So I posted this today and sparked a tantrum.

[erhein]

Originally Posted by G'ed

Haters gonna hate.

Here’s my Rolex.

Ha! It's only rated to a depth of 660 feet. It would never occur to me to wear a watch rated at less than 1,000 feet. (sniff, sniff)

[KAHN]

I personally prefer a four door.

[r8t3d_M]

From my experience, there will always be people like that on social media. It's best to ignore them and go about your business. That's a great picture and even better timepiece!

[2Redbulls]

One of the reasons I like TRF is because of the folks on it. We share similar interests and each have our own favorites but rarely does something ever get person or nasty. You just don't see it here. The other thing I like is that the Moderators do give us some flexibility in debate without being overly punitive or editing heavily. Kudos.

[Albertone]

Originally Posted by Al1969

One of the reasons I don't care for social media(other than TRF).
Nice BB

I am a very happy GMTii owner, I was REALLY tempted by a Tudor just like yours. Went as far as going to the dealer to check it out. (Un)fortunately it was a bit too big for my wrist. But what a beaut! And one advantage it has over Rolex is that it's much less common, but genuine watch lovers will know and appreciate it. The rest ... who cares

Alberto

[faz]

Originally Posted by saskmh

That is a beautiful shot!

[gccmd]

Post a picture of a Patek in a reply to the hater and say it's better than his cheap ass Rolex. There is always someone with something that is more expensive.
That is a beautiful Tudor btw.

[Bluside]

I don't do Facebook, but I do partake in Tudor.

[machob55]

OMG, What a beautiful Tudor! Simply superb...

Sent from my R1 HD using Tapatalk

[Sublovin]

Great watch, but in fairness, I don't think a Tudor is a Rolex. Obviously the company agrees as well, or they wouldn't give it a different name.
Just like a Volkswagen is not a Porsche.
Tudor is great and can stand on its own, but it isn't a Rolex.

[KrismanX]

Well he sounds like an awesome person...

[watchmavan]

Originally Posted by Sublovin

Great watch, but in fairness, I don't think a Tudor is a Rolex. Obviously the company agrees as well, or they wouldn't give it a different name.

Just like a Volkswagen is not a Porsche.

Tudor is great and can stand on its own, but it isn't a Rolex.

I haven't followed all the posts, but is anyone saying they are? The fact is the forum thread is for both. The vintage pieces "are" Rolex with a different movement. Is a Daytona not a full Rolex with a Zenith movement?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[aes7.5x55]

That guy was absolutely right. You should be embarrassed to own such a thing. Today's your lucky day though, I'd be willing to take it off your hands and I'll even pay shipping. Seriously though, that's a fantastic picture.

[Buckeye4life]

I like Tudors. There are antagonistic people in all walks of life and it's not worth your time to play their games.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Quicksilver]

Originally Posted by Sublovin

Great watch, but in fairness, I don't think a Tudor is a Rolex. Obviously the company agrees as well, or they wouldn't give it a different name.
Just like a Volkswagen is not a Porsche.
Tudor is great and can stand on its own, but it isn't a Rolex.

You raise an interesting point - are we so carried away with the Tudor hype that we think they are Rolex? Fact is they both share the same DNA and you can see that clearly in the style of the watches and also the superb quality, fit and finish. The kinship with Rolex is very apparent even if they are not actually the same - kind of like your handsome/ beautiful kid sibling.

[HogwldFLTR]

The Facebook group was the Rolex Collectors World. The anti Tudor idiot is no longer a member having taken on the groups owner (and lost).

[Polarbears]

Originally Posted by Moggo

Do you think it will be sought after? I know you don't have a crystal ball but interesting to know :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Around 3,000 made. I can't see how it's not a very expensive watch sooner rather than later.

[Quicksilver]

Originally Posted by HogwldFLTR

The Facebook group was the Rolex Collectors World. The anti Tudor idiot is no longer a member having taken on the groups owner (and lost).

Poetic justice.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moggo]

Originally Posted by Polarbears

Around 3,000 made. I can't see how it's not a very expensive watch sooner rather than later.

A few still available on leather but none on the bracelet that I can find.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Sublovin]

Originally Posted by watchmavan

I haven't followed all the posts, but is anyone saying they are? The fact is the forum thread is for both. The vintage pieces "are" Rolex with a different movement. Is a Daytona not a full Rolex with a Zenith movement?



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Did you read the op? It isn't about this forum, it's about posting a Tudor on a Rolex Facebook page and getting grief for it.
And yes, people in this thread have said Tudor is Rolex. It isn't. That's just a fact

[watchmavan]

I joined the group just to read it all. Very entertaining.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[watchmavan]

Originally Posted by Sublovin

Did you read the op? It isn't about this forum, it's about posting a Tudor on a Rolex Facebook page and getting grief for it.

And yes, people in this thread have said Tudor is Rolex. It isn't. That's just a fact

Ahhh what's it matter? Rolex Shmolex... it's just another watch. Both owned by the Hans Wilsdorf Foundation neither owns the other.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[Sublovin]

Originally Posted by watchmavan

Ahhh what's it matter? Rolex Shmolex... it's just another watch. Both owned by the Hans Wilsdorf Foundation neither owns the other.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

You're missing the point. The "matter" is that everyone is acting surprised that people made comments because he posted a Tudor. I understand why...a Tudor isn't a Rolex, and it has absolutely nothing to do with who "owns" them.
End of "mattter"

[Moggo]

I know it probably been discussed before but is the ETA worth sourcing over the new in-house?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[fergusmcarthur]

Great looking watch, who cares what anyone else thinks.... I know I don't....

[beshannon]

Originally Posted by saskmh

I posted this on a Rolex group on Facebook today.

Well there is the problem.

[watchmavan]

Originally Posted by Sublovin

End of "mattter"

I take it you like the last word.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

[saskmh]

Originally Posted by Sublovin

You're missing the point. The "matter" is that everyone is acting surprised that people made comments because he posted a Tudor. I understand why...a Tudor isn't a Rolex, and it has absolutely nothing to do with who "owns" them.
End of "mattter"

Yes the group is called "Rolex collectors" and people post Tudors there all the time. It just happened to be that my Tudor was that last one posted before the guy (apparently now banned) went on his rant. I for one would never say that a Tudor is a Rolex. They are obviously different pieces and different companies. However, a lot of people recognize the history and link between the brands... we talk about Tudors on TRF all the time.

...the guy on FB just decided it was his day to throw a hissy fit.

It's not the end of the world, and nothing to get into an argument over either. I just found the over 200 comments to the guy comical. Just worth a good chuckle. That's all.

[Sublovin]

^^ yep, totally get it. As I said, I really like Tudor and I'm looking to get a Pelagos actually. I almost find it offensive that people sometimes try to lump Tudor in with Rolex because I think it's a strong enough brand to stand on its own.

[daveo5]

Social Media. One of the worst places to express an opinion on anything. It's a boil on the backside of the world. Hyde Park in London use to, maybe still does, was a location were anyone could get up on a soap box and spout, rant about practically anything. A constable was stationed there to ensure a modicum of order. If anyone is foolish enough to even hint a criticism of Rolex, thousands will rise up to defend their expensive model. I've worn Rolex for over 50 years. You might think I know a thing or two about the company and products. Well I do. Far more than some owner with his whatever Rolex and knows nothing except what he may read on BB post proclaiming the glories of THE watch. Solidity, quality, design and engineering that's what Rolex is. Forget all the hype of a bigger dial or is it Sky Dweller or Sea Dweller or a 43 or a 41. Nonsense. Now have at me.