Louis vuitton and prada

[ernest]

Also too small for your wrist.

I have no complex with ******** so I do not need a huge watch as you do...

 

[ernest]

Hey stupid indian guy, check this website for prices of Cartier and JL http://www.passions.com.sg

 

[kalra2411]

Quote:

(kalra2411 @ 15 July 2004, 5:59)

Originally Posted by ernest,16 July 2004, 01:56

A JL chronograph in STEEL with NO diamonds costs 10 000 euros as you could see it on my picture (9 750 euros) As you said Cartier is more expensive, HOW much cots a CHRONOFLEX in STEEL with no diamonds?

?

How much costs your chrono with diamonds?
JL Reverso (500 Pounds), which is similar to Tank Francaise (3500 Pounds) I also have the steel one (chronoreflex), it is 5000 pounds My chrono is 25,000 pounds.
You must be very very rich if you are not you are STUPID I will tell you how to become : 1) Buy JL @ 500 GBP in UK and sell them at their retail price in France  ( 10 times) 2) Buy Cartier CHRONO at his retail price (4000 euros maxi) in France and sell it at 5 000 GBP in UK
Sorry, you are right, steel chrono is 2500 pounds, $5000 US. But JL Reverso is 500, my friend bought one last week, silver with green croc strap.

 

[kalra2411]

Also my chrono is $25,000 US not 25,000 pounds.

 

[imageWIS]

Quote:

(kalra2411 @ 15 July 2004, 10:03) Actually, Mr. Watch Expert the Cartier Chrono-Reflex has been deemed a far finer movement than most automatic movements on the market, by such esteemed publications as Horology International, Catro D'Vesquela and COSC Bi-Annual Review. Therefore, why you constantly call it an inferior quartz movement also brings me many laughs.

Tell me again how Quartz Cartier's are better than mechanical Tourbillon JLC's...

Shows how much you understand, I said automatic movement, not mechanical (i.e. wound) - a tourbillion is a complication. I would not know why the Chrono-Reflex is better than most automatic movements, but as you should know, three much esteemed publications in the world of watches have said so.
Yeah, NO. Automatic watches are mechanical... it is you who yet again write without any fathom of what you are actually writing about. But, yet get frustrated when people do not understand what you are writing about. Jon.

 

[ernest]

Check this website = http://www.cresus.fr/acceuil.php You can find this 1) Cartier Tank Francaise = YOUR WATCH IN STEEL you said having paid 5000 GBP Montre chrono CARTIER Tank Française en acier. Mouvement chronoreflex. Dimensions 28 x 28 mm. Fonction chrono et date. Glace saphir. Bracelet en acier d'origine. LivrÃ

e avec Ã

crin et document d'origine. Garantie un an. Prix du neuf 4430 € = RETAIL PRICE 2) Montre JAEGER LECOULTRE Ultra Thin en acier. Mouvement mÃ

canique à remontage manuel. Diamètre 34 mm. Fond squelette. Bracelet cuir et boucle dÃ

ployante en acier d'origine. LivrÃ

e avec Ã

crin Jaeger Lecoultre et garantie d'un an. Prix du neuf 3800 € = RETAIL PRICE The cheaper JL watch Any comments?

 

[kalra2411]

Quote:

(kalra2411 @ 15 July 2004, 5:14)

Originally Posted by kalra2411,15 July 2004, 10:03

Actually, Mr. Watch Expert the Cartier Chrono-Reflex has been deemed a far finer movement than most automatic movements on the market, by such esteemed publications as Horology International, Catro D'Vesquela and COSC Bi-Annual Review. Therefore, why you constantly call it an inferior quartz movement also brings me many laughs.

Tell me again how Quartz Cartier's are better than mechanical Tourbillon JLC's...

Shows how much you understand, I said automatic movement, not mechanical (i.e. wound) - a tourbillion is a complication. I would not know why the Chrono-Reflex is better than most automatic movements, but as you should know, three much esteemed publications in the world of watches have said so.
Yeah, NO. Automatic watches are mechanical... it is you who yet again write without any fathom of what you are actually writing about. But, yet get frustrated when people do not understand what you are writing about. Jon.
I do realise that an automatic movement works mechanicaly, but you may not realise, a wound movement and a automatic movement are NOT the same.

