Revo
·Now if we could solve the other Everest-related watch controversy, being the whereabouts of the charlatan Michael Kobold and everyone’s money:
https://english.khabarhub.com/2020/14/68571/
https://watchlords.com/viewtopic.php?t=40849
This seems to be pretty definitive and damning:
https://forums.timezone.com/index.php?t=tree&goto=7500775&rid=12189#msg_7500775
So there's two watch brands which are also "charities" (Kobold & Rolex) who have both been less than truthful about their Himalayan adventures?!
Back to Everest & Hillary: if Rolex had been on the summit in '53 we'd never have heard the end of it, think Omega and the Moon only a decade and a half earlier.
Instead we get coy and carefully-worded statement that imply and pictures that suggest e.g.
But none of these ever say the one thing necessary "Hillary wore a Rolex to the summit of Everest in 1953". Ask yourself why.
The Omega equivalent would be something like "We supplied NASA with watches that were used by the crew of the 1969 Apollo 11 spaceflight which landed men on the moon for the first time ever" = "Yeah, not actually ON the moon, but, you know . . . [and if you get the impression that they were worn on the moon from what we've said, well, we can't be responsible for what people think.] But, no, Omega can make a simple statement: "first watch on the moon". Five words. No hedging or fudging. Rolex cannot do the same for Everest. So they don't. Instead we get . . . is "misled" too strong a word?