'm sure one of the Mods will chime in shortly with the correct protocol. __________________ 'I am easily satisfied with the very best' - Winston Churchill

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)