closing tag is in template navbar
Time Factors Watches



TZ-UK Fundraiser
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 56

Thread: What is a proper watch?

  1. #1
    Journeyman Idontgram's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    174

    What is a proper watch?

    Iím not asking for myself, just looking to generate discussion:

    I occasionally hear people say ...it was my first proper watchí or ...first luxury Swiss watch, which I think is a permutation of this. How would you people define this?

    To me, it implies a certain maturity, perhaps ability to wear more formally. Iím not sure cost comes into it as I wouldnít want to discount a watch as Ďimproperí because itís affordable but thereís probably something in the fact itís a bit of a stretch.

    I think of my nomos club dunkel as a proper watch but itís affordable, not Swiss and a little casual...


  2. #2
    Journeyman sickie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2020
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    449
    It's all about taste and everyone has different tastes. I don't even know if there's such a thing as a proper watch. If I like it and can afford it I'll buy it that's what I judge one buy but the one thing they all do no matter if it's a £10.00 or £10000.00. They all tell Time to varying degrees.

    Sent from my SM-N960F using TZ-UK mobile app

  3. #3
    Craftsman AKM's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Rotherham
    Posts
    834
    Quote Originally Posted by Idontgram View Post
    Iím not asking for myself, just looking to generate discussion:

    I occasionally hear people say ...it was my first proper watchí or ...first luxury Swiss watch, which I think is a permutation of this. How would you people define this?

    To me, it implies a certain maturity, perhaps ability to wear more formally. Iím not sure cost comes into it as I wouldnít want to discount a watch as Ďimproperí because itís affordable but thereís probably something in the fact itís a bit of a stretch.

    I think of my nomos club dunkel as a proper watch but itís affordable, not Swiss and a little casual...

    For many, it's the first watch which to them was expensive or from a recognised brand.

    For me, it needs to meet the following: be mechanical not quartz (and certainly not entry level quartz) not from a fashion brand and capable of being maintained and enjoyed in the long term. Ideally, the brand also needs to have some involvement in engineering the watch or its movement and not simply be selling white label genetic outsourced parts or having outsourced assembly.

    By my definition a 90s quartz TAG isn't a proper watch, yet something cheaper might be. For most people, it's simply the first watch that they cared about and which was likely to have been a stretch for them to buy.

    I know there's 'high end quartz' but for me, a first proper watch is best as a mechanical.

    Sent from my JSN-L21 using Tapatalk

  4. #4
    Without context it's a bit of a 'non-statement' to me... depending on where you are in life and what you're into at that time (watch wise!!)

    A proper watch at the age of 7 is probably digital, at 10 it may be analogue (maybe a snoopy quartz), at 16 auto, at 18 proper swiss (tag kirium), at 25 premium brands (rolex sub), at 40 maybe premium brands in PM or full on dress watch ... means so many different things to so many different people.

  5. #5
    Master Alansmithee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Burscough, UK
    Posts
    7,975
    Quote Originally Posted by Idontgram View Post
    I think of my nomos club dunkel as a proper watch but itís affordable, not Swiss and a little casual...
    The last time I checked in Watch Pro - the average selling price of a watch in the UK was £83...

    So I think it's likely most people would think say £300 was a lot to spend on a watch.

  6. #6
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Location
    Bristol uk
    Posts
    285
    For me my first proper watch was one that I purchased with my own money because I wanted it and loved it. I wore it out with pride because it looked cool. Quartz was fine. I think it might have been a pulsar date/adjust and a sekonda moon watch both of which I still own. Ooooo to be 21 again.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Alansmithee View Post
    The last time I checked in Watch Pro - the average selling price of a watch in the UK was £83...

    So I think it's likely most people would think say £300 was a lot to spend on a watch.
    Unless it's a smart watch, in which case it's 'good value' even though it'll be replaced in a year or two...

  8. #8
    Grand Master abraxas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    London
    Posts
    32,573
    I couldn't put it into words but if you show me a watch I can tell you if it is a proper watch or not.

    To me these days, a proper watch is a watch that is respected by the watch community (and not hodinkee).
    "How much is that 'tona in the window?"

  9. #9
    Grand Master abraxas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    London
    Posts
    32,573
    According to Archie, a proper watch is a Patek. To which I agree.
    "How much is that 'tona in the window?"

  10. #10

    What is a proper watch?

    I think itís either being mechanical, analogue (so a Seiko 5 would count), or a certain level of Ďfinishí (and thus usually considerable price) - so a Seiko 5 in that instance wouldnít count, but a Grand Seiko, or Seiko ĎWillardí would.

