The Rolex Forums   The Rolex Watch

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX


Go Back   Rolex Forums - Rolex Watch Forum > Other (non-Rolex) Watch Topics > Audemars Piguet Discussion Forum

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12 March 2019, 04:53 AM   #91
RLX_NY
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2018
Location: NYC
Posts: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by yyzpam View Post
IF you had sold the OP a NEW watch and he wore it and then contacted you after to return....you may have a point. You sold him a previously worn USED watch.....so unless he materially changed its condition, him wearing it a few times should make NO difference to the value. You bringing up the value of a new watch is irrelevant (you did not sell him a new watch).

You described the watch very poorly and have yet to remedy the situation and have now let an easily resolved issue grow into something that will hurt your future business. I would call your handling of the issue shortsighted. Everyone is entitled to do business in any matter they see fit. Just as I am entitled to spend my money with people I feel comfortable with. There is nothing about how you have handled this issue that makes me feel comfortable.
I had a long post ready to go as the whole time I'm shaking my head reading Stein's reply... but this pretty much sums it up .


Stein, all your doing at this point is more damage to your company than good. A situation that should have been resolved fairly quickly and didn't need to get to 3 pages, but instead you insist on trying to justify your actions is only making it worst. But hey it's your business, if you want to run it into the ground who are we to stop you otherwise
RLX_NY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 March 2019, 05:31 AM   #92
aa909
Banned
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: USA
Posts: 530
Quote:
Originally Posted by DK3 View Post
I had a similar experience with them. I purchased a ROC steel 4 years ago and it was advertised as new. STAY AWAY from this dealer. In the local Los Angeles area many watch collectors will never do business with them. They are dishonest.
can you share the details? how did you determine it was not new and what was the outcome?

thanks!
aa909 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 March 2019, 09:04 AM   #93
77T
2024 Pledge Member
 
77T's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Real Name: PaulG
Location: Georgia
Posts: 40,568
Quote:
Originally Posted by sitkenneth View Post
Hi. Just want to give everyone an update.



Joe from Stein and I are working to get this resolved. We agreed that I send them the watch back and with an additional fund (which I think is reasonable), and they will send me a brand new one of same model.



Despite some hassles, if this works out OK I will be able to really enjoy the piece and move on.



Will keep everyone posted.



Btw: the watch I got had been put on my wrist for a wrist shot. I then realised the issue as detailed in this thread and brought it to AP boutique a few days later. Technically it should be of the same condition as when I received it. It even has the same plastic sheet wrapping as the watch was delivered to me.


Glad you feel optimistic and hope for best outcome. Looking forward to a happy ending.

As for Stein - let me guess the outcome of a hypothetical poll (I can’t start one from Tapatalk). The question might be “After reading everything in this thread, would you buy any watch from Stein Diamonds?”

Ummm...99.995% would vote No.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
__________________


Does anyone really know what time it is?
77T is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12 March 2019, 09:18 AM   #94
RolexZen
"TRF" Member
 
RolexZen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Atlanta
Watch: No Rolex
Posts: 722
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apheaven View Post
To be clear, they are suggesting you pay them more money so you can receive another watch in the actual condition they had initially represented to deliver the original watch in, after they just tried to screw you over? My apologies in advance for my candor, but you are f**king joking me?! Just get your money back. Candidly I will personally help you find another watch, if not out of my own collection, before you do business with them again. That watch is not hard to find. Just get your money back as you are legally owed. At this point, they can not be trusted and you should not do any more business with them, especially after hearing the asinine terms that are being proposed to resolve this.

Seller, to be clear, you have engaged in negligent misrepresentation at best, if not fraudulent misrepresentation at worst. Either way, the sale was through illegal means. I actually tried to help you earlier in this thread as I saw this as a potential honest misunderstanding, before it became clear you were/are trying to pull one over on the seller. Give him his money back! I think you can already tell this isn't going away or getting easier for you with time.
To be fair, the seller was willing to give a refund, minus a restocking fee. And they were negotiating with OP on that. Not sure what the final refund offer was, but OP seems to have happily accepted an offer to "upgrade" to a brand new watch.

Honestly, if OP is happy with the deal, and the seller does indeed send him a brand new watch, then this is a happy ending. I just hope the seller does not try to turn around and sell the current watch as Like New or Mint.
RolexZen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 March 2019, 10:11 AM   #95
Apheaven
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: SF
Posts: 584
Quote:
Originally Posted by RolexZen View Post
To be fair, the seller was willing to give a refund, minus a restocking fee. And they were negotiating with OP on that. Not sure what the final refund offer was, but OP seems to have happily accepted an offer to "upgrade" to a brand new watch.

