Am I being done?

[Al1969]

Obviously fake.

[JayB]

Originally Posted by chrisday

Thanks for everyone's help. I won't bother ringing around trying to get someone to open it to see a crappy movement. Other than the mentioned sticker can anyone tell me what isn't right with it? I haven't seen the watch yet (was going to today) but it didn't look too bad to
Me!

Seems I should deffo stick to ADs!!

Thanks

Chris

Nobody is going to list this issues with this watch here, it's just not done on this forum.

The best I can do is suggest you look at www.watchfinder.co.uk. Pick a Submariner around the same age as the one you were considering buying and compare the pictures side by side.

The difference between this fake and a real watch will be plainly obvious.

[aleeboy]

Hays a really bad fake. Looks like a mutant omega/ Tag/ Rolex failure.

[chrisday]

Originally Posted by JayB

Nobody is going to list this issues with this watch here, it's just not done on this forum.

The best I can do is suggest you look at www.watchfinder.co.uk. Pick a Submariner around the same age as the one you were considering buying and compare the pictures side by side.

The difference between this fake and a real watch will be plainly obvious.

I don't understand why the faults wouldn't be discussed - I am just trying to learn.

I am not being ungrateful but everyone was a beginner once and at some point I am sure everyone has almost bought a lemon.

I know the photography is awful but looking past that I still can't see any tangible differences.

Maybe this makes me an idiot but at least an honest idiot.

If it's not the done thing to out issues with these fakes then please feel free to PM me...

Thanks

Chris

[Bob the brush]

Trusted sellers from this forum are the only way to go. In UK I have bought from Blowers and found them to be straightforward and honest. Good luck and caveat emptor.

[BillA]

Not sure why it cannot be discussed what is wrong......what jumped out at me was the cyclops magnification, there was none.

[Andad]

Originally Posted by chrisday

I don't understand why the faults wouldn't be discussed - I am just trying to learn.

I am not being ungrateful but everyone was a beginner once and at some point I am sure everyone has almost bought a lemon.

I know the photography is awful but looking past that I still can't see any tangible differences.

Maybe this makes me an idiot but at least an honest idiot.

If it's not the done thing to out issues with these fakes then please feel free to PM me...

Thanks

Chris

I can't argue with you Chris.

My wife if not up to speed with Rolex watches but glanced at your watch pix and laughed out loud.

As has ready been said there are thousands of pix of this Rolex model on the web.

Just find one and compare instead of embarassing yourself even more.

Simple.

There is nothing correct about this one.

[chrisday]

Originally Posted by BillA

Not sure why it cannot be discussed what is wrong......what jumped out at me was the cyclops magnification, there was none.

Thanks Bill, I did see that but because there was almost zero magnification I guessed it was a trick of the camera since any shape of the glass would at least distort the date somehow - even if incorrectly. Obviously that would be a show stopper and something to check in person rather than some questionable photography.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk