Kevin O'Leary describes Omega watches as "entry level" and "affordable"

Posts
2,675
Likes
7,487
Kevin is all about hype and investment...nothing else.
... and letting your wife take the blame when you kill someone on the water... boating in the dark

(Edited)
Edited:
 
Posts
110
Likes
83
An opinion is like an assh*le...everyone has one...why get so twisted over one person's opinion?... you purchase an Omega because it speaks to you in one way or another...that's all that matters...
Edited:
 
Posts
29,242
Likes
75,625
... and letting your wife take the blame when you murder someone on the water... boating in the dark

There's that too. As I said, his views on Omega are the least douchey thing about him...
 
Posts
29,242
Likes
75,625
An opinion is like an assh*le...everyone has one...why get so twisted over one person's opinion?... you purchase an Omega because it speaks to you in way or another...that's all that matters...

Despising a person because he's a terrible human isn't the same as being twisted over an irrelevant opinion about man jewellery. It baffles me why some cannot make that distinction in this thread.
 
Posts
2,067
Likes
4,210
Anyone who wears two watches...

Watch it ... omega granny would be mad at you for that statement. And Buzz. And me. 😀
 
Posts
2,067
Likes
4,210
Jesus, no wonder I stopped coming to this forum. All because a wealthy watch collector rightly calls Omega watches (of which I own two) "entry level" in the world of higher end watches?? I also consider Rolex (of which I own three) entry level higher end watches. It's not an insult to thin skinned Omega or Rolex owners, it's an accurate comment.

Yet you returned to post that gem of a reply. Interesting.
 
Posts
2,067
Likes
4,210
I find it amusing that so many are so offended by a wealthy man's opinions on watches

The only one here who seems truly offended by anything said is you. Strange for sure, maybe it's just me.
 
Posts
2,587
Likes
2,871
Despising a person because he's a terrible human isn't the same as being twisted over an irrelevant opinion about man jewellery. It baffles me why some cannot make that distinction in this thread.
I agree. I don't dislike him because of his opinion on watches. I dislike him because he's a terrible person that's a giant piece of shit.
 
Posts
13,125
Likes
18,018
I dislike him because he's a terrible person that's a giant piece of shit.
And I have heard exactly the opposite.

His perspective is a little different than yours or mine. We are all entitled to our own opinions.
gatorcpa
 
Posts
3,665
Likes
7,781
... and letting your wife take the blame when you murder someone on the water... boating in the dark

I don't like O'Leary for many reasons, but it seems beyond reasonable doubt that the boat that was struck in the case you are referring to was completely dark on the water. Regardless of the total truth of what may have happened during that collision, the fact that the other boat was completely dark renders your statement incorrect.

There are a lot of reasons for disliking O'Leary, but calling this "murder" is probably not reasonable (although it does seem there's a lot more to the situation)
Edited:
 
Posts
3,665
Likes
7,781
On topic:

Here is an interesting read on how O'Leary built his fortune, regarding The Learning Company, which was purchased by Mattel in 1998 for 3.5 billlion and sold during the dotcom bubble (a little over a year later) for 27 million.
Edited:
 
Posts
29,242
Likes
75,625
There are a lot of reasons for disliking O'Leary, but this isn't one of them.

Well, the fact that he said numerous times in the press that the other boat "fled the scene" despite the fact that the other boat had two critically injured persons on board (who both died), and that they told the O'Leary's that they had called 9-1-1 and were leaving to meet paramedics at the dock, would tell me he's a piece of shit. He was pretty clearly trying to crate a false narrative.

Also, the O'Leary boat didn't offer any assistance or follow to help - they went back to their lakeside mansion to work on their stories and call their lawyers...
 
Posts
3,665
Likes
7,781
Well, the fact that he said numerous times in the press that the other boat "fled the scene" despite the fact that the other boat had two critically injured persons on board (who both died), and that they told the O'Leary's that they had called 9-1-1 and were leaving to meet paramedics at the dock, would tell me he's a piece of shit. He was pretty clearly trying to crate a false narrative.