Honestly, if OP is happy with the deal, and the seller does indeed send him a brand new watch, then this is a happy ending. I just hope the seller does not try to turn around and sell the current watch as Like New or Mint.
No disrespect intended, but your opinion appears to the minority here. I think most found their conduct atrocious.

The mere initial suggestion that the buyer should pay a 20% restocking after the seller had misrepresented the condition of the watch is laughable in my book. To be clear, the seller (per his words in this thread) was marketing the watch as "like new"....and now the buyer can "upgrade" to a new watch for more money? Forgive me if I am missing something here. The way I see it, they will now take home more money on something they were supposed to deliver upon initially. Can't you see the issue with this (among many other issues)?

Just because the buyer may have "happily" accepted the offer does not condone the behavior of the seller nor does it suggest that everything is now OK. God help the next guy who does business with Stein Diamonds and does not have a forum to back him up...
Apheaven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 March 2019, 10:32 AM   #96
Burlington
"TRF" Member
 
Burlington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 5,634
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apheaven View Post
No disrespect intended, but your opinion appears to the minority here. I think most found their conduct atrocious.

The mere initial suggestion that the buyer should pay a 20% restocking after the seller had misrepresented the condition of the watch is laughable in my book. To be clear, the seller (per his words in this thread) was marketing the watch as "like new"....and now the buyer can "upgrade" to a new watch for more money? Forgive me if I am missing something here. The way I see it, they will now take home more money on something they were supposed to deliver upon initially. Can't you see the issue with this (among many other issues)?

Just because the buyer may have "happily" accepted the offer does not condone the behavior of the seller nor does it suggest that everything is now OK. God help the next guy who does business with Stein Diamonds and does not have a forum to back him up...


Without rereading the whole thread again above, I think there was agreement from the OP that the price he paid was commensurate with a used watch. Not what he was after though, so if he is happy to pay a bit extra for a market value new piece and a clean exit to this mess, then so be it.

Sometimes accepting an unpalatable circumstance is the best way to achieve a successful resolution.
__________________
“My tastes are simple; I am easily satisfied with the best.”

― Winston S. Churchill
Burlington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 March 2019, 11:03 AM   #97
RolexZen
"TRF" Member
 
RolexZen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Atlanta
Watch: No Rolex
Posts: 722
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apheaven View Post
...Forgive me if I am missing something here. The way I see it, they will now take home more money on something they were supposed to deliver upon initially...
The seller was selling a used watch in "like new" condition. I totally agree that the watch was not "like new", but the seller clearly differentiated this condition from "brand new", and the prices reflect that. They are not taking "more money on something they were supposed to deliver upon initially".

Quote:
Originally Posted by Burlington View Post
Without rereading the whole thread again above, I think there was agreement from the OP that the price he paid was commensurate with a used watch. Not what he was after though, so if he is happy to pay a bit extra for a market value new piece and a clean exit to this mess, then so be it.

Sometimes accepting an unpalatable circumstance is the best way to achieve a successful resolution.
Exactly.
RolexZen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12 March 2019, 07:33 PM   #98
tyler1980
"TRF" Member
 
tyler1980's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: Houston
Posts: 17,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Burlington View Post
Without rereading the whole thread again above, I think there was agreement from the OP that the price he paid was commensurate with a used watch. Not what he was after though,
.
i agree with this somewhat. Looking for a deal and you will lock on to the lower priced option and it tends to be more risky.

However, price is totally fine to be a differentiator as far as a tool sellers use... condition is not.

You shouldn't have to be a condition expert to buy. If you agree with a price, whatever it is, the condition should match the description vs the condition matching the price
__________________
Instagram: tyler.watches
current collection: Patek 5164A, Patek 5524G, Rolex Platinum Daytona 116506, Rolex Sea Dweller 43 126600, Rolex GMT II 116710LN, AP 15400ST (silver), Panerai 913, Omega Speedmaster moonwatch, Tudor Black Bay (Harrods Edition)
tyler1980 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 March 2019, 06:09 AM   #99
SteinDiamonds
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 5
As we and Ken reach an agreement I would like to make a few things clear:

1- we recognize the issue in using "like new" and will not describe watches as such moving forward.

2- We are absolutely not charging the OP more money for what was initially promised.
We sold a pre-owned watch at a pre-owned price, which everyone including OP agrees. We are getting more money for a brand new never worn watch with new style 5-year warranty. It is a completely different watch from what was initially sold and given at an extremely competitive market price.