  11. #11
    Journeyman Idontgram's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    174
    Quote Originally Posted by Alansmithee View Post
    The last time I checked in Watch Pro - the average selling price of a watch in the UK was £83...

    So I think it's likely most people would think say £300 was a lot to spend on a watch.
    Youíre absolutely right Alan. Perhaps affordable was a poor choice of words, I simply meant that itís not Speedmaster / Explorer 1 money. Those seem to be the ones I mostly commonly see people write about as their first proper / good watch.

    Jon


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  12. #12
    Master
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Sussex, UK
    Posts
    4,701
    A Ďproperí watch costs loads of money and is generally unavailable.

  13. #13
    Journeyman Idontgram's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    174
    Also, In my original post, I wrote you, then I thought people sounded better, forgot to delete you. Ended up with you people. Simple error, no offence meant to anyone!

    Quote Originally Posted by Idontgram View Post
    :

    I occasionally hear people say ...it was my first proper watchí or ...first luxury Swiss watch, which I think is a permutation of this. How would you people define this?

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  14. #14
    Grand Master snowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Hampshire
    Posts
    10,830
    I think you know when you see one.

    For me, it would be mechanical and more than a week's wage (anything less is likely to be impulse buy territory).

    In my case, my first 'proper' watch was my vintage Breitling Cosmonaute - It was one I discovered, researched, pursued and finally obtained and I wanted IT, not a 'brand name watch'.

    It wasn't easy to get and it was expensive enough that I had to think long and hard before buying (although I wish I'd bought an all black one and a Navitimer too now, having seen today's prices! ).

    I'm sure though many will have very different views on what it means, but I think, as some have already said, it depends on context.

    Anyone who discounts a mechanical TAG (say, no axe grinding here) as 'not a proper watch' is probably just been snobbish, whereas someone who says 'My first proper watch was a Seiko 5' is probably meaning 'my first mechanical watch'.

    M
    Breitling Cosmonaute 809 - What's not to like?

  15. #15
    Master Tetlee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Somerset
    Posts
    2,108
    The one I would have referred to as my first proper watch was when I bought my first analogue which was an Animal watch back in the early 90's. After owning numerous digital Casio watches growing up that felt pretty mature at the time and a departure from the digital gimmickry I'd always loved.

    I know alot of people would class that as fashion watch tat and shouldn't qualify as a proper watch, but hey that was how I felt about it when I got it.

  16. #16
    Craftsman RS404's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Norwich, Norfolk
    Posts
    533
    It's a watch that someone who was into watches would buy and could outlast the owner if well looked after.

    Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

  17. #17
    Master
    Join Date
    Mar 2016
    Location
    Lake District
    Posts
    1,461
    One that tells the time.

  18. #18
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jul 2017
    Location
    Felixstowe, UK
    Posts
    988
    Quote Originally Posted by Idontgram View Post
    Iím not asking for myself, just looking to generate discussion:

    I occasionally hear people say ...it was my first proper watchí or ...first luxury Swiss watch, which I think is a permutation of this. How would you people define this?

    To me, it implies a certain maturity, perhaps ability to wear more formally. Iím not sure cost comes into it as I wouldnít want to discount a watch as Ďimproperí because itís affordable but thereís probably something in the fact itís a bit of a stretch.

    I think of my nomos club dunkel as a proper watch but itís affordable, not Swiss and a little casual...

    Thatís definitely a proper watch. I foolishly let mine go and miss it desperately.


    Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

  19. #19
    Master
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    swansea uk
    Posts
    1,340
    To me it means a watch that the manufacturer made a significant effort to make high quality, long lasting, reliable and servicable watch.

    Not just a cheap thing banged together on a tight budget that is mostly disposable and weak

  20. #20
    Master Alansmithee's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Burscough, UK
    Posts
    7,975
    Quote Originally Posted by Idontgram View Post
    Youíre absolutely right Alan. Perhaps affordable was a poor choice of words, I simply meant that itís not Speedmaster / Explorer 1 money. Those seem to be the ones I mostly commonly see people write about as their first proper / good watch.

    Jon


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

    Still a very nice watch however! :-)

  21. #21
    Master MartynJC (UK)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Surrey, UK. OdiŠxere or somewhere in-between
    Posts
    9,023
    Blog Entries
    19
    This is a proper watch allbeit quartz - the iconic Omega Seamaster 2221.80.00

  22. #22
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Location
    Bristol
    Posts
    351
    "Proper" watches exist at any price point, in my opinion. Right down to the humble F91-W.

