# There You Go Mac



## pg tips (May 16, 2003)

Fill your boots!


----------



## feenix (May 27, 2008)

Posting guide-lines? Do we get pre 1970 or has another date been picked?


----------



## mach 0.0013137 (Jan 10, 2005)

Woo Hoo!! Briliant!! thanks guys :rltb:

As to what could be considered Vintage, I feel 1970 is too far back especially as there were some really cool & amazing designs/technologies produced in the 70`s :afro:

My personal view is that be anything over 25 years would be acceptable 

Mind you as I said before I`m still going to post the odd Oldie pre-2000 thread in the main watch section


----------



## JoT (Aug 12, 2003)

mach 0.0013137 said:


> Woo Hoo!! Briliant!! thanks guys :rltb:
> 
> As to what could be considered Vintage, *I feel 1970 is too far back especially as there were some really cool & amazing designs/technologies produced in the 70`s* :afro:
> 
> ...


Tough


----------



## feenix (May 27, 2008)

mach 0.0013137 said:


> My personal view is that be anything over 25 years would be acceptable


Works for me


----------



## mach 0.0013137 (Jan 10, 2005)

JoT said:


> mach 0.0013137 said:
> 
> 
> > Woo Hoo!! Briliant!! thanks guys :rltb:
> ...


Bully!! :crybaby: :lol:


----------



## mach 0.0013137 (Jan 10, 2005)

Just noticed the "Watches made before 1970" in the forum heading so now I`m deffinitely going to post the odd Oldie Pre-2000 Thread in the usual place :tease:


----------



## JoT (Aug 12, 2003)

You are just being greedy wanting the 1970's and early 1980's in as well


----------



## mach 0.0013137 (Jan 10, 2005)

JoT said:


> You are just being greedy wanting the 1970's and early 1980's in as well


Not really, I`ve always felt it opens things out for people who don`t own really old watches & even early 90`s watches like the Breitling Shark or Omega SMP 200 for example do have a different feel to modern offerings :wink2:


----------



## JoT (Aug 12, 2003)

Moan moan bloody moan :lol:


----------



## feenix (May 27, 2008)

Its not as if there's any shortage of places for general posting of watches. If you're not careful you'll end up with a board thats for posting any watch you've had for more than a week :down:


----------



## JoT (Aug 12, 2003)

That was out view, by putting pre-1970 as the vintage cut-off it ties in with the first appearance of quartz watches in 1969.


----------



## mach 0.0013137 (Jan 10, 2005)

JoT said:


> That was out view, by putting pre-1970 as the vintage cut-off it ties in with the first appearance of quartz watches in 1969.


Fair enough


----------



## Andy the Squirrel (Aug 16, 2009)

Might as well call it the mechanical watch forum!


----------



## Arbs (Jun 6, 2009)

80's can't be vintage 'cos it only seems a short time ago.

doesn't it ?


----------



## Andy the Squirrel (Aug 16, 2009)

Arbs said:


> 80's can't be vintage 'cos it only seems a short time ago.
> 
> doesn't it ?


I dunno, there are plenty of quality 1980s quartz watch designs which ceased production in the 90s when things started getting cheap and nasty!


----------



## Rotundus (May 7, 2012)

assuming this is post #17 would actually posting a picture of a watch in this thread be off topic? :bag:


----------



## pg tips (May 16, 2003)

if it's post 1969 or qtz then yes it would :lol:


----------



## feenix (May 27, 2008)

desmondus rotundus said:


> assuming this is post #17 would actually posting a picture of a watch in this thread be off topic? :bag:


Is that a new rule? Every thread has to have a photograph? :taz:


----------



## chris l (Aug 5, 2005)

Tissot, M&S and a Junghans. Just to get things started...

























​


----------