3- Not once did we stop responding or stop trying to find a resolution with the OP. It is not our intention to screw or deceive our customers. Without seeing the watch and after hearing the OP wore it we told him of the restocking fee (rightfully so, a watch that is worn cannot be returned without a fee). If it was the same condition as delivered (ie he barely wore it) or if he opened it and didn't wear it there would be no restocking fee.
SteinDiamonds is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 March 2019, 08:47 AM   #100
Apheaven
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: SF
Posts: 584
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteinDiamonds View Post
As we and Ken reach an agreement I would like to make a few things clear:

1- we recognize the issue in using "like new" and will not describe watches as such moving forward.

2- We are absolutely not charging the OP more money for what was initially promised.
We sold a pre-owned watch at a pre-owned price, which everyone including OP agrees. We are getting more money for a brand new never worn watch with new style 5-year warranty. It is a completely different watch from what was initially sold and given at an extremely competitive market price.

3- Not once did we stop responding or stop trying to find a resolution with the OP. It is not our intention to screw or deceive our customers. Without seeing the watch and after hearing the OP wore it we told him of the restocking fee (rightfully so, a watch that is worn cannot be returned without a fee). If it was the same condition as delivered (ie he barely wore it) or if he opened it and didn't wear it there would be no restocking fee.
If you say so.... Could it be that people took issue with the fact you would not immediately refund 100% of the buyers money after it became abundantly clear the watch condition was not even close to what was described via the written description or respective photos. Even then, instead of apologizing and making it right, you then dug your heels in deeper... Just saying that might have had something to do with the push back you received here. Let's not rewrite history here.
Apheaven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 March 2019, 08:57 AM   #101
remz07twos
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Nash
Posts: 148
Playing devils advocate here but could there be a potential that stein was not the reason for the polish work. Stein may have received this watch via purchase or trade. Stein may not have had it disclosed to him of any work done outside of AP.

While by no means does this validate anything. There is still a possibility that they are not the end all be all experts on AP and missed the .2mm difference in chamfer size.

Others have said “its a preowned watch why can’t you take it back” there are probably things that they cannot guarantee weren’t done to the watch by OP that they have to be covered for. Not saying OP did, but what if a preowned watch (not this one) was being sold and a client wore it and then noticed a small issue on day the dial that went unnoticed. Now the seller is going to be on the hook for the fact that the piece being returned may have additional wear on it.

Just playing devils advocate.
remz07twos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 March 2019, 08:59 AM   #102
Wahlberg
"TRF" Member
 
Wahlberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Paris
Posts: 3,527
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteinDiamonds View Post
Without seeing the watch and after hearing the OP wore it we told him of the restocking fee (rightfully so, a watch that is worn cannot be returned without a fee). If it was the same condition as delivered (ie he barely wore it) or if he opened it and didn't wear it there would be no restocking fee.
How would you even notice if he wore it for 2 weeks or just 10 seconds? You can't. This is BS.
Wahlberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 March 2019, 09:09 AM   #103
remz07twos
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Nash
Posts: 148
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wahlberg View Post
How would you even notice if he wore it for 2 weeks or just 10 seconds? You can't. This is BS.
Op noticed a .2mm difference in lug chamfer, so even a scratch in 10 seconds could be seen by someone else. Scratches from 2 weeks would definitely be noticed.
remz07twos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 March 2019, 09:26 AM   #104
Apheaven
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: SF
Posts: 584
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteinDiamonds View Post
we recognize the issue in using "like new"

We, also, recognize the issue when YOU use “like new”.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Apheaven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 March 2019, 12:34 PM   #105
inadeje
2024 Pledge Member
 
inadeje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Miami
Watch: me lose count.
Posts: 5,555
I have read this whole thread. Stein Diamonds admits that their description was deceptive. That admission unto itself should have provoked an immediate, “no questions asked” full refund to the buyer. Yet, they debate, if a used watch was worn by the buyer...as if this fact changes anything in the documented chronology of deceit. Stein Diamonds should fire their PR guy, because drawing out this debate on one of the worlds most frequented watch forums is a PR chiefs biggest nightmare. Usually, any sane, savvy and coherent business owner would want this to go way, as quickly as is earthly possible. I'm more shocked a watch dealer would openly submit themselves to this, than I am of the visible hack-job on the supposedly “like new” watch...astounding

10-20% restocking fee? So let me get this straight. Dealer lists a watch “like new”, takes a few photos with the damage in a shadow or astutely off angle, sends out the watch “knowing” it’ll return, grabs 10-20% and, cycles that process 10 times and, still ends up with the watch?

Based up this, I believe that, had the OP not turned to this forum, he would have been a victim here.