  23. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by xellos99 View Post
    To me it means a watch that the manufacturer made a significant effort to make high quality, long lasting, reliable and servicable watch.

    Not just a cheap thing banged together on a tight budget that is mostly disposable and weak
    Agree with this.

  24. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by Pagan View Post
    "Proper" watches exist at any price point, in my opinion. Right down to the humble F91-W.
    And this.

  25. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by xellos99 View Post
    To me it means a watch that the manufacturer made a significant effort to make high quality, long lasting, reliable and servicable watch.
    Agreed.

    I also think it should be something that you aspire to own and once purchased you look after. If I were to put a figure on it I would say something around a months salary.

  26. #26
    Apprentice
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Essex
    Posts
    26
    I think itís an interesting term. For me itís subjective and based on where you are in the journey.

    When I was a boy the Timex my dad bought for me and put on my wrist felt like my first íproperí watch, likewise the flick-flak I have for my son will feel Ďproperí to him. When I bought my first g shock when I was 15 or so that felt proper because it was so tough and capable, and at the time was at a price that felt significant to me.

    The moniker was certainly applied to the Tag my wife bought me when we got married - my first spendy Swiss watch, and when I bought my speedie that felt more Ďproperí again.

    Nothing diminishes how Ďproperí I feel the earlier watches were, even if the more recent ones cost more.

    Nowadays I look for purpose in the design of a watch, and good build quality. Brand is secondary to a degree, price point largely irrelevant.

  27. #27
    Grand Master snowman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Hampshire
    Posts
    10,830
    Quote Originally Posted by boring_sandwich View Post
    Agreed.

    I also think it should be something that you aspire to own and once purchased you look after. If I were to put a figure on it I would say something around a months salary.
    I've never spent a month's salary on a watch (and probably never will!).

    Pretty sure, though, that a few of mine are 'proper'.

    Quote Originally Posted by Pagan View Post
    "Proper" watches exist at any price point, in my opinion. Right down to the humble F91-W.
    I was going to disagree with this, but I can see that the F91-W fulfils a purpose it sets out to. Indeed I bought one decades ago specifically to windsurf in.

    On the other hand, the main reason I bought it was because I regarded it as 'disposable' (I wonder where it is, because I'm sure I never lost it!), so maybe that removes it (for me, at least) from the 'proper watch' category.

    That said, unlike G-Shocks, most of which I view as fashion watches (I know that will infuriate many), I have a regard for the F-91W that far outweighs its cost.

    M
    Last edited by snowman; 27th September 2020 at 09:41.
    Breitling Cosmonaute 809 - What's not to like?

  28. #28
    Master murkeywaters's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    Near the sea
    Posts
    4,195
    When you start thinking of a safe and insurance!!

    Seriously though, for me it was a watch that I really liked the look of so much that I was willing to spend at the time what I considered a lot of money, this then escalates to the point of looking at a few watches in your collection and you ask yourself how you ended up with this value in watches!!

    I blame TZ..

  29. #29
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,575
    Mechanical and not a fashion brand, starts from seiko.

  30. #30
    Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    England and Spain
    Posts
    4,475
    All watches that work are proper watches, it's just that some are better than others. It's like asking what is a proper coat.

  31. #31
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    Leeds, UK
    Posts
    787
    To me a proper watch is one that you don't see yourself growing out of. That will stay on the wrist as one grows old and as fashion change. For some that is a cheap quartz watch - sometimes with sentimental attachment - for others it is a Patek.

  32. #32
    Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    England and Spain
    Posts
    4,475
    Quote Originally Posted by jwillans View Post
    To me a proper watch is one that you don't see yourself growing out of. That will stay on the wrist as one grows old and as fashion change. For some that is a cheap quartz watch - sometimes with sentimental attachment - for others it is a Patek.
    The watch needs a proper owner, not someone who keeps chopping and changing and then moans later on about letting it go.

  33. #33
    It's one you bond with, preferably w/o stickers.

  34. #34
    Master earlofsodbury's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    The Flat Stuff, Lincs.
    Posts
    1,335
    Proper watch Smart watch.

    Anything else goes - pocket, fob, wrist, quartz, hybrid, mechanical, cheap, expensive, big name, no-name, Chinese, Swiss &c...

  35. #35
    Master RustyBin5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Scotland central
    Posts
    9,530

    What is a proper watch?

    A proper watch to me is one thatís not disposable. One that you would pay to service.
    Last edited by RustyBin5; 27th September 2020 at 17:02.

