Leonardo Perez has pleaded guilty to charges he stole eight gold Rolex Presidential edition watches, each worth $50 000, over four months in 2007.

The crime spree began just after Perez finished a 17-year sentence for stealing Rolexes in South Florida.

The 36-year-old Miami native is so loyal he even has the Rolex logo tattooed on a forearm, according to reports.

He primarily found victims while they were shopping, followed them home and robbed them at gunpoint, the newspaper said.

source: news24.com

I finally got the Milgauss GV after a one year wait. It’s an exceptional watch
and I’ll now describe some of my feelings towards it. I find the green crystal
to be genius. Variations such as making watches larger, changing bezel or hand
colors, are all changes that one may expect or imagine to occur at some point.
Conversely, changing the color of the crystal is something that I find very
subtle and definitely not something that I would have thought of. Apart from it
being a genius variation, I find it very pleasant too. The green is not
obstructive – it does not degrade the clarity of the dial in any way.
Furthermore, the green has enough presence that it’s actually there and you can
see it all the time should you wish to, without having to “concentrate” or look
for it (i.e., not like the crown etching, which incidentally, I haven’t seen on
the GV). In other words, Rolex found a perfect tonality and balance of green
that is present but yet not obstructive. I’ve found that once you get used to
the colored crystal, the green slowly “disappears” (i.e., you notice it less)
and it merely leaves a pleasant contour the the watch’s dial/crystal. Even if I
hated all of the aspects of this watch, I’d still strongly love it simply
because of its colored crystal – that’s how much I like that attribute and how
much it matters to me. If this is the first watch with a colored crystal, I
think that it may indeed launch a trend in the future or at least be remembered
as the parent of this (to me, great) idea.

Next, even if its not a uniqueness of the Milgauss, I love the rolexrolexrolex
engraved inside the watch. I’ve always felt the space between the dial and the
crystal to be somewhat empty and I believe that Rolex now found a nice and
subtle way to fill it. If the writing was more in relief and explicit (e.g.,
Yachtmaster II or Ring Lock System) it would have bothered me. If you chose to
ignore the rolexrolexrolex writing, it will virtually disappear in front of you -
otherwise it will emerge. I find it to be of the same subtlety of the green
crystal, and hence I like it.

Following that, I actually like the fact that the Milgauss has writing on the
caseback. This is also something I liked on the Sea-Dweller although I prefer
the Milgauss implementation. The font seems smaller on the Milgauss so the
writing looks less like an advert and more like a decoration.

I like the mix of orange and white indexes. It highlights important points on
the dial and gives the watch a nice symmetry. Perhaps an orange crown would
have made it even more symmetric – or ruined the watch! The different colors
also make the dial less boring, without exaggerating it. I think that I’ll
absolutely love the lume and its different tonalities at 3, 6 and 9 o’clock
markers. I still haven’t had time to experiment what the lume looks like – it’s
difficult to find sunshine in London these days. The “two-tone” lume could turn
out to be a great winning factor for me since I’m a great lume fan.

I’m not so sure that I’m a fan of the orange lightning bolt hand. Maybe I would
have preferred it to be black. Maybe I would have preferred it to be straight.
The current implementation makes the watch seem less elegant and more playful.
Maybe the orange on it is too strong. In any case, it doesn’t bother me, but it
also doesn’t make me jump with joy. It’s a bit like the cyclops – I have a
love-hate relationship with it; sometimes I like it, other times I don’t.
Ultimately, in practice, I’m indifferent – it’s not the factor that makes me
choose one model from another.

One of my first reactions with the Milgauss was that the watch was big. I think
that it had to do with the fact that it has a clear / empty bezel. I’ve always
had watches with something written on the bezel (e.g., numbers) and this is the
first time where there’s a lot of “empty space” following the dial’s perimeter.
Perhaps this illuded me into thinking that the watch was rather large. Now that
I think about it, the Milgauss’s bezel reminds me of the DD2 which is a
relatively large watch, so perhaps I saw the same size in the Milgauss.

