Well I enjoyed his presentation as I always liked him, but if I had the choice I would prefer to have the watch on his wrist than those RM jobbies. I suppose the Panerai is kinda cool since it's old and sorta started that craze.
Would be very interesting to see the rest of his collection too.
I enjoyed Stallone's presentation of his watches, but, I was surprised that the RMs far outnumbered the Panerai. Stallone has been long associated with Panerai and I was unaware that he is a fan of Richard Mille. Although I admire the movements of RM watches, I find the design style and look almost cartoonish on a number of their watches... don't get me started on the straps. I guess, RM, regardless of the ridiculous prices, are not for me.
https://perezcope.com/2020/12/23/the-stallone-panerai-logo-story-debunked/
I imagine this is making the rounds among Paneristi, but don’t really follow that so sharing here.
Anyone see this deep dive that claims to debunk the origin story in the video? Stallone does not come off well here, as the author essentially argues he and a business partner screwed Panerai over and forced them to sell to Richemont:
https://perezcope.com/2020/12/23/the-stallone-panerai-logo-story-debunked/
I imagine this is making the rounds among Paneristi, but don’t really follow that so sharing here.
Anyone see this deep dive that claims to debunk the origin story in the video? Stallone does not come off well here, as the author essentially argues he and a business partner screwed Panerai over and forced them to sell to Richemont:
https://perezcope.com/2020/12/23/the-stallone-panerai-logo-story-debunked/
I imagine this is making the rounds among Paneristi, but don’t really follow that so sharing here.
here is why that long article doesn’t matter at all.
without that story, without Stallone, and without one of those 5 watches Paneri would not exist today. As such the watch has value. As it’s value is tied to being that watch, not veracity of the story that has nothing to do with the watch in this case. True or not the watches value does not change.
So, this video is in line with the main theme: Panerai and its ilk (here, Stallone) knowingly perpetuating false narratives/histories
Wait, you mean watch brands lie in their marketing?!?! What the hell? I thought it really did take a year to make just 1 Rolex! 😉
👎
So, the value of the watch does not depend on whether it was actually the only watch worn during filming, or possibly even one of the five worn during filming, or whether Stallone wore the watch because he independently fell in love with the watch vs was a paid marketing talent?
That seems unlikely, at least to me.
I imagine a parallel story about Connery’s “the” Submariner in Dr. No, supposedly from his personal collection, going to auction with Connery doing a PSA about his love for Rolex, and that “the” Sub was the one going to auction... only to find out Connery was actually a paid marketing talent, there were 5 Submariners on set, no way to verify if the one being auctioned was the one (or only one) worn by Connery, plus a lot of physical evidence that the watch was NOT the one worn during filming...
😲
... pretty sure that Sub’s value would change
if Stallone had not worn that watch in that Movie would Panari be around today?
no.
is Stallone saying this is the main screen worn one? Yes.
nothing else matters.