 

[kalra2411]

Check this website = http://www.cresus.fr/acceuil.php  You can find this 1) Cartier Tank Francaise  = YOUR WATCH IN STEEL you said having paid 5000 GBP Montre chrono CARTIER Tank Française en acier. Mouvement chronoreflex. Dimensions 28 x 28 mm. Fonction chrono et date. Glace saphir. Bracelet en acier d'origine. LivrÃ

e avec Ã

crin et document d'origine. Garantie un an. Prix du neuf 4430 € = RETAIL PRICE   2) Montre JAEGER LECOULTRE Ultra Thin en acier. Mouvement mÃ

canique à remontage manuel. Diamètre 34 mm. Fond squelette. Bracelet cuir et boucle dÃ

ployante en acier d'origine. LivrÃ

e avec Ã

crin Jaeger Lecoultre et garantie d'un an. Prix du neuf 3800 € = RETAIL PRICE The cheaper JL watch Any comments?

Yes, look at my previous comments, I made a mistake with the prices, with wrong currencys.

 

[LabelKing]

Labelking,

To clarify, the cal. 89 pocket watch in 18kt yellow gold was sold by Antiquorum in Geneva on behalf of Patek for Sfr. 4,950,000 ($3,000,000) was the most expensive new Patek ever sold.

I think the piece you are thinking of is the Graves Supercomplication, which was sold in 1999 by Sotheby's for the immense sum (for a pocket watch) of $11,003,500. Whilst, it is the most expensive portable timepiece ever sold, it does not hold the record for the most expensive timepiece sold, that title goes towards Vacheron.

Jon.

Yes, I got confused. There were a few highly complicated pocket watches by Patek sold at various auctions for those figures.

The Kallista is that diamond women's watch, yes? I have a penchat though, for the Ulysee Nardin Freak, and Genghis Khan.

 

[kalra2411]

Quote:

(kalra2411 @ 15 July 2004, 6:03) Also too small for your wrist.
I have no complex with ******** so I do not need a huge watch as you do...
Tank Francise is HUGE? What about Franck Muller, Rolex, and Jacob & Co??

 

[imageWIS]

Quote:

(ernest @ 16 July 2004, 12:55)

Originally Posted by kalra2411,15 July 2004, 09:23

If you thought that I would further argue this, you are mistaken. By the way, Jon, I may also bring to your note, that Lakshmi Mittal does know of more expensive watches than a Patek. Vacheron, Richard Mille and Roger Dubis cost more than Lang, see I know more than you, two can play at the same game. Although, as you, the watch expert that you are should indeed realise, the most expensive production watch is, wait for it, a Patek. Money is very much part of the equation, the Cartier and the Patek shown are at similar price points, with a difference of only about five thousand pounds. I am glad to see that you have said that we are not talking about monetary value of timepieces, even though I brought about the subject, it is so nice to see that you are telling me what I am talking about. It is obviously not like comparing Loro Piana to polyester. It is like comparing maybe a fashion suit, e.g. Dior Homme, to a similarly priced Kiton, which I see nothing wrong with doing. I did realise that the Patek had a better movement, but it looks bad, who cares what it is like inside, that's like saying you would drive a Toyota instead of a Mercedes/Bentley/Ferrari because the Toyota can go faster, and has an engine which is better made. It does not matter that the Toyota looks terrible to you does it? It does not matter that people will still think you are driving a Toyota does it? The point of such products is to get the reaction from others. Ernest thinks that Jaeger Le-Couture is better than Cartier, enough said in terms of a more money buys a better product ideology.
Who cares? Me and many people who loves really nice stuff and not just in fashion, people who wear non fused suits, 7 fold ties, sea island shirts... French Tank is a great watch for design, I have one so I can not tell you it is not. But it does not worth his price because of the poor movement. Many Patek are great watches for design but also for movement. That is funny = you show us Cartier for women (or for sissies&#33

. I can not imagine you think such a watch is nice for a man... If you think so, you are more ridiculious than I thought. Go and learn about watches, Cartier, Patek and JL and comme back...
My you are in a strange world if you see women wearing chrongraph watches.
For "˜supposedly' reading all these watch magazines, somehow the entire large wristwatch trend and the fact that women have heavily contributed to this trend has evaded you; interesting. So, you have never seen a woman wear a Technomarine (a huge world-wide craze)? Or a Rolex Daytona (Even Tarantino showed this in Kill Bill vol. 2, when the bride takes off her watch)? So, basically you only read what you want to read? Whether the reading is regarding horology magazines, peoples posts, etc... Jon.