The watch actually feels quite heavy. It feels heavier than all of my other
watches, including the Sea-Dweller. It doesn’t feel uncomfortable although it
definitely has wrist presence. The watch overall also feels very “solid”
somehow – almost indestructible. The crown on the other hand seems less “solid”
than that of, for example, the Submariner. When screwing the Submariner’s crown
it really feels like closing the hatch of a submarine (not that I’ve ever closed
one) and it feels that the crown is impenetrable. With the Milgauss, less so.
Perhaps because it turns less, it “clicks out” less, and perhaps because there
is no rubber gasket immediately visible. Finally, the crown has no shoulders
(which I’m instead used to) which at first seemed a bit awkward although I think
that I now like this simplicity. Overall, the Milgauss’s case feels very smooth
and has no rough ends like instead the Submariner has. For example, on the
Submariner, the corners of the case where the bracelet is attached are rather
sharp – not so on the Milgauss.

The clasp on the Milgauss is very solid and practical. It’s probably better
than the other clasps I’ve come across (Submariner, Daytona). It opens and
closes very easily and quickly. There’s no extra piece to open/close for
“securing” it like on the Submariner, and this makes it simpler to open/close
during day-to-day life. Sure it may be less secure, but on average, I don’t
need that security and would prefer practicality. The extension link is also a
very nice feature which I’ve already appreciated on the Daytona. Finally, I’m
not a big fan of polished center links since it gives the watch a two-tone look
which I don’t like, but I must admit that they fit the Milgauss well – better
than the Daytona.

Overall, on the Milgauss, I love the green crystal, like the simple dial, love
the clasp and like the solid feel of the watch. I’m less convinced by the
orange lightning bolt hand – maybe the color is too strong for me, although it
may turn out that I’ll actually start liking it with time.

I can finally call it a collection, even though it is
composed of the minimum number of items—three. Perhaps it
is like flowers where you need at least three for a bouquet
[to living people ;D]. I decided to review the three
watches, focusing on what makes each one special to me.

The sub non-date was my first watch. I was new to the game,
so I entered a shop, asked for a Daytona and got the
well-known answer. Finally I understood that the only thing
that I could find (and afford) that day was the sub
non-date, so I decided to go for it. My first reaction was
that it felt perfect. It embraced my wrist in a unique way
and the weight was perfectly balanced on it. By looking at
it, I thought: wow there is all this hype around Rolex,
although this is a very “simple” watch. Only after buying
the Daytona had I realized that the simplicity in design was
what made the sub no-date such a unique and beautiful watch.
The more I looked at it, the more I liked it, and that is
true for all the models I have. The sweeping hand is
something I absolutely love. The only thing that I’m not
too keen on is the non-smooth bezel. Overall, it was a
great choice for my first watch and a good introduction to
the subject.

Then came the daytona. I entered a shop asking for one,
almost giving the keeper the answer myself, but I was
wrong—there was one in stock. Black dial, exactly what I
was looking for. After buying it, my first reaction was:
damn, this is a complicated dial. I couldn’t even read the
time on it—the hands were difficult to see. This is when
I realized the beauty of the sub non-date: simplicity.
Next, the bracelet had a “TT look”: polished & brushed which
I didn’t like much. The watch was totally different and it
took me some time to get used to it. Thus, my reaction
wasn’t so glorious about it as opposed to the hype of buying
it. However, the usual story kicked in rapidly: the more I
looked at it, the more I liked it. Every day you discover a
nuance and detail of the watch that you never noticed before
and you start loving the watch even more.