  36. #36
    Journeyman Idontgram's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2020
    Location
    Leeds
    Posts
    174
    Quote Originally Posted by RustyBin5 View Post
    A proper watch to be is one thatís not disposable. One that you would pay to service.
    I like that. I must say that in contrast to some views expressed above, I donít consider my digital Casios proper watches. Fun, durable, reliable but disposable. If they started playing up, Iíd see it as a welcome opportunity to buy a fun new model.

    As for a monthís salary... Iím not sure Iíll ever have a proper watch by that criteria. Though I recognise that how much one spends on this hobby is a very personal thing and this whole discussion is entirely subjective.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  37. #37
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Location
    Bristol uk
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by Mick P View Post
    All watches that work are proper watches, it's just that some are better than others. It's like asking what is a proper coat.
    I have to agree with you. Seems to be a lot of snobbery with this . Who really gives a monkeys if itís mechanical or quartz, £400 or £4000? As long as it tells the time and you like it what else matters unless of course you think that wearing an expensive piece is an extension of your pecker:)


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  38. #38
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Bristol
    Posts
    178
    For me it's a watch that the maker endeavoured to make function well in (at least) one of the fundamentals of watchiness (timekeeping, water resistance, durability, complications, finishing etc etc). Not something designed to sell based on looks and branding alone.

    On that basis my first was a Seiko 5.

    I don't think price is a good basis for a definition. Building an effective watch for a low cost is an endevour as worthy as creating the best watch regardless of cost.

    ...also, on the basis of the week's or month's salary definition, I still don't own a proper watch, which doesn't seem accurate!

    Sent from my SM-G973F using TZ-UK mobile app

  39. #39
    Master
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    England and Spain
    Posts
    4,475
    Quote Originally Posted by Stilgoe1972 View Post
    I have to agree with you. Seems to be a lot of snobbery with this . Who really gives a monkeys if it’s mechanical or quartz, £400 or £4000? As long as it tells the time and you like it what else matters unless of course you think that wearing an expensive piece is an extension of your pecker:)


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    There is nothing wrong with wearing a watch that is an extension of your pecker. Anyone who spends say £20k on a watch is keeping a lot of people in a job whereas the tight fisted git who spends £20 is contributing nothing to society.

    Big spenders are very useful people.

    Please note this is a rare time I am advocating Keynesian economics.

  40. #40
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Location
    Bristol uk
    Posts
    285
    Quote Originally Posted by Mick P View Post
    There is nothing wrong with wearing a watch that is an extension of your pecker. Anyone who spends say £20k on a watch is keeping a lot of people in a job whereas the tight fisted git who spends £20 is contributing nothing to society.

    Big spenders are very useful people.

    Please note this is a rare time I am advocating Keynesian economics.
    Everyone to their own I suppose :) Luckily Iím not in need of an extension so Iíll stick with the non Willy waving prices as mine still works as it should. I donít have a £20 watch so I donít fall into that sector of buyers. Does £120 fall into that sector?
    I do agree though that big spenders are needed to keep the cogs turning.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  41. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by RustyBin5 View Post
    A proper watch to me is one thatís not disposable. One that you would pay to service.
    I remember seeing a programme about Vostok watches on RT basically saying so cheap if you damage it you can just throw it away and buy another.

  42. #42
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Stilgoe1972 View Post
    Everyone to their own I suppose :) Luckily Iím not in need of an extension so Iíll stick with the non Willy waving prices as mine still works as it should. I donít have a £20 watch so I donít fall into that sector of buyers. Does £120 fall into that sector?
    I do agree though that big spenders are needed to keep the cogs turning.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    A discrete 33m calatrava in white gold would be much less willy waving than those large rose gold plated Daniel wellingtons fashion watches

  43. #43
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Location
    Bristol uk
    Posts
    285

    What is a proper watch?

    Quote Originally Posted by ac11111 View Post
    A discrete 33m calatrava in white gold would be much less willy waving than those large rose gold plated Daniel wellingtons fashion watches
    Very true . There are some monstrosities about. Mind, they donít have to be cheap to be a monstrosity. I just had a look at the 33mm calatrava as Iíve never seen one. Itís not what I would call an interesting watch. Looks like a sekonda from the 80s.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  44. #44
    Craftsman
    Join Date
    Nov 2019
    Location
    Bristol
    Posts
    351
    Quote Originally Posted by snowman View Post
    I've never spent a month's salary on a watch (and probably never will!).

    Pretty sure, though, that a few of mine are 'proper'.



    I was going to disagree with this, but I can see that the F91-W fulfils a purpose it sets out to. Indeed I bought one decades ago specifically to windsurf in.

