TomBombadil Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 What is happening to Rolex? It used to be such a great brand. They need to take off their skirt this year and get rid of the ice. :yucky: None of the classic sport models (sub, gmt, sd, exp) are changing. The good news is that the are now a 100% in-house manufacturer. Here are some of their new models releasing this year: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the collector Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 What the F is going on with the first four watches??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jraines87 Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 your late to the party A.... We've already discussed this here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polynomial Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 the TT GMT is sort of OK, the rest (specially diamond models) are horrible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Polynomial Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 your late to the party A.... We've already discussed this here That was the TT right? I didn't see the bloody diamonds before, haven't seen this elswhere, but if true, really yuk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomBombadil Posted March 30, 2006 Author Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 your late to the party A.... We've already discussed this here Oops. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jraines87 Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 and yes, I really like the pepsi bezel... I don't like the bling in the case and crown though.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manuel Posted March 30, 2006 Report Share Posted March 30, 2006 i see i am right. We are currently living under the antichrist perid. nothing else can explain this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bignasty Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Yeah I think Rolex's Designers might be smokin some rocks and/or they've hired Zsa Zsa Gabor to head up the design team! Good thing most of these can't be repped. Jon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsph Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 i call HOAX! if true, these watches are my exhibit A if ever rolex takes me to court for buying a replica. they'll say, "sir, you showed incredibly poor judgment in committing such a heinous act." and i'll say, "you want to talk about 'incredibly poor judgment' and 'heinous acts' -- check this $h!+ out!" and pull out exhibit A. yup. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 (edited) Rolex has become a joke. Releasing these kind of dog turds with diamonds will only hurt their reputation. Edited March 31, 2006 by By-Tor Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hk45ca Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 i call HOAX! if true, these watches are my exhibit A if ever rolex takes me to court for buying a replica. they'll say, "sir, you showed incredibly poor judgment in committing such a heinous act." and i'll say, "you want to talk about 'incredibly poor judgment' and 'heinous acts' -- check this $h!+ out!" and pull out exhibit A. yup. the only poor judgement i see is that green crap. if your rich, you are a punk if you don't have a rolly on the rocks. they are a peice of jewlery like a pinky ring or a braclet. if you just want to know what time it is go by a timex. if i am going to ware a big heavy chunk of 18k gold on my wrist it better have about 10 carots of ice glittering on it. face it ,if you can afford that, you don't give a damn if anybody likes it much less what time it is. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jraines87 Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 the only poor judgement i see is that green crap. if your rich, you are a punk if you don't have a rolly on the rocks. they are a peice of jewlery like a pinky ring or a braclet. if you just want to know what time it is go by a timex. if i am going to ware a big heavy chunk of 18k gold on my wrist it better have about 10 carots of ice glittering on it. face it ,if you can afford that, you don't give a damn if anybody likes it much less what time it is. Hmmmm.... Interesting perspective.... In a way, I guess your right.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leeroy697 Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 They are trying to keep up with all the other bling, bling watches that all the celebs are wearing. I dont like any of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsph Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 hk45ca: well, yes, of course... there are exactly two kinds of rich people. both kinds spend 50k on their watches, but one kind buys these kinds of rolexes so that his/her watch screams "i am a flying, smearing, reeking turd of surplus incomprehensible cash and precious gems!" wealth, like samurai swords, needs no such demonstrations.... but bad taste? -- priceless! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomasng Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Damn, one really needs to be a very stuck up show off to wear wither one of the first 4. That is just so "Emperor's New Clothes", IMO. I think I would spend $100,000 on a watch in the future, but damn, I would buy a Patek, a AP, a VC over these watches anyday. I would much rather take a $50,000 AP over a $100,000 cheap, tacky Rolex like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsph Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 that would make you the second kind of millionaire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Isoroku Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 they spinnin', they spinnin', they spinnin'..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Bond Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 April fool! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shimside11 Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 bling=new rich, fleeting, fickle,dilettante, bad taste, poor people w/ money...rather embarassing to be in that sort of company. don't want to be associated in the least with any of that. Show me these guys in ten years. In 1984 MC Hammer was flying all his cokehead friends around on private jets and buying personal islands. By 1990 he was selling commercial real estate in Dallas (according to an early 90s Rolling Stone article). At least he has the sense of humour to laugh at it now. 90% of lottery winners are broke within five years. That is exactly the kind of gaudy stuff that the nouveau riche think will make them look sophisticated, and it's the first to be pawned when times get hard. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsph Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 shimside11: uh... are you trying to say... m.c. hammer will be the next president of the united states?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TTK Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 (edited) I think it defines exactly the kind of company Rolex has become......regardless of their recent move to manufacturing their own movements...which everyone who has a Rolex declares with pride......it's obvious that the move was simply to increase profit by cutting out external expenditure.....it certainly wasn't a move that favoured the development of new and innovative movements....not for Rolex ...a new rattrapante......or perpetual calendar......even a nice alarm module for the GMT.......! Rolex = cynical = shame = tacky....! Even if you don't like the new Panerai 8 Days with power reserve indicator......you at least have to give them credit for at least trying to be innovative......! Edited March 31, 2006 by TTK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r11co Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 Rolex = cynical = shame = tacky....! Hear here! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ekhunter Posted March 31, 2006 Report Share Posted March 31, 2006 bling=new rich, fleeting, fickle,dilettante, bad taste, poor people w/ money...rather embarassing to be in that sort of company. don't want to be associated in the least with any of that. Show me these guys in ten years. In 1984 MC Hammer was flying all his cokehead friends around on private jets and buying personal islands. By 1990 he was selling commercial real estate in Dallas (according to an early 90s Rolling Stone article). At least he has the sense of humour to laugh at it now. 90% of lottery winners are broke within five years. That is exactly the kind of gaudy stuff that the nouveau riche think will make them look sophisticated, and it's the first to be pawned when times get hard. Pimp my Watch! Unfortunately, it is a sign of the times! Those watches are horrible. BLING! BLING! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thomasng Posted April 3, 2006 Report Share Posted April 3, 2006 I would shoot myself if Patek started to pull crap off like this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.