All I said was that it’s “fugly” which was my opinion then you took it personally by implying the empty cash wallet implying that I can’t afford luxury watches. Now you’re suggesting that you bought it not for for its appreciation value which is fair enough, I understand that but your earlier post was about the prices of the watches. Anyway my comment was just my own opinion and it was nothing to do with the “brands” rather the aesthetic look.... beauty is in the eye of beholder.
Obviously I can't, because they do deprecate, like MOST things in life. But to be fair, I didn't buy it as an investment, I bought it because I enjoy it, and never suggested it was an appreciating asset. This said, it's still worth around £3,000, and I bought it for less than list price, so as and when I ever sell it i won't have lost a fortune. The reason that some (not all) Rolex models appreciate is due to how Rolex control the supply, not because they are especially good. When I ordered the GMT I had to sign an agreement that I will allow the supplying AD to keep the papers in their safe for the first year, to prevent 'flipping'.
Can you show me that this omega will hold its value or show me an omega over the past 5 years that have held their rrp value? :/
Same with the Omega you gimp.
LOL! you've got a Tag and you think it's class, It's money down the drain with resale values dropping quicker than Jordans panties.