Why do some get triggered by Nicknames?

[Cambo]

Why do some “New Rolex Admirers” get triggered by those who prefer proper reference numbers? And to use the excuse “how are we supposed to remember….?” That’s simply lame.

[Cambo]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

Really?

Just which reference are you referring to as a "Pepsi?"

In a face-to-face conversation with the watch present or in a post with a picture, it might be obvious, but otherwise, you could be referring to anything with a red and blue bezel.

This is an excellent point!

[Wismo]

I have a really nice, 15 Rolex collection. I bought almost all of them through ADs in the last three years.

I could not tell you the reference number for any of them.

They are “GMT meteorite”, “Batman”, etc.

[Harry-57]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

Really?

Just which reference are you referring to as a "Pepsi?"

In a face-to-face conversation with the watch present or in a post with a picture, it might be obvious, but otherwise, you could be referring to anything with a red and blue bezel.

That's a good point.

[Andad]

Originally Posted by Tools

Nicknames are fine if they mean something or are "earned": Paul Newman, Pussy Galore, etc.

The desire to immediately jump into the Comic Book world or a bad-coffee shop for a "name" based on little but a cape or cup color, or rename it once again because it's shinier or another minor reason is likely more confusing for new enthusiasts. Plus, it's childish, as somebody else noted.

[GradyPhilpott]

Originally Posted by Wismo

I have a really nice, 15 Rolex collection. I bought almost all of them through ADs in the last three years.



I could not tell you the reference number for any of them.



They are “GMT meteorite”, “Batman”, etc.

That's good for you, but you're not really a collector or a hobbyist. You take no interest in the finer details of the hobby and your very nice collection is based primarily on what's available at the AD and your obvious large bank account.

You do have a collection in the broadest sense of the term, but without a deeper interest in horology, history, reference numbers, evolution of design and a gillion little details, you're just a guy with a lot of watches.

That's nothing against you, but you and I are different breeds.

I have a large collection of things that go bang, but I'm not really a collector.

I just use them for fun and whatnot, but my base of knowledge is very rudimentary and I like it that way.

[SocialMediaUser]

Originally Posted by GradyPhilpott

That's good for you, but you're not really a collector or a hobbyist. You take no interest in the finer details of the hobby and your very nice collection is based primarily on what's available at the AD and your obvious large bank account.

You do have a collection in the broadest sense of the term, but without a deeper interest in horology, history, reference numbers, evolution of design and a gillion little details, you're just a guy with a lot of watches.

That's nothing against you, but you and I are different breeds.

I have a large collection of things that go bang, but I'm not really a collector.

I just use them for fun and whatnot, but my base of knowledge is very rudimentary and I like it that way.

So to sum it up.

You and your interest in guns is what 98% of the watchowners have for interest in watches?