    On the other hand, the main reason I bought it was because I regarded it as 'disposable' (I wonder where it is, because I'm sure I never lost it!), so maybe that removes it (for me, at least) from the 'proper watch' category.

    That said, unlike G-Shocks, most of which I view as fashion watches (I know that will infuriate many), I have a regard for the F-91W that far outweighs its cost.

    M
    I agree that for most people these days, an F-91W would be considered disposable, just because they're so cheap. But they aren't built to be disposable, and that's what makes them proper IMO.

    They have a 7-10 year battery life, and are built to last, not built to fail like most consumer electronics these days.

    I think they count!

  45. #45
    Apprentice
    Join Date
    Jul 2020
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    9
    I think thereís probably an argument that your first ďproperĒ watch is the one you get after first really ďunderstanding ď or starting to understand watches. If you get something you love as a kid, you donít really understand it - itís just got a cool colour or something. Many people will have expensive (or fairly expensive) watches they got as gifts but to them it might as well be a £50 cheap disposable (other than the brand name perhaps).

    However, if youíve started to have an interest in watches, and you understand them a bit and you understand what you want in a watch, then it means something to you. There arenít then any other criteria really. If you know what youíre looking at and like quartz for its superior time keeping, then your first ďproperĒ watch could be a fifty quid quartz watch with a bit of history behind the brand. It could be a £100 Japanese movement auto. It could be an entry level Swiss mechanical or a super expensive luxury brand.

    But the difference for me between ďproperĒ and ďnot-properĒ is understanding watches and buying according to something more than just how it looks.

  46. #46
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,575
    Quote Originally Posted by Stilgoe1972 View Post
    Very true . There are some monstrosities about. Mind, they donít have to be cheap to be a monstrosity. I just had a look at the 33mm calatrava as Iíve never seen one. Itís not what I would call an interesting watch. Looks like a sekonda from the 80s.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    Oh yer, Iím just saying, price is largely irrelevant in this discussion, on proper/showy/monstrosity or not, so many out there that fits all those categories across all prices

  47. #47
    To me the first proper watch is one you love for more than just its fashion design, ability to tell the time and its brand.


    Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app

  48. #48
    Master PreacherCain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    London, UK
    Posts
    2,570
    An interesting question, this - insofar as the concept of "proper watch" holds any water (and personally, I'm not sure it does). Purchase price seems a poor analogue, in that there's no way on God's green Earth I'd pay market price for a Rolex Submariner (I just don't "get" Rolex, I'm not a hater) but equally, that's clearly a "proper" watch.

    Mechanical only? Nope. My Snowflake and X-33 are ridiculously accurate, beautifully engineered, and well suited to the jobs they do. Also, quartz.

    I'm left with "a watch that makes you smile, and that you enjoy". It's woolly, and imprecise (hence my wondering whether "proper watch" is a helpful concept at all), but it holds true for everything I have in the box, from my first ever analogue watch (midsize TAG F1, given to me for good GCSE grades, 1992), to my extensive but low value collection of G-Shocks, to my hilariously '70s Seiko chronos, to my "premier league" spendy Swiss stuff. Everything is there because I enjoy the aesthetic, or the design, or the engineering, or the memories. Or any combination of these things.

  49. #49
    Master
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Location
    Bedfordshire, UK
    Posts
    1,087
    I think the previous post of 'a proper watch is one you'd have serviced' fits for me.
    I have a few watches that I'd not hesitate to bin if they stopped working but most are those that will be serviced and / or have money spent on them to keep them operational in the future.
    I only have one watch that I'm keeping in a non operational state and that's an old Citizen eco drive that accompanied me on my world travels a few decades back. I'll not get rid of it but doubt it'll ever work again.

  50. #50
    Journeyman
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    191
    I don't think it's price, because most of us would consider a Seiko 5 more of a 'proper' watch than a MVMT or Daniel Wellington at 5 times the price.

    Don't think it's quartz v mechanical either because I don't think too many people would consider a Breitling Superquartz or a GS 9F to not be 'proper' watches.

    And I'm not even sure it's brands. Everyone would consider a Tag Heuer Monaco to be a proper watch, but not maybe not some of their entry level quartz offerings?

    I think as others have said, it maybe comes down to effort, engineering and design. I can appreciate the effort that goes into Seiko 5, coming up with 5 things you need in a watch and then finding a way to make it as affordable as possible is an effort worth appreciating. Slapping a logo on a cheap Chinese quartz watch and paying some celebrities to market it for you is not.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Do Not Sell My Personal Information