solicitor

Here are a few pics of a (chrono) GEN which allow you to see the strap and the over-sleeve/glove look.....

I think it's an acquired taste. I thought the same about my first PAM (104) but got used to that fairly quickly.

And then when I stepped up to a Radiomir and thought THAT was too big, but got used to it, too. It's not that big of a shock for me, then, to take a further step up to the BR. It's truly a beautiful watch-pics do not do it justice. Anyway, someone with large wrists might want to post some pics.

Oh, and no, I'm not wearing a sweater in those pics! ;-}

Some quick wristshots of my new Trusty BR 01-92 46mm x 46mm:

I have a narrow 6.5" wrist!

Quick wrist shots added!

Some quick pics of Trusty's 46mm x 46mm BR-01-92:

Gen Pic for comparison:

I have a narrow 6.5" wrist!

I've upgraded my membership. I think members should be charged a fair fee for access to restricted areas. Once members realize their access is denied, they'll come up with the money. Heck, this stuff is addictive. Withdrawal will set in quickly! Present fee structure seems fine to me.

Done.

Oops. Sorry! ;-) BTW, I noticed the case was decided back in '99. No chance for review of that case by the Supremes at this point.....

Please note the objectivity of my earlier post. In general, I try to refrain from name-calling or attaching labels to someone, or to some court for that matter, just because I might disagree with their opinion(s).

For the record, I'm not necessarily a fan of our beloved Supreme Court. Quite frankly, I have no reason to believe the current high court is any less "agenda driven".

E-mails are not the most reliable means of communication, obviously.

I think if "onezero" follows through with the WU payment it should be publicly stated here on this thread.

I guess it's up to the good conscience of those involved to decide whether something more than that is appropriate...Just my two cents.

Ostensibly, the ninth circuit's opinion is limited to the facts of this particular case. And the earlier "Bulova" decision appears to be adequate precedent to justify their decision. But there are serious questions as to whether it is supported by the evidence and findings of fact made by the trial (district) court herein. Findings of fact are normally the primary function of a trial court and are generally given great deference by a reviewing court unless they are not supported by "sufficient" evidence.

It's important to note that Michel was in the business of selling watches, not simply repairing them. The issue here was whether the nature of the modifications were so extensive that the watch could no longer be reasonably considered a "Rolex". Interestingly, the district court either explicitly or impliedly found that the changes were NOT so extensive inasmuch as they allowed the continued sale of the watches marked as "Rolex" as long as the replacement parts were labeled as non-Rolex.

Notwithstanding the district court's finding, the ninth circuit reversed the lower court and found that the evidence supported the opposite conclusion that the watches could no longer be reasonably considered a "Rolex". I don't have a problem with the holding in theory as much I do with their reading of the facts in this case. To that extent, I agree that an allegation of "judicial activism" might be warranted.

Nevertheless, if Michel has adequate funds they can petition the U.S. Supreme Court for further review. It is important to note that the high court is notorious for holding the ninth circuit, rightly or wrongly, in low esteem and rarely misses an opportunity to reverse their opinions.

We shall see.

i"

The REP pics on the TZ thread are linked from EL's site BTW.....

I've read some who allege that is the sole raison d'etre for this site!

Now I'm totally confused. I took a ruler to Andrew's pic and there's clearly a gap...as there should be with a rep.

I went to check out some gens yesterday and discovered that Tourneau in Santa Clara, CA (Santana Row) has the netire collection of Planet Ocean Chronos and the special edition Seamaster 007 available - they told me that the 007 is a limited edition....hahaha at 10.000 pieces????

I've been Santana Row before. Is that Russian woman still there?

Is the gen LE the one with the gun-barrel dial (Ref. 2226.80.00)? What's is the retail? My Omega AD said he CANNOT get any ot them. I'm not certain why since his store has been around for almost 50 years.

Will Tourneau deal on price?

Thanks.

Checking in for weekly update....

How are things going with this project? Anyone?

Interested. PM sent

Any updates on this project?

It shouldn't even be a question of contributing or not: if you want to become (or stay) a member of RWG, you PayPal $10.00 to the fund.

Not happy with that? There's always TRC, IWC and RWG1.

Myself, I feel more comfortable knowing that I'm giving something back - however nominal - rather than just taking, and letting others take the real risks.

I hope the forum moderators and the dealers themselves will consider this proposition and let us know what they think.....

10.00 annual subscription fee is a good idea. The powers that be should make a decision regarding that as soon as possible.

I'm in, but price is a consideration...

Does the anthracite dial change colors as they say? BTW, which series is that?

Wow. I live in the area and Shreve is a totally reputable dealer. That's an awesome buy! Enjoy!

The 212 is one of my favorite reps. I like that strap, too!