“Stein Diamonds”, “STEIN DIAMONDS”, “Diamonds Stein”, “DIAMONDS STEIN”, “Stein Diamonds Los Angeles”

The above is to assist google with metasearch keywords to locate this thread.
__________________
♛ 116689 ♛ 116500LN Blk ♛ 116500LN Wht ♛ Sky Dweller 326934-003 ♛ 126710BLNR ♛ 126710BLRO - ♛ 126610LV ♛ 16520 ♛ 16523 ♛ 16610 ♛ 5513 Birth Year - ✠ Patek Philippe 5980/1A-001 - AP 26331ST Panda - Panerai Fiddy 127, Bronzo 671, 687, 111, Ω Speedmaster 1957 Broad Arrow, Daniel Roth Endurer Chronosprint, Cartier Santos XL - ✿ Tudor Black Bay 58 Bronze M79012M, Montblanc TimeWalker Chrono 41
inadeje is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 March 2019, 12:46 PM   #106
DK3
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: California
Posts: 257
Stein Diamonds should be posted as a NON-TRUSTED seller. There are way too may honest and reputable dealers out there than to do business with these clowns. They are a total joke.
DK3 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 March 2019, 02:16 PM   #107
CoveWatch
"TRF" Member
 
CoveWatch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: SoCal
Watch: Rolex & AP
Posts: 4,535
Quote:
Originally Posted by SteinDiamonds View Post
As we and Ken reach an agreement I would like to make a few things clear:

1- we recognize the issue in using "like new" and will not describe watches as such moving forward.

2- We are absolutely not charging the OP more money for what was initially promised.
We sold a pre-owned watch at a pre-owned price, which everyone including OP agrees. We are getting more money for a brand new never worn watch with new style 5-year warranty. It is a completely different watch from what was initially sold and given at an extremely competitive market price.

3- Not once did we stop responding or stop trying to find a resolution with the OP. It is not our intention to screw or deceive our customers. Without seeing the watch and after hearing the OP wore it we told him of the restocking fee (rightfully so, a watch that is worn cannot be returned without a fee). If it was the same condition as delivered (ie he barely wore it) or if he opened it and didn't wear it there would be no restocking fee.

So let’s see here... after you somewhat admitted to misleading the OP on the condition of the watch you sold him, you are still trying to justify charging him to return the watch that was YOUR mistake?

Why should OP take the hit because he was the victim? What kind of business are you running? Did you really think that restocking fee was worth the bad PR you’re getting now? Did not think this one through, did ya?

I feel bad for the OP to have to deal with this.. I really thought a resolution was coming but instead Stein comes back and says although we lied(intentional or not), oh well won’t do it again but you’re still paying us something
CoveWatch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 March 2019, 04:29 PM   #108
Ronco
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: London
Posts: 62
Quote:
Originally Posted by Apheaven View Post
We, also, recognize the issue when YOU use “like new”.





Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
This is why, if possible, I always go to see the actual watch before I purchase anything used.
Had this happen to me recently, on a piece I wanted to buy, which was described as unworn and when I saw the watch in person it was covered in scratches.
Stein Diamonds have clearly misled the buyer and should have taken back the watch free of charge.
Ronco is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 March 2019, 06:51 PM   #109
mjrennie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Real Name: MJR
Location: Midlands, UK
Watch: 116618 LB
Posts: 878
Quote:
Originally Posted by yyzpam View Post
IF you had sold the OP a NEW watch and he wore it and then contacted you after to return....you may have a point. You sold him a previously worn USED watch.....so unless he materially changed its condition, him wearing it a few times should make NO difference to the value. You bringing up the value of a new watch is irrelevant (you did not sell him a new watch).

You described the watch very poorly and have yet to remedy the situation and have now let an easily resolved issue grow into something that will hurt your future business. I would call your handling of the issue shortsighted. Everyone is entitled to do business in any matter they see fit. Just as I am entitled to spend my money with people I feel comfortable with. There is nothing about how you have handled this issue that makes me feel comfortable.
Agreed.
mjrennie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15 March 2019, 06:53 PM   #110
mjrennie
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Real Name: MJR
Location: Midlands, UK
Watch: 116618 LB
Posts: 878
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronco View Post
This is why, if possible, I always go to see the actual watch before I purchase anything used.
Had this happen to me recently, on a piece I wanted to buy, which was described as unworn and when I saw the watch in person it was covered in scratches.
Stein Diamonds have clearly misled the buyer and should have taken back the watch free of charge.
I am amazed that they can even think the watch is 'like new' with that amount of marking on the watch; I say markings, in reality, they look like gouges.
mjrennie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 March 2019, 02:40 AM   #111
Burlington
"TRF" Member
 
Burlington's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 5,634
Reminds me a little of Bremont mis-understanding the terminology ‘in house’ a few years ago.
__________________
“My tastes are simple; I am easily satisfied with the best.”