Unfortunately, there is no sweeping hand on the Daytona, but
you can keep the chrono going. The most practical use I
found of the chrono was mimicking the behavior of the GMT
master. When 8am in London, start the chrono to get
California time. The bezel is smooth and I do like that.
The extension link is a great idea, although I never ended
up using it too much. The new clasp is much more elegant
too and I prefer it to the old one. Its 72 hour life also
makes quite a difference, especially if you do not go out on
the weekends and do not wear your watch at home. I’m a lume
fan, and the lume is low on the daytona, although its looks
& design are much more elegant. Also, there is no lume on
the seconds hand, so you can’t see the “moving lume” at
night. I love the 12 o’clock crown and the pentagonal markers.
Overall, it is a great watch, and the best one in
my collection. I think that the white gold model cures the
only [slight] problem that I have with the daytona: it
doesn’t have the “TT-like” bracelet. [In fact, the WG
Daytona is currently my favorite rolex.]

Last [for now] came the Submariner LV. I’ve always “hated” this watch,
so the hype of buying it was low. However, after buying it,
I had the opposite reaction of the daytona and my first
impression was: I love this watch. The green is a weird
green. Depending on the light, it is a different green.
Thus, in one picture you may like the watch, but not in
others. The maxi dial is awesome, especially when it comes
to lume. When the sweeping hand passes one of the lumes,
it’s like a solar eclipse.

My first reaction on the cyclops was: wow it serves a
purpose. The magnification really helps, and the number is
magnified in a “perfect” way: it does not become distorted
nor too big. I’m not a big fan of the cyclops, and in fact
think I am in the sea dweller league [ironically]. There
also is much reflection on it, making it hard to read at
times. I noticed that dirt gathers around it, probably
because that area doesn’t get cleaned well when I pass a
cloth on the crystal. The date is useful, although I still
need to remember looking at it—I’m still too used to the
Daytona & Submariner no-date and forget that I have a date. There
are two differences between the LV and the sub no-date for
which I prefer the no-date version. First, the height
between the dial and crystal [where you now get
rolexrolexrolex] is greater in the LV—i prefer the
non-date. Second, it seems like the seconds hand is
“shorter” in the LV because it doesn’t overlap with the
markings—I liked that in the non-date. That said, the LV
is really is a great watch. If you don’t like it, buy it.
That’s what I did, and it only took me 5 minutes to realize
that my opinion (dislike) about the watch was wrong.

What I like about rolex is perfection, or at least, their
attempt in reaching it. I like when people take care, and
care in detail. Simple things such as the crown being very
smooth to turn make the difference. The other thing I like
most about rolex is their “usefulness”. There is no
feature on the watch that is pure aesthetics—everything
serves a purpose. For example, the hologram [which I always
kill] is studied so that the serial number gets removed with
wear, i.e. indicating if the watch is new. I am ready to
pay for a company which I know will put thought and care in
making their product. Very few companies try to produce a
perfect product—most only are interested in making
something that will merely “sell”.

Since I’ve seen discussions on this, as a last note, I’ll
say that I wear my watch to the gym. It’s a perfect time to
look at it. First, the largest boredom of the gym is
waiting for the next set—look at your watch instead!
Next, you can look at it from the mirror, and you will
notice how different it looks from third person vs. first
person; for example, the reflections are totally different.

By: John B. Holbrook, II

June 5th, 2005

The Rolex Yacht-Master Reference 16622 is, from many perspectives, a unique and interesting Rolex.  When I first saw the watch and tried it on in person, I wasn’t impressed.  It just didn’t seem to grab me, so I never paid it too much attention for several years thereafter.  It wasn’t until this past year, when several of my online friends started getting the watch that I gave it a second look, and boy am I glad I did.

The Yacht-Master is one of Rolex’s newer models in their line up, and was first introduced in 1992.  However, it wasn’t until 1997 that Rolex debuted the Rolesium (Rolex’s term for a stainless steel and platinum finish) Yacht-Master, reference 16622.  It was the Rolesium configuration which really has caught the public’s attention, and risen sharply in popularity.  While not in short of supply as the stainless steel Daytona, it would appear that demand is greater than the current supply, and the margin seems to be growing every year.

The Yacht-Master was the first Oyster Professional series watch to feature the Rolex Maxi Dial – so named due to the enlarged markers and thicker hands as compared to the standard issue Oyster Professional watch.

