ROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEXROLEX

jacksonian · 6 September 2011, 04:34 AM

I'm not arguing with you, Tommy. I don't think either side (you or the folks with the issue) should be so upset about it. I'm not. I simply said that IMHO that it's a legitimate complaint when the biggest selling point of the new composite material was how it resisted scratching/damage. That's all. Perhaps you're right and one day "non-matching composite 339's" will be all the rage.

6 September 2011, 04:34 AM	#11
jacksonian Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: NC, USA Posts: 125	I'm not arguing with you, Tommy. I don't think either side (you or the folks with the issue) should be so upset about it. I'm not. I simply said that IMHO that it's a legitimate complaint when the biggest selling point of the new composite material was how it resisted scratching/damage. That's all. Perhaps you're right and one day "non-matching composite 339's" will be all the rage.

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