 

[kalra2411]

Quote:

(kalra2411 @ 15 July 2004, 7:58)

Originally Posted by ernest,16 July 2004, 12:55

Originally Posted by kalra2411,15 July 2004, 09:23

If you thought that I would further argue this, you are mistaken. By the way, Jon, I may also bring to your note, that Lakshmi Mittal does know of more expensive watches than a Patek. Vacheron, Richard Mille and Roger Dubis cost more than Lang, see I know more than you, two can play at the same game. Although, as you, the watch expert that you are should indeed realise, the most expensive production watch is, wait for it, a Patek. Money is very much part of the equation, the Cartier and the Patek shown are at similar price points, with a difference of only about five thousand pounds. I am glad to see that you have said that we are not talking about monetary value of timepieces, even though I brought about the subject, it is so nice to see that you are telling me what I am talking about. It is obviously not like comparing Loro Piana to polyester. It is like comparing maybe a fashion suit, e.g. Dior Homme, to a similarly priced Kiton, which I see nothing wrong with doing. I did realise that the Patek had a better movement, but it looks bad, who cares what it is like inside, that's like saying you would drive a Toyota instead of a Mercedes/Bentley/Ferrari because the Toyota can go faster, and has an engine which is better made. It does not matter that the Toyota looks terrible to you does it? It does not matter that people will still think you are driving a Toyota does it? The point of such products is to get the reaction from others. Ernest thinks that Jaeger Le-Couture is better than Cartier, enough said in terms of a more money buys a better product ideology.
Who cares? Me and many people who loves really nice stuff and not just in fashion, people who wear non fused suits, 7 fold ties, sea island shirts... French Tank is a great watch for design, I have one so I can not tell you it is not. But it does not worth his price because of the poor movement. Many Patek are great watches for design but also for movement. That is funny = you show us Cartier for women (or for sissies&#33

. I can not imagine you think such a watch is nice for a man... If you think so, you are more ridiculious than I thought. Go and learn about watches, Cartier, Patek and JL and comme back...
My you are in a strange world if you see women wearing chrongraph watches.
For "˜supposedly' reading all these watch magazines, somehow the entire large wristwatch trend and the fact that women have heavily contributed to this trend has evaded you; interesting. So, you have never seen a woman wear a Technomarine (a huge world-wide craze)? Or a Rolex Daytona (Even Tarantino showed this in Kill Bill vol. 2, when the bride takes off her watch)? So, basically you only read what you want to read? Whether the reading is regarding horology magazines, peoples posts, etc... Jon.
Do you know the difference between Chronograph and a big watch?

 

[ernest]

Quote:

(kalra2411 @ 15 July 2004, 7:58)

Originally Posted by ernest,16 July 2004, 12:55

Originally Posted by kalra2411,15 July 2004, 09:23

If you thought that I would further argue this, you are mistaken. By the way, Jon, I may also bring to your note, that Lakshmi Mittal does know of more expensive watches than a Patek. Vacheron, Richard Mille and Roger Dubis cost more than Lang, see I know more than you, two can play at the same game. Although, as you, the watch expert that you are should indeed realise, the most expensive production watch is, wait for it, a Patek. Money is very much part of the equation, the Cartier and the Patek shown are at similar price points, with a difference of only about five thousand pounds. I am glad to see that you have said that we are not talking about monetary value of timepieces, even though I brought about the subject, it is so nice to see that you are telling me what I am talking about. It is obviously not like comparing Loro Piana to polyester. It is like comparing maybe a fashion suit, e.g. Dior Homme, to a similarly priced Kiton, which I see nothing wrong with doing. I did realise that the Patek had a better movement, but it looks bad, who cares what it is like inside, that's like saying you would drive a Toyota instead of a Mercedes/Bentley/Ferrari because the Toyota can go faster, and has an engine which is better made. It does not matter that the Toyota looks terrible to you does it? It does not matter that people will still think you are driving a Toyota does it? The point of such products is to get the reaction from others. Ernest thinks that Jaeger Le-Couture is better than Cartier, enough said in terms of a more money buys a better product ideology.
Who cares? Me and many people who loves really nice stuff and not just in fashion, people who wear non fused suits, 7 fold ties, sea island shirts... French Tank is a great watch for design, I have one so I can not tell you it is not. But it does not worth his price because of the poor movement. Many Patek are great watches for design but also for movement. That is funny = you show us Cartier for women (or for sissies&#33