The extra surface area on the markers and minute hand means more luminous material can be applied, making for a brighter glow.  The Yacht-Master has the best low light visibility of any Rolex I’ve owned.  I have no problem reading the time all the way through a movie at the theater – something I’ve never been able to do with my other Rolexes.  It’s widely speculated that Rolex will eventually implement the Maxi Dial on all of the Oyster Professional watches.

The bezel and dial of the Yacht-Master really are quite stunning.  The bezel and the watch dial are solid platinum.  I was initially hesitant that the platinum bezel (which rotates in both directions) would easily scratch, thus far that hasn’t been the case  I’m also quite fond of the red second hand, and red lettering of the dial – reminiscent of the vintage red letter Submariner and Sea-Dweller.  The dial is protected by a sapphire crystal.

In the above comparison picture you can also see that the Yacht-Master has more rounded, polished case and lugs than on the Sea-Dweller – the case is virtually identical to that found on the Cosmograph Daytona.  The Yacht-Master bracelet also is very similar to the Daytona in that the center links are solid (not hollow like the other Oyster professional line bracelets) and has a polished finish applied.  If the Yacht-Master has any short coming, it’s the bracelet clasp – it’s the same flip-lock clasp used on the GMT Master II and the Explorer II.  I’ve spoken to several owners who have gone to the expense of ordering the much higher quality clasp found on the Rolex Daytona from European Rolex dealers, and attached it to the Yacht-Master (very easily done).

The Yacht-Master case is 40mm in diameter, but a shade thinner than most Oyster Professionals.  The thinner case and polished surfaces give the watch a very dressy appearance -  my Yacht-Master has become a favorite watch to wear with a suit.  Even though the Yacht-Master has the Rolex Triplock crown, Rolex only rates the Yacht-Master for 100 meters of water resistance (compared to 300 meters for the Submariner).  That water resistance rating is fine enough for a sporting watch like the Yacht-Master.  It’s not designed to be a diving “tool” watch like the Submariner or Sea-Dweller.

Inside the watch lies one of the Yacht-Masters strongest selling points – the Rolex caliber 3135 movement.  The 3135 is a 31 jewel automatic movement that is manufactured completely in house by Rolex.  Over they years, many watch manufacturers have implemented an outsourcing strategy for various components of their watches and movements to attain manufacturing efficiency and cost reduction.  However, despite the higher cost in inherent inefficiency of doing so, Rolex has always sought to completely control all aspects of the design and manufacturing by keeping it under their own roof.  While the cost/benefit of an in house strategy can be debated, the success of the 3135 is undeniable.

The current 3135 caliber in the Yacht-Master has been in service since 1989.  In those 16 years of services, the 3135 has garnered a reputation as being one of the most reliable, and robust movements ever created.  The movement has been criticized at times for lacking refinement and technological sophistication.  I would argue that it was designed from the beginning as a movement to be encased in a stainless steel Oyster case, and endure rigorous conditions and treacherous environments.  It’s a clear case of function over form.  I would also argue that the 3135 isn’t lacking in technological sophistication – Rolex Research and Development is second to none.  Rolex has implemented several, truly notable features into the 3135, such as a Breguet overcoil balance-spring, and the Microstella adjustment screws, and Kif shock absorption.  In short, it’s hard to criticize Rolex for setting the benchmark which other manufactures strive to attain.  The 3135 in the Yacht-Master is of course COSC certified.

The Yacht-Master has quickly become a mainstay in my collection of watches, and I’m really surprised that I didn’t get this watch sooner.  It easily dresses up or down, and the color of the platinum dial blends easily with nearly all choices of wardrobe.  Unfortunately, the watch has a very high retail price – $7,800.00 – that’s higher than the stainless Daytona or the two-tone Submariner.  On the plus side though, the Yacht-Master is one of Rolex’s very best designed and most exclusive models, with the enhanced dial, bracelet, and precious metals used its construction.

]]> http://www.beshawatch.com/watch-reviews/rolex-yacht-master-review/feed/ 0