|
|
Posted by factchecker76 on 06/05/07 19:46
On Jun 4, 10:15 pm, Heinrich Galland <heinri...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> In article <eKGdnSqoPIZY5fnbnZ2dnUVZ_gGdn...@comcast.com>, infiltrate
>
> <googoog...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > > Exactly...you gotta pay for quality.
> > wrong. sure sometimes its like that but a lot of times thats the way the
> > marketers want you to think. i have a $20 timex non-digital watch that for
> > the last 5yrs has kept perfect time even after it getting banged,etc...
>
> As apposed to Rolex which cost $20,000 and looses a minute or two a day!
A Rolex has a mechanical movement as opposed to a quartz movement and
most are certified chronometers which means they are accurate to
within -2 to +3 seconds a day (I believe somewhere around there). If
your Rolex loses a minute or two a day it needs to be serviced. Not
saying Rolexes are the best watch for the money but they keep good
time (for a mechanical watch), have a great service network (you can
send in your Rolex for service and it will come back looking new every
time), are really durable and hold their value well due to Rolexes'
iron hand and savvy marketing. Whoever wrote this is obviously
talking out their ass as not too many Rolexes are $20k maybe a solid
Platinum Day Date. Comparing a Rolex to a Timex is like comparing a
classic European sports car to a KIA and saying the KIA gets better
mileage.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|