ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX
13 June 2012, 04:36 AM | #121 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Oct 2009
Real Name: Marc
Location: SoCal
Watch: Not enough ;-)
Posts: 21,232
|
|
13 June 2012, 04:49 AM | #122 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Real Name: Tony
Location: England
Posts: 5,425
|
Kodiak, I am pleased to read that your aunt has decided to hold onto these two pieces. I am sure that they hold sentimental memories for you.
Sorry that you have had to endure the "The third degree" and had to justify yourself to some members, that is not what the forum is about. I can fully understand, should you never wish to take part again. Regards Tony
__________________
|
13 June 2012, 10:07 PM | #123 | |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Real Name: Hans Henrik
Location: EU, Denmark
Posts: 184
|
Quote:
|
|
13 June 2012, 10:37 PM | #124 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: So. California
Posts: 1,232
|
I too would be VERY interested to see Bob's response and estimates.
__________________
1601, 1675/3, 16753, 16750, 16750, 16700, 16610, 18238 |
14 June 2012, 04:57 AM | #125 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jan 2008
Real Name: Tony
Location: England
Posts: 5,425
|
Why do you honestly think that Kodiak would wish to any further part in this thread.
Just so that he has to either justify or leave himself open to further criticism.
__________________
|
14 June 2012, 05:40 AM | #126 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Apr 2007
Real Name: Martin
Location: London
Watch: Sub,Exp2,BlkBy,SD
Posts: 1,258
|
Sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.
That is all.
__________________
Lest we forget. |
14 June 2012, 07:28 AM | #127 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: So. California
Posts: 1,232
|
Well I owe the OP a huge apology I hope he accepts. My skepticism while not unreasonable In my opinion, was wrong. I came to this conclusion after review of the OP's postings and some additional research.
I hope that your aunt hands those family heirlooms downto family members who will treasure them, restore them and wear them. Again, I was wrong! I apologize for doubting the veracity of your story.
__________________
1601, 1675/3, 16753, 16750, 16750, 16700, 16610, 18238 |
14 June 2012, 08:47 AM | #128 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: UK
Watch: 216570 & 1601
Posts: 236
|
Hmm. I dunno... I mean: My serious envy versus Other people's fortune, who aren't me?
It's a tough one! of course I'm joking you plonker! Maybe my humour isn't for everyone! Sorry. Anyway - I think we can all agree that it's threads like this that really make you wish you had more dead relatives. PS. Special prize for you if you can guess if I'm joking or not about the last bit! |
14 June 2012, 01:32 PM | #129 |
"TRF" Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Watch: All of them
Posts: 2,789
|
I find it somewhat poor character on certains posters parts to ridicule the OP post.
These watches are not Picasso's where only 1 was created. These are mass produced products available to the public, and if Paul Newman didn't wear one, no one would care about the Daytona as with many wannabe's. When they were being produced, Rolex couldn't give them away.....now it's a "grail". A lot of hype. So is it possible a person bought these inexpensive watches back then and put them in a safe, sure. If the OP found them, good for them. Enjoy them and don't worry about what anyone hiding behind a computer has to say!
__________________
I used to be indecisive, now I'm not sure |
15 June 2012, 01:14 AM | #130 |
2024 ROLEX DATEJUST41 Pledge Member
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Japan
Watch: ing your back.
Posts: 16,180
|
IBTL!
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
|
|
*Banners
Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.