― Winston S. Churchill
Burlington is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16 March 2019, 04:35 AM   #112
Wahlberg
"TRF" Member
 
Wahlberg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Paris
Posts: 3,527
Quote:
Originally Posted by remz07twos View Post
Op noticed a .2mm difference in lug chamfer, so even a scratch in 10 seconds could be seen by someone else. Scratches from 2 weeks would definitely be noticed.
The lug was obvious, anyone would have seen it.

And if you put the watch on you don't scratch it that easily or fast, come on now.
Wahlberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17 March 2019, 02:20 PM   #113
startrolexendrolex
"TRF" Member
 
startrolexendrolex's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: US
Posts: 650
Wow I was look at their yellow gold RO chrono 39mm and was about to give them a call. After reading this, no thanks.

Sent from my SM-G892U using Tapatalk
startrolexendrolex is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 18 March 2019, 12:13 PM   #114
inadeje
2024 Pledge Member
 
inadeje's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Miami
Watch: me lose count.
Posts: 5,555
Quote:
Originally Posted by startrolexendrolex View Post
Wow I was look at their yellow gold RO chrono 39mm and was about to give them a call. After reading this, no thanks.

Sent from my SM-G892U using Tapatalk
Their only coming back from this would be to give the OP a new watch and that be published on here. Otherwise, they’re toast and this will cost them dearly.
__________________
♛ 116689 ♛ 116500LN Blk ♛ 116500LN Wht ♛ Sky Dweller 326934-003 ♛ 126710BLNR ♛ 126710BLRO - ♛ 126610LV ♛ 16520 ♛ 16523 ♛ 16610 ♛ 5513 Birth Year - ✠ Patek Philippe 5980/1A-001 - AP 26331ST Panda - Panerai Fiddy 127, Bronzo 671, 687, 111, Ω Speedmaster 1957 Broad Arrow, Daniel Roth Endurer Chronosprint, Cartier Santos XL - ✿ Tudor Black Bay 58 Bronze M79012M, Montblanc TimeWalker Chrono 41
inadeje is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 March 2019, 02:43 PM   #115
Tom808
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Real Name: Tom
Location: USA
Posts: 121
Any updates? Did you get your new watch?

Sent from my SM-J810M using Tapatalk
Tom808 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 March 2019, 04:24 PM   #116
sitkenneth
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Real Name: Ken
Location: HK
Watch: AP SS Jumbo
Posts: 41
Hi Tom, it's on its way. Hopefully I will be able wrap this thread up on a positive note. Thanks for asking, will post updates
sitkenneth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 21 March 2019, 06:06 PM   #117
galtinuk
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: London
Posts: 215
.
galtinuk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23 March 2019, 05:11 PM   #118
Watcheroo
2024 Pledge Member
 
Watcheroo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: CT
Posts: 3,908
That kind of (bad) polish job, in my opinion, is one that 99 out of 100 people that handle APs on a regular basis will quickly identify. The fact that the seller didn’t state this in their description of the watch is deceptive. I will not believe that the seller was not aware of this issue.

What added insult to injury was the seller’s arguments of it being “worn” by the buyer, and initially insisting that it was “better than mint”.

In any case, I would insist on returning the watch for a full refund and would not do business with this seller again.

Very short sighted of the seller unless they already have, and are comfortable living with, a bad reputation.
Watcheroo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 March 2019, 12:08 AM   #119
bobernet
"TRF" Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Real Name: Bob
Location: Mountains
Watch: ALS, AP, PP, Rolex
Posts: 2,877
I could have rationalized almost everything before they came here to try to justify a restocking fee on the watch they clearly misrepresented.

Count me just another lost potential customer.
bobernet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 24 March 2019, 10:55 AM   #120
shafran
"TRF" Member
 
shafran's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: woodmere,ny
Posts: 555
ands I was negotiating a deal with them on a panerai....

I am glad I read this
shafran is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
steindiamonds


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Takuya Watches

Bobs Watches

Asset Appeal

My Watch LLC

OCWatches

DavidSW Watches

Coronet


*Banners Of The Month*
This space is provided to horological resources.





Copyright ©2004-2024, The Rolex Forums. All Rights Reserved.

ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

Rolex is a registered trademark of ROLEX USA. The Rolex Forums is not affiliated with ROLEX USA in any way.