Bring back Bryan wade!!
I wanna caravan for me ma
- Thread starter
- #41
Not that I could afford such a watch, but I think the look fantastic! So different and evocative, love 'em.
My thoughts exactly sir!
Not that I could afford such a watch, but I think the look fantastic! So different and evocative, love 'em.
Not that I could afford such a watch, but I think the look fantastic! So different and evocative, love 'em.
That's the beauty of watches everybody has different taste.
Whilst in the RAF I was serving in Aden (South Yemen) in 1966 where I purchased a stainless steel Rolex Oysterdate for the princely sum of £25. It is a genuine article as it has been to Rolex for a couple of servicings. It is still going strong keeps perfect time and looks the dogs whatnots. Current insurance value £2800.
What do you mean by 'evocative', may I ask? What exactly do they evoke in you?
As a non watch wearer this is a subject I know nothing about. What I can say however is that they are ugly beyond doubt.
Going back to the original question a watch telling the time does not strike me as innovative. So, flatter to deceive must be the answer.
is it really necessary for them to have hour and minute written next to the numbers? does that show the market they are aiming at?
Surely the timekeeping abilities must be a bit suspect coming from Devon,it's at least 10 years behind real time down there.
I've got a great casio from Argos ... and it's got a calculator!!!
And I bet it was £5,950 cheaper than the Devon![]()