The largest independent, non-commercial, consumer-oriented resource on the Internet for owners, collectors and enthusiasts of fine wristwatches. Online since 1998. | ||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Feel free to discuss pricing and specific dealers. But 'for sale' postings, commercial solicitation and ads are not allowed. Full archive of all messages is accessible through options in the Search and Preferences features. Privacy, policies and administrivia are covered in the Terms of Use.
For the answer to the NUMBER #1 most frequently asked question here--for details or value of a specific older Omega watch you have--go to: Tell Me About My Omega. | Learn more about How To Include Photos and HTML In Your Postings. | To contact someone with a question not relevant to other readers of the forum, please click on their email address and contact them privately. |
After responding to your Post initially, John, I went to the Omega site to see if Pierce Brosnan was still listed as an Ambassador.
He is not.
Then I searched "James Bond" as was interested to see that Mr. Brosnan's photo is still being used to promote the Bond watches for Omega. As I've written before here, I think his contract to play Bond provided for this, separate from any other deal he may have made to promote wider watch lines personally. See link below.
But what really got my attention there were the 3 watches featured. The 2531.80, of course, was first. Then the brother-watch, the 2535.80.00 GMT was there, and, altho I disagree w/ including it, I can at least understand the reasoning.
Then: The DeVille Co-Axial 4832.51.31 was shown as a Bond watch.
Does anyone else recall ever having seen this one among that category before? I'm trying to think if it was even a "Pierce Brosnan" collection watch (maybe grandfathered over to maintain interest altho the actor is gone).
It would certainly be consistent w/ the "new direction" we've been hearing about for Casino Royale. And consistent w/ the Rolex watches Sean Connery wore early on (note that in Dr. No, he wore his watch on a leather strap. Yet the lack of rotating bezel on the 4832.51.31 avoids the "wanna be" criticism.
If this was posted to "test the waters," how do you feel about the choice they may be making?
I'll be getting my eMail off to Omega to let them know what I think, forth with. Of that you can be sure!
Chronocentric and zOwie site design and contents (c) Copyright 1998-2005, Derek Ziglar; Copyright 2005-2008, Jeffrey M. Stein. All rights reserved. Use of this web site constitutes acceptance of the terms of use. | CONTACT | TERMS OF USE | TRANSLATE |