Also, the O'Leary boat didn't offer any assistance or follow to help - they went back to their lakeside mansion to work on their stories and call their lawyers...


I agree- strongly. but Murder is much too strong of a word, it suggests both intent and malice, not possible in a case where the other boat was totally dark. There's a lot wrong with the situation; the alcohol presence is odd at the least. Not rendering assistance is deplorable. I'm not trying to jump to his defense even if it seems I am, the entire situation shows a carelessness and self-centeredness that we see echoed in many other of O'Leary's behaviors, but it doesn't reach the level of Murder when another person also exhibited extreme carelessness by having their boat lights off.

I re-worded my initial response because I didn't like my "this isn't one of them" statement. It is "one of the [reasons to dislike O'Leary]" but not because he murdered someone. He was just himself during and after an accident occurred- self-centered, careless, and with a general lack of respect for others. And that's a plenty good enough reason to dislike someone, and O'Leary has an extensive and unimpeachable track record of being an insensitive t***.
Edited:
 
Posts
29,242
Likes
75,625
I agree- strongly. but Murder is much too strong of a word, it suggests both intent and malice, not possible in a case where the other boat was totally dark. There's a lot wrong with the situation; the alcohol presence is odd at the least. Not rendering assistance is deplorable. I'm not trying to jump to his defense even if it seems I am. The entire situation shows a carelessness and self-centeredness that we see echoed in many other of O'Leary's behaviors, but it doesn't reach the level of Murder, when another person also exhibited extreme carelessness by having their boat lights off.

I re-worded my initial response because I didn't like my "this isn't one of them" statement. It is "one of the [reasons to dislike O'Leary]" but not because he murdered someone. He was just himself during and after an accident occurred- self-centered, careless, and with a general lack of respect for others.

Fair enough - I don't agree that anyone was "murdered" in the strict legal sense.

Re: the booze - yes she was "handed a drink by someone" after the crash and the only thing they left off was "at the advice of our lawyer"...
 
Posts
643
Likes
978
The biggest surprise on this thread is that producer Michael isn't getting more stick! ::stirthepot::
 
Posts
2,967
Likes
17,392
And here I’d never heard of Mr. Wonderful’s misadventures on the high seas. This thread just keeps on giving.
 
Posts
2,700
Likes
4,318
On topic:

Here is an interesting read on how O'Leary built his fortune, regarding The Learning Company, which was purchased by Mattel in 1998 for 3.5 billlion and sold during the dotcom bubble (a little over a year later) for 27 million.

Woah. I worked for the Learning Company back in 1991, before joining Apple. A curious place. I was brought on for QA as to test a history game. This on my strength as a participant in the Renaissance and Dickens fairs. The game related to American history. They did have a teacher on the team, who was Swiss and had taught french. She was really pedantic about all the punctuation issues. Was supposed to be balanced but the random generator, mostly on TRS-80s tended to favor Custer's last stand and the Carington Event (where the sun turned green and telegraph wires caught fire.) The QA lead blew his hearing out at a cyberpunk rave and we never saw him again. I did see the game on store shelves, but it was not one that ever did anything. I do not think any of us really knew anything about American history. Or what ever re-write of it they were wanting to promote. The premise of the game was someone stole a time machine and changed history, so the player had to restore it back.

Never really was aware of who actually ran the place. At the time it was associated with the PBS television network.

Sill remember someone shouting out at lunch. "I went to Julliard to write compositions for cartoon rabbits." The buildings were in the same office park that they used for one of the Terminator movies.

There was a sign a the entrance which stated "Change is inevitable, progress is not."

Stories like this really does make one question the illusion of free will. There were a lot of people in the dot com era who were completely clueless. And where I came up with the notion that many mistake luck for skill. Looks like this guy was one of them. I usually do my best to ignore such. They tended to wrap themselves around a tree with their camero on 280 more often as not.

I do not know if it is me ,or just the mood today, as it seems there are a lot of cynical threads here. Then I am of the opinion watches are not really worth anything at all.
 
Posts
3,665
Likes
7,781
many mistake luck for skill.


A very important notion, one that seems to be easily ignored or lost during behaviors that could be described as "bubble-like."