. I can not imagine you think such a watch is nice for a man... If you think so, you are more ridiculious than I thought. Go and learn about watches, Cartier, Patek and JL and comme back...
My you are in a strange world if you see women wearing chrongraph watches.
For "˜supposedly' reading all these watch magazines, somehow the entire large wristwatch trend and the fact that women have heavily contributed to this trend has evaded you; interesting. So, you have never seen a woman wear a Technomarine (a huge world-wide craze)? Or a Rolex Daytona (Even Tarantino showed this in Kill Bill vol. 2, when the bride takes off her watch)? So, basically you only read what you want to read? Whether the reading is regarding horology magazines, peoples posts, etc... Jon.
whom are you talkin to?

 

[kalra2411]

Quote:

(imageWIS @ 15 July 2004, 6:17)

Originally Posted by kalra2411,15 July 2004, 7:58

Originally Posted by ernest,16 July 2004, 12:55

Originally Posted by kalra2411,15 July 2004, 09:23

If you thought that I would further argue this, you are mistaken. By the way, Jon, I may also bring to your note, that Lakshmi Mittal does know of more expensive watches than a Patek. Vacheron, Richard Mille and Roger Dubis cost more than Lang, see I know more than you, two can play at the same game. Although, as you, the watch expert that you are should indeed realise, the most expensive production watch is, wait for it, a Patek. Money is very much part of the equation, the Cartier and the Patek shown are at similar price points, with a difference of only about five thousand pounds. I am glad to see that you have said that we are not talking about monetary value of timepieces, even though I brought about the subject, it is so nice to see that you are telling me what I am talking about. It is obviously not like comparing Loro Piana to polyester. It is like comparing maybe a fashion suit, e.g. Dior Homme, to a similarly priced Kiton, which I see nothing wrong with doing. I did realise that the Patek had a better movement, but it looks bad, who cares what it is like inside, that's like saying you would drive a Toyota instead of a Mercedes/Bentley/Ferrari because the Toyota can go faster, and has an engine which is better made. It does not matter that the Toyota looks terrible to you does it? It does not matter that people will still think you are driving a Toyota does it? The point of such products is to get the reaction from others. Ernest thinks that Jaeger Le-Couture is better than Cartier, enough said in terms of a more money buys a better product ideology.
Who cares? Me and many people who loves really nice stuff and not just in fashion, people who wear non fused suits, 7 fold ties, sea island shirts... French Tank is a great watch for design, I have one so I can not tell you it is not. But it does not worth his price because of the poor movement. Many Patek are great watches for design but also for movement. That is funny = you show us Cartier for women (or for sissies&#33

. I can not imagine you think such a watch is nice for a man... If you think so, you are more ridiculious than I thought. Go and learn about watches, Cartier, Patek and JL and comme back...
My you are in a strange world if you see women wearing chrongraph watches.
For "˜supposedly' reading all these watch magazines, somehow the entire large wristwatch trend and the fact that women have heavily contributed to this trend has evaded you; interesting. So, you have never seen a woman wear a Technomarine (a huge world-wide craze)? Or a Rolex Daytona (Even Tarantino showed this in Kill Bill vol. 2, when the bride takes off her watch)? So, basically you only read what you want to read? Whether the reading is regarding horology magazines, peoples posts, etc... Jon.
whom are you talkin to?
me

 

[ernest]

Also my chrono is $25,000 US not 25,000 pounds.

The cheapest REVERSO is QUARTZ and his price is 2 450 euros NEW.

So it is not possible to buy it new for 500 GBP...