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. |
GZ, not being very impressed with how much something costs as a measure of quality, talk to me about why so many watch brands at all levels use ETA movements? I understand and accept the mechanical issues experienced by some 2892 A2 movements, but I don't know, nor do I accept that Rolex has not experienced some of the same issues during the evolution of their movements. Why do so many watch makers stake their reputations on ETA if their are better movements to be had? Breitling, Omega, IWC and others come to mind as brands who have the choice to go elsewhere, but do not. Do you know why? Is it a Swatch Grp thing? Are these brands part of a larger business plan? Thanks.
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 |