ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

4therightcause · 4 December 2012, 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jay1988

I'd genuinely struggle to tell the time on that watch. Then again I doubt the person who bought it cares what time it is.

Rolex won't touch it for servicing, poor diamonds, poor setting of said diamonds and I think that the day wheel may be aftermarket.

When I think of the things that could of been done with that 75k, makes me wonder how these people got rich in the first place.

I would generally struggle to look at that watch...

T. Ferguson · 4 December 2012, 03:04 PM

Not the best of executions. The view of the date is obstructed and the T in Thursday is not visible in the window.

andyboy39 · 4 December 2012, 05:51 PM

Hideous.. Send this back to the depths of hell from whence it came

Singslinger · 4 December 2012, 06:54 PM

When it comes to blinged Rolex, there are varying shades of ugliness and this has to be on the extreme upper end.

Still, like the iced GMT, iced Sub or Leopard Daytona, there is presumably a market for such watches, albeit a very small one. Undoubtedly the profit margin must be large.

Psmith · 4 December 2012, 06:55 PM

Shame they covered up some of the day and date (or so it appears in the pic)

In fact, just a shame really. Now, I wonder if the RSC would return it to factory spec...??!!?

Cru Jones · 4 December 2012, 08:52 PM

i actually don't mind the concentric diamond rings with black center and shortened hands. not my style at all, but, if you're into that sort of thing, it's okay i suppose.

ralpie · 4 December 2012, 11:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cru Jones

i actually don't mind the concentric diamond rings with black center and shortened hands. not my style at all, but, if you're into that sort of thing, it's okay i suppose.

I agree, it's not that bad a dial job.

I should mention that nobody actually bought the watch, the listing ended with no buyer.

Rags · 4 December 2012, 11:32 PM

Definitely not my taste.. I would't touch it even if I had the cash..

Camel · 5 December 2012, 12:07 AM

Too much of a good thing - is bloody ugly !

globalmedia33 · 5 December 2012, 01:19 AM

Too much bling for me. Don't like it.

Slinkey · 5 December 2012, 01:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vincent65

hideous

x 100

DrLindaPhD · 5 December 2012, 01:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ralpie

I agree, it's not that bad a dial job.

I should mention that nobody actually bought the watch, the listing ended with no buyer.

You are right - I thought someone bought it but it just "ended" but for kicks here is the listing if anyone wants to look at all angles of the watch

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Mens-Rolex-S...item53f11f8106

Bugsy123 · 8 December 2012, 01:31 PM

Wow !! I have no words..smh

4 December 2012, 06:55 PM	#65
Psmith "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Real Name: Clive Location: Exoplanet Watch: spring-driven Posts: 38,856	Shame they covered up some of the day and date (or so it appears in the pic) In fact, just a shame really. Now, I wonder if the RSC would return it to factory spec...??!!? __________________

4 December 2012, 11:32 PM	#68
Rags 2024 Pledge Member Join Date: Jan 2009 Real Name: Chuck Location: SW Florida Watch: 16233,16610,214270 Posts: 11,196	Definitely not my taste.. I would't touch it even if I had the cash.. __________________ 16233 Y Serial Datejust 16610 Z Serial Submariner 214270 Explorer *114300 Oyster Perpetual* *76200 Tudor Date+Day*

5 December 2012, 12:07 AM	#69
Camel "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2012 Real Name: Willem Location: Pretoria RSA Watch: ROLEXROLEXROLEX Posts: 1,072	Too much of a good thing - is bloody ugly ! __________________ Rolex Datejust II WG/SS Blue 116334 "8368xxxx" Rolex Sea-Dweller SD43 126600 "94A6xxxx" Rolex Deepsea Sea-Dweller 116660 "V84xxxx" Rolex Deepsea D-Blue Horizon 116660 "3170xxxx" Rolex Explorer II Polar 16570 "T20xxxx" Rolex Explorer II Black 216570 "G53xxxx" Rolex GMT-Master II 16710 "P32xxxx" Rolex GMT-Master II Ceramic 116710LN "V97xxxx" Rolex Submariner 16610 "Z61xxxx" Rolex Submariner Ceramic 116610LN "G79xxxx"

5 December 2012, 01:19 AM	#70
globalmedia33 "TRF" Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Real Name: Thien Location: Frisco,TX/Saigon Watch: All Rolex Posts: 2,754	Too much bling for me. Don't like it. __________________ Sub. 5513 116710LN 116610LV “I THINK PERFECTION IS UGLY. SOMEWHERE IN THE THINGS HUMANS MAKE, I WANT TO SEE SCARS, FAILURE, DISORDER AND DISTORTION" - YOHJI YAMAMOTO

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

4 December 2012, 03:04 PM	#62
T. Ferguson "TRF" Member Join Date: Oct 2012 Location: Left Coast Posts: 7,025	Not the best of executions. The view of the date is obstructed and the T in Thursday is not visible in the window.

4 December 2012, 05:51 PM	#63
andyboy39 "TRF" Member Join Date: Aug 2012 Location: New Zealand Watch: Day Date Posts: 1,409	Hideous.. Send this back to the depths of hell from whence it came

4 December 2012, 06:54 PM	#64
Singslinger "TRF" Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: singapore Posts: 6,424	When it comes to blinged Rolex, there are varying shades of ugliness and this has to be on the extreme upper end. Still, like the iced GMT, iced Sub or Leopard Daytona, there is presumably a market for such watches, albeit a very small one. Undoubtedly the profit margin must be large.

4 December 2012, 08:52 PM	#66
Cru Jones 2024 SubLV41 Pledge Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: Paris, France Posts: 35,300	i actually don't mind the concentric diamond rings with black center and shortened hands. not my style at all, but, if you're into that sort of thing, it's okay i suppose.

8 December 2012, 01:31 PM	#73
Bugsy123 "TRF" Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: U.S.A Watch: GMT II Posts: 48	Wow !! I have no